1955-05-26

Mr. Speaker:: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following communication:
Ottawa, May 26, 1955.
Sir:
I have the honour to inform you that the Honourable Patrick Kerwin, Chief Justice of Canada, acting as Deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to the Senate chamber today, the 26th May, at 5.45 p.m., for the purpose of giving the royal assent to certain bills.
I have the honour to be, sir.
Your obedient servant,
J. F. Delaute,
Secretary to the Governor General (Administrative)



BANKING AND COMMERCE

[Stage Direction]
Fourth report of standing committee on banking and commerce.-Mr. Cannon.

Hon. George Prudham (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys) moved: the first reading of Bill No. 412 (from the Senate), respecting the boundary between the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS


ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY


Mr. Diefenbaker:: 1.	Did the Canadian Locomotive Company Limited of Kingston receive a contract for torpedo tubes from the Royal Canadian Navy in or about the month of May, 1953, as announced in the Canadian press on the 13th May, 1953?
2.	If so, has such contract been completed? If not, to what extent?
3.	What was the price per unit, or if a cost plus contract, what were the terms thereof?
4.	What is the total expenditure under this contract to date?
5.	Was the contract for the above order not previously awarded to another contractor?
6.	If so, what was the name of the said company and why was the change made?


Mr. Dickey:: 1.	Yes.
2.	No. Contract suspended October 29, 1953, pending service decision on the torpedo for which the tubes are designed.
3.	Cost plus 7J per cent on production. Cost plus 5 per cent on self-manufactured tooling.
4.	Nil under production contract. (Expenditures on development work have amounted to $251,929.99.)
5.	Yes.
6.	Dominion Engineering Company Limited. Agreement as to contractual terms could not be reached.
'^NATIONAL REVENUE



COMMUNICATION OF INFORMATION

Mr. Knowles:: 1.	Did the Minister of National Revenue communicate to the premier and provincial treasurer of Ontario any information concerning any payments or contributions made by the late Mr. James Drohan to Mr. James Dempsey?
2.	On what date was such information communicated?
3.	Was such information communicated in writing? If not, in what way was it communicated?
4.	Was such information requested by the premier and provincial treasurer of Ontario?
5.	When and how did the Minister of National Revenue first become aware of the information so communicated?


Mr. McCann:: Mr. Speaker, this question calls for an oral answer. My answer is the following. The Minister of National Revenue has no right and is expressly forbidden by statute to disclose to anyone not legally entitled thereto the information which he disclosed to the provincial treasurer of Ontario, who was legally entitled thereto. The Minister of National Revenue has not in fact disclosed this information to anyone not legally entitled thereto.
The Minister of National Revenue has never confirmed that all or any part of the alleged information which has been discussed in the press and in and outside the House of Commons in connection with this matter is the same in whole or in part as that which he disclosed to the provincial treasurer of

Questions
Ontario. For him to do so would be a disclosure of information in contravention of the Dominion Succession Duty Act.
The Minister of National Revenue cannot, without making a disclosure forbidden by the statute, either indicate the nature of the information communicated to the provincial treasurer of Ontario or other details, other than to say in reply to the questions of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) and the hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker) that the said information was conveyed to the provincial treasurer of Ontario on April 27, 1955.
I suggest, sir, that this also is the answer to the questions put yesterday by the hon. member for Prince Albert.

On the orders of the day:


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: May I ask the Minister of National Revenue if he will consider answering the part of my question which asks when and how the Minister of National Revenue first became aware of the information which he communicated to the provincial treasurer of Ontario on April 27?


James Joseph McCann: Mr. Speaker, my full answer is given in the statement which I have given to the house.

On the orders of the day:


Mr. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: should like to revert to the matter on which the minister just made his statement, to ask him one very simple question to which a categorical yes or no answer can be given without in any way invading any of the secrecy provisions. Did the minister procure the documents in question from the executors of the estate or were they documents in the possession of his department?


James Joseph McCann: Mr. Speaker, in fairness, I am a poor, uneducated man as far as legal matters are concerned. I ask the hon. member, do you consider it fair to try to trap me into answering questions from one who is supposed to be well trained in the legal profession? In my statement I have given what I believe is a fair, honest answer with reference to the questions asked by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre and the hon. member for Prince Albert. If you wish to ask further questions, be good enough to give me notice of them according to the tradition of the house, or put them on the order paper.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, notice was given yesterday, and it is a simple question. Did you get the documents-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


John George Diefenbaker: Did the minister-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


John George Diefenbaker: Did the minister get
the-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


John George Diefenbaker: Did the minister secure these documents from the files of his department? Surely that is not a question that requires notice.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member put a question and the minister has given a reply to the best of his ability, which reply may not be satisfactory to the hon. member. Now the hon. member is putting the question again. I do not think matters will be further advanced if the question is repeated, because apparently the hon. member would get the same answer.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask the Minister of National Revenue if it is fair for him to suggest that we put our questions on the order paper when he neglected to answer at least three parts of my question, which has been on the order paper for over two weeks?


James Joseph McCann: I suggest that if the hon. member will read the statement he will find that all his questions were answered.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Did the premier of Ontario request that information? We have had no answer to that or to two other parts of my question.



RADIO SAGUENAY LTEE.

Mr. Gauihier (Lake St. John):: 1.	Will the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation include in its network the private television station to be erected by Radio Saguenay Ltee, at Jonquiere, Quebec?
2.	II so, on what date?
3.	What proportion ot Canadian Broadcasting Corporation programs will be relayed by this television station?


Mr. McCann:: 1.	No.
2.	See answer to No. 1.
3.	The proposed television station to be erected by Radio Saguenay Ltee, as all other private television stations under established policy, may if it so wishes secure free of charge all C.B.C. national service programs by microwave connection or kinescope recordings from the time they go on the air.



BOARD OF TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERS -COMPETITIVE RATES

Mr. Starr:: 1.	Has the board of transport commissioners made any regulations in respect of the manner in which railway competitive rates may be acted upon and put into operation?
2.	If so, what are the regulations presently in effect, in respect to competitive rates?
3.	If such regulations have been made and none are presently in effect, what are the latest regulations with regard to the manner in which railway competitive rates may be acted upon and put into operation?


Mr. Langlois (Gaspe):: 1.	Yes.
2.	(1) Competitive rates comprising reductions from existing published rates, which, owing to the exigencies of competition of transportation services not subject to the board's jurisdiction, are urgently required to be brought into immediate effect without previous notice to the board, may be acted upon before filing with the board, but the initial carrier, or duly appointed agent, must forthwith publish such rates and file the same with the board, effective as from the date of the movement of the traffic. The filing advice covering the filing of such schedule shall be accompanied by a clear statement of the reasons for such publication, the name of the party for whom the rate was made, the rate and the name of the carrier with whom competing, the rate which would otherwise apply in the absence of such publication, and such other information as will satisfy the board as to the bona tides of the action taken.
(2)	Competitive rates (local or joint) comprising reductions from existing published rates may be published without prior notice where such action is to equalize existing rates of competing routes (subject to recognized differentials, if any, between rail and water carriers) between common points of carriers subject to the board's jurisdiction. The filing advice shall be accompanied by a clear statement of the necessity for such action and detailed reference to the rate and tariff authority of the existing published rate of the other carrier or carriers.
(3)	Competitive rates may be published to expire on any date subsequent to the effective date thereof provided that such date of expiration is shown in the schedule when issued.
3.	Answered by No. 2.



QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN


Mr. Gillis:: I. What amount of money was paid the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation, for the year 1954; (a)
Inquiries of the Ministry
as subvention for the movement of coal; (b) for the movement of steel; (c) as a drawback on coal used for metallurgical purposes?
2. What amount of money was paid the Sydney and Louisburg Railway, (a) as a subvention for the movement of coal; (b) as a rebate under the Maritime Freight Rates Act?


Mr. Pinard:: Return tabled.



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. T. Purdy (Colchester-Hanis):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Acting Postmaster General or to the parliamentary assistant. My question is this. In view of the serious inconvenience being suffered by a large number of patrons of the post office in Nova Scotia due to the delay in mail delivery, caused chiefly by a two-hour change in the time of the so-called mail train leaving Halifax, will the department at once take active steps in an endeavour to correct this situation?


Mr. T. A. M. Kirk (Parliamentary Assistant to the Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, may I assure the hon. member that the department will take the matter into consideration and will as rapidly as possible make the necessary inquiries.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: wish to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. Can the minister inform the house whether all the weapons of war in front of the parliament buildings today are the property of the Canadian government?


Hon. R. O. Campney (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, so far as I know they are all the property of the Canadian government, with the possible exception of the "Nike".



PROPOSED DEMOLITION OF PART OF QUEBEC CITADEL

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. Wilfrid Dufresne (Quebec West):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence, of which I gave notice. Has the minister received a protest from the Quebec historical society concerning the decision by the Department of National Defence to demolish an old part of the Quebec citadel called "Le Bastion de Gaulle" to make way for a new building for the Royal 22nd Regiment? Is it the intention of the department to reconsider this decision?

Inquiries of the Ministry


Ralph Osborne Campney: I have received one or two letters with regard to the matter raised by the hon. member, as a result of which the matter is now being reviewed.



REPORTED APPEARANCE OF CANADIAN SOLDIER IN EAST GERMANY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. Has the minister any information regarding a Canadian army private by the name of Cross who is allegedly in the eastern part of Germany? Has he any information as to whether Private Cross went of his own volition or was taken to East Germany forcibly?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I have no further information other than has appeared in the press, except the fact that Private Cross proceeded on leave on May 2 and was due to return on May 18. When he did not return he was posted as absent without leave, and that was the first indication the brigade in Europe had of the matter. It is being investigated by our security people in Germany.



MANITOBA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. S. Zaplilny (Dauphin):: I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Has the government received from the government of Manitoba a request for emergency assistance with respect to flood conditions in that province? If so, what steps are being taken by the government to make such assistance available?


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: I received notice of the hon. member's question only a few minutes ago. No request has been received in the Prime Minister's office nor in the offices of the Minister of Justice or the Minister of Agriculture, but I understand a request was made in the usual form by the attorney general of Manitoba to the Department of National Defence for the assistance of members of the armed forces in patrolling and repairing the dikes on the Assiniboine river. That is the only request from the government of Manitoba that appears to have been received up to the present time.
[Mr. Dufresne.l



PRIVILEGE


Stanley Howard Knowles: I rise on a question of privilege in connection with an error which I made in the course of a speech on Friday, May 20. May I say, Mr. Speaker, that I am indebted to one of the members of our protective staff for calling my attention to this error.


Mr. MacDougall:: Don't tell me he reads your speeches.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I think hon. members
should be aware of the fact that we are being watched by those who surround us.


Mr. Marlin:: Only the hon. member is being watched.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I referred to a vote which was taken in the House of Commons on March 8, 1921, and I indicated that the present member for Grenville-Dundas (Mr. Casselman) voted against the motion which was before the house on that occasion. It has since been drawn to my attention that although the present member for Grenville-Dundas was elected in 1921, he was not elected until December of that year. The Mr. Casselman listed in that vote was Mr. O. D. Casselman, who represented Dundas county at that time. Apparently there are quite a few people in that area by that name. I am happy to make the correction, so that the record will be accurate, and I am happy also to do so because it gives me the opportunity, as one party whip to another, to send best wishes for a speedy recovery to the hon. member for Grenville-Dundas.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. M. Nicholson (Mackenzie):: Has the
attention of the Minister of Public Works been drawn to the report in today's Globe and Mail to the effect that the Toronto city council cannot proceed with the Regent Park South housing project owing to delay in completing the federal-provincial agreement? Can the minister comment on that, and indicate the cause of the delay?


Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister of Public Works):: To the best of my knowledge there is no delay on the part of the federal government, nor in fact do I know of any delay.



EFFECT ON CANADA OF SALE BY UNITED STATES TO ITALY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. A. Bryson (Humboldi-Melforl):: should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce to comment on what effect the recent sale of wheat by the United States to Italy will have on Canadian wheat exports.


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I am unable to comment on that question, because I do not know. If a sale of wheat is made by the United States, the same sale will not be made by Canada.

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



INTERIM SUPPLY

Mr. Harris moved:: That a sum not exceeding $257,705,895.34, being one-twelfth 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 $3,122,487.50, being one-twelfth of the amount of items 216 , 219, 221, 223, 224, 229, 520, of the said estimates be granted to Her Majesty on account of the fiscal year ending March 31, 1956.


Mr. Macdonnell:: I understood the minister was going to make a statement by way of explanation.


Walter Edward Harris: I shall make it now; then it will not be necessary to make it on the bill.
As hon. members are no doubt aware, this is a vote of one-twelfth of the estimates to cover expenditures during the month of June. There is an additional vote of one-twelfth in respect of seven special items having to do with items where money is urgently needed at this time of the year.
I give the usual undertaking that if the resolution and bill are passed there will be no restriction whatsoever on the opportunity and privilege of hon. members to discuss items in the normal way on the estimates.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.



WAYS AND MEANS


[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of ways and means, 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
Interim Supply
expenses of the public service for the fiscal year ending 31st March, 1956, the following sums be granted out of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada, namely:
1.	The sum of $257,705,895.34, being one-twelfth of the amount of each of the items set forth in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1956; and
2.	The sum of $3,122,487.50, being one-twelfth of the amount of items 216, 219, 221, 223. 224, 229, 520 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. 413, 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 and 2 agreed to.
On clause 3-$3,122,487.50 granted for 1955-56.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, can the minister say a word as to the reason for the extra money that is required by the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, covered in clause 3, and which is referred to in schedule I.


Walter Edward Harris: I have just been depriving myself of my notes in order to be of assistance to the staff of the house in reporting this discussion, but in this particular case I think my friend is aware that we do a lot of extraordinary work in the summer with the assistance of university students and the like, who go out on survey parties. We need the money at this time rather than in the fall.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is any additional expenditure required this year by reason of the unemployment situation, or is it just normal?


Walter Edward Harris: This is the result of a long period of endeavour in the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys to expand the work of exploration to be of assistance in the development of the country.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clause 4 agreed to.
Schedule agreed to.
Preamble agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Post Office SUPPLY
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
[Stage Direction]
334. Departmental administration, $1,546,388.
The Chairman:: May I draw the attention of hon. members to the fact that this resolution may be found on page 54 of the main estimates, and the details commence on page 440. Shall the resolution carry?


Mr. Pickersgill:: I should like to say just a word, if I might. As hon. members know, I have been acting for the Postmaster General since his unfortunate illness. I am sure all hon. members will be glad to know that he is making very good progress indeed, and that he hopes to be back in his place in the house at a very early date; and no one hopes with him more sincerely than I do. But I would not want to misrepresent the situation. During his absence the person who really has carried the brunt of his work is our colleague, the hon. member who is his parliamentary assistant. While I am going to remain in the committee and take my constitutional responsibility as the temporary incumbent, the hon. gentleman knows far more about the estimates than I do, and I hope hon. members will feel it will be quite satisfactory to have him answer the questions and make the opening statement as well.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: Mr. Chairman, I thought probably hon. members would prefer it if I gave a more or less general report on the operations of the Post Office Department for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1955, before proceeding to a discussion of the estimates for the fiscal year 1955-56 which are now before the house for consideration.
The fiscal year which closed on March 31, 1955, was the largest in the history of the postal service from the standpoint of the volume of mail handled and revenue collected. The increase in the number of pieces handled during the year was approximately 6 per cent. This resulted in a total of approximately 3,355 million pieces. The revenue increased from $129 million to $151 million, which is approximately a 17 per cent increase.
It is estimated that on the 1954-55 year's operations there will be an apparent surplus of revenue over expenditures of approximately $5 million, but this does not take into account the rental on accommodation supplied by the Department of Public Works on the one hand, or the amount involved in free postage privileges on the other. The annual rentals on buildings provided by the public 
works department is estimated by that department at $13 million for the last fiscal year. The free postage privilege represents an amount which is estimated as being in the neighbourhood of $5 million.
During last year the department completed the reorganization of the postal service in accordance with the major recommendations made in the Woods-Gordon report. The benefits of this reorganization and the subsequent decentralization of authority to field officers are already being felt. There have been considerable improvements made in the service during the fiscal year, which have resulted in greater efficiency and increased economy.
As the human element enters to an appreciable extent into the operations of the postal service it is impossible to entirely eliminate irregularities due to individual errors, but the department is continually endeavouring wherever possible to take the necessary corrective measures. This is why we appreciate the cases which have been brought to our attention from time to time, which have enabled us to make inquiries and take remedial action when necessary.
Unfortunately many of the complaints made are based on incorrect information, and are often attributable to a non-observance by the complainants themselves of the regulations issued by the department for their guidance. It is largely for this reason that we request exhibits in the way of envelopes or wrappers when dealing with complaints. During the year there have been' numerous extensions of service. In the rural districts the number of rural mail routes has been increased by 56. In addition there have been 574 extensions granted, and the frequency of service has been increased in the case of 80 routes. As a result direct service has been given to more than 21,500 additional householders.
In regard to letter carrier delivery in the urban centres, in addition to the points where letter carrier delivery has been inaugurated there have been numerous extensions of existing routes, so that the total number of points of call made by letter carrier has increased by 93,500.
Group boxes have been installed both on rural routes and on the periphery of letter carrier delivery. This service is becoming increasingly popular and at the present time constitutes the method of delivery to more than 4,000 families, who in the majority of cases formerly had to go to the post office for their mail.
Since the amendment to the Post Office Act providing that the Postmaster General may

increase the rate of payment to mail contractors under certain conditions, more than 5,000 applications have been received. Upward adjustments have been effected in over 3,500 cases, and the actual additional expenditure through these adjustments is now approximately $850,000 per annum, which will be increased as additional cases are dealt with and adjustments granted.
Some 35 new motor vehicle services have been established. Some of these superseded rail services, in some cases due to the withdrawal of the trains, and generally the change has resulted in an improvement in the mail service.
The last fiscal year was the initial year of the five-day 40-hour week in the operating service. This resulted in an additional expenditure of approximately $4,600,000 and involved additional staff to the extent of 1,400 employees. The additional volume of mail handled and the improved service given have necessitated increases in staff, but these increases bear a very favourable comparison with the increase in the number of pieces handled and the increase in revenue.
The policy of the department is to reduce overtime wherever practical and this has been accomplished to a large extent by the employment of casual or part-time help. Overtime is, however, necessary, particularly at the Christmas period when the volume of mail increases manyfold, and also on statutory holidays.
There has been continued improvement in the letter carrier delivery service to those residential areas which receive one delivery a day, and although there were a number of complaints when the one delivery per day was established, these have been considerably reduced. The five-day week and delivery on six days a week involve a rotation problem which cannot be avoided, so that deliveries must be made periodically by relief carriers who are not so well versed on all the details of the routes as are the regular letter carriers.
As regards revenue postmasters, that is to say the postmasters who are in charge of the small offices, the department, after extensive study, is introducing a new system of payment. The annual rates of compensation which are already being paid in some instances and which will be paid in all cases in future will be based on the work load of the office rather than the actual revenue. This will be a much fairer system in so far as the individual postmasters are concerned, as in a number of cases the revenue did not properly reflect the work of the office.
The employment conditions of revenue postmasters are further being improved
Supply-Post Office
under the terms of the Public Service Superannuation Act. It is estimated that 1,200 additional postmasters will now fall within the provisions of that act. This is a privilege which is greatly appreciated by these hard-working postal employees. Further, 28 offices have been raised from a revenue to a semi-staff basis. This means that the postmasters and staffs of these offices are now paid according to a classified fixed salary wage, and receive benefits comparable to those enjoyed by civil servants. In addition 22 semi-staff post offices have been reclassified to full staff basis, which means that employees in those offices will have the full status of civil servants.
One of the features which has an important bearing on the public service is that of postal accommodation. Unfortunately at the present time our accommodation is inadequate in many centres. This is due to two main factors, namely the continued appreciable growth of the postal service, and the fact that during wartime and in the period subsequent thereto the building program was somewhat retarded.
During 1954-55 some 35 projects of different sizes were completed which will facilitate service to the public. There are in addition 61 projects which are either under construction or for which tenders have been called. These include such large buildings as the post offices at Vancouver, Winnipeg, Regina, and other comparatively large centres. Furthermore, there are 131 projects for which plans are being prepared and studied further, both by the public works and post office departments.
The department is continuing to study and develop the most economical and efficient method of mail handling. We have also initiated a program of work simplification. Significant progress is being made along these lines which we feel will further improve the efficiency of the service. The department is pioneering and developing a system of electronic sortation, and is also developing mechanical facing-up machines which will not only speed up the handling of the mail but will render the performance of post office tasks performed by the individual employees less onerous and laborious.
The number of employees in the postal service, including mail contractors, now totals approximately 50,000. Of these approximately 23,000 are civil servants, 13,000 are mail contractors and the balance, approximately 14,000, are the postmasters and assistants in revenue post offices.
There has been a continuous development in the transportation of mail by air. In the domestic service, the increase in the weight limit of "all-up" letter mail to eight ounces

Supply-Post Office
has resulted in a sharp increase in the volume carried, with corresponding advantages to the mailing public. In the international sphere the department has extended its services wherever air transportation is available, and has developed air transportation to many international points for parcel post and other categories of mail in addition to letters.
A reduction in international air transportation charges has enabled the department to reduce postage rates to the mailing public, and also to extend the 10-cent air letter form to any post office in the world.


Mr. Balcer:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to join with the acting minister in hoping for, in the name of all members of the official opposition, the early return of the Postmaster General. At the same time I would express our congratulations to the parliamentary assistant who is acting for him in the presentation of his estimates.
The parliamentary assistant has painted a rosy picture of the activities of the department, but I must say the Canadian public certainly had the right to hear of great improvements in the Post Office Department, especially since this year the estimated revenue of the department-that is for the fiscal year 1954-55-will be $132 million, which means $22 million more than last year, while the expenditures will show an increase of $13 million.
I would imagine that with this increase of $13 million in expenditures the department must have made great improvements all across Canada. The situation must be very different from what it has been in previous years. During the discussion of the present estimates I hope the parliamentary assistant will have the opportunity of giving us many examples of these improvements. There is, however, one place where I believe improvements are greatly needed. I refer to the problems of the suburban areas of our great cities across Canada.
By its policy the Post Office Department, in previous years, has caused a great deal of hardship to the people who are settling in the suburban areas around these big cities. In practically every new housing development in Canada the post office was always the last service to be offered to the people. Most of the time the municipal authorities were spending hundreds of thousands of dollars-even a million dollars-to provide the new suburbs with water, sewage and streets. The school boards were spending money. The telephone companies and power companies were trying to help these people. Usually the only thing missing was the postal service.

The postal service is always given about a year or two after these people have been established. Most of the time they were obliged to practically form an association and then enrol the support of the chamber of commerce, the municipal council and the churches in order to get even a mail box. I remember a few cases of that kind. Then they had to work for years following the same routine and making appeals to their members to get a certain service. Most of the time their campaign to get postal service was blocked by some sort of semi-secret regulation in which there was always some clause that prevented any improvement. There was always some regulation standing in the way; the houses were too far apart, they were so many yards apart or there were not enough houses on the street, and so on and so forth.
After the municipalities and the school boards had spent millions of dollars, it is hard to imagine that the Post Office Department would not believe in spending $25 for a mail box or a half hour or an hour of the mail carrier's time just to give these people some service. It sounds ridiculous, but I have witnessed some real hardship in my own riding.
I remember that in Three Rivers we had such a new district where most of the men were labouring men who worked until six o'clock at night in an iron foundry. It was then too late for them to go to the post office, which was at least two miles away from their houses. They therefore were obliged to send their children there after school, either by bicycle or bus, just to get, most of the time, a bill or some advertisement by mail. That situation lasted for more than two years. Improvement was always blocked by some regulation saying that between two houses there was a distance of over 80 yards. Finally after many representations the situation was corrected, but it took a long time. For these people the situation was really discouraging. I therefore hope that with the great surplus the department has this year- I mean now that the department is rich- we shall have some definite planning to look after these special cases.
Speaking about special cases, may I say that we have one in my riding, and it is a fair illustration of what these regulations of the postal department are like. In my riding we have an island called Wayagamack island, where we have one of the biggest paper mills in Canada. We have about 25 families living on this island, which is connected with the city of Three Rivers by a bridge. It is, in fact, within the city limits of Three Rivers. The people on that island have had

mail service since 1917. They had that mail service until January 31, 1951, when the collapse of the bridge across the St. Maurice river stopped the mail for a while. On August 13, about eight months afterwards, the communications were repaired and the service was re-established, so everything was all right. This service these people had enjoyed for over 30 years was re-established. But unfortunately the postal department discovered there was a certain regulation they could apply, and they cancelled the service.
Ever since then these people have been trying to get their postal service re-established. They tried to get it by means of all kinds of requests. They sent requests and even delegations to the deputy postmaster general, but to no avail. After having had the service for 30 years, we now find that the postal department have decided these people are not entitled to it. If the department felt for 30 years that these people deserved the service I think it sounds rather silly all of a sudden to invoke some regulation in order to stop such a service.
Now that the department has a great deal of money on hand, or has a great surplus, I think it is about time something was done. I suggest that at the next session of parliament a committee of the house should be set up to study these regulations. So far as I know the regulations are not codified. I think it is time the government set up such a committee, in which people with experience from all across Canada could sit around a table and discuss these regulations. I am quite sure there are some regulations that must be absolutely out of date and of such a nature that they do not fit into the regular life of our Canadian people.
For instance, there are certain regulations which state that in order to get a post office, a town must have so many people; that in order to have delivery of mail in certain areas by carriers there must be a certain population, and so forth.	These regulations
worked very well for a while, but I think it is about time they were reviewed. I believe this would be a grand opportunity for the government to set up a committee to discuss these matters. Most members have had a good deal of experience with these things, and cases are different from one end of Canada to the other.
I know, for instance, that in the city of La Tuque, north of Three Rivers, delivery by mail carrier has been an electoral promise for the last 30 years. It sounds a bit strange that a city of the importance of La Tuque cannot get service by mail carrier. I know there is always some regulation in the postal department which says that for such and
Supply-Post Office
such a reason these services cannot be provided, but I think all these regulations should be reviewed. Now that the department has enough money to make some real improvements, this is the proper time to correct the situation and remove the hardship from the people of these cities.
There is another point I should like to raise, having to do with a situation that I think is not quite fair. It has to do with the cost of mailing letters between Cap de la Madeleine and Three Rivers. The two cities are adjacent to each other, and are only separated by the St. Maurice river. Many of the people of Cap de la Madeleine work and do their business in Three Rivers, and the reverse is also the case to some extent. It is rather surprising that the people there have to pay an extra cent to send mail from Cap de la Madeleine to Three Rivers and vice versa, when on the island of Montreal a letter can be sent a distance of 10 or 15 miles at exactly the same rate of postage.
I think these matters should be discussed and corrected. I believe it would also be good for the people of Canada if the regulations were codified so that every time a special situation arose in some part of Canada the people of the area would be able to look at the regulations and see what they had to do to get mail delivery. Up to now the practice has been that they have to write the deputy postmaster general, who issues a certain regulation to the local postmaster. I do not think this is the proper channel to have to go through. I believe the regulations should be set forth in codified form so that people all across Canada can go to the book and find out exactly what is what so far as mail service is concerned.
I was very pleased to hear the parliamentary assistant refer to a few improvements in the postal service, but I can assure him that the people of Canada, who had to suffer a tremendous increase in the rates of postage last year, should receive much better service than they used to get and are getting now.
The reduction in service from two deliveries to one delivery a day has hurt a lot of people. I know that on a certain street in my riding there is a man who is a great reader of the morning newspaper, Montreal Matin, and the poor man does not get his paper until around six o'clock at night. He is very disappointed. I think something should be done to rectify these special situations. Before we are finished with these estimates I hope the parliamentary assistant will be able to tell the house what great plans the Post Office Department has for the coming year,

Supply-Post Office
and will be in a position to announce to the house and the people of Canada great improvements in the postal department in the near future, because the department costs the people of Canada a lot of money and had quite a surplus during the last year.


Mr. Regier:: Mr. Chairman, the members of this group would also like to express their keen desire to see the early return to active duty of the Postmaster General, with his genial personality. I think I can honestly say that if there is any cabinet minister whose absence we feel keenly it is the most pleasant Postmaster General of Canada. We are looking forward to the day when he will be in his place again and able to resume his responsibilities. We were highly impressed a year ago, when he was under very severe fire from the opposition, with the able manner in which he held his own ground.
At this time I should also like to express the appreciation of this group to the many thousands of employees of the Post Office Department. It is one department of government, in my opinion, in which you can notice a pride of service that is not found in any other department. Perhaps it is because the Post Office Department is many years old that we find a situation where even the humblest of civil servants in the department takes an intense personal pride in his responsibilities and in the fact that he is rendering a worthwhile public service.
Contrary to the attitude just expressed, I believe that on the whole the service rendered by the Post Office Department to the people of Canada is excellent. We retain our right, of course, to criticize what we consider are shortcomings here and there. That is our responsibility. However, I think the average Canadian is very much impressed by the most efficient service the Post Office Department is rendering to the people.
At this time I should also like to express the appreciation, as I know many other individuals and organizations have done, of the people of the lower mainland of British Columbia for the setting up of a metropolitan postal area there. In our opinion this step was long overdue. The cities of Montreal and Toronto and the areas surrounding them have had this great privilege for a goodly number of years, and Vancouver, the third largest metropolitan area in Canada, had to put up a fight in order to gain recognition.
I should like to say to the acting minister that when he set up the metropolitan area we were pleased to have him endorse the principle enunciated by the Postmaster General just before his illness. We were most pleased to see that the Acting Postmaster General did
fMr Balcer.l
not desert the decisions of the Postmaster General in his absence. However, I should like to point out to him that there are many little isolated places within the metropolitan area which he omitted to include at the time. I sincerely believe it was only an oversight. However, there are places that to all intents and purposes are part of this lower mainland metropolitan area. I hope it will not be too long before places like Port Moody, Port Coquitlam, North and West Vancouver will be included.
While I am speaking about the local situation I should also like to put in a plea for the early establishment of sub-post office facilities for the people of East Burnaby. This was one of the things mentioned at the time the Postmaster General was still able to assume his responsibilities. He did assure us that serious consideration would be given to this matter. We feel that the people of East Burnaby should have some sub-post office facilities so they would not have to spend the time going to North Burnaby, South Burnaby or New Westminster if they want to do any post office business.
Last year I noticed what in my opinion amounted to almost an admission by the Post Office Department that it was one of the few remaining departments of government in which patronage was still tolerated. While it was not said this system was endorsed, one almost got that impression. I should like to make a plea that any sign of patronage be removed at a very early date, because I think the prestige of any department of the public service is to a certain extent dependent on the absence of patronage. In so far as civil service matters are concerned, I believe we are getting away from pork barrel politics, and I should like to see the last vestiges of it removed from the Post Office Department.
I hope the recently announced regulation concerning the deduction of holiday time as a punishment for tardiness is not being applied. I feel that if there are civil servants who repeatedly show up late for work, they should be dealt with as they would be in any other line of employment. The civil servant who insists on being tardy should no longer be retained by the civil service; that is the only honest way of dealing with tardiness. I feel that this business of taking away a man's holiday which he needs, whether he is a tardy civil servant or otherwise, is not to be commended. After an adequate warning the civil servant should be dismissed, rather than have his holidays taken from him.
In connection with the civil service I may say also that I hope the government will see its way clear to setting an example in the

matter of fair employment practices. Rather than granting the 40-hour week only to those postal employees who work in an area where the 40-hour week is prevalent, the department should grant the 40-hour week to all employees, irrespective of what industry in the area may be doing. I feel also that some attention might be given to what I sometimes feel is the rather rapid turnover in employees in the Post Office Department. There seem to be a great number of postal employees resigning and taking other jobs. I think there could well be reasons for this large number of resignations. I do not believe it speaks very well for the post office as an employer when they have to hire large numbers of new employees to replace the members of the civil service who have left.
I listened with a good deal of interest to the speech by the hon. member for Three Rivers. He was complaining about the same thing that many of us are complaining about, and asked for a change in the regulations covering suburban areas. I do not know what change in the regulations he would want, but so far as I can determine there is really no policy in the Post Office Department covering service to growing areas of Canada. There seems to be a tendency to feel that once the post office is established it must remain the centre of distribution regardless of what happens to the area involved. It is readily understandable that those who are operating such post offices would wish to retain this ever-expanding area of service under their personal direction.
I believe the department should have definite conditions-I know that is what the hon. member for Three Rivers meant-that must be complied with before new services can be rendered. We should be able to look at the policy and determine whether or not a section is entitled to door to door delivery; whether it is entitled to these little red mail boxes connected with the pick-up service, or whether it is entitled to postal facilities in the corner store. There should be a policy that would enable us to determine whether an area would be entitled to the erection of a sub-post office. We feel that the policy of the department in connection with these things is far too vague. It may well be that the wheel that creaks the loudest first gets the grease, or it may be that the community that has the most influence with the department is able to get attention first.
We of the lower mainland feel we should not have had to use many of the tactics we had to employ in order to get the 4-cent letter rate. We feel that there should have
Supply-Post Office
been a policy covering such matters. I would once again, as I did a year ago, appeal to the acting minister to reduce the first class letter rate. I feel it is an imposition on the people who really need the mail service of Canada to ask them to subsidize the advertising of commercial enterprises. I feel we could very easily lower the 5-cent first class letter rate to 4 cents and still make ends meet if we raise the second class mail rate. I believe you would make many postal employees happy if you imposed such an additional tariff on second class matter, because it would discourage the use of this medium for the promotion of Rinso soap and things of that sort.
I was in the New Westminster post office some months ago, and saw the arrival of monthly magazines. I would call the attention of the acting minister to a recent innovation of the daily newspapers. In my area one may receive a daily newspaper for $1.50 a month, I believe it is; and if one agrees for the period of a year to pay an additional 40 cents a month to the local carrier boy one is entitled to choose from a number of magazines which will be delivered by mail. We in New Westminster are not particularly keen about the magazine known as True Story. We regard it as that much trash, and we used to get only one mail bag of this magazine each month. However, since the introduction of this offer at 40 cents a month the New Westminster office receives a dozen mail bags filled with issues of this one magazine.	When one considers that the
number of magazines available was extensive, that the list was very long, one can imagine at once the additional burden placed on the post office by this innovation of the daily newspapers.
There may have been a time in Canadian history when second class mail required the advantage of a subsidy. There is a howl in certain sections of Canada when mention is made of subsidies for useful purposes, including the sale of our wheat overseas and the sale of Canadian foodstuffs to the people of Canada as well as to other people in other parts of the world. However, I have yet to hear many objections to this hidden subsidy to commercial firms in Canada. If these were essential and the most useful forms of advertising I might not feel so keenly in the matter, but I do not see a particle of difference between Oxydol and Rinso soaps, and I see no reason whatsoever why our faithful civil servants should have loaded on their backs week after week hundreds of pounds of this useless trash, particularly when they might be rendering a much more useful service to society.

Supply-Post Office
There is one more point I would like to raise, one which up to now I have not had a suitable opportunity to call to the attention of the Acting Postmaster General. I had written about it to the Postmaster General, assuming that in his absence mail would be placed on the desk of the Acting Postmaster General or, failing that, at least on the desk of the parliamentary assistant. Instead of that I received a reply from the deputy postmaster general enclosing confirmation of an earlier decision by a lesser official. I resented that, because I feel that when I as a member of parliament write a letter in which I call into question some of the activities of a department, I should receive something more than a reply from a member of the civil service. I feel that is not the customary procedure. No other department of government has ever treated me in this way.
This is what happened. While the postmaster at Port Moody was absent on his holidays there was removed from the post office, by an alleged theft, the sum of $500. The Post Office Department is now withholding $50 a month from the salary of the postmaster at Port Moody until the $500 is recovered. I am told that in many post offices, even in offices as large as that at Port Moody, the postmaster is held responsible for what happens in his absence, even when he is away on holidays. If this is so, then certainly we are not helping those people to take holidays. I do not think postmasters should be held financially liable for whatever may happen in their absence.
I hope the Acting Postmaster General will look into the situation. The postmaster in question is one of the most highly honoured in the community.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Did I understand the hon. member to say that he had written me a letter to which I had not replied?


Erhart Regier: No, I wrote to the Postmaster General. However, I had assumed the letter would be placed on the desk of the Acting Postmaster General, or at least on that of the parliamentary assistant. I regret that for various reasons I was not able to call it to the attention of the Acting Postmaster General. I mention this merely to emphasize to him the way many members of parliament feel in regard to the Post Office Department; that there is a self-styled postmaster general of Canada who has no right to be a postmaster general because he has not been designated as such. In saying this I am referring to the deputy postmaster general.
I feel that the procedure of making the postmaster at Port Moody pay for something that happened in the post office in his absence is most unwarranted. This man is most highly

regarded in his home town. He is a veteran of the first world war. On two separate occasions, at great risk to his own personal safety, in cases of fires in that town he saved for the Post Office Department thousands of dollars. He has been an alderman for many years; and to have him thus penalized for something he had nothing to do with is not, in my opinion, a fair procedure when dealing with a good and faithful civil servant.
Then I have one other complaint, which I think is nation-wide. This complaint deals with the renting of post office buildings. I do not think we can argue that the government of Canada ought to own all the many small buildings in which post offices are housed. I do not think anyone would be logical in asking for that. I notice from the public accounts that in the year ending March 31, 1954 no less than 1,946 public buildings were rented by the government of Canada, through the Department of Public Works, where the rental was less than $250 a month. I assume that most of these buildings housed post offices. The total rental paid in that fiscal year for these buildings was $1,432,442.
I do not think one could argue against that expenditure. Indeed, on the whole we have expressed our satisfaction with it. A man who lives in a building and permits the government to use part of it as a post office is certainly entitled to receive some compensation. It would be poor business for the department to go out on a limb to the extent of erecting public buildings in every little hamlet in Canada.
However, the Department of Public Works, again chiefly on behalf of the Post Office Department, paid out in rentals in that same year the sum of $3,399,051. This was paid to people who received rentals for buildings in excess of $3,000 a year. In looking over the rates of rental paid I noticed that in one case it went as high as $2.20 a square foot a year. This is an exceedingly high rate for some of the smaller centres of Canada. In most of the urban centres of Canada adequate facilities might well be rented for $1 a square foot a year. That is considered a fairly high rate of return. I am just wondering why in some cases rentals are so high.
This is what I do not like to see happen, Mr. Chairman. Somebody is offered a lease by the Post Office Department, which agrees to rent a certain specified building for a 10-year period at a fixed yearly rental. This individual, who possibly does not even own a lot, much less a building, can then take the lease and walk over to see his bank manager and say, "I have an agreement with the government of Canada which will pay me for this accommodation so many dollars a month

for the next 10 years. I am willing to assign my rent to you. Will you lend me the money to buy the lot and put up a building?"
If we are not careful, Mr. Chairman, this is what can happen. A man can rent a building costing $25,000 for $500 a month. He is assured of paying the cost of the building through monthly payments of $250 without investing any money of his own whatsoever. He can receive a net return of $250 a month, yet make no contribution whatsoever to the public interest.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: Will the hon. member permit an interruption at this time? The Post Office Department does not rent buildings; it obtains them through the Department of Public Works. We tell them of our needs.


Erhart Regier: I fully realize that, Mr. Chairman. At the same time I also realize that the Department of Public Works will not put up a building for the Post Office Department unless the Post Office Department asks for a certain building to be put up.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: We
ask for appropriate accommodation. We do not ask them to put up a certain building in a certain place. We want a building in a suitable location which will meet our requirements.


Erhart Regier: I am glad to have the parliamentary assistant now put the blame for what is happening on the Department of Public Works. If that is the case we shall raise the matter again when the estimates of the Minister of Public Works are before us. If that is the proper time to raise it, we certainly shall do so. However, if it is good business for an individual to put up a building in such heavily populated areas as the city of New Westminster, the municipal district of Burnaby, the city of Port Moody, the area around Surrey-and I know it is happening in other parts of Canada.-if it is in someone's selfish interests to put up a new building and lease it to the government of Canada, it is also good business for the government of Canada to own such public buildings and collect its own rents. If it were not profitable for those individuals to put up those buildings they would not do it.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, the parliamentary assistant has twice raised the point that this is not a matter for the Post Office Department; it is no concern of ours. Surely the hon. member would not mind saving it until the minister who is responsible has his estimates before the committee.


Erhart Regier: Mr. Chairman, I shall end this discussion now. However, I am not fully
Supply-Post Office
satisfied that the Post Office Department is not in great measure responsible for obtaining certain accommodation from the Department of Public Works. I am not satisfied that it does not exercise some influence on whether or not public buildings are to be erected and owned by the government of Canada.


Mr. Hahn:: Mr. Chairman, we in this group are pleased to associate ourselves with the remarks that were made earlier in regard to the improvement in health of the Postmaster General and his return here in the very near future. We are looking forward to the day when he can return to his seat in the house next to the Acting Postmaster General.
I should like to compliment the parliamentary assistant on the very capable and efficient way he presented his report on the doings of the department in the past year.
In the course of his remarks the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam mentioned the new postal regulations having to do with the metropolitan area of New Westminster and Vancouver, under which my constituents come. I should like to associate myself with his commendable remarks in that respect. I want to compliment the government representative on the fine way in which the meeting was conducted. We possibly set a precedent, in that for the first time we had members of the Social Credit party, the C.C.F. party and the Liberal party in one room discussing a problem on which we reached an agreeable solution. However, it did call for some help from the people of Burnaby, who took it upon themselves to conduct a plebiscite and help the matter along. We in the area are very happy that such changes were made. The people in the north part of Surrey, which is now to be known as the North Surrey postal area, are very happy about the situation.
However, I am not on my feet for the purpose of extending only complimentary remarks. I am very happy to have the privilege of doing that and to pass them on, but for that reason I feel the department should know something else. In the course of his review the parliamentary assistant did indicate that the department was anxious to receive any information as to complaints, suggestions or recommendations the people had to offer, and would give them some consideration.
During the time I was at home at Easter, and earlier, I had occasion to meet with the letter carriers, the rural route carriers and the mail contract carriers, and discuss with them some of the problems with which they are faced. It might be possible to deal with some of the problems in a regulatory way.

Supply-Post Office
Others are problems that are common to the nation as a whole and should be made known here.
With respect to the contracts of the rural mail carriers, I find that the population of the area in which I live is growing rapidly. The Postmaster General and his parliamentary assistant are aware of that. That also applies to the departmental officials. There are some 15 rural routes which terminate in the postal district of New Westminster. Because of the increase in population in that area and the contracts having been let at an earlier time, we of that area find that while the mileage remains the same the number of stops is continuing to mount. It would be very interesting indeed to discover what discrepancy, if any, exists between the rates paid to United States rural route carriers, the prairie rural route carriers, the rural route carriers of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and those in the mountainous area of British Columbia, including the lower mainland.
Another matter that bothers them considerably is the question of overtime and extra help. The report by the parliamentary assistant indicated that his department is cutting down on the amount of help that was supplied. These rural mail carriers are unhappy about that, as they feel they are being penalized. It is true that for a long time changes have not been made in respect of the regulations. From December 12 to December 31 the mail is particularly heavy when everyone is getting parcels or more mail than usual. These men have to do their own sorting, and are not given additional help.
1 know under our system of mail contracts it will be said they should realize that when they put in their bid. That probably is an answer that could be made. I shall deal with that point shortly. It is found that during the week these rural mail carriers work as much as 16 hours a day, as well as eight hours on Sunday, in order to get out the mail as efficiently as our post office officials have the right to expect them to do. They work also on statutory holidays such as May 24 and December 25. It is most unfortunate that of all the people in the nation only parliamentarians and rural mail carriers have to work on a holiday such as May 24. If these days are permitted as holidays for the ordinary civil servant we should go a step further and grant the same privilege to these 13,000-odd mail carriers.
Usually when a route is put up for tender there are about 350 boxholders on the list, but quite often within a very short time the

number of boxholders may increase to as many as 900, as has happened in my own area. Many of these men when bidding on these routes do not appreciate the potential growth, and they are afraid to bid high for fear they will not get the contract. It may be said that as they have contracted for the route they should go ahead and suffer the consequences, but I do not think the Canadian taxpayers expect these men to make deliveries to 500, 600, 720 or 802 boxholders when they have contracted to make deliveries to only 350. I do not think the public feel they should have to do that at the original contract rate.
This contracting system is actually unjust, for the reason I have just outlined. It is an antiquated system. It is something like the old tax collector who tendered for his job of collecting taxes. It is true that the mail carrier does not bring in revenue, but in order to obtain the contract he must underbid others for that particular job. Quite often the results are not the best, and poor service is given to the public.
I know the department was familiar with conditions on one rural mail route two or three years ago. In this case a particular individual had underbid for the route, and he obtained the contract. For four or five days after he took over the route people failed to get their mail, or it was misdirected. It was found the man could not read or write properly. More efficient men had bid on that route but were unable to get the contract. I must congratulate the postmaster at New Westminster for taking an active part in this matter and seeing that this man was replaced. But in the meanwhile there was this misdirection of mail, which would not have occurred had the proper man obtained the contract.
Oftentimes a route is changed and tenders must be called again. The experienced man knows the difficulties that will be encountered, but when he puts in a reasonable bid quite often he is underbid by someone who may have supplementary income, or who has little knowledge of how the mail should be carried and what work is involved. Yet that man gets the contract and we lose the benefit of the experience which the other man has to offer.
I have one case in mind in which a man was not given a contract in the beginning, but later on he replaced a most inefficient man, the one I spoke of earlier. This man had been with the department for a matter of 18 years.


Mr. Campbell:: Who is "we"? The hon. member says "we", and I should like to know it he is referring to the department.


Frederick George Hahn: I am referring to the people in the area to whom this man delivers mail. I happen to be one of those in the area and the "we" would include the people in the area. I think this is a matter that should be taken into consideration. We should consider the experience possessed by some of these men, and should take into account the lesser efficiency of a man who may underbid on a contract in order to get a particular route.
It may be true that the lowest tender is not always accepted. Frequently these men are brought into the district office and their bids are discussed, in the hope that they will bring them down to the lowest bid. The department is desirous of hiring the efficient and experienced carrier. I must say it has been found quite frequently that the department has been asked by some of these inexperienced people who have taken contracts that they be given increases, and quite frequently they get the increases from the department. The department realizes that their original bid was too low. But the result of all this is that the person with the greater knowledge of the route and who could have given the most efficient service does not get the job. Someone else gets the job, and then the rate is brought up to that at which the other man tendered.
Frequently the stock answer to a request for an increase is that the department does not feel that an upward revision in pay is justified, but should the man so desire the department will on 90 days' notice open the route for tender and the man will be free to bid again. That is the stock answer that is given when many of these experienced route carriers make these requests. They want to bid whenever there is an increase in pay because of changes in the number of boxholders, rerouting, or for some other reason.
This is a most unfortunate situation, and I do not think we are treating these men properly. They do not have a 40-hour work week; they do not receive any superannuation; they are not under the sick leave provisions, and they are granted no annual holidays. They pay their running expenses, which average about $100 a month, and they do not get the same benefits as do the letter carriers. They tender on labour.
The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam mentioned one of the other problems with which letter carriers have found themselves faced, namely this matter of subsidized advertising carried through our mails. Incidentally, this same complaint applies to both the
Supply-Post Office
letter carriers and the rural route carriers. As the result of an active advertising campaign on the part of the newspapers, as was explained by the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam, there has been a tremendous increase in the number of magazines which the letter carriers and rural route men are asked to carry. Two years ago it was rather usual for the letter carrier to have only two days on which his mail was particularly heavy, by reason of the fact that he had to carry more magazines on those days than on any others. However, today he has a heavy day every day.
The hon. member mentioned True Love magazine, I believe. I have others I could add to that list. There is Popular Science. The New Westminster post office used to receive a bundle and a half. Today they get 20 bundles of Popular Science. As to Parents Magazine, two years ago they got two bags; now they get 10 bags. Reader's Digest and other magazines are received in proportionate numbers.
According to the statement of the parliamentary assistant the post office is losing money. It is true it showed a $5 million net profit, but he said it failed to pay $13 million in rents to the Department of Public Works. In other words on a business basis it lost $8 million last year. In effect we are subsidizing these magazines. Whether they are cheap or whether they are good is not the important factor. It is the advertising contained in them that is supposed to be paying these charges, and not necessarily the householder, whether or not he buys those magazines.
The service to these magazines and to the publishers of other periodicals is greater than that given to air mail or first class mail. That, of course, is a situation which should not exist. We find that the postman notifies each publisher of the old and the new address. He notifies the United States publisher once and the Canadian publisher twice. He does not get any pay for this extra clerical work.
That raises a question that was mentioned earlier in respect to docking them one day's holiday for each three hours or five hours-I forget which it is-of time they are late within the year. These clerks quite frequently spend anywhere from 15 to 30 minutes a day after hours or during their lunch hour in redirecting magazines. This Post Office Department gets nothing for that service, nor do the men. However, if they happen to be 15 minutes late for a matter of three days-I forget just what it is now-or three hours late in the year, they lose a full day. Yet they do not get paid anything extra, whether it is 15 or 30 minutes extra they have to spend. I do not think that is playing the game fairly.

Supply-Post Office
It is not unusual to see these letter carriers redirecting mail for 15 to 30 minutes of their own time. These misdirected magazines and periodicals are forwarded for 90 days, as is all first class mail; and then they are treated as first class mail and there is no extra charge to the magazine publisher. A letter carrier finds it impossible to get his regular work done in regular hours. As I said, he gets no credit for this extra time put in after hours or during his lunch hour. It does not matter actually on what part of his route he happens to be when lunch time comes. If he is two or three miles away from the post office he is given no credit for the time spent travelling back and forth to get his lunch, etc. I would not say that he should necessarily receive any extra time for travelling, but we should not penalize him, as we are doing according to this regulation that was posted as of April 1, in respect of one day lost for three hours that he may have lost through coming late during the year.
I return to the magazine question. At the present time the clerk notifies the Canadian publisher twice, and then he returns the magazine to the company. Some of these publishers never take notice of a change of address. On examination I have discovered that there are certain magazines such as Eagles magazine and Western Grocer, which the larger publishers find it more economical to send to the Post Office Department and then have the clerk spend his time returning it to the publisher, and it never does get to the man who has subscribed to it originally. He apparently does not bother to get his address changed properly. As to one particular magazine that was drawn to my attention, namely Motor Coach Conductors and Operators the same address was kept on that magazine for ten consecutive years. I am not so sure that it does not still come to the same post office.
Such a condition should not exist, under which we continue to charge our clerks one day holiday for being the equivalent of three hours late during the year, and at the same time give them nothing for redirecting this mail; especially on heavy magazine days, which is every day now. Fifteen to thirty minutes are given to the Canadian people of the time of these men who deliver the mail.
There are certain recommendations I would propose that might be instituted. One is that we as the parliament of this country should ask our magazine publishers to have their magazines labelled in a particular place. I do not know whether hon. members have taken the time to study the magazines at

all. If you do so, just ask yourselves what you would do if you were a clerk and received a magazine that had to be redirected, let us say, back to the publisher. Do you know where you would find the publisher's name? I venture to say that if you brought 50 magazines in here you would find the addresser's name in 50 different places. That is a situation that should not be tolerated. If we want to use people's time properly we should ask that the name of the periodical and its address should be properly placed, let us say, on the inside cover or on page 1 or page 2, or some uniform place. It would not take anything from the cover of the magazine which seems to be the important thing but it could help these letter carriers and others in the postal department. It would save them considerable time.
The location of the names of the individuals to whom the magazines are addressed is something that might also bear some uniformity. It is helping cost the taxpayers this $8 million deficit that we will actually have for the year. Because it is costing us actual cash I think the people of Canada would be quite within their rights in asking that if a certain magazine reached a particular volume, the company should set up its own delivery system. Carrier boys deliver magazine such as Liberty and other publications, and I see no reason why the post office should subsidize magazine delivery.
There is another difficulty that is encountered. If you go into any large post office you will find magazines of all kinds stacked there. One magazine is to be delivered on May 24, let us say, another on May 27 and another on May 29. In this way we are providing a warehouse for some of these publications. Householders expect their magazines to be delivered on a particular day, and the person who takes the brunt of the blame is none other than the letter carrier. We cannot blame the householder. He has a right to expect that the magazine should be in his hands on the first Monday of the third week in the month, or whatever day it may be. However, by reason of the fact that the mail may be particularly heavy a great burden is loaded upon the letter carrier, who is not being treated in the same way as the ordinary worker in our cities and towns.
There are instances of mail coming into the post office marked, "Do not open until Christmas", or with instructions not to deliver it before a certain date. The post office personnel are particularly careful to try to please the person sending the mail and the person who is to receive it, but at times such as the Christmas season, when the amount of mail is particularly heavy, no one should expect

mail to be kept in the post office for any length of time. However, in their co-operative way the post office personnel try to serve the public as efficiently and as well as they expect to be served. They provide this service at a very nominal charge, but I do not think they should be expected to do so.
I suggest that magazine publishers should be told that their magazines will not be held for delivery on a particular date once they arrive in the post office. Efficient operation is not only a matter of getting the mail to the post office but of dispatching it as quickly as possible, and it should be gotten rid of as quickly as possible.
Another problem that is of concern at particular times of the year has to do with heavy catalogue deliveries. To the best of my knowledge the catalogues have to be tied in bundles by the letter carrier on his own time. In the case of a city such as New Westminster the catalogues are shipped there by freight, and the freight rate of course is very low. Then they are delivered by letter carrier at the local rate of 18 cents each. I do not know where our business sense has gone. The letter carrier has to tie these catalogues into bundles on his own time. It is his own time because we do not pay him anything extra for it. Then he has to deliver them to householders some distance from the post office at a rai,e of 18 cents each. It is economically unsound. The catalogues come in burlap sacks, and then they are handled in the same way as magazines. They are stored until ready for release according to the wishes of the particular firms.
These catalogues are entirely advertising and nothing else. Why should the letter carriers be burdened with them? New Westminster post office is not a particularly large one. There are only about 100,000 householders who receive their mail through that office, but I find that the average shipment of catalogues to the office weighs some 34 tons As you can well understand, that represents a great number of catalogues.
In most of our major cities and towns you will find mail order offices. If a person wishes to place an order with Simpsons-Sears or the T. Eaton Company or any other mail order house he can go to the mail order office and give the attendant his order, rather than use the mail to send the order to the company. At these offices he can either pay for his order or, if he has a credit account, the matter can be looked after in another manner. Instead of all these catalogues being handled through the post office, as they are today, I suggest that the different mail order houses be instructed to use a card system. I understand that some now do so to a certain
Supply-Post Office
extent. They should be asked to use a card system wherever possible to notify their customers that the catalogues are available at the local mail order office. Otherwise the postal rate for carrying the catalogues should be increased. The present rate for the handling of these items is only 18 cents which is unreasonably low.
Another complaint has to do with overtime. This question has been discussed in the house from time to time, but I for one am not satisfied that it has been handled properly. I am satisfied that if the deputy postmaster general or any of his staff were to check the larger post offices they would find postal clerks and letter carriers working after hours readdressing mail. This does not happen once or twice a year but once or twice a week, or oftener, and each time it may take a matter of 15, 20 or 30 minutes. If a person in industry has to work 10 or 15 minutes overtime he is paid for half an hour, but that does not apply in the Post Office Department.
The postal clerks and letter carriers are told that if they want to put in overtime they must come in earlier the next morning. If a letter carrier is in the habit of coming to work at 6.30 a.m. he should anticipate when he is going to have a particularly heavy load of mail and arrive at 5.30 a.m. Then the postmaster will recognize that the man is there for an extra hour and will give him an hour's overtime. I do not know whether it is because we mistrust our civil servants who deliver the mail that we have this kind of thing, but in my opinion we should not expect people to spend their evenings doing extra work and not pay them for it in the same way that industry treats its workers.
Another ground these men have for complaint is the fact that the check-up time, so far as letter carrier routes are concerned, is usually during the month of July. As everyone knows, July is a vacation month, and only about 65 per cent of the householders on a route are receiving delivery of mail. In the months of April and October, for example, 70 per cent or more of the householders are receiving mail, but by taking the month of July it is found that the figure is 65 per cent. Magazine subscriptions usually lapse at that time of the year. Catalogues are not distributed then, with the result that the mail is considerably less than usual. In speaking of the various letter carrier routes, it just means that once the fall and winter months are here the chore becomes more difficult. It means these carriers have to cover 70 per cent or more of a route which was actually set up on the basis of 65 per cent.

Supply-Post Office
There is one other fact that was drawn to my attention, and that concerns the matter of carriers' garments. On April 5 of this year I had tabled a return of sessional paper No. 112-E concerning the type of garment being used and the suppliers thereof. Question No. 3 read:
Who were the five chief suppliers of (a) summer weight trousers; (b) winter weight trousers, during each of the past five years?
The answer was Master Craft Uniform Company, Registered, Quebec, for the years 1950 to 1953 and Maurice Pollack Limited, Quebec, for 1954 and 1955. I find that particularly interesting because the letter carriers complain that whereas formerly their uniforms lasted for two or three years, they are now very fortunate to have a uniform last for more than two or three months. I do not know if there is any relationship between the fact that letter carriers are being docked $20 per month for clothing and the fact that there is a new supplier. I am not in a position to say. If it is a matter of $20 per month, as I have been led to believe, then that totals to a $240 per year deduction. I am not prepared to say that is correct because I have not checked with the minister or any of the departmental officials, but I think it is $20 per month. If that is so, I would strongly urge that consideration be given to the fact the men feel they would be much better off buying their own uniforms and getting the $240 because the old uniforms lasted them for two or three years.
I am quite aware of the fact that the recommendations I have made are going to cost money. There is only one possible place from which this money can come. My suggestion is that the second and third class mail, which frequently receives the same treatment as first class mail, be handled on a sound economic basis. If it costs more money to handle third class or second class mail, then certainly we should expect those people who use the service to pay the extra cost of it. I am not interested in where they are going to get the money, but I dare say the natural and obvious place would be from the advertisers who use the mails and whom the people of Canada are subsidizing.
(Translation) :


Mr. Gagnon:: Mr. Chairman, I am happy to have this opportunity of adding my voice to that of the preceding speakers to express by best wishes to the Postmaster General (Mr. Cote) and to wish him a prompt return to good health. I am also happy to congratulate those who have ensured the proper operation of the department during his absence.

The city of Chicoutimi, county town of the area which I have the honour of representing in this house, by virtue of its population, of its geographic location and of the beauty of the surrounding district, has been aptly named "Queen of the north". It is an important industrial, commercial, religious and educational centre; a progressive and lively city. It is the pride of those who live in the kingdom of the Saguenay and evokes the admiration of visitors because of its location, of its sunshine, of the warm hospitality and dynamic enterprise of those who live there.
It might possibly be perfect from a town planner's point of view if it had fewer level crossings, if the Canadian National Railways station were a more adequate structure, if its harbour installations were improved and the surrounding area beautified, and finally if the public buildings necessary to the proper discharge of various departmental activities were to be built there.
All these are things which come under the jurisdiction'of the authorities in Ottawa and about which we should complain every time we have an opportunity to do so. I rise in this debate to protest against a lack of appropriate facilities, for the postal service more particularly, which is prejudicial to my fellow citizens.
I shall speak as briefly as possible and merely recall certain oral or written representations made in that connection during the past years.
One of our weeklies wrote as follows on May 8, 1952:
Chicoutimi-Following the request made by the Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Fournier replied that the federal government would do everything in its power to start work on the new central post office by this summer.
On March 16, 1953, the minister wrote me the following letter:
Dear Mr. Gagnon:
I acknowledge receipt of your letter of March 13 regarding the construction of a public building at Chicoutimi, P.Q.
Any delay in the construction of that building is due to the fact that we do not know definitely which departments will occupy it nor what floor area will be required by each of them.
Yours very sincerely.
On April 9, 1953, I directed to the minister the following question:
Could the minister tell me which government services will be housed in that building?
The building in question is the one which was to be erected at Chicoutimi.
The minister answered:

The post office, the customs office, the unemployment insurance commission office and, I am told, other government services.
I suppose that the idea is to centralize, in this new building, the different federal offices that now exist at Chicoutimi.
He would know now which departments might use this building.
On October 27, 1953, the present minister wrote me the following:
Dear Mr. Gagnon:
In reply to your letter of the 15th instant concerning the proposed public building at Chicoutimi, I must inform you that we do not expect to be able to call for tenders with regard to that building before the spring of 1954.
Please believe me, dear Mr. Gagnon.
Yours truly,
Robert H. Winters.
In 1952, the minister advised the chamber of commerce-
(Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the hon. gentleman would permit me to rise on a point of order. I wonder if these remarks about the desirability of a public building in Chicoutimi would not be more appropriately made on the estimates of the Minister of Public Works, who has the responsibility of providing public buildings as well as for providing premises for the post office. It is true, of course, that the Postmaster General does make certain recommendations to the Minister of Public Works, but it is the responsibility of the Minister of Public Works to evaluate all these recommendations. He is the only minister who could properly reply to the hon. gentleman.


Paul-Edmond Gagnon: I am not speaking about the necessity of a public building for Chicoutimi for the other services of the government. I was speaking of the necessity of a building for post office purposes only. I am speaking about the urgency of building that building. Hon. members should see from my remarks that what I am now saying is in order.
(Translation) :
As I was saying, the minister advised the chamber of commerce in 1952 that he would do his utmost to have the building started that year.
In 1953, I was told he was waiting for information from the various departments concerned in this project. Later on, I was notified that tenders would not be sought before 1954.
On January 3, 1954, the deputy minister wrote me the following:
50433-261$
Supply-Post Office
I acknowledge receipt of your letter of January 22, 1954, concerning the erection of a public building at Chicoutimi, P.Q.
The whole question of premises for the various government offices in Chicoutimi is now under consideration and, until the results of such survey are known, I am not able to tell you when construction on this new building will start.
Please believe me, dear Mr. Gagnon,
Yours truly,
Deputy Minister.
On the 15th of February, 1954, the Chicoutimi chamber of commerce sent the minister the following letter:
The Honourable Minister,
Since 1947, the Chicoutimi Chamber of Commerce has made numerous representations to the Post Office Department and to the Public Works Department, which is under your authority, to get a suitable post office in Chicoutimi.
The voluminous correspondence on the subject, the great number of photographs and other documents we sent and the visit of the Honourable Alcide Cote in June 1952 have fully shown the merits of our representations.
On the other hand, the honourable Postmaster General told us, in his letter of January 26, 1953, that his department had asked for the construction of a new building in Chicoutimi which matter now comes entirely under the jurisdiction of your department. Furthermore, on March 4, 1953, in reply to our letter of February 27th, you have told us, through your executive assistant, that a sum of $250,000 had been put in your estimates for the construction of a new building on the Tremblay site, on Racine street, but that the date of the beginning of the undertaking was not yet known at that time.
We need not tell you that the post office situation in Chicoutimi is more critical than ever before and that a new building must of necessity be constructed. For that reason we beg you to send us at your earliest convenience the following information:
A.	-Has the amount of $250,000 which was written in your estimates for last year been carried over?
B.	-We were informed last year that the delay was due to the drawing of plans and specifications for the new building. We assume that such work has now been completed. Is that correct?
C.	-On what date do you anticipate the actual work to start?
The Chicoutimi Chamber of Commerce would greatly appreciate receiving the requested information in the near future, because that matter is of the utmost interest to our members.
Yours truly,
(Signed) A. Sincennes, Secretary.
On April 29, 1954, I put the following question to the Minister of Public Works, as shown on page 4241 of Hansard:


Paul-Edmond Gagnon: An item of $250,000 was approved
by parliament last year for that project but nothing has been done up till now. Would the minister care to comment on the project?


Robert Henry Winters: The situation there, Mr. Chairman, as I recall it, is that although there was that amount in the estimates last year we found this year when compiling the estimates that we were not ready to go ahead with the building. The.'

Supply-Post Office
plans had not been prepared. At the same time the postmaster indicated to me that he would like to study the whole matter of postal services in the area, and until such time as that is done we shall not be able to proceed with the building.
On May 14, 1954, I made the following remarks to the hon. Postmaster General:
Last year parliament approved a $250,000 appropriation for construction of a public building in Chicoutimi. A few days ago, when I asked the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters) where this project stood and why there was no mention of that amount in this year's estimates, he answered that the Postmaster General (Mr. Cote) had told him that he would like to make a survey of postal services in that district and that his department was not in a position to proceed with this building before this survey was ended.
I would therefore like the Postmaster General to tell me what point has been reached in this survey and whether he will soon make a report to his colleague, the Minister of Public Works.
The minister knows full well that for the past twenty years and more the people of Chicoutimi, through civil authorities and chambers of commerce, have been requesting the erection of a suitable building. Present accommodation is inadequate, considering the growing needs of those people. A few years ago some land was acquired for that purpose. I know that the minister is well acquainted with Chicoutimi and that he also has some good friends there. I would therefore like him to tell me, when he speaks of his department, what his plans are with regard to Chicoutimi.
Here is part of the answer given by the Postmaster General as reported at page 4763 of Hansard:
As far as the Chicoutimi project is concerned, I do not remember whether the plan called for a building to accommodate various federal departments or whether it was only to be a postal station. I know that we had to revise this project and hold back for further study. X will look further into the matter and will be glad to give more detailed information to the hon. member.
I must add that the project has not been abandoned but that it is simply under further consideration.
Finally, on October 8, 1954, I received a further letter from the Minister of Public Works, which reads as follows:
I hereby acknowledge receipt of your letter of September 21 regarding the construction of a public building in Chicoutimi.
Since returning from my trip I have had the opportunity of discussing this matter with the Postmaster General and other departments concerned. X can tell you that I have asked the building construction branch of my department to undertake the preparation of plans for this building.
Yours very truly,
Robert H. Winters.
On February 14, 1955, the minister wrote me as follows:
I have received your letter dated January 27, 1955, regarding the inadequacy of postal accommodation in Chicoutimi. P.Q.
The situation will not be lost sight of with regard to the difficulties mentioned. However it will be impossible to proceed with the immediate construction of a building in Chicoutimi, appro-

priations for this purpose not having been included in our departmental estimates for the coming fiscal year.
Yours very truly,
Robert H. Winters.
I made it a point, Mr. Chairman, to read part of the correspondence exchanged between the Minister of Public Works, the Postmaster General and the Chicoutimi chamber of commerce, as well as certain appeals I made in the house, in order to show all the delay in this matter and the excuses put forth for not remedying this situation, which has become unbearable.
I wish to assure the Minister of Public Works that should he be kind enough to pay us a visit at Chicoutimi, he would be received as a friend and I am convinced that having seen for himself the acute situation with which we are faced, he would immediately grant us this public building for which the land was purchased some years ago.
Here is what the Progres du Saguenay, a daily newspaper published in our district, had to say on December 22, 1954, about the postal service in the city of Chicoutimi:
We would like to see the embarrassment of the Postmaster General if, during a stay in Chicoutimi, he had to send his Christmas parcels through the local post office. He would very likely do the utmost without delay to correct an unbearable situation. A visit to the post office, facing the cathedral, during the rush period, would show the congestion there is in that building. The number of wickets being insufficient, people have to queue up and must wait as long as half an hour to unload their parcels which become exceedingly heavy. We are not criticizing the service given by the postal employees: they are doing the best they can under the circumstances and the postmaster has enough employees to provide the best service he can in the existing building but the people cannot tolerate indefinitely such a situation.
The building of a new post office at Chicoutimi has definitely been agreed upon, but the necessary appropriations have not yet been voted. Let us hope that they will be at the next session.
One can readily understand, Mr. Chairman, why the people of Chicoutimi are so much in favour of decentralization of powers and provincial autonomy.
They know how difficult it is to get anything but statutory grants from the federal government.
We can count on our fingers the favours bestowed upon us by Ottawa since confederation, while the favours granted us by the government of our own province, especially in the past 10 years, have changed the appearance of our cities and even of our smallest villages. Our district is among those that pay the most taxes to Ottawa but, on

the other hand, it is perhaps the one which receives the least in return.
We should be treated, not with more generosity because there is no such thing in Ottawa, but with more justice.
The taxpayers of Chicoutimi deserve more sympathetic attention from the government and I think the time has come to recognize it. Besides, I am satisfied that the Postmaster General and the Minister of Public Works are well disposed towards us and that they will at last grant our requests.
(Text):


Mr. Bryce:: Mr. Chairman, in common with other members I regret the Postmaster General has not yet been able to return to his duties. I do hope however that he will have a speedy recovery and will soon be back with us.
I have a matter that I wish to bring up. I have taken it up with the department on other occasions. I am prompted to do it again because I have received a petition, and when I have finished with it I am going to send it over to the Acting Postmaster General. It has to do with my request some time ago for an airmail service to Norway House. I do not need to go into it. In the wintertime they get mail from Winnipeg, via Wabowden, and into Norway House. In the summertime they have to use the Keenora, which visits there once a week. This petition asks the department to do something about getting first class mail into Norway House more often than just once a week.
During the freeze-up and the break-up when the bombardier and the boat cannot operate, there are times when they get no mail service. I know that the weather is to blame for that.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That happens in my riding.


William Scottie Bryce: Yes, you and I should get together on this thing.
The plane that carries the mail during that period is quite a large one. It has been suggested by some people, who should know, that a lighter plane could land there with first class mail. They had the unfortunate experience this year of being without mail for some 5 weeks. The minister was surprised at that, but it was true.
I am not going to elaborate on it. There are 70 signatures on the petition. I know many of these people personally. They are reliable and good Canadians. They are worthy of the minister's consideration in an effort to get first class mail in there by air. If the
Supply-Post Office
Acting Postmaster General and his parliamentary assistant lived in Norway House they would have to prepare their mail on Monday night to get it away on Tuesday morning. That permits the mail to get into Winnipeg on Saturday afternoon. Because the mail arrives on Saturday afternoon you cannot possibly get a reply until the following week when the boat returns.
Let me give an example of how it works. A letter posted in Norway House on Monday, May 23, leaves that place on the 24th or the 25th, depending on the weather conditions. It reaches Winnipeg on Saturday afternoon, May 28. The offices or the wholesale houses receive it on May 30. At that time the mail bags for Norway House are already on the way to the station or to Selkirk. Therefore, that mail does not leave Winnipeg until the following week, and an answer will have to wait until Monday, June 6. It will reach Norway House on June 8 or June 9.
Some people seem to think that Norway House is away back from civilization, but let me draw the committee's attention to this. There are about 1,800 people in and around that district. The population is composed of Indians, half-breeds and white people. There is a large up-to-date settlement; there is a large new hospital there, an Indian agency, a detachment of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, 2 boarding schools, missions representing the different churches, and also different day schools and a few stores. Surely, a community of this size is entitled to better mail service than they are getting at the present time.
If you look at a map of my constituency you will see that not very far from Norway House is Cross Lake, God's Lake and Oxford House. These places get an airmail service. There is also Island Lake, which receives an airmail service twice a week. I am advancing these arguments in an effort to get the department to give this matter further consideration. I appeal to the Acting Postmaster General and the parliamentary assistant, and ask them to look this over to see if it is not possible to give Norway House an airmail service for first class mail in the near future.
I have a letter from a gentleman who wants to know whether he can buy a 1J cent stamp. I wrote back to him and told him that I had not seen one. He immediately sent me back an envelope that carries a 1J cent stamp. I do not know how that comes about unless it is some of the cheap publicity used by the soap companies. They send out advertising matter. You take a coupon to the store and you get two articles for the price of one, or something like that.

Supply-Post Office


John Whitney Pickersgill: Maybe it is political literature.


William Scottie Bryce: If it is, I would know something about it.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think the hon. gentleman is right.


William Scottie Bryce: Now, when the minister replies I hope he will explain how some of these companies work it. It must be a company because the envelope carries a prominent name. It goes to the householder for 14 cents. The cheapest rate I can get, or any of my constituents can get, is two cents. The department puts out a booklet entitled "Hints About the Post Office". I can find nothing in it about a 14 cent stamp.
I was out of the House of Commons for about a year. When I left here there was an item of $25,000 in the estimates of the Department of Public Works for a post office in Selkirk.


John Whitney Pickersgill: We listened for 20 minutes to a talk by the hon. member for Chicoutimi, which should have been delivered on the estimates of the Department of Public Works. Surely, that is not going to be looked upon as a precedent that every hon. member may follow in the committee.


William Scottie Bryce: I was not going to go into it.


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. May I take a moment of the time of the committee to express my views on this particular subject? It seems to me that under the estimates of the Post Office Department, or of any other service department, the inadequacy, or the non-existence, of certain facilities must surely be a subject which is within the ambit of the resolution that we are discussing. I can understand that if the Department of Public Works had undertaken the construction of a building for the Post Office Department and some member wished to criticize the manner in which that construction was being carried on, or the speed, it would come under the estimates of the Department of Public Works. But if the hon. member is, as I think he is, dealing with non-existent facilities which he is asking the Post Office Department to bring in, then I find it impossible to rule that he would be out of order; because, if the building is not under construction, then it seems to me it surely is not within the ambit of the Department of Public Works. I hardly see how one can discuss under the Department of Public Works the construction of post offices which the Department of Public Works has not been instructed to construct. Therefore, while I can see that it is very desirable that all members should hold their criticisms and their

requests down to those things which the Postmaster General can bring into effect, I cannot rule that the discussion of the need for improving or enlarging the post office facilities is out of order in a discussion of the estimates of the Post Office Department. I cannot rule a discussion of the need for improved or enlarged post office facilities to be out of order during a discussion of estimates of the Post Office Department, but I think perhaps one would be justified in saying that members would at least be indicating their co-operation if the need for the same building was not discussed under more than one department.


William Scottie Bryce: Mr. Chairman, I am going to
abide by your ruling and I am also not going to tramp on the toes of the minister. The recommendation for the building of a post office comes from the Postmaster General or the people who have to do with that. However, I am not talking about the building of a post office, I am talking about the need for a post office. Three or four years ago I brought photographs to this house to show how mail bags were left sitting around outside the door. There was no room for them inside. The hon. member for New Westminster has indicated how mail is held up for 24 or 48 hours. They simply have not room in the Selkirk post office at the present time. The space in which they have to work is deplorable. As I say, I have brought photographs to show the conditions.
I thought we were getting somewhere when I saw an item in the estimates. I am wondering now whether the officials of the Post Office Department changed their minds and decided that this post office was not needed. I will have to ask the Minister of Public Works what he did with that $25,000. During the last election they even had blueprints of the post office and, believe me, that did not help me any. This year there is no money being voted for a post office. I hope the Acting Postmaster General will look into this matter and recommend that Selkirk be given a new post office. The present building could be used to advantage for the R.C.M.P. and the Indian affairs branch. It would be good business to do that and to give Selkirk a new post office.


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Mr. Chairman, I imagine that there is no one who rises to speak on the post office estimates but thinks of the employees working for that department, the service which they are rendering and the efforts which they are putting into their jobs. That is particularly so because the Post Office Department, next to the Department of National Defence, is

the largest employer of labour in the government. I think we have a particular respect for these employees of the post office when we realize some of the difficulties under which they labour and remember that the top man of their department has not been present in the house for some time. I am sure we all regret the unfortunate illness of the Postmaster General, for whom we have great respect. When you think about it for a few minutes you will perhaps wonder what would happen if the present status of the Postmaster General and the Acting Postmaster General were reversed. It is just possible that in that case both the Post Office Department and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration might be better off.
There was one thing in the remarks of the parliamentary assistant to the Postmaster General that surprised me quite a little, because to me it flies practically in the face of something we were told last year at the time the proposed and now effective increase in postal rates was being discussed. At that time the Postmaster General, as reported on page 1102 of Hansard of January 14, 1954, was referring to certain cost increases which he foresaw for his department, and he went on to say:
These three items alone amount to $13,500,000. Expected net revenues from the increase in postage rates will be approximately $14 million, leaving only $500,000 to take care of possible normal increases in the price of basic materials and services which are essential for the operation of the postal service.
At that time the Postmaster General was crying poverty before the house. He said he simply had to have this increase in postal rates because if it did not come along his department was going to operate under a tremendous deficit. He was calculating that the increase in the postal rates would be just sufficient to permit him to end up on a break-even basis. If you read through the discussion of those several days you come away with the impression that even with the increase the post office was going to have a pretty tough time making ends meet.
The estimates originally tabled show a surplus for the present year of something over $6 million while the statement made earlier this afternoon indicates a surplus of approximately $5 million. Of course it is all hedged about with verbiage about public buildings, franking and various other things. When the Postmaster General was crying his tale of woe before the house last year there was no mention of those particular items. It is only now when the Post Office Department finds that it is wrong in its estimate that they come before us and
Supply-Post Office
attempt to explain away their faulty figuring. They surround the estimate with this other material which apparently has been thought up on the spur of the moment as an excuse.
In some respects I think we can feel very glad that there is this surplus, provided it is the result of more efficient operation in the post office. In that case it is a welcome situation which is far different from most other departments of government.
I would rather hope that with this surplus it might be possible for the government to examine again the question of their postal rates to see whether some reduction in some rates would not be possible.
We have had continuing promises for many years that as soon as the government found itself in a position to reduce taxation it would do so. They gave us a small example of that this year. If they were really and genuinely speaking their minds on this subject, let them give us another example. Let them take this $5 million surplus in the operations of the Post Office Department and follow through with a reduction in postal rates.
Having said that, I go on to make one or two comments on the post office and some of its operation. First I should like to deal with a situation which I think is particularly iniquitous because it is a direct reversal of what we in this party would like to think is the right way for a government to operate, that is to treat all people alike. We like to think that that is the principle upon which a government should operate. We like to think particularly that the government should treat all its employees alike.
If a man holds a job in one centre he should receive the same treatment and prerogatives as he would receive if he held the same job in another centre. We see no particular reason why there should be one set of rules and one set of standards for a man who happens to live and work for the government in Montreal and another set for a man holding the same position in Toronto. Yet I defy the gentlemen who sit over there on the opposite side of the chamber presenting these estimates to the committee to stand up and say that in the post office they have not the situation in which certain men who occupy exactly similar positions within the post office structure are being given varying treatment according to the locality in which they work.
To bolster this statement I am going to have to set it out in detail. I set it out for the benefit of the committee. Over a period of a couple of months I have tried to discuss it with the officials of the post office. I did

Supply-Post Office
not want to bring it before the House of Commons because it has always been my experience that once a minister takes a position in the house, no matter how stupid it is, he will never retreat from that position. However, sometimes you can get even a stupid minister-and they exist, Mr. Chairman-to see reason if you discuss the thing with him outside the house where his mistakes do not have to be brought. before the people of Canada as a whole. That was my hope in this instance; but as far as I can see, I have not made much progress.
The situation is this. With the advent of the five-day week in the post office and with the department's desire to continue six-day-a-week mail delivery, it became necessary to employ certain other people who would, on a rotating basis, fill in on route after route as the regular men went off for their sixth day holiday. In order to get those men the department went to its present employees and offered them the opportunity for these particular positions. In order to make the position attractive, they gave them a title which, if my memory serves me rightly, was that of supervisory letter carrier. In connection with this matter it is important to remember that although a different title is - attached to this job, the function is, without any change whatever, similar to that of the normal mail carrier, save that in the one case the mail carrier remains on the same route and in the other-supervisory letter carrier is the name of the function-he will rotate from one route to another.
Through certain circumstances which I will not go into here most of these supervisory letter carrier positions appeared to be more attractive to the newcomers to the department. By accepting that position, the newcomer to the department could get a sudden increase in salary. It brought him no higher than the men who had been in the department for a number of years but it brought him up to their level. That perhaps was the principal interest of the newcomer in applying for these positions. The result was that after a period of time the department found, first, that most of these supervisory letter carrier positions, for which applications had been made, were being applied for by newcomers to the department. Second, they found that they were not getting sufficient applications to fill all their positions. Thus, they decided to do something which I think was quite unfair.
In this connection I turn now to a series of three announcements or bulletins from the post office which dealt with these positions of supervisory letter carriers. The first one went out on February 19, 1954, and it said

in effect-the government never speaks quite in this way-"We need supervisory letter carriers; here are the details of the position. The men who fill that position will have no preference in relationship to choosing their vacations over the rest of the letter carrier staff".
A week later, on February 26, the government completely reversed its position, this time issuing a bulletin saying that those who apply for the position of supervisory letter carrier and are accepted will have a preference over the remainder of the letter carrier staff in respect of their vacations.
As I have already indicated, the majority of these supervisory letter carriers were comparative newcomers to the service, and the effect of this second bulletin was to give them preference in choosing their vacation period over many men who had been in the service for 10 years, 15 years or 20 years as letter carriers, who had families, who had vacation plans and who had every reason-[DOT] both because of length of service and because of personal position-to have prior consideration in respect of choice of their vacations. This was so obvious to the entire postal service across Canada and its officials that the holler which went up was simply tremendous.
Finally the department came out with one of the most amazing bulletins-for anybody who believes in decent treatment of employees-that I can imagine. It is dated March 16. It deals with this same subject and in effect it says this. I have a French version here and that is why I say "in effect", since I am not quoting directly from the English. In effect it says: If it is possible to get enough good letter carrier supervisors without giving them any preference with regard to vacations, you do not need to give them any preference with regard to vacation. But in the localities where it is impossible to recruit the necessary number of good letter carrier supervisors without giving them a preference in vacation time, we will give them this preference with regard to vacation.
What has happened since then, Mr. Chairman? In Toronto letter carrier supervisors and mail men-the ordinary letter carriers -select together from the same list in order of seniority. If a man is a letter carrier supervisor but has only five years of service he will not get a choice of vacation dates until an ordinary letter carrier with six years or ten years of service has had his choice of vacation. That situation applies in the great majority of locations across Canada. But in a minor number of cases, including Montreal, in order to bludgeon and

to force the letter carriers into accepting these positions, the Post Office Department has chosen to give this preference in choice of vacation time-this preference which exists nowhere else except in these few localities across Canada-in respect of the letter carrier supervisor position, a job which is exactly the same as that of the letter carrier himself.
There are letter carriers by the hundreds- and I use that word advisedly-in the city of Montreal who have been in the service of the department for many years, who are being discriminated against. Because they are older men they have children who are going to school. They have perhaps got enough money together to be able to have a country home to which they like to go. These men are being deprived of their opportunity to take their vacations at a time when they can go with their families to their country homes in order that some newcomer to the department who has taken advantage of this particular situation to get a fast salary increase-and I have no objection to that whatsoever-may take his vacation in the months of July or August. It is .completely unfair and iniquitous. To cite two cities, a completely different set of standards applies to letter carriers in Toronto and letter carriers in Montreal.
In the course of my discussions on this matter I never saw, in my estimation, more uncomfortable people than the departmental officials with whom I discussed it. We had interesting discussions that were very helpful. I am grateful to them for their help, but right across the board, starting with the heads of the department who sit in the house, it seems that I have never been able to get any sort of satisfactory answer outside of the completely ruthless one that they have got to do this in order to force these men into these positions. That was the interpretation I placed on the information I got from them, and I have never been able to get any other answer.
Having dealt with that subject and placed it on the record, may I express the hope at this point that this inconsiderate, ruthless and inequitable attitude of the department will be changed and changed very quickly.
I should now like to say a few words about the post office savings bank which was dealt with at some length in the Woods and Gordon report of some note last year. I think hon. members will recall the recommendation in the Woods and Gordon report that the post office savings bank be discontinued. I should 50433-262
Supply-Post Office
like to quote one or two sentences from the report. It has this to say:
. . . other banking facilities are available in the communities of 18,670 of the 22,699 active depositors.
In other words, at that point they were making the argument that in most places across Canada facilities parallel to the post office savings bank are available. The report says further:
It is apparent therefore that the need for the facilities of the post office savings bank is not nearly as great as it used to be and we suggest that .the time may have come when it could be wound up without hardship to any large number of depositors.
Finally:
The annual cost ... of the post office savings bank is estimated to be $377,000.
Despite this report, the department subsequently decided to continue the operation of this largely unnecessary and certainly money losing function. In thinking about the matter the thought came to me first that if .we could suggest an alternative means by which facilities similar to the post office savings bank could be made available to the Canadian people generally at a figure substantially less than the current cost of the post office savings bank, we might be able to persuade the government to get out of this small banking business. I want to make it quite plain at this juncture that, while I think the government has some responsibility to lead in the provision of certain services, I feel equally strongly that when private enterprise is in a position to provide those services adequately it is time for the government to get out of the service. They certainly should not continue to operate them at a loss involving such an expense to the taxpayers as in this case.
Therefore I put forward this thought for the possible consideration of the Postmaster General, the Acting Postmaster General and the parliamentary assistant to the Postmaster General. In 1952 there were only 167,000 deposits made in the post office savings bank. That is the last figure I have. All the department needs to do is to agree to carry these deposits, properly insured and properly registered, from the post offices to any chartered bank branch in Canada without cost. They can then get out of the banking business in this field tomorrow and leave post office savings bank depositors in exactly the same position as they are now.
In other words, what I am suggesting is that the post office savings bank would drop out of the operation. Its accounts and operations would be placed with the chartered banking system of Canada. People who now bank with the post office savings bank would

Supply-Post Office
bank with a chartered bank. In cases where people cannot go directly to the bank they now have the privilege of sending their money through the mails, as we all know, but if we want them to be on a basis comparable to the present post office savings bank it may be necessary for the post office to carry these funds to a bank without charge. The interesting thing is that if the Post Office Department did that the charge incurred by the department for the cost of the postage and registration would be about $25,000 for the whole operation against the $377,000 that they are now paying.
An alternative suggestion, which I just mention, is that a person might be allowed to deposit his money with the post office, obtain a receipt and send the receipt to the bank which would in turn, on depositing the receipt with the post office, be reimbursed for the amount. The point I am trying to make in putting forward these two ideas is that the department should take another look at the post office savings bank with the thought in mind of seeing that the depositors will still get the services they are now getting but will get them through some established banking operation so that the government can get out of the business.
I should like to say a few words about twice-a-day mail deliveries. I do not agree with the attitude of the Postmaster General and the department that once a day mail delivery is genuinely satisfactory or acceptable to the people of Canada. In the statement made this afternoon it was said that the number of complaints with respect to this matter has been reduced. Of course they have been reduced. After people have complained and complained and complained for four or five years they finally throw up their hands in disgust and say: There is no use any more; we will stop complaining.
I can remember that when the income tax was first raised substantially not too many years ago there was a great deal of discussion and tremendous antipathy towards the move. We have reached the point now where we all realize, I think, that the incidence of taxation is terribly heavy, but you might say that we have learned to live with it a little bit. We do not like it but we know there is no use complaining because it is going to be crammed down our throats anyway. I think that has been the attitude of the people of Canada towards this one-a-day mail delivery. I suggest this thought in that connection to the Postmaster General. Why do we not have two-a-day mail deliveries five days a week? At the present time we give a mail delivery in most residential areas once a day, and that is six deliveries a week. If
[Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace) .1
you gave two deliveries a day for five days, that would be 10 deliveries a week, which is an extra service.
The interesting thing about it is that if you examine it carefully you will find your costs for the two deliveries a day five days a week would be very little more if any more than the cost of the type of service that is now given. The operation of the department on Saturday would be reduced to a minimum. Sortage charges, overtime pay for clerks and many other things connected with Saturday operation would be substantially reduced. My information and my analysis lead me to the conclusion we could have two-a-day mail delivery five days a week on a very sound basis. I believe the people of Canada would be more satisfied with that. I feel they would far rather have 10 deliveries a week than six deliveries a week. I believe that in an era when we have come almost universally to recognize that the five-day week is in existence, the Post Office Department would receive general public approval if they realized that as well.
I regret, Mr. Chairman, that a question of mine of May 11 has not been answered. I am rather interested in it. In the last six months or so the Post Office Department seems to have been subjected to a rash of thefts and robberies. My question of May 11 asked for certain information concerning thefts and robberies over the past year or so. I am amazed, first, that it was found necessary to make it an order for return. I am very surprised that the post office was not in a position, on as important a matter as money being stolen from office after office across Canada, to give an immediate answer to that question. But no, they bury it by means of making it an order for return. The question affects only one department, so there could be no reason for letting it stand for more than two weeks without an answer. The only inference I can draw, Mr. Chairman, is that the Post Office Department does not know how much money has been stolen from it, where it has been stolen, who is being charged with those thefts or what sort of success is being achieved in curbing the thefts.
I think that is a particularly poor situation for a department which has had something of the order of a quarter of a million dollars stolen from it in the last six months. Among other things, this department found it necessary to engage a man who finally turned out, only a couple of months afterwards, to be one of Canada's 10 most wanted criminals.

Here is a release from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police dated January 27, 1955, which says:
John Keith MacDonald, 46, an ex-insurance agent, has been added to Canada's most wanted criminals list. John Keith MacDonald has been identified as John Clealand Wallace Black who is wanted in connection with the $44,500 missing from the post office at Britannia Beach, B.C., on December 17, 1954.
MacDonald, under the name of Black, was employed in the post office as a clerk.
In other words, we have now reached the point where the Post Office Department, handling tremendous sums of money like this, is apparently letting creep into its staff- who are ' almost all among the finest people in Canada-criminals who are prepared to steal money from the department. Do you not think that indicates poor supervision somewhere along the line, poor care in the selection of certain employees or a loose examination of the records of the people who are allowed to handle post office funds?


An hon. Member:: Perhaps it is the result of patronage.


William McLean Hamilton: My
hon. friend points out that perhaps this man came in under patronage. There are lots of such people in the post office who certainly did not go through the normal civil service channels. I hope, though, that even the Liberal party is not accustomed to patronizing some of Canada's most wanted criminals. I have a lot against these men on the treasury benches, but I do not think they would go that far-at least, not in between elections.
There is one point I should like to bring before the house. On March 25, I asked another question concerning the machinations of the post offices in Montreal and Toronto in connection with the T-4 returns. I am not going to go into details on that because I am coming towards the end of my time. I do want to express my regret that the question has not been answered up until now. I should like the Acting Postmaster General to lay before the house the information which I know he now has in that connection, and explain to us why it is that the government must break its own rules. In other words, the Department of National Revenue prescribed that certain returns must be in by a certain time, and a penalty was attached to failure to observe this provision. Then the post office, daddling along again probably without proper supervision or control, breaks the rules of another government department, delays these returns and generally causes considerable inconvenience to the employees in a number of Canadian cities.
It was interesting, Mr. Chairman, when they did make the return in the province 50433-262i
Supply-Post Office
of Quebec, to find that they got around to filing the federal government return first and then the provincial return. I do not know whether or not that is any indication of this government's attitude towards these two income tax systems. I mention that as well, and I think we might have an explanation of it.
In the course of this talk, Mr. Chairman, I have pointed out first the woolly-headedness of the Post Office Department in coming before this house last year and asking for an increase in postal rates, at which time they cried poor mouth and indicated they would have no surplus. Then later they come along and inform us that they have made over $5 million. I have pointed out the unfairness of their labour policy in respect to vacations for letter carriers in certain parts of this country. I have pointed out ways in which they might quite legitimately and quite properly give the same service to the people of Canada in respect of the post office savings bank and save themselves $325,000. I have pointed out the way in which they could restore the two-a-day mail delivery over a period of five days a week to the centres which are now deprived of it with very little, if any, increase in the cost of providing the service. I have pointed out a situation that is rotten in respect of thefts from the department and the way in which they are allowing the occasional person of doubtful record to creep into their ranks and sully the reputation of 50,000 of Canada's most devoted civil servants. Then, I have pointed out the' regrettable situation in connection with the filing of their own T-4 returns.
I think what I have said will suffice for this afternoon.


Mr. Winch:: Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to discuss more than one matter under this vote. I am not going to ask the Acting Postmaster General for a new post office at Vancouver. It is now being built, and we appreciate it very much.
However, there is one matter I most certainly wish to discuss this afternoon, a matter which I consider of the utmost importance -of such importance that I am going to be most careful and deliberate in anything I shall say about it. Sir, the use of the mails is very important; it is a great trust. I am hoping that after I have finished, the Acting Postmaster General or the parliamentary assistant will be able to give us some information.
In order to introduce the subject I have in mind perhaps I should give some background material. There has developed in Canada

The Royal Assent
and in the United States a practice of sending goods or magazines to citizens, even though such goods or magazines have not been ordered.
I have known this for some considerable time. My understanding of the law is that if one has not ordered goods or has not subscribed to a magazine, he does not have to pay. However, I am afraid there are many people in this country-I would say even a majority of people-who do not know that they are protected by the law which says that if they have not ordered goods or subscribed to a magazine they do not have to pay.
However, there has been an unfortunate development in Canada in that some companies are sending out goods and magazines without orders or subscriptions, and then forwarding letters through the mail demanding payment. I have heard about this often, but only recently did it come to my close attention. Someone may ask why I discuss this matter under the estimates of the Post Office Department. I do so because there is connected with it the use of the mails in Canada.
I have said I am going to be very careful and deliberate. I shall speak from my own knowledge-and not only that because I believe the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has had a similar experience. I say, sir, that in my estimation Her Majesty's mails in Canada are being used for what I call indirect blackmail, and that as a result many citizens of Canada are being placed in an invidious position, not because of Her Majesty's postal service but because of the use being made of it.
I would ask the Acting Postmaster General and the parliamentary assistant whether the law in Canada, and the regulations under that law, are adequate to take care of what is now taking place in this country. If not, will the government bring in the required amendments to the act or the regulations?
Let me place on record my own experience, to show what is happening. About two years ago someone-I do not know who- sent to Life magazine an order for a 12-months subscription to be delivered to me. I do not know who did that. I received Life magazine for 12 months and at the end of that time received a letter from Life, 540 North Michigan avenue, Chicago, Illinois, telling me that my subscription had expired.
I wrote the magazine saying that I had not subscribed and did not wish to have the magazine sent to me. It continued to come. They wrote me again saying, "You have not renewed your subscription", ignoring completely the fact that I never had one. They told me that I owed them a certain amount

of money, and I replied "I have never subscribed to your magazine, nor have I renewed a subscription. I have told you once that I do not want to have the magazine sent to me." It continued to come, and I received another letter to which I replied as I had replied before. Those communications were from the United States.
But, Mr. Acting Postmaster General, last week I got something different. And what I received last week brings this matter within the purview of Her Majesty's mails in Canada. The letter I received last week was signed by a man named Charles A. Palmer, and the letterhead bore the name of Life magazine, of the United States. This letter from Charles A. Palmer, credit manager, enclosed a business reply envelope addressed to Life, Post Office Box 160, Toronto, Ontario, for the attention of Mr. Charles A. Palmer. So now it is strictly a Canadian matter, and a Canadian postal matter.
Sir, I want to read to you the letter I received, after having for months said I did not want the publication. I never sent for the publication; I have never taken any subscription to the publication. This is the letter I received through Her Majesty's mail:
I am very sorry that I have to write to you-


William Alfred Robinson: Shall I rise and report
progress?
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by Major C. R. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, the Honourable the Deputy Governor General desires the Immediate attendance of this honourable house in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker with the house went up to the Senate chamber.
And being returned:
Mr. Speaker informed the house that the Deputy Governor General had been pleased to give, in Her Majesty's name, the royal assent to the following bills:
An act to amend the Northwest Territories Act.
An act to amend the Yukon Act.
An act to amend the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act.
An act to amend the Precious Metals Marking Act.
An act to incorporate Westspur Pipe Line Company.
An act to amend the Historic Sites and Monuments Act.

An act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1956.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Applewhaite in the chair.
POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT 334. Departmental administration, $1,546,388.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.

AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Harold Edward Winch: At the time we adjourned this afternoon, Mr. Chairman, in order that the House of Commons could attend at the other place, I was drawing to the attention of the committee a factor which I thought was of importance, namely that of using Her Majesty's mails for a purpose which I said- and I will repeat it-I thought was indirect blackmail. I had outlined to the committee a procedure which was being followed by companies in sending not only goods but magazines to citizens of Canada, then sending them a bill-even although they have not ordered the goods or the magazines-and then demanding payment. This afternoon I pointed out that this is followed up, to my own knowledge, by three letters from the United States. At the time of adjournment I had pointed out that on the fourth occasion it is a letter strictly from and in Canada, thus bringing the matter within the complete jurisdiction of the postal services of Canada.
At the time of adjournment I was just starting to read a letter which I received only one week ago about a publication which I never ordered, and never subscribed to. I wrote three times to Life magazine in Chicago, Illinois, saying that I did not want it. Yet from Toronto last week, under the name of Charles A. Palmer, I received a letter. Not only did I receive a letter but I received an envelope saying that it should be sent to "Life, P.O. Box 160, Toronto, Ontario. Attention: Charles A. Palmer". If you desire me to do so, Mr. Chairman, I will file that envelope with you. I also received a bill. I have it right here and I will file it, Mr. Chairman, if you desire me to do so. This bill says "Amount due, $7.87" and "Due for copies mailed, $2.60". This, sir, is from Toronto. Here is the letter sent through Her Majesty's
Supply-Post Office
mail on something I never ordered, with a bill which I do not know anything about. Here is the letter:
I am very sorry I have to write you this letter. Up to now we thought you really wanted Life- and had just put off or forgotten to pay for your subscription.
Mr. Chairman, I never subscribed to that magazine in my life, but this is what I received:
But now that your account has remained unpaid so long that we have had to stop sending you Life- now that we are billing you only for copies already served . . .
Mr. Chairman, the letter talks about "copies already served". I have said I will file, if you require it, the bill sent me for $2.60 for copies mailed but also due, $7.87. I quote again:
For we are members of the Publishers National Credit Service; and, as members, we have assumed a very definite obligation to other publishers and to all other business houses that extend mail order credit.
Sir, I am asking you to note that term "mail order credit" because I am going to refer to it in a few moments. Again I quote:
And that obligation makes it impossible for us just to forget the small bill you have owed us over these last few months, for each account on our books is closely investigated by the credit auditors.
Somehow I can't help feeling that our not receiving your cheque or money order for so small a sum must have been a mistake. For it almost never happens that the kind of person who would be interested in Life consciously defaults his bill . . .
If your failure to send your payment was just an oversight, will you please let me have your cheque in the enclosed envelope, marked for my personal attention, by return mail?
And "by return mail" is underlined. The letter is signed by Charles A. Palmer of Toronto.
Mr. Chairman, 1 have had a remarkable experience since I adjourned the debate when the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod knocked on the door when I was speaking. Since then a number of members of parliament have come to me and said that they have had letters of a similar nature. I asked them, "What have you done with them?'" They were not all from the same company.. They all have told these people where they could go and, as I did, just how they could! get there. But, sir, we are members oft' parliament. Perhaps we know something about the law. But if letters of this kindt are being sent to members of parliament demanding payment and casting aspersions on our characters, I wonder how many thousands of people in Canada-who perhaps; do not know the law as we do and who. perhaps can be intimidated as we cannot be-

Supply-Post Office
-are getting letters of the same kind, demanding payment on something they have never ordered, and being sent through Her Majesty's mail.


William Alfred Robinson: Order. I have hesitated to interrupt the hon. member but I have been waiting with some interest to see how he would connect his remarks with the estimates of the Post Office Department. He has related at some length letters which he has received through the mails, but so far I do not see that he has shown in what way the Post Office Department would enter into this matter or how his remarks are related to the estimates of the department. I would ask the hon. member to relate his remarks to resolution No. 334, administration of the Post Office Department.


Harold Edward Winch: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I thought I had made that very clear when I began my remarks this afternoon. First of all I had to give the background of the picture and show what was happening. I pointed out that demands for payment, which I called and still call indirect blackmail, were being sent through Her Majesty's mails. The letter I have just read came through Her Majesty's mails. When I began my remarks this afternoon I asked if the Acting Postmaster General or the parliamentary assistant could inform the house whether it was permissible for Her Majesty's mails to be used along the lines I have been outlining. I have related the matter completely to the estimates now before us.
There is one other phase of the use of the mails for this purpose which can be very serious and detrimental to anybody who receives through the mails this kind of letter demanding payment and enclosing a bill for something never ordered or subscribed for. Information that payment is refused goes to a credit association, and there are such associations in every province of Canada. Such information about failure to make payment can hurt the credit of anyone in this dominion. Therefore I think this is an important matter. As I said only a few moments ago, I have discovered I am not the only one who has had this experience. A number of members have encountered the same thing. I have been told by three members of parliament that Time magazine is doing the same thing as Life magazine. Therefore I ask the question now, and I think it is important in the interests of the people of Canada, whether or not the postal law and regulations can prevent the Canadian mails being used for this kind of thing. If not, will the Acting Postmaster General take under advisement the amendment of the law or regulations to

stop this practice on the part largely of United States companies operating through agencies in Canada, and which is now prevalent in this country.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, this afternoon I was attending the external affairs committee and I am not aware of what course the debate has followed. However, I want to bring to the attention of the acting minister and his assistant a couple of matters I was asked to raise, and as usual I will be quite brief. Our letter carriers perform a very essential and necessary service and the amount of labour involved in it is not appreciated by many people. They walk miles every day going up and down steps from house to house. In my constituency their difficulties are rather above average. We have advantages and disadvantages on account of living in Kootenay West.
In the cities of Nelson and Trail the letter carriers have to climb hundreds of steps daily going from one street to another and therefore the performance of their duties is somewhat more arduous than is the general case throughout Canada. I know that their organization has made representations urging an increase in their rates of pay and improvement of their working conditions. I am simply going to ask that sympathetic consideration be given to these representations and that every consideration be taken of the burdensome nature of their employment compared with many other jobs in the civil service.
The other matter I want to raise has to do with what I think is a quite unnecessary burden placed upon the letter carriers by many companies. Letter carriers and postmasters tell me there is an increasing number of heavy catalogues, booklets of various kinds and other reading material going through the mails. Quite recently it was brought to my attention that Reader's Digest produced a special booklet and sent thousands of copies into my constituency. Each booklet weighed one pound, eight ounces, and the local letter carriers had to lug them around and make trip after trip to dispose of them. The whole staff was completely exhausted when that day's work was completed.
I suggest the Post Office Department should make some better arrangements and find some way of having this heavier material delivered without causing this completely unnecessary burden on letter carriers. I understand that formerly this only occurred at infrequent intervals, but now the carriers are repeatedly being burdened with heavy catalogues, booklets and things of that sort. I do not know what to suggest. Possibly

a card could be mailed from the post office to the person who is to receive the publication or some arrangement could be made for their distribution by freight or express. I was asked to bring these two matters to the attention of the acting minister, and I trust he will give them his usual serious consideration.


Mr. Byrne:: Mr. Chairman, like the hon. member for Kootenay West, I was also busy this afternoon with committee work. I too do not know just what trend the discussion has taken. I want to say at the outset I have had the very finest co-operation from the officials of the department in all matters I have brought to their attention. But there is one matter I believe must go to the ministerial level for attention, the question of the differential in rates of pay between various classes of post offices. There are perhaps four post offices in Kootenay East that are grade 9 offices. The rates of pay for clerks in those offices begin at $2,010 a year and reach a maximum of $2,760 while postal clerks in the larger offices begin at $2,400 and reach a maximum of $3,360. I believe that the clerks in the smaller offices take the same civil service examination and are required to know as much about post office business and the distribution of mail to various countries as clerks in the larger offices. In the cities where the larger offices are, the cost of living is much lower in most cases. In East Kootenay, for instance, the men on prevailing rates are paid on the basis of rates in the mining and lumbering industry. Local conditions require a higher rate of pay for the employees to maintain equality with the local residents. Of course, the cost of groceries is very much higher than in the larger centres. It is for that reason I feel the clerks in the smaller grade 9 post offices should at least receive a rate comparable to that received by the clerks in the larger centres. I hope the minister will take that into consideration.


Mr. Ellis:: There are one or two observations I should like to make on this first item. Last year a great deal was said about the introduction of the 40-hour week and the government used that as one of the reasons for introducing an increase in postal rates. This year the parliamentary assistant referred to the 40-hour week and gave us some figures of the additional cost to the post office as well as the number of new employees resulting from the introduction of the 40-hour week. Last year there was some doubt in the minds of many of us as to just what the 40-hour week was going to be, particularly in view of the fact the Postmaster General seemed to feel that it meant
Supply-Post Office
a normal working period of 40 hours, followed by an overtime period paid for at regular rates of pay.
This matter was brought up last year, but we did not get any clear-cut satisfactory answers. I am not satisfied, Mr. Chairman, that there has been any improvement in this regard during the past year. I am sure hon. members received a letter dated February 9 from the federated association of letter carriers, branch No. 3, Hamilton, Ontario, dealing with the situation in one of our large postal areas in Canada. From the information contained in this letter over the signature of Fred Bimson, secretary treasurer, the postal officials asked the employees of the Montreal post office to vote on a plebiscite to determine whether or not they were in favour of working a six-day week, and for the hours worked in excess of the five-day week they were to be paid at an hourly rate equal to their salaries.
Now, when that plebiscite was held the letter carriers revealed quite clearly by their vote that they did not favour the proposed changes in their working conditions. However, in spite of the fact the letter carriers voted down the proposition put forward by the postal officials the department nevertheless went ahead with their plans. They ignored entirely the wishes of the employees in this regard. According to the information that we received in February last, the secretary of the federated association of letter carriers protested to departmental officials. He was informed-


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: May
I say that the particular plebiscite to which the hon. member was referring was purely a local plebiscite. It was held in Montreal at the request of the employees and had no particular official sanction and no action was taken. We carried on as we had in the past.


Alfred Claude Ellis: I want to thank the parliamentary assistant for that bit of information. I had no way of knowing whether the plebiscite had been taken at the instigation of the Post Office Department or the employees. Nevertheless, the fact of the matter is a plebiscite was held, irrespective of the fact the initiative was taken by the employees, and apparently departmental officials were prepared to sound out the employees in that postal area. Those employees made it quite clear that they were not in favour of departing from the five-day 40-hour week. Notwithstanding the evident desire of the employees, the Post Office Department went ahead with the proposal. I am not suggesting it was made

Supply-Post Office
mandatory or compulsory, but the employees would be asked to work a sixth day and if they agreed to work a sixth day they would be paid only regular rates of pay.


Mr. Kirk (Shelburne-Yarmouih-CIare):: May
I make this clear? The employees requested that this plebiscite be taken, and it was taken. In some areas a majority wanted the change and in other areas a majority did not want the change. The five-day 40-hour week was in effect before the plebiscite was taken and it was in effect afterwards. The vast majority of the employees throughout the city did not want any change. They wanted the five-day 40-hour week, and they still have it.


Alfred Claude Ellis: The thing I am concerned about is this. If it is the policy of the department to institute a 40-hour week in certain localities in Canada, then that is departmental policy. I gathered from the remarks made by the Postmaster General at the last session that he did not see anything wrong in the idea of asking postal employees to work extra hours at regular rates of pay. I recall asking the Postmaster General at that time whether he was not aware of the fact that under normal practice when an employee works in excess of the 40 hours then that employee should receive overtime pay at overtime rates of pay. The ordinary practice is to pay time and a half for overtime. That is the thing about which I am concerned. I am glad the parliamentary assistant has given more information about this matter.
I am still concerned about the status of the 40-hour week in the post office in those areas in Canada where the department has presumably adopted the 40-hour week. I feel that if the 40-hour week means anything, it means that the normal work week is 40 hours. Every employee who is required to work a single hour in excess of 40 hours is working overtime and should be paid for that at overtime rates of pay. If you do not pay time and a half for overtime, then it is not a proper 40-hour week. That is the thing about which I am concerned. I believe that when the Post Office Department or any other department of government institutes a 40-hour week, they ought to be prepared to pay employees who are asked to work overtime at overtime rates of pay. I hope when the parliamentary assistant speaks later he will deal with this point and inform the members of the committee whether or not the practice is to pay overtime rates of pay. Otherwise this boast of the 40-hour week is not entirely accurate.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I may be permitted to interrupt the hon. member. I am

informed that the regulations with respect to the 40-hour week in the post office are precisely the same as they are in all other branches of the civil service where the 40-hour week is in force. Any change that might be made would apply to the civil service generally and would be made by the civil service commission. It would not be within the power of the Post Office Department to make any change, and therefore it would hardly seem to be an appropriate subject to deal with on these estimates and should be dealt with on the estimates of the civil service commission.


Alfred Claude Ellis: It seems to me that this afternoon the Acting Postmaster General has been on his feet three or four times stating points of order in which he has sought to circumscribe debate-


John Whitney Pickersgill: To the Post Office Department.


Alfred Claude Ellis: -by suggesting that we should bring this matter up or bring that matter up under the estimates of some other department. I suggest I would be out of order if I began to discuss the civil service as a whole. I am now dealing with post office employees because the estimates of the Post Office Department are now before the committee. What I am saying about postal employees certainly has an application in a wider field. But in an effort to be strictly in order I am confining my remarks to employees of the Post Office Department.


John Whitney Pickersgill: If I might interject once more, I would say that I have not the slightest desire to circumscribe the hon. member or any other hon. member. But there is a rule which says that the minister who is responsible for and can do something about a certain thing is the minister who ought to answer in that particular field.
I understand these regulations with respect to hours of work apply uniformly to all branches of the civil service. They could not be changed by the Postmaster General, nor could they be changed for the Post Office Department as a separate entity. Unless there were a general change of policy, whatever can be done would have to be done at the instigation of the responsible minister. I do not wish to circumscribe the hon. member, or anybody else, but it is certain that there is a large area over which the Postmaster General has responsibility, and that is the responsibility for which he is expected to answer in committee-and not with respect to things not within his jurisdiction.


Alfred Claude Ellis: Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that the Acting Postmaster General must certainly be concerned about the esprit de

corps among post office employees. I am certain he is concerned about working conditions because, after all, the efficiency of his department depends upon good relationship between employers on the one hand and employees on the other. I suggest that if the Acting Postmaster General or the parliamentary assistant is anxious to bring about better conditions within the Post Office Department he might use his influence with the appropriate minister to bring about changes, not only in the Post Office Department, but in other departments of government as well.
There is one other aspect of working conditions among post office employees I wish to mention. I am referring to the matter of holidays. It will be recalled that at the last session holidays were used as an instrument of policy on the part of the post office to bring about certain desired effects so far as staff was concerned. It will be recalled that as a result of a change in policy at that time, which I understand has been modified since, certain employees who took certain jobs were given priority in the matter of holidays. As I say, it is my understanding that this policy has been modified to meet the wishes of the employees.
However, I think it is indicative of the type of thing we must always watch for in this department, when we find that this year the Post Office Department-and once again I am speaking of that department, but it has its broader application-is determined to use the annual holidays as a weapon to achieve certain results in the administration of the department.
Mention was made this afternoon of the rather humiliating proposal that civil servants who are late a certain number of hours shall have their holidays docked. I suggest to the acting minister that that is not the way to deal with the question of habitual lateness. If it is found that there are employees who are causing trouble and who, without reasonable excuse, are late habitually, then I think the proper method is to deal with each individual employee. But to pass a blanket regulation to cover all civil servants is an insult to them and a humiliation of the worst kind. The government is treating civil servants as parents might treat children. The threat is made that if employees are late so many times then, as a matter of policy, so much of their holiday time will be taken away. To my way of thinking that is a very shortsighted and foolish policy indeed.
As a matter of fact one civil servant who spoke to me about the matter said that he had not been late for work in the last seven years, but that he was greatly upset about
Supply-Post Office
this ruling. He was not concerned about himself, but rather with the principle involved. It is such a childish procedure for the government to say to civil servants en masse, "If you are late a certain number of hours you will lose that time from your holidays". I suggest that holidays are the right of employees, irrespective of the jobs they are doing; and that to use a man's or woman's holidays as a means of bringing about certain results in the day-to-day administration of the department is, to say the least, a mistake.
It seems to me there are a number of improvements that could be made in the Post Office Department, so far as working conditions are concerned. Hon. members may have noted the recommendations made by employees of this department a week or so ago, as publicized in the press. It would appear to me that those requests are quite reasonable and that the government should be giving favourable consideration to them. There are some matters I shall not deal with this evening, because I wish to be brief. There is, for example, the matter of longevity pay, as well as other proposals that are reasonable and which should commend themselves to the Acting Postmaster General. I hope those suggestions will be given consideration.
I wish to close on this note. Last year I suggested that we are always going to have little annoyances from time to time, so long as the government treats its employees in the present fashion. The answer of necessity must be that employees of the government, working through their organizations, must be free to bargain collectively with the government as the employer. I am certain all hon. members have come to accept the idea of collective bargaining, under which employees, through their organizations, meet with employers around the bargaining table and reach agreements mutually satisfactory. I think that is the only proper way to carry on negotiations and day-to-day discussions between employee and employer. I suggest the government ought to be giving serious consideration to keeping away from the idea that federal civil servants must simply beg for improvements in working conditions dealing with matters such as overtime, wage increases and the like. The only proper way is to say to the employees, "You have your organizations which are free to bargain on your behalf. We will meet around the table as equal partners, and we will arrive at a contract dealing with wages and with working conditions generally." I believe that is the only answer to improved relations between the government as an employer and its

Supply-Post Office
employees. It is something that we have to accept as normal and desirable in this country. Rather than always following the lead of other employers, the government should be setting the example. We have had arguments raised about the question of the 40-hour week in the post office. The 40-hour week should be made much wider in its scope; but the government takes the attitude, well, we are not going to institute the 40-hour week unless it is the normal practice in the area. In other words, the government as an employer is not going to set the example; it is going to adopt the 40-hour week in the areas where local conditions pretty much force it into that position.
I suggest that the government ought to be setting a high standard for other employers. One way in which they could do this is by revising their methods in dealing with employer-employee relationships. They should get the employees around the table and come to an agreement which would be applicable to both sides and mutually acceptable.


Mr. Boisvert:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words in connection with the matter which was brought up this afternoon by the hon. member for Vancouver East. The hon. gentleman discussed a matter this afternoon and tonight which is giving some concern to many people. We are well aware in this country that some United States publishers are trying very hard to increase the circulation of their magazines and reviews. To arrive at their aim they are trying to get subscriptions to their publications in an indirect way. First of all, I must say I have no objection at all to the publication of those reviews, but I do object to their method of getting subscriptions.
There has been a decision in the courts, in the province of Quebec, to the effect that a contract cannot be a unilateral proposition. Therefore, if someone is receiving reviews, magazines or newspapers without having subscribed to them there is a way out. It is to refuse the publication, and send it back. In the province of Quebec no publisher can collect money from an individual who does not sign an agreement to receive a publication for a year, a month or two years. Of course, from another point of view I recognize that publishers are abusing their rights and are trying by all means to increase, if not their circulation, the amount of subscriptions. I am against that method of getting magazines into this country. I am against all kinds of pressure. I am not going to blame the department of the Postmaster General. The

department has nothing to do with this problem. It is not the duty of the department to open the letters of publishers to see what is in them.


William Alfred Robinson: Order. The hon. member has just said that the Post Office Department has nothing to do with the problem he is discussing.


Stanley Howard Knowles: He had better withdraw that.


William Alfred Robinson: I think I should advise the hon. member that I brought a similar point to the attention of the hon. member for Vancouver East, who then related his remarks to the Post Office Department. I would ask the hon. member who has the floor to bring his remarks within the discussion of the administration of the Post Office Department.


Maurice Boisvert: I was coming to that. I was saying that the department has no responsibility for that method of carrying on business. If the department could find a way to overcome the difficulty that now confronts the people of Canada with respect to these magazines I would ask it to do so. I think they could overcome the present situation by getting in touch with the department of the postmaster general in the United States and making representations to this effect. We must be free to subscribe to publications of any kind, provided that the morality of the same is safeguarded. I have nothing to say against them. The only departments which can help the people of Canada resist the pressure campaigns of publishers of all sorts of magazines in this country are the departments of the Postmaster General of Canada and of the United States.


Mr. While (Middlesex East):: I suppose that no department of government enters into the daily life of every Canadian citizen as much as does the postal department. When I say that, I should like to pay my tribute to the parliamentary assistant, who is so ably carrying on the duties of the Postmaster General, who is ill.
The remarks I have to make tonight will be brief. There are two or three matters that are of particular interest to Canadians. The first is this. In a world that has been speeded up in the last 25 years the post office has not kept pace with the speedy developments. I see the parliamentary assistant looking at me and probably thinking of airmail. Twenty-five years ago a letter posted in London before five or six o'clock in the afternoon would be delivered in Toronto the next morning. Two months ago a friend of mine posted a letter in London and two days later it was delivered in Toronto. At the

same place at the same time he posted a special delivery letter, and it was delivered three days later in Toronto. It was addressed by the same man to the same persons and posted on the same day at the same post office.
When the all-up airmail was introduced, most Canadians thought they were going to get speedy mail delivery, but such is not the case. Thousands and thousands of Canadians who are paying a 25 per cent increase in first class mail rates, which is what the increase amounted to a year ago, are not getting any advantage from all-up airmail because of the fact that they do not live in areas where airmail is available. Much of the airmail within the province never gets to a plane at all. It is only when large distances are to be traversed that the all-up mail really comes into effect. An editorial in the St. Thomas Times-Journal of March 17, 1954, had this to say:
People In the big cities may benefit from the all-air mail service, but the vast majority of Canadians who live in rural districts or in centres remote from airports used by T.C.A. will suffer grave inconvenience. There is real merit in the suggestion that a special stamp be issued that would serve as an ironclad guarantee that mail when desired shall move only by rail.
That indicates the thinking of some people in the country. I have here a news item which appeared in the London Free Press protesting the slash in the rail service in western Canada. It states:
Changes in the Stratford-Sarnia route become effective next Monday.
It was also announced that a truck will take over from the train in carrying mail between Sarnia and Stratford.
It goes on to point out that a passenger unit will leave Sarnia Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday morning at 8.30 beginning March 14. The train will make the return trip from Stratford Monday, Wednesday and Friday. I might mention this news item was written a year ago. If they have to depend on a schedule like that the people in that area are going to have a much poorer mail service than they have now. There is no provision in these trucks for sorting mail en route, which means that in many cases mail will have to be rerouted over the same route a couple of days later.
The establishment of the 40-hour week has made the people employed in the railway mail services begin to think that they are the forgotten people. Because of particular routes and train schedules they are penalized.
The United States has introduced a diesel motor truck which is equipped in the same way as the railway mail car. In many cases
Supply-Post Office
this service has proved to be more efficient and cheaper than the rail service. We are facing a problem as far as railroad revenues are concerned, especially in the case of the Canadian National Railways, and therefore I submit that motor truck routes should be set up only in those cases where the railways do not give a service.
There are four or five such routes that could be established in the vicinity of London, and I would just mention Clinton, Wingham, Kincardine, Wiarton and the Stratford-Sarnia service to which I referred a moment ago. I think western Ontario would provide a good area for an experiment of this nature because of the density of population, the conditions of the highways and the fact that there is a central administration point at London which is equidistant between Windsor and Toronto and serving the northern area of Huron and Bruce.
For the information of the minister I will send over this copy of the National Geographic magazine of July, 1954, which describes the development of this motor truck service where the sorting is done en route. In the truck service provided in Ontario no sorting is done en route. By adopting this other method the sorting could be done en route and mail delivery made much sooner than it is now.


Mr. Jones:: I should like to endorse what the previous speaker has said, that while an excellent airmail service is provided for the larger towns some of the smaller towns are not getting the type of service they deserve, and I refer particularly to the interior of British Columbia. I suggest that the minister start to make greater use of the small air lines operating between Calgary and Penticton, and Vancouver and Penticton. This would speed up the service in that area.
What I rose particularly to do was to pass on several complaints I have received from British Columbia with reference to the period between the calling of tenders and the expiry date for filing applications for the conveyance of mail between stations and post offices and so on. I submit that an extra week's time should be given before the final date of acceptance, this to apply west of Winnipeg and definitely throughout British Columbia.
The nature of the complaints varies. One complaint I have is that the notice appeared in the post office for just one day before it was taken down. The person complaining did not know who had taken it down. Another complaint is that the notice was taken down

Supply-Post Office
the same day it was put up. Presumably someone interested in the contract did not want any competition.
I suggest that there be a penalty for anyone removing such a poster from a post office before the time has expired for the receiving of tenders. I can give the minister the particulars of these complaints if he wishes to have them, but I understand that they are fairly general. Members of parliament receive copies of these notices but in many cases there is no possible chance of sending them along to someone in British Columbia who might be interested in tendering but could not get a tender in on time owing to the short period allowed for that purpose.


Mr. Leboe:: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Vancouver East referred to the mails being used for the disposal of merchandise. X wish to warn the Postmaster General that when door to door service in place of a box service is introduced he might be on the lookout for people who send out little metal mail boxes. You wonder where it comes from, but after a while you get a letter saying it is worth $2.75. When you write back and say that you do not want the thing they ask you to pay the return postage. I suggest to the Acting Postmaster General that he note this, because it will happen again.


Mr. Small:: Mr. Chairman, last year when the Postmaster General introduced a bill to change the postal rates we had the benefit of a report which had been issued on March 1,
1953.	This year we did not have the benefit of the report of the department for some reason or another. I am not criticizing them for that fact. The report is dated October 1,
1954,	and for the report that I have here I am indebted to the parliamentary assistant who allowed me to have it so that I could make some kind of comparison between last year's report and this year's report.
When they introduced the increased postal rates last year they anticipated a deficit in the department of somewhere in the neighbourhood of $13,500,000. I just thought that I would check over those figures with the report this year, and I find that they just do not seem to stand up. That brings back the contention that we made last year that there was not any justification for increasing the rates until such time as the suggested changes that were to be made in the department were put into effect, as recommended by J. D. Woods and Gordon and that then we would see what the outcome would be. But the department maintained that nevertheless the

increased rate had to go into operation if the department was even going to carry itself for the next year.
Here is what they estimated. I will quote from last year's Hansard of January 14, 1954, at page 1124 when I quoted the Postmaster General's contention:
. . . as I followed the reasons for the increase in the postal rates advanced by the Postmaster General, they are the five-day week or the forty-hour week at a cost of $5 million; the increase in wages that is involved in the amount of $7 million, and for the rural mail $1,500,000, amounting to approximately $13,500,000.
Then on top of that they estimated a deficit in the department, for the withdrawal of the excise revenue tax, of another $7 million or $7,500,000. It was a very extensive figure that ran into anywhere from $13 million to $20 million.
Our position in the opposition was this. We did not find out, until it was mentioned on the bottom of the page in the introduction, that they had received valuable assistance from the firm of J. D. Woods and Gordon Limited, management consultants. We wanted to know what that was all about. It was not for some considerable time afterwards that we were given the opportunity to look at the report and its contents were very revealing. The suggestions, recommendations or observations in it, if they had been followed out, would have made considerable economies in that department. In view of the report itself that had been tendered last year, the Postmaster General's report and the J. D. Woods and Gordon report, it would have been only fair to the people of this country if the government had introduced these changes before imposing the additional rates. That is what I should like to cover tonight.
There has been some improvement in the operation of the department. It is all very well when we criticize them for what we think is not competent or efficient operation. But when there has been improvement in the department they are at least entitled to some commendation, and there has been considerable improvement.
But I should just like to take their own figures. I quoted last year that over a period of 20 years there has been an increase every year in the revenue of some $4 million and that there has likewise been an increase in the expenditures, but on the sum total there has been a surplus or a profit each year; and I pointed out what had been done in the past by the postmaster general, the one outstanding postmaster general since confederation, Sir William Mulock. When he had charge of the department it was more or less his ambition and his goal to make it

work and to make it pay. He surprised everybody in that day by what he did. Instead of increasing rates, as soon as postal volume increased he would reduce rates. Then there would be a deficit for a year or so. Then following that, revenue would pick up in the course of three or four years and he would again have a surplus. He kept on doing this and he was criticized for it.
But the picture has changed. Now we have the postmasters general increasing rates and they have increased the rates. Inside of 10 years they have increased them by 100 per cent. Now they have increased revenue, but in this report it is not shown that there is increased revenue because the rates did not go into effect last year until April 1, 1954. The figures we have in the 1954 report of this department are based on the old rates of last year, with the one exception, namely the withdrawal of the excise revenue from cheques.
If you examine the figures closely and with the increase in wages that has taken place, you will find that the figures work out nearly to a balance or even-Stephen. He estimated the deficit on the excise revenue from cheques at about $5 million. It turned out to be some $7,500,000. He estimated the increase in wages at about $5 million for rural mail carriers, and other carriers at about $1,500,000. It did not work out to that because on their own figures of expenditures, in this report for 1954, on page 14-when you get the report you can look it up-there is shown an increase for salaries and allowances paid to revenue post offices, some staff post offices and sub-post offices. It amounts to a total of, in 1952-53, $15,417,000. For the year 1953-54 it is $16,636,000 or an increase of approximately $1,120,000. There is a vast difference between what the minister suggested was going to take place in the department because they are working exactly as they were last year, on the same set-up, with the exception, as I pointed out, of the withdrawal of the revenue from the excise stamps on cheques. But I pointed this out last year to them when we were discussing it, after we had the benefit of the J. D. Woods and Gordon report. Last year the Postmaster General, when he was supplementing his remarks, said:
Perhaps I may complete my views on that subject. We had a surplus last year of $61 million and this year we are going to have a deficit of $1 million. This deficit will result through the loss of $71 million by the cancellation of the excise tax.
He says there will be a $5 million deficit due to the adoption of the 40-hour week, and $7 million due to the increase in wages of
Supply-Post Office
the general post office staff, $1,500,000 due to the increase to rural mail carriers and approximately $1 million covers the increase to the railway company, all this dealing in the realm of conjecture. I go on further to point out that the addition to the post office revenue that the minister was asking from the excise stamps on cheques was unwarranted, for this tax had its proper place in the consolidated revenue fund. To suggest the inclusion of receipts from this tax in the Post Office Department service or deficit was entirely wrong. In the first place the only conclusion that can be drawn is that it was an indirect way of supplying funds that were necessary for subsidies and subventions within the department.
It is now apparent that these concealed subsidies will have to be paid from the consolidated revenue fund and not from postal revenues. That is about what will take place. With the withdrawal of the $7 million benefit from their operations it just about brings the department out even. Next year when the increased rates will be in effect there will be a surplus of something like $14 million on the estimate of the Postmaster General, and I think the people of the country will feel that they have been taken in.
I mentioned last year that there were some illustrations of stamps in the report of the department. There was one very beautiful stamp. I guess you would call it a picture of a blue goose. At that time I think I described it as the goose that laid the golden egg for the government and said that if they were not very careful and if they pressed their luck too far they would kill the goose that laid the golden egg. This year in their report they have a new series of stamps which are also very good. One appears to be a polar bear, I presume, with the aurora borealis behind it. Then there is one of a mountain goat. There is also one of a reindeer or elk. I think it would be worth while if they had one with a fish, a clammy looking big sucker, to portray exactly what the government is doing to the people of Canada. They are just playing them for suckers with the increased postage rates and it would be very appropriate if they would introduce such a stamp to let the people know what is happening to them.
I have been checking over the changes in the department in the light of the recommendations in the Woods and Gordon report from the point of view of the economies that could be effected. Certain changes in the staff were recommended. I think I put on record last year a number of the changes and recommendations contained in the report which if followed out would bring about

Supply-Post Office
economies in the operation of the department. They have carried out some of them. I have been comparing the organization of the Post Office Department this year with last year. They have been introducing changes, and I think it is all for the best that they are doing so.
Last year there were some 30 personnel divisions; they have made a rearrangement. There are some six branches this year and 38 personnel divisions, an increase of one branch and eight personnel divisions to operate the department in line with the recommendations of the Woods and Gordon report. We will not be able to get a real picture of the situation until next year because we do not know what is the full effect on the revenues with the increased postage rates. That is not apparent in the report for the year ended April, 1954 compared with the one ended April, 1953, and the rates have not been in effect for a full year. I have not had sufficient time to compare the 1954 report but offhand I would say that the revenues do not bear out the contention made by the Postmaster General that there would be a deficit. On their own figures they wiped out a surplus of $6 million odd last year, and for this year I think the amount is around $2,474,000, but they have not had a chance to get the benefit of the increased revenues for a full year. If you compare the financial results for the past 20 years, the result still comes out the same as it did last year. There were only three years in those 20 years in which there was a deficit. In all those years the surplus averaged about $100,000.
In face of that I suggest the department should consider reducing the postage rates again because, even on the figures they gave us, their contention has not been upheld. When they have the benefit of the increased rates for a full year they are going to have a surplus, and I do not know what their story is going to be then. It was contended that with the introduction of the 40-hour week for postal employees and the increased wages for postal employees and the rural mail carriers there would be a deficit of somewhere around $12 million, but all that shows up in this year's report is $1,250,000.
The estimating of the department is very much out, and if that is the kind of estimating they are capable of the house should not have very much faith in their estimates for the future on the basis of this performance. Mention is made of improvement of the postal service and the question of public relations from the point of view of educating people to address their mail properly with the right
[Mr. Small.l
name and address so as to help the postal carrier. I suppose one cannot be too critical of that, but there is some cause for humour in it. In the old days when someone had moved or there had been some changes or there were misdirections or wrong numbers on letters you could always rely on the postman on the beat. He would see that letters got to the right place without too much difficulty. He would say that so and so had moved up the street or over to the next street and he would make the correction himself.
I have had mail sent back to me when there was only a difference in the address of six or seven houses from the place where the person had moved. These letters have come back with the notation, "Not known, not at this address." Yet the individual was living on the same street only five or six doors removed from his old address. One might say that there was a new man on the beat but still that does not warrant it because the people living at the old address will tell the postman that the former resident has only moved three or four doors away. But the postal carriers now must have instructions from the department to return the letter to the post office if the people are not at the address, and letters are returned irrespective of the expense involved.
I do not say this by way of criticism of the heads of the department, but I do say it is a change from the good old days when you could rely on the postman to see that the mail got to the right place. I would ask that next year we receive the report of the department in time for us to make comparisons. Then we would be in a better position to offer constructive criticism of the operations of the department. At the present time we are more or less just taking a guess at what has happened. I was fortunate, as I said, in that the parliamentary assistant let me have his copy of the report so I could make a hasty summary of it. If my remarks do not jibe entirely with the report it is because I have summarized it in haste, and when I have a chance to go over it more thoroughly I will probably have something further to say.


Mr. Barnett:: Mr. Chairman, I am not at all sure that the little bouquet I had for the minister may not have one or two skunk cabbage leaves in it too as in the case of the member who has just spoken. He remarked that he had noticed some improvements in the Post Office Department in the last year, and I was rather hesitant about rising right after him because I was afraid that the shock of two opposition members making remarks of that nature one after the other

415S
might be too great for the minister to stand. However, I shall say at once my remarks are going to be somewhat more brief than perhaps they were on this item a year ago. At that time I had occasion to remind the Postmaster General of a statement which had been made that when the new postal rates went into effect all first class mail would be carried by air wherever such carriage would speed its delivery. I said at that time I hoped to discover the Postmaster General would realize that Canada did not stop at Vancouver. I am very glad to be able to state this year that so far as I am concerned some recognition has been given to that fact, and there has been some improvement made in the matter of the carriage of mail by air to some of the more remote places in British Columbia.
I hope that having said that the minister and his officials will not simply sit back and bask in those remarks. I hope they will recognize that in a good many respects there is still some room for improvement in that situation. I could, of course, go on to tell them of the fact that there are at least two places where we badly need new post office buildings and other places where better facilities are needed. However, I shall not take the time to go into all the details of that tonight.
I was interested in some remarks which were made this afternoon by the parliamentary assistant. I was not quite able to follow all of' them, but they concerned the possibility of improved conditions, and in some cases improved income, for the postmasters in revenue post offices. I hope that the result of his remarks is that there will be a further improvement in that particular direction. I do know that in many cases in communities where, on a straight revenue basis, the post office may not appear to be very important, nevertheless the duties which are being performed year in and year out by these postmasters are certainly far beyond the scale of remuneration they have been receiving. I believe there is an area of the public service which, in a great many cases, could very well receive better financial recognition than has been the case.
(Translation) :


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Chairman, like the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Balcer), who spoke this afternoon on the estimates of the Post Office Department, I want to offer to the minister, who has been away from the house for quite some time owing to ill health, my best wishes for a quick and complete recovery. I am sure that all hon. members have regretted his absence and missed his smile and good humour.
Supply-Post Office
The sympathetic Postmaster General (Mr. Cote) has been compelled for several years to work hard under unfavourable conditions, not to say unbearable.
We often find that in certain branches of the department, the minister only plays a secondary part and that he is, as it were, a front that must be saved. The Postmaster General is one of those ministers whose authority exists in name only and who is not permitted to play the part assigned to him.


Maurice Boisvert: That is not as good as the first part.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Wait until the end.
He must nevertheless face our bitter criticisms on the administration of the department and cover as best he can those who have given orders one way or the other and who are the real masters and authorities in the department.
We are particularly concerned with this today. No one can deny that the great master of the situation, the one who makes and cancels decisions, the one who rules the roost within the department, in the presence or in the absence of the minister, is none other than the all-powerful deputy minister, Mr. Walter Turnbull.


Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: Listen!


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Far be it from me to think that the minister-
(Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am wondering if, in the absence of the Postmaster General who is not here to defend himself, it is a proper thing for the hon. member to cast these reflections on him as a member of this house.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I think the minister is not aware of what I am saying.


John Whitney Pickersgill: On a question of personal privilege, Mr. Chairman, I listened to every word the hon. gentleman said and I comprehended their meaning thoroughly.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: On the point of order, I began to say I regretted that I could not give my speech in English as I had intended, but I thought I would be speaking tomorrow afternoon. For the benefit of most members of the house, my intention was to speak in English. I should say on this point of order, Mr. Chairman, that I have the greatest sympathy for the minister. I was just saying in French that I regretted the fact that the authority in the Postmaster General's department did not lie with the minister but rather with the deputy minister, Mr. Walter

Supply-Post Office
Turnbull. That is exactly what I was saying. I was not saying anything against the minister, for whom I have the greatest sympathy.


Maurice Boisvert: Would the hon. member permit a question?


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I am speaking to the point of order, and I do not intend to be interrupted by the hon. member for Nicolet-Yamaska. If he wishes to ask a question, he may do so now.


Maurice Boisvert: May I ask the hon. member a question?


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Certainly; go ahead.


Maurice Boisvert: Does the hon. member believe that it is fair to say what he has already said against the deputy of the Postmaster General, when the minister is not in this house?


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: The Acting Postmaster
General is here and the parliamentary assistant is here. A few minutes ago, Mr. Chairman, I said I regretted the fact that I did not have any opportunity to translate my speech into English.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order; the Acting Postmaster General having raised this matter as a point of order, I suppose it is my responsibility to settle it to the extent that it can be settled. I would say that criticism of the Postmaster General, even in his absence, in his capacity as Postmaster General is undoubtedly in order. The administration of the department is before the committee at this stage and it is the only stage in our proceedings during which the administration of the department can be criticized. Criticism of the administration of the department is the privilege of the members of the house.
I do not believe it is the duty or the responsibility of the chairman of the committee to try to guide members in what is or is not ethical or in good tastt, I should like to express my personal opinion that the conduct of the department is a fair subject for criticism even though, through unfortunate circumstances, the minister is absent. I might perhaps be permitted to go this much farther and to suggest to members that criticism of a nature which could only be answered personally by the minister himself and which, under the force of circumstances, could not be answered either by the acting minister or the parliamentary assistant, might safely be left unsaid at this time. I do not think I have the power or the right to go farther than that.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Chairman, thus far I have not criticized at all the Postmaster

General, and it is not my intention to do so. A few moments ago I was speaking in French, and I shall continue to do so.
(Translation) :
Mr. Chairman, far be it from me to think that the minister is not qualified to conduct the affairs of his department were he given the opportunity to do it, but in the case of the present minister as well as in the case of those who preceded him in this position since the end of the last war, history repeats itself.
In this connection, I wish to quote from an editorial by Mr. Pierre Chaloult which appeared in the Ottawa paper he Droit on April 19, 1955, under the heading:
The Battle Against Shadows
We hear about the impending resignation of one of the youngest and most active members of the federal cabinet. Mr. Alcide Cote, who, as the rumour goes, would no longer be able to work twelve hours a day, the time needed to supervise the administrative mafia entrenched in the Post Office Department for some years.
In other words, the report has it that they finally wore down this incumbent as they did his immediate predecessors.
For it is obvious that the Post Office Department, formerly a realm of peace and quiet, can only be thought of now in terms of insoluble problems, while the ministers, one after the other, not only come to their wits' end but lose face, however strong they may be physically and politically.
When, indeed, Mr. Ernest Bertrand, on August 29, 1945, left the Department of Fisheries to become Postmaster General, he found, when he assumed his duties, a new deputy minister, Mr. Walter James Turnbull.
The latter knew the department inside out. He had spent his career there before becoming private secretary to the then prime minister who had just made him a deputy minister, no doubt as a reward for services rendered.
Now, it so happens that from that time on, exactly, the history of that department has ceased to be that of the minister in charge of that portfolio to become that of the deputy minister whose hand has never ceased to appear in every intrigue, every plot, every difficulty which has beset the representatives of the department in the federal cabinet.
After three and a half years of undistinguished rule, Mr. Bertrand abandoned politics as well as his portfolio which he passed on to one of the most brilliant and dynamic representatives of the rising generation, Mr. Edouard Rinfret who, following a short though hectic stay in that position, was obliged, in turn, to bow to Mr. Turnbull, until such time as Mr. Alcide Cote will be compelled to do likewise.
Such an opposition, hidden but unmistakable, between the deputy minister and the minister was in no manner helpful to the latter and, both under the administration of Mr. Rinfret and that of Mr. Cote, there were debates during which the postmaster general, hedged in all around, had to fight off not only the three opposition parties, which is normal, but also his own administration (which is less normal) and even some of his colleagues who under the pretence of help threw banana peels under his feet. In other words, blows came not only from the front and from below but also from behind.

Such tactics were evidently not of the kind to help the minister consolidate his position, and the deputy minister, back in the shadows, could gloat with pleasure and lick his chops, which he evidently did.
What would Mr. Turnbull be hoping for besides his present position? Why is he so bold as to risk everything, including a false step which might bring about his downfall?
What purpose was he following in all these intrigues? Could it be that, as former secretary to Mr. Mackenzie King, as was, from 1924 to 1926, Mr. Ralph Campney (now Minister of National Defence), as was from 1937 to 1952 Mr. John Pickersgill (now Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, as well as acting Postmaster General), as was Mr. Lester Pearson, former deputy minister of the former prime minister himself (now Secretary of State, that is, minister, for External Affairs), just as his former colleagues who lived within the orbit of the former master, Mr. Turnbull was hoping to see himself some day appointed Postmaster General?


John Whitney Pickersgill: What poppycock!


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Maybe the relations between the minister and his deputy minister would then become less intricate?
Who knows!
This article, in my opinion, gives the perfect picture of the situation that had obtained for a long time within the Post Office Department, a situation for which, as you will note, the present deputy minister, Mr. Turnbull, is solely responsible. This situation being generally known, it is, doubtless, one of the main reasons for which we sympathize so much with the Postmaster General.
There is confusion in the post office administration, a confusion that was evidenced last year by my hon. friend from Notre Dame de Grace (Mr. Hamilton) and admitted by the hon. minister, because the authority responsible for the department is not respected. It has been replaced by that of the deputy minister, who is in no way answerable to either the people or parliament.
Most of the time unaware of what is going on, the minister is caught in an unqualifiable position, facing a cross-fire of protests from all sides. Unfortunately, his job ends there, except for a few speeches now and then, at the opening of a new post office, or when he has to represent the Prime Minister at some place when the latter is unable to attend because of his numerous engagements. Now is the time more than ever to have the ministers administer their own departments and not inferiors who get their bureaucratic authority from I do not know where. If the deputy minister, as in the case of Mr. Turnbull, takes over certain powers which belong only to the minister, who is solely responsible to the people and to parliament, a superior authority, in this instance the Prime
Supply-Post Office
Minister, should put an end to this unseemly monopolizing which is a serious obstacle to a good administration.
Having set forth this extremely important principle, I will now come to another problem which deserves the full attention of the department, of the house and the whole population.
On February 24 last, the hon. Minister of Labour told the house that an employment agency which claimed to find jobs within the organization which is to build the St. Lawrence seaway had been precluded from using the mail. And the minister added that other similar companies were being investigated.
I was one of the first to endorse these steps to protect our working public against some exploiters. The agency was ordered to explain its action within 10 days before a hearing committee of the department. We have never been told what was the outcome of the inquiry, but we know that the mail service was suspended at that time for this agency until it would prove that it was not guilty of the charge laid against it of having used Her Majesty's mail to make false representations. Such procedure meant that the local office no longer delivered mail to the agency and that letters were returned to senders.
All honest people were glad of that decision and the Post Office Department was congratulated for the energetic stand it had taken.
That wonderful picture is marred, however, Mr. Chairman, by circumstances which bring forth the conflicting attitudes of the Post Office Department and of the federal government.
At the very moment when an agency fraudulently obtaining money from the people is prevented from using the postal services, which is excellent, the propagandists of that infamous ideology known as communism are still allowed to distribute their pernicious literature in all Canadian homes. This infernal propaganda, however, does not merely aim at subtracting a few hard-earned dollars from the taxpayers, but its self-imposed devilish mission is first to poison and then to kill the soul and heart of all those candidly trustful people, who yield to this indoctrination. The hon. members of this house are not spared by this communist literature and are snowed under by letters and publications arriving by mail at their offices, even without postage on them.

Supply-Post Office
As a citizen of the province of Quebec more particularly I cannot let the sickle and the hammer become the symbol of honour.
I would like to draw the attention of the Postmaster General to a certain bureaucracy, not to say gestapo, which is now prevailing in his department in the city of Quebec. I believe that the minister has realized what is happening, because I am told two officials from the department in Ottawa, Messrs. Craig and Charlebois, are now in Quebec to investigate the matter and find out what is going on.
The employees are said to be complaining of the harsh treatment. In fact those who could be doing their work sitting down are no longer allowed to use a seat. An iron rule prevails there. The government has undoubtedly become aware of it because I am told two investigators are now making a thorough investigation into the dictatorial doings of certain officials.
If, in the course of this investigation, present employees are interviewed, I would suggest to the department that all those who, within the last year for example, have either been dismissed or have resigned for the simple reason that, in their judgment, they were working in an unbearable atmosphere, be also consulted so that we may know the real reasons behind either their resignations or their dismissal.
I will also bring to the attention of the acting minister a refusal which cannot be justified and that I had to put up with some time ago when I asked for some information which should be available to any member of parliament, as it did not call for the production of any confidential documents.
I wanted to know, once, in order to compile some statistics on employment, what was the amount of unemployment insurance stamps which had been bought at the post office and distributed in the district. I was flatly denied this information, on the grounds that an order from the minister was necessary to divulge this information.
Some departmental officials are usurping privileges which should normally be denied them. I believe that elected representatives of the people are entitled to this information, particularly in view of the fact that it becomes public knowledge overnight.
I protest against this state of affairs and I hope that the minister will see to it that this does not happen again.
I now have another suggestion to offer the Post Office Department. For a number of years, the Quebec Power Company, of Quebec

city, had a contract with the department allowing mail carriers and certain other classes of postal employees to travel free on Quebec city buses-or street cars at the time. Numerous representations have been made on behalf of the mail carriers since the day the company decided against renewing this contract. However, the department would only consent to allow its mail carriers two street car tickets per day. This, to my mind, is unfair, considering the privileges they previously enjoyed. There have been talks between the departmental officials and the Quebec Power Company, but, so far, to no avail.
I am not trying to blame the department for that failure, since I am told that it was the company that refused to grant that privilege to the postal employees. The new agreement between the company and the city of Quebec withdraws that privilege from policemen and firemen as well as from letter carriers.
I know for a fact however that the Post Office Department has offered to pay the Quebec Power Company $113.33 a year per letter carrier for their transportation, and that the company refused the offer. These poor employees are now receiving only two tickets a day and must pay out of their own pocket the additional tickets they need to reach their place of work, get their mail and deliver it.
Let me point out that the offer of the department to the Quebec Power Company is fair and that every letter carrier is entitled to that amount.
Raising the mail carrier's wages by $113.33, which is the amount offered to the Quebec Power, would give all concerned a square deal. If the employee spends only from $50 to $60 a year, the difference would be his to keep. If, on the contrary, he travels by bus often enough to spend more than $113.33, let him pay it out of his own pocket. I feel that would be an act of elementary justice for those devoted public servants who never miss an opportunity to serve the people.
I already had an opportunity, some time ago, to convey to this house a suggestion made to me by the various credit unions throughout Canada which now have a membership of 1,500,000, of whom 1 million are in the province of Quebec.
Requests reached me from all the credit unions in the city and district of Quebec, asking me to speak on their behalf to the minister in order that, during 1955, the birth

of their founder, a man who did so much good for the people, especially in the homes of working people, be commemorated by the issue of a postage stamp bearing the effigy of that great Canadian. The request is as follows:
Whereas the Post Office Department issues from time to time postage stamps bearing the effigy of prominent people who have been illustrious in Canadian life:
Whereas Commander Alphonse Desjardins was the founder of the credit unions;
Whereas his work has now spread to all parts of Canada and in the two Americas, and renders immeasurable services;
Whereas the year 1955 marks the centenary of the birth of Mr. Desjardins;
Whereas the founder of credit unions is recognized as a Canadian benefactor;
Be it resolved:
That the board of directors of the credit union, representing a certain number of members . . .
I am not going to mention any particular group, because there are a great many of them.
. . . express the wish that a stamp be issued in honour of Commander Desjardins, and that a copy of this resolution be addressed to the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent, the Hon. Alcide Cote, the Hon. Cyrille Vaillancourt, the Hon. Chas. G. Power, and Mr. Wilfrid Dufresne, M.P.
All his life, that great Canadian dedicated himself by teaching thrift, and I think the Postmaster General should seize the occasion of the centenary of Commander Desjardins' birth to pay him a tribute by issuing, in 1955, a stamp bearing his effigy.
Mr. Chairman, we are told that a new post office will shortly be built in Quebec city on a block of land registered until lately by the city of Quebec, but the registration of which was recently cancelled to enable the federal government to purchase the land.
A letter was sent a short time ago to all store owners and to all people who have homes within that block, ordering them to leave the premises on May 31, if they did not want to become liable to the penalties provided by law. The said letter was sent on May 6 last, which means that those merchants who have been in business at that same place for the past 50 years, were given only three weeks to get out.
In the name of all those people who would be only too glad to move elsewhere, provided they be given sufficient time, I urge the Post Office Department authorities to speak on their behalf to the Department of Public Works so that this post office may not be erected right now and so that they be given time to find new locations. In Quebec, as elsewhere, there is a housing problem; people living in those houses should be given time to find another home.
Supply-Post Office


Maurice Boisvert: And what about unemployment of which the hon. member speaks so much?


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I was expecting that question from the hon. member for Nicolet-Yamaska (Mr. Boisvert). He wants to speak about unemployment? A post office is to be erected. I did not object to the construction of that building but I believe that it should be built in a more suitable place.
To begin with, I do not know whether the Quebec municipal council has been stampeded into this, but this registration must have been sanctioned yesterday in the superior court. And yet it had provided for the demolition, at a given time, of all the buildings in this block in order to improve traffic conditions in Quebec city.
The distinguished French town planner, Jacques Greber, was among those who had submitted recommendations to the town planning committee. I cannot understand how it is that the Post Office Department can so summarily dismiss the views expressed by Mr. Greber and make such short shrift of a plan prepared by competent authorities. Why does it have to erect, in the very heart of the city, where traffic moves only very slowly as it is, a building far exceeding in area the block of which I spoke, in such a way as to prevent any easing in cross-town traffic conditions.
May I be permitted to tell the minister that at that spot, traffic congestion is frequent and that about 133,000 vehicles pass that point between eight o'clock in the morning and eight o'clock at night. The streets of Quebec city are already narrow enough and I do not see why the federal government would wish to add to the traffic problem and would want to build a post office-
(Text) :


Some hon. Members:: Ten o'clock.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: May I have just a few minutes?


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Has the hon. member for Quebec West unanimous consent to continue after ten o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: There is not unanimous consent tonight.
Item stands.
Progress reported.

Business of the House BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Stanley Howard Knowles: What is the business tor tomorrow?


Walter Edward Harris: May I express my personal regret that it was not possible to go on tonight to complete some business so that we might have a more expeditious disposal ol the post office estimates tomorrow. I quite understand that hon. members have
had a long day. It they would be good enough to consider that normally we do not take more than a day and a portion of another day on a department of this size, we would continue tomorrow with post office, hope to complete it in the early afternoon, and then go on with agriculture.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Friday, May 27, 1955