1955-07-25

AGRICULTURE AND COLONIZATION COMMITTEE


Mr. Zaplilny:: 1.	Since January 1, 1955, what farm organizations presented briefs to the standing committee on agriculture and colonization?
2.	What was the opening date on which each such brief was presented?


Mr. Speaker:: I might inform the house that I have had a conversation with the hon. member for Dauphin and he has agreed that this question be dropped.
Question dropped.



*POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT


Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: 1.	(a) Did the member for Quebec West bring to the attention of the Acting Postmaster General alleged irregularities in the Post Office Department? (b) If so, on what dates?
2.	(a) Did an investigator of the Post Office Department accompany one Marcel Belair to Seven Islands? (b) If so, for what purpose?
3.	Did either of the two thieves convicted in connection with theft at the Cabano post office in the fall of 1953 implicate Belair in any way?
4.	(a) Did one Marcel Belair turn over to postal officials $28,000 worth of stamps stolen from the Notre Dame de Grace post office in February, 1954? (b) If so, under what circumstances? (c) were charges laid? (d) If not, for what reason?
5.	Has the acting postmaster general any further information regarding the alleged irregularities in the Post Office Department, brought to his attention by the member for Quebec West?


Mr. Pickersgill:: Mr. Speaker, this question calls for an oral answer. Part 1 of the question reads:
1. (a) Did the member for Quebec West bring to the attention of the Acting Postmaster General alleged irregularities in the Post Office Department? (b) If so, on what dates?
The answer to that question, sir, is as follows: The hon. member for Quebec West stated that several times he had attempted to bring serious irregularities to the attention of the acting postmaster general. The truth is that the only occasion on which the hon. member discussed any alleged irregularities in the Post Office Department with me was about the middle of June, after he had put a series of questions on the order paper about a man named Marcel Belair.
As soon as the answers had been prepared, I asked the hon. member for Quebec West to come to see me in my office where I explained that I felt it would be preferable not to have the answers given in the house because the questions related to a police investigation which had not been completed; and the answers might give information, which they did not already possess, to some of the suspects.
I added, however, that I would give the answers if the hon. member insisted. The hon. member replied that he would like to have the answers put on the record and he added that the information could be of no value to the thieves because this man Belair was no longer at the place where he had been taken by the post office investigators. The hon. member also stated that Belair was being protected by certain investigators of the Post Office Department. I asked him at once if he had given any information he had to the police, or if he would give it to me so that I might have an immediate investigation made. He replied that he had not given the information to the police and declined to give it to me. The hon. member added that he might decide to make accusations in the house but undertook before doing so to advise me. Despite this voluntary promise, I heard nothing more about the matter from the hon. member for Quebec West.
Immediately after this interview, I told the deputy postmaster general what the hon. member had said to me and asked whether the action taken by the postal investigators in arranging employment for Belair at Seven Islands was taken with the knowledge and approval of the police. The deputy minister informed me that the action was taken at the request of the police and that the postal investigators had co-operated throughout with the police. As the hon. member for Quebec West had given me no information on which I could base any further investigation, there was nothing more I could do.
Despite the undertaking he had given me, I was not surprised, however, when I was informed by the press, while I was in Newfoundland, that the hon. member had made certain accusations in the house in my absence from Ottawa.
The second question reads:
2. (a) Did an investigator of the Post Office Department accompany one Marcel Belair to Seven Islands? (b) If so, for what purpose?

Questions
The answer, sir, is as follows: The hon. member for Quebec West stated in the house that an investigator of the Post Office Department accompanied Marcel Belair to Seven Islands for the purpose of hiding him from justice. It is true that an investigator did accompany Belair to Seven Islands and arrange for his employment under an assumed name. I so informed the house on June 20 last in answer to a question by the hon. member for Quebec West.
I have read the report made to the Post Office Department on this incident by the post office investigator, Mr. Fernand Vil-leneuve of Montreal. The report is dated September 22, 1954. According to this report, Belair had been held in custody for some time by the provincial police as a material witness in a case being prepared against another suspected thief. As neither the police nor the department had evidence against Belair on which they felt they were justified in prosecuting, Mr. Justice Wilfrid Lazure, of the court of queen's bench, authorized his release on September 16, 1954. Belair was in custody in Quebec city. Mr. Fernand Villeneuve was instructed to go to Quebec and to arrange for Belair's release with the crown prosecutor's office in Quebec.
On his arrival in Quebec, Mr. Villeneuve got in touch with the crown prosecutor's office and the provincial police and was informed that it had been arranged that Belair would be released and taken to Seven Islands by a member of the provincial police force, who was to arrange for his employment under an assumed name so that he would be available as a witness whenever it might become possible to proceed with the prosecution in which his testimony was required. This arrangement had been agreed to voluntarily by Belair.
Mr. Villeneuve was about to return to Montreal when he was called back to the office of the provincial police and informed that the police felt it would be preferable to have Belair accompanied to Seven Islands by Mr. Villeneuve rather than a provincial policeman. The police provided Mr. Villeneuve with an air ticket and he accompanied Belair to Seven Islands and made arrangements for his employment and for unemployment insurance under the name of Arthur St. Jean. Mr. Villeneuve also bought some work clothes for Belair and gave him $10 to meet his expenses until he began to earn some wages. Before Mr. Villeneuve left Seven Islands, Belair gave his assurance that he would stay there as long as his employer would keep him, but in fact he disappeared a few days later.
Such action had become necessary because of the disappearance of one Lucien Gagnon,
[Mr. Pickersgill.l
now a disbarred Montreal lawyer, who was accused of receiving unemployment insurance stamps stolen from the Ville St. Laurent post office. Belair was a material witness against Gagnon, who, according to the crown prosecutor, had previously succeeded in preventing Belair from giving testimony against him at the preliminary hearing. Belair was taken to Seven Islands with the approval of Mr. Noel Dorion, Q.C., special crown attorney in the case, in order to prevent Gagnon and his friends from subverting Belair again before the trial. I agree with Mr. Dorion that this action was taken in the interests of the proper administration of justice.
That would seem to dispose of the hon. member's accusation that a post office investigator accompanied Marcel Belair to Seven Islands for the purpose of hiding him from justice.
The third question is:
Did either of the two thieves convicted in connection with theft at the Cabano post office in the fall of 1953 implicate Belair in any way?
The answer is:	The hon. member for
Quebec West stated in the house that Belair was never troubled by the police in connection with the burglary at Cabano, although in the written confession made under oath by one of the accused men Belair was implicated in the theft.
The records of the Post Office Department indicate that information was obtained some time in October, 1953, which led to the arrest of two persons suspected of robbing the post office at Cabano on September 16, 1953. Both suspects were questioned at length by the provincial police and by post office investigators. Though the two men pleaded guilty themselves, they did not give the name of any accomplice, and the investigators of the Post Office Department know of no verbal or written statement furnished by either of these suspects which implicated Belair in this burglary. I am informed that, when questioned by Mr. Fortin and Mr. Villeneuve, investigators of the Post Office Department, Belair did say that he knew about the burglary at Cabano but he never admitted having taken part in it and the Post Office Department has never had any evidence of his complicity.
The fourth question is:
(a) Did one Marcel Belair turn over to postal officials $28,000 worth of stamps stolen from the Notre Dame de Grace post office in February, 1954?	(b) If so, under what circumstances?
(c) Were charges laid? (d) If not, for what reason.
The answer is: The hon. member for Quebec West stated that the post office investigators learned that their friend, Belair, was in possession of $28,000 worth of stamps

Questions
stolen from the post office at Notre Dame de The question of laying charges against him Grace and that they did not call the Mont- was discussed with the police but it was real police who would have been forced to felt that, in view of the lack of evidence, it arrest Belair and bring him into court. I am would be useless to lay a charge of burglary informed by the postal investigators in and that it was preferable to keep Belair question, Mr. Fortin and Mr. Villeneuve, that available as a witness rather than lay a the provincial police apprehended four sus- charge of receiving stolen goods, pects, one of whom was Marcel Belair, in	That, of course, was a decision which was
connection with another robbery. All four made by the police with the full approval of had lengthy police records. The suspects the crown prosecutor in the province of refused to talk and were about to be released Quebec. The fifth question, sir, is:
for lack of evidence when Mr. Villeneuve was called in to question them. After some questioning, Belair told Mr. Villeneuve that, if he was released, he would try to recover the postage stamps and unemployment insurance stamps stolen from the Notre Dame de Grace postal station. On this occasion Belair gave Mr. Villeneuve valuable information regarding other post office thefts, which information led to the arrest of Lucien Gagnon, a Montreal barrister, on a charge of receiving stolen goods. Mr. Villeneuve at once informed both the provincial and municipal police of the offer made by Belair to find the stamps and they agreed to release Belair and to keep the other three suspects in custody.
Mr. Villeneuve reports that Belair made no condition except that Mr. Villeneuve should accompany him and that they should not be followed by anyone. They went to an address on St. Denis street in Montreal the first day and waited for some time, but did not get the stamps. Mr. Villeneuve and Belair met again the following day and this time went to Belair's mother's house which Belair entered alone. When he came out he told Mr. Villeneuve to go into the lane and pick up a suitcase and a parcel. These two articles were taken by Mr. Villeneuve to Mr. Fortin and other officials. On investigation, it was found that the parcel contained $1,900 worth of stamps and the suitcase contained some torches.
Both the provincial and the municipal police were notified at once. Mr. Villeneuve got in touch with Belair again and told him what he had found in the suitcase. Belair appeared surprised and said there must have been a mistake and promised to get the stamps the next day. The following day Mr. Villeneuve accompanied Belair to a private house in the north end of the city. They went into a front room and Belair told Mr. Villeneuve to open a valise they found there. The valise was full of stamps. The recovery of the stamps was at once reported to Mr. Fortin and to the provincial and municipal police.
Belair never at any time admitted taking part in the Notre Dame de Grace robbery.
Has the Acting Postmaster General any further information regarding the alleged irregularities in the Post Office Department, brought to his attention by the member for Quebec West?
The answer, sir, is: As soon as I returned from Newfoundland on Thursday evening, July 21, I got in touch with the deputy postmaster general, who had already arranged to have Mr. Villeneuve, one of the investigators of the Post Office Department, as well as other postal officials available to meet me. The deputy minister informed me that Mr. Villeneuve had reported to the department on the evening of July 18 concerning an interview he had had with one Gerard Gagnon, of Quebec, who had informed Mr. Villeneuve that certain accusations were going to be made in the House of Commons the next day. This information was passed on to the deputy minister who instructed Mr. Villeneuve to make a sworn statement of what had taken place in this interview. In view of the character of this statement, I shall not attempt to paraphrase it but shall read it exactly as it was handed to me by Mr. Villeneuve on Thursday evening.
The sworn statement reads as follows:
I, Fernand Villeneuve, of 11805 Filion street, Ville St-Laurent, in the county of Montreal 9, province of Quebec, do solemnly declare that
In the forenoon of July 19, Miss Thibault of the office of the regional director, phoned me concerning a telephone call she had received from a Mr. Gerard Gagnon of Quebec city who wanted to speak to Mr. Fortin for a very important matter and when told that Mr. Fortin was out of town, he asked to speak to me. Miss Thibault gave him my phone number and Mr. Gagnon called me around 11 a.m. on July 19, 1955.
Mr. Gagnon made an appointment to meet me at the office of the investigations division on the same day around 3 p.m. He said that it was something very important.
He did not come at the time expected and around 4 p.m. he called me, excused himself and asked me at what time I could see him. 1 told him that I was at his disposition even after the office hours. He then said that it was preferable that I see him at his room in view of the nature of the case he had to discuss with me.
I made arrangements to meet him at his room No. 581 at the Queen's hotel.
In view of the fact that he had asked to speak to Mr. Fortin and then to myself, I suspected that it was concerning Lucien Gagnon and before going to his room, I went to check with the house officer of the Queen's hotel, the records of room 581.

Questions
The records showed that Mr. and Mrs. Gerard Gagnon of Quebec city had registered on that day. To the records was attached a business card of Gagnon Transport Limitee of Quebec and Montreal.
Gerard Gagnon did not arrive until 6 p.m. When I went in, his wife was on the phone and he told me that he would wait until she was finished as he wanted to be alone to discuss what he had to say.
While his wife was on the phone, he showed me a piece of paper on which were different remarks concerning Lucien Gagnon and Marcel Belair. He took this paper back but from what I can recollect, the remarks were something as follows: "Lucien Gagnon is staying in New York city. Marcel Belair is also in the states and he would have lately been suspected of having taken part in a burglary. Marcel Belair had registered at Seven Islands under a false name. A postal investigator paid with his personal cheque goods purchased for Belair. A postal investigator connected with Marcel Belair has been promoted."
Mr. Gerard Gagnon then asked his wife to leave which she did, and after her departure, Mr. Gagnon told me "You know now what I wanted to see you for?" I answered in the affirmative. He first began to tell me that he was not related in any way to Lucien Gagnon and that he was not a friend of him but he was interested concerning a very important transaction involving over $100,000 and that in order to have this transaction go through, it would be necessary to have Lucien Gagnon in Montreal, that this could not be done if Lucien Gagnon was behind the bars. He then asked me if it would be possible for Lucien Gagnon to obtain bail should he present himself. I told Mr. Gerard Gagnon that it was up to the department of the attorney general to decide. Mr. Gagnon then said that the attorney general would need the consent of post office officials since the charge had been laid by post office investigators.
Mr. Gerard Gagnon was told that as far as I was concerned, I could not give my consent. Mr. Gagnon then repeated that he was not interested about the case of Lucien Gagnon but only concerning the transaction and added he saw no reason why I would not give my consent. I then told him that I would contact the authorities but that I doubted very much if they would give their approbation.
I related to Mr. Gerard Gagnon what Judge Lazure had said when one of the lawyers of Lucien Gagnon had made a request for bail. Judge Lazure had then informed that he would not grant bail even if they would offer one for a million dollars.
Mr. Gagnon then told me that serious accusations would be made in the House of Commons, very y the following day concerning Fortin and Villeneuve that a member of parliament had a number of affidavits signed by Marcel Belair and others and that mention would be made concerning promotion of a high official who had been closely connected with this case. I cannot of course remember all what Mr. Gagnon said, but he did make allusion of an officer having been seen often in a night club with Marcel Belair and that the same officer was the owner of a bad house where post office officials used to meet.
I told Mr. Gagnon that I was perfectly at ease and that everything that was done concerning this case was in the interest of justice and that we had nothing to hide.
Mr. Gagnon then said that even if what will be said against Fortin and myself is not all true, there is always something left and that it would of course be preferable not to have anything of the kind mentioned.
tMr. Pickersgill.]
Gerard Gagnon then spoke again of Lucien Gagnon and told me that he knew he was in New York and added that he would see lawyer Noel Dorion, Q.C. crown prosecutor in this case and he then asked me to take the matter over. I told him that if I could contact the authorities, particularly Mr. Fortin, I would call him up.
Around noon on July 20th, I tried to reach him (G. Gagnon) to advise him that I would not be able to see Mr. Fortin before the end of the week, but could not contact him.
I have not heard from Gerard Gagnon since.
The same evening, that is, July 19th, I informed Mr. Pageau-
Who is an official of the Post Office Department, I might interject.
-who is presently in Montreal, of the result of the interview I had with Mr. Gerard Gagnon, and after having discussed the case over again, the following morning, it was then agreed to inform the deputy postmaster general which was done at 12 p.m. by Mr. Pageau in my presence.
I had never met nor heard of this Gerard Gagnon before and found very strange, the request he made and all he had told me about the accusations that were to be made.
AND I MAKE this solemn declaration conscientiously believing it to be true, and knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under oath and by virtue of the Canada Evidence Act.
DECLARED before me at Montreal in the county of in the province of Quebec
this 21st day of July, 1955


f (Sgd.) Fernand Villeneuve


Mr. Speaker:: I do not know how many supplementary questions may be asked, but it might be more regular to have these questions asked when we reach the orders of the day.


Mr. Fleming:: Mr. Speaker, I wish to raise one point. The minister has read two statutory declarations. I presume that those original statutory declarations will be tabled?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I shall be very happy to do that if it is within the rules of the house.


Mr. Speaker:: Is there unanimous consent that these documents be tabled and that we revert to motions for this purpose?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Later.'l
On the orders of the day:


Mr. J. Wilfrid Dufresne (Quebec West):: Does the Acting Postmaster General remember that I told him before leaving his office on the afternoon of June 17 that he should investigate the great friendship existing between some Montreal post office investigators and Marcel Belair? The minister has referred to names, and I will mention some names- Mr. Maurice Fortin and Mr. Fernand Villeneuve.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not know whether there would be any particular profit in the hon. gentleman and myself exchanging recollections of that conversation. I might say, however, in direct answer to his question, that I do not recollect his mentioning the names of any specific investigators.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: It cannot be useful to the minister in recollecting that conversation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the hon. gentleman would permit me to reply without being interrupted. I certainly did not interrupt him when he made his statements the other day-


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: You were far away.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -statements which he promised he would not make without previously advising me.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I could not go to Newfoundland.


John Whitney Pickersgill: My recollection is the recollection I gave the house a few moments ago, namely, that he had said that certain investigators had been connected with this man, Belair, in this transaction relating to

Questions
Seven Islands. As I told the house, I immediately asked the deputy postmaster general whether everything that had been done in connection with this Belair affair had been done with the knowledge and approval of the police, and I was assured that it had been done not only with their knowledge and approval but in some cases at the instance of the police and with the full knowledge and approval of Mr. Noel Dorion, Q.C., who is the special crown prosecutor in these cases. As I indicated to the house, that information has been confirmed by Mr. Dorion himself.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Speaker, on June 20 I asked the Acting Postmaster General certain questions. Question No. 3 was:
Was the said investigator following instructions of the department and acting on its behalf on this trip?
The answer is "Yes". Question No. 4 was:
If so. what were the reasons for this trip and what was accomplished by the said investigator?
The answer was as follows:
The trip was made in connection with a police investigation which is still in progress.
From the investigator's report can the minister tell me how many persons were questioned in Seven Islands on that trip regarding this police investigation about which he has talked?


John Whitney Pickersgill: It must be quite obvious that no persons were questioned in Seven Islands in connection with this police investigation. It is perfectly obvious from the statement I made to the house that the police investigation was taking place largely in Montreal, and that the purpose of taking this man, Belair, to Seven Islands and securing employment for him there was to provide him with an honest means of livelihood so that he would not be dependent-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -upon the gang with which it was suspected he was associated, the gang of this disbarred lawyer, Gagnon, and so that he would be available when required as a witness in the case if Gagnon's case could be brought before the courts. That is the police investigation I was referring to, the investigation of Gagnon.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Could the minister tell me where the written confession is which was given to the investigators regarding the Cabano theft and which was written by one Germain Dumont?


Mr. Lesage:: How do you know?


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Was it removed from the investigators' file and destroyed and, if so, for what purpose?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am aware of no such document. I assume if any confession was made it was made to the police, and I assume if there is such a document, of which I have no knowledge whatsoever but about which the hon. member seems to be extraordinarily well informed, it is still in the possession of the police.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Could the minister explain how Belair could know who the post office investigators were in order to approach them if he were not in some way closely connected with them? I understand there is no answer to that question.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is not a question.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: How many interviews has the acting minister or the deputy postmaster general had since my speech in the house last Wednesday, July 20, with the two investigators mentioned and probably also with Marcel Belair?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not think, strictly speaking, that I should answer that question at all. I am charged with the responsibility temporarily, and I must say I hope it will be very temporary, of administering the department. While I am charged with the responsibility I am responsible for what goes on and the number of times I see officials is, I think, a private matter within my jurisdiction. But I do not mind answering the question. I saw Mr. Villeneuve on Thursday evening. I saw Mr. Villeneuve again on Friday. I saw Mr. Villeneuve and Mr. Fortin on Saturday and I saw both of them for about one minute this morning. As for Belair, to the best of my knowledge and belief I have never seen him in my life. Mr. Gerard Gagnon, who seems to be very well known to the hon. member, says he is in the United States.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Does the acting minister know that Belair and three others were in the provincial police cells in Montreal on the 4th, 5th and 6th of March, 1954, in connection with the Notre Dame de Grace post office theft and that it was on the 6th of March, 1954, that Belair gave back the $28,000 in stolen stamps to the investigators?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have some information about this matter which I believe to be correct. It is that Belair and three other people were apprehended by the police in connection with another robbery altogether, that it was during the course of the time

they were held that the police had Mr. Ville-neuve question Belair, and that it was at that time that Belair offered to find these stamps. It was at that time also that Belair gave the information which led to the arrest of Lucien Gagnon. I said all that in my original answer.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I am not interested in what Lucien Gagnon has done or what he is going to do. I want to state here, Mr. Speaker-


Some hon. Members:: Question, question.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: On a question of privilege-


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member has more questions, perhaps he might proceed-I do not know how many more he has.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: One more.


Mr. Speaker:: Only one more? Would the hon. member be good enough to put his question?


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: In view of the request in many newspapers throughout the country, will the acting minister have conducted a full scale investigation of the whole matter-


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, sir, I will not.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I am not quite through with my question.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I beg your pardon.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: -or will he be satisfied with a statement made to him by the two implicated investigators I have charged in my speech on Wednesday last?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, sir, I will not, on the basis of any evidence that is now before me, have any further investigation of this matter. If, however, the hon. gentlemen can furnish me with any documents or any information which he will affirm to be true or which he has good reason to believe to be true, which would warrant an investigation of any further items, I will take the matter up at once or have it taken up at once with Mr. Noel Dorion, Q.C., the crown prosecutor in this case. If he and the police are not able to furnish a satisfactory explanation of the matter it will, of course, be investigated further. I took, out of the mixture of fact and innuendo, to which the house was treated the other day by the hon. member, all the alleged facts, and I asked questions about them of the officials. I had verified with the crown prosecutor, all the facts or alleged facts that the hon. gentleman had in his statement, and it is apparent that none of these alleged facts is, in fact, correct.
Questions
LLater:]
On the orders of the day:


Donald Methuen Fleming: May I
ask a supplementary question of the acting postmaster general? In the course of his interviews with his officials on which he is placing reliance, may I ask him if any record was taken of the questions and answers? If so, is he prepared to table the transcript in the house?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, sir, there was no such record taken.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Has the minister no notes or anything of that kind or is he simply proceeding on his own memory?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister has made a full statement of all the information he gleaned on these matters. This statement was checked not merely with the investigators, but it was also checked with the special crown prosecutor.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: May I ask the acting postmaster general this question? He referred to some money given by Fernand Villeneuve to Belair on Seven Islands. I know that a personal cheque from Mr. Villeneuve was given to Belair for the amount of $36. Could the minister explain how Mr. Villeneuve could give to Belair $36 of his own money if he was not interested in any way in Belair?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not know anything about this. The hon. gentleman seems to possess a lot of what he is pleased to call information, and I think it is about time that, instead of using bits and pieces of information to vilify the reputations of civil servants, he should make all the information he has and all the documents he has available so they can be looked at by some independent person.


Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):: Without in any way enlarging upon the rather ingenious explanation of some remarkably irregular practices which has been given by the minister, might I ask him if he proposes to do anything about the statement made by the deputy postmaster general to the Ottawa Citizen and reported in its issue of July 22? I refer him to his statement:
Admitting that he was far from satisfied with the number of prosecutions in connection with post office robberies, he laid the full responsibility for this situation on the shoulders of local police authorities.
"It is significant", he said, "that although 22 post office robberies occurred in Vancouver and New Westminster since January 1, 1953, in not one case have the police apprehended the criminals."

Questions
Does the minister not think the statement of the deputy postmaster general, quite regardless of his interpretation of the particular case under discussion, merits examination and investigation to ascertain where the trouble lies? If it is outside the department, well and good; but on the statement of the deputy postmaster general there is a situation where no prosecutions have been registered in connection with 22 known cases of theft.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I said the other day that I thought it was rather unfortunate that any statement or any answers to questions-because this is not a statement by the deputy postmaster general-had been made. He was asked by an individual newspaperman who took this return, of which I have a copy, the return that was made at the time the Post Office Department estimates were up, and asked a number of questions about these specific thefts. The deputy postmaster general gave some answers.
Now, the fact is, as I think all members of the house, and certainly all members of the bar, must realize, that post office investigators are not policemen; they are not prosecutors. They are investigators, and they can only go to a certain stage and then lay an information. From then on, the matter has to be followed up by the police. To the best of my knowledge the police follow these things up as best they can. As I said when the post office estimates were before the house, it is often very difficult to find someone to arrest and to get enough evidence on which to base a charge. The Post Office Department does its utmost, through its investigators, to get all the evidence it can to assist the police. But, as everyone knows, the responsibility for apprehending criminals and for bringing them to justice is the responsibility of the attorney general in each of the provinces.


George Alexander Drew: I have no desire to pursue this unnecessarily, and I want to make it quite clear that I have no knowledge of any of the facts that have been previously discussed. I am merely relating my remarks to the statements of the deputy postmaster general following what I have already quoted, and this is a direct quotation:
"We are at the mercy of the police in every community," he added. "In any community where a series of post office thefts have occurred without subsequent successful action on the part of the police authorities it is a reflection on the police force of those communities."
I ask, Mr. Speaker, whether, in the face of that statement by the deputy postmaster general, which is not challenged so far as accuracy is concerned, there is no ground

for investigation. An investigation would fulfil the very purpose he has himself indicated of clearing the officials referred to of any implication, and of ascertaining where there is a breakdown in the administration of justice.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I did not submit the deputy postmaster general to a detailed catechism on this press report. If he said those words in the way in which they appear there, and it is possible he did, it is unfortunate. I do not think any of us here want to reflect upon police forces that are under jurisdictions other than our own. Certainly I do not. And I think it is much more likely that he used the phrase "at the mercy of" in a rather loose sense, meaning that it was the responsibility of the police.
Now, that is correct; it is the responsibility of the police. It is the responsibility and duty of the Post Office Department to do its utmost to assist. But it is the responsibility of the police, if they can find them, to arrest criminals and bring them to justice. My knowledge of these matters is very, very limited indeed; but from what I have already discovered in this brief time in connection with this Belair case, it does seem to me there has been most excellent co-operation between the Post Office Department, and the attorney general's department, and the crown prosecutor, and the provincial police of the province of Quebec in this particular case. And, as I say, that is the one that is under review. That is the one about which I had attempted, as far as I could, to ascertain the facts.
About what the situation may be in Vancouver, I have not felt it was my duty as acting minister to investigate that particularly; but if the hon. member would like me to, I can make some inquiry about it. But I would imagine that the police in Vancouver, or in British Columbia generally, are just as anxious to bring these criminals to justice as the police in any other part of Canada.


George Alexander Drew: I will close with these remarks: I would point out that I did not raise this. I am simply pointing out that the deputy postmaster general voluntarily, in his discussion of another subject in another province, raised this question of 22 known robberies in Vancouver and New Westminster in regard to which there had been no one apprehended. It does seem to me that this calls for some consideration by the minister. This is not something I am putting forward, but something I have read in a press statement, which is not challenged by the deputy postmaster general, and which is reported by a very responsible reporter who speaks in exact quotes.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


[Stage Direction]
DRIVERS* PERMITS
Mr. Balcom:: 1.	Is the federal government, through the Department of National Defence, or any other departments, paying for certificates of competency for its drivers in the armed services stationed in the province of Quebec?
2.	If so, is it proposed to pay for similar certificates or operators licences for drivers in the armed services stationed in the province of Nova Scotia, and other provinces?


INTRA-PROVINCIAL FERRY SERVICE, NOVA SCOTIA
Mr. Lusby:: 
Mr. Pinard:: Return tabled.


MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Mr. Knowles:: For a copy of all correspondence, exchanged between the superintendent of insurance, or the office thereof, and the president or any other officer or director of the Canada Health and Accident Assurance Corporation of Waterloo, Ontario, since the date of the incorporation of the said company.


Mr. Harris:: I tried to get in touch this morning with the hon. member who placed this motion on the order paper, but I did not know that someone else was prepared to move it for him. The file in connection with the Canada Health and Accident Assurance Corporation is spread over a period of ten years and by actual measurement is almost 2 feet thick. If my hon. friend has any particular kind of correspondence in mind, we will be glad to supply it to him, but I do not think he means to ask for every letter that has passed between the superintendent of insurance and this company.


Mr. Nicholson:: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the motion might pass.


Walter Edward Harris: No, I do not think so.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Stand.


Mr. Speaker:: Stand.


TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY, ONTARIO
Mr. Benidickson:: For a copy of all correspondence during 1954 and 1955 to date, between the Minister of Public
Inquiries of the Ministry Works and the minister of highways for the province of Ontario, relating to completion of the trans-Canada highway.


Mr. Winters:: Subject to the usual reservation about obtaining permission from the government of Ontario.


Mr. Speaker:: This motion is carried subject to the observation made by the minister.



PRIVILEGE


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: May I
ask the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration a question? On page 6638 of Hansard for July 23, 1955, the middle of the first column, the minister is reported as having said:
I am referring to a great number of false and misleading statements that have been made in and outside the house on a great many occasions about a great many civil servants, and I have nothing particular or specific in mind.
Would the minister, as a former professor of history, and after considering the matter, now agree to have those words withdrawn.


Mr. Speaker:: This matter was settled on Saturday and therefore should not be brought up today. See official report of debates, Saturday, July 23, pages 6637 to 6640.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: As I recall it, I asked Your Honour to consider the matter after the minister had replied.


Mr. Speaker:: As I have said, my ruling was made and the matter should be considered closed.



COMBINES INVESTIGATION ACT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, on Saturday last the hon. member for Mackenzie (Mr. Nicholson) asked this question:
In view of the surprisingly uniform price increases in tires and tubes announced by three Toronto rubber companies in this morning's Globe and Mail. will the minister consider instructing the restrictive trade practices commission to investigate this matter?
The reply is that, as the hon. member for Mackenzie will perhaps recall, this industry was investigated some time ago, and a report was published in 1952. This was followed by prosecution and conviction. In accordance with the usual practice the combines branch is keeping the tire market under observation.
I am sure the hon. member will realize it is not possible for anyone to form an opinion on

Supply-Labour
the basis of the facts to which he referred, taken by themselves, as to what if any significance they might have under the Combines Investigation Act. But he may rest assured that the matter is being carefully investigated.

Hon. W. E. Harris {Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of supply.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR

The Chairman:: We are considering resolution No. 175. When the committee was previously considering this resolution an amendment had been moved by the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre in these terms:
That item 175 on page 31 of the estimates, which calls for an expenditure of $1,015,522, be reduced to the sum of $1.


Mr. Herridge:: Mr. Chairman, we in this group are very much concerned with the amendment and, on that account, on behalf of this group I wish to say a few words about it. In our opinion the adoption of this amendment would mean the destruction of the annuities act and a breach of faith on the part of this parliament with those who have invested their hard-earned savings in annuities to provide income in their declining years. We most strongly oppose this deification of the cash register as against our acceptance of social responsibility for human needs and welfare, and a recognition of contracts entered into by thousands of people in good faith.
In our opinion this motion is spawned from an economic philosophy that would have denied British financial aid in her hour of need and greatly reduced Canadian markets for grain, on that account; would have undermined our universal old age security system; would have liquidated our agricultural support prices policy and, to some extent, ruined the dairy farmers of Canada; would have left unsheltered any poverty-stricken Indian without the means to build a home; would have left untaxed the excess profits of the larger corporations in this country. It would also mean that we should defer the value of an investment by the people of Canada in a national library. The same philosophy would leave other countries uninformed about Canadian activities, by the dissolution of the international service of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. It would begrudge our civil servants an adequate reserve for their superannuation fund. Also

it opposes freight assistance on western feed grains required by the farmers of British Columbia and eastern Canada, if they are to continue to produce dairy, beef and poultry products without loss. It would deny to the Quebec maple syrup producers the purchase of aluminum pails so as to prevent any possibility of lead poisoning of consumers in Canada.
In our opinion the text of the advocates of this economic philosophy is: Save the taxpayers' money. We in this group are in favour of economy and efficient administration; but what these people really mean when they say "Save the taxpayers' money" is "Save the big taxpayers' money".
I would remind the house that this was the favourite slogan of the former President Hoover of the United States, who sat with palsied financial hands for two or three years while millions went hungry in the United States, and until the late President Roosevelt remedied the situation. This was a favourite phrase, you will find if you read parliamentary records, of the Chamberlain family in Great Britain, whose economic and other policies brought such suffering to the workers in that country.
In our opinion this is the economic philosophy of some people on Bay street and St. James street. But, fortunately, the philosophy that prompts this amendment is not the philosophy of progressive capitalists. I think we must give them credit for believing in periodic inoculations of relative economic and social justice in order to defeat the virus of totalitarianism.
This resolution springs from the extreme right in economic thinking. We in this group believe that instead of limiting this form of insurance-and it is a form of insurance- we should be evolving a scheme on a wider basis to cover the whole population. And this idea has been expressed in the house on many occasions.
On February 12, 1934, William Irvine moved the following resolution:
That in the opinion of this house the government should give immediate consideration to the advisability of nationalizing life insurance.
In reading the record I find that during the debate the resolution was supported by the present Senator Howden, and several other Liberal speakers. When the vote was taken, it was interesting to note it was supported by that great Canadian whom we all respect, the Right Hon. J. L. Ilsley. The hon. member for Cape Breton South and other members have urged a system of national industrial pensions. This question has been discussed at length in the British

house on occasion. Even the Right Hon. Sir Winston Churchill, when speaking on this question, had this to say:
You must rank me and my colleagues as strong partisans of national compulsory insurance, for all purposes, from the cradle to the grave. We hope to bring the magic of averages to the rescue of millions.
I just want to say on behalf of this group, Mr. Chairman, this is a great question that must receive careful consideration by this house in the near future. Today there are millions in Canada lacking the opportunity to provide further for their old age at cost. Today there are thousands in Canada lacking satisfactory homes and accommodation. Today insurance companies with vast investments refuse to expand their investments in this field, and on that account it was necessary for the government to provide for the banks to make loans for housing.
In my opinion, through an over-all national insurance scheme, we can provide a measure of security for all our citizens and considerable funds that can be used in a public investment program for houses, for highways and for public facilities, and so on.
We trust-and when I say "we" I mean members of this group for whom I am speaking this morning on this question-that, by unanimous defeat of this motion, this house will allay the fears of those who are on old age security, old age assistance, disability pensions, war veterans allowance, family allowances, civil service superannuation and annuities; that this parliament would even consider the reduction of these benefits to save the taxpayers' money. This suggestion, that we suffer from a leprosy of the human spirit as indicated in this motion, must be cured, in the opinion of this group, by unanimous disapproval of this motion.


Mr. Martin:: I might briefly indicate that the government has already indicated its strong opposition to this particular motion. It would be wholly impossible for the government, through the annuities branch, to carry out its obligations under the annuity contracts which have already been entered into, and I call upon the committee to reject this motion promptly.
The hon. gentleman who proposed it said that the cost of each contract to the taxpayer was roughly $54. I have had the chance to read the hon. gentleman's observations and I have noted that that was his conclusion. I find that as of March 31, 1955, the annuities branch had 349,661 annuities in force. Consequently, instead of the individual cost of each contract being $54 to the taxpayer, the cost is $2.90. For these reasons and for obvious reasons of the social
Supply-Labour
interest involved, this is legislation to which the government attaches great importance and value. I hope the motion will be speedily defeated.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Her Majesty's loyal opposition certainly will not support this amendment which would involve repudiation. We shall have nothing to do with that.


William Alfred Robinson: Is the committee ready for the question?


Some hon. Members:: Question.
Amendment (Mr. Thatcher) negatived:
Yeas, none; nays, 56.


William Alfred Robinson: I declare the amendment lost.


Mr. Bryce:: May I remind the minister who is piloting these estimates that years ago I was a member of a committee that studied a bill to add a cash clause to the annuity legislation so that after a certain period an individual could obtain cash. Does the government intend to do anything further on it, or is it dead?


Mr. Marlin:: My hon. friend will recall the statement made by the Minister of Labour. I can go no farther than that. He said these matters were always being considered by the annuities branch.


William Scottie Bryce: Is it being actively considered or is it dead?


Murdo William Martin: The branch is always very active on these matters.


William Scottie Bryce: It is pleasant to hear that. The discussion took place a number of years ago and as yet nothing has been done about it. It is a tremendous hardship on a person who puts his life savings into an annuity and cannot get cash when he needs it.


Murdo William Martin: My hon. friend knows that these matters are being studied. Personally, I do not believe that in a matter like this the cash surrender principle is justified. That is my own personal view. My hon. friend understands that I am not the minister in charge of this department. I am advised that the annuities branch is studying these matters.


William Scottie Bryce: I appreciate the minister's own views. I definitely believe there should be a cash clause in the annuity agreement.


Mr. Regier:: Can the minister tell us how many of the 174 employees employed by the bureau would be on administrative work and how many would be employed in informing the general public of Canada of the activities of the annuities branch; in other words, acting as public relations men, or as salesmen, if you like?

Supply-Labour


Murdo William Martin: I cannot give that figure exactly. There are 174 shown in the estimates, which is a reduction of 12 compared with last year and a reduction of 38 since the fiscal year 1949-50. I am advised that 71 persons are now engaged as field representatives in most communities of the country concerned, pushing the advantages of this enactment. In addition to that, there is advertising pointing out the desirability of this great social measure.


Erhart Regier: I realize that advertising has been going on. However, I find that in the area that I come from at least the vast majority of the people, for some reason or other, seem to be unaware of the benefits that might be derived from the purchase of these annuities, and I regret that.
There is one further bit of information the minister may have. Can the minister tell the committee what is the present interest rate allowed on annuities?


Murdo William Martin: 
Erhart Regier: How does that compare with the average bond interest paid by the dominion government?


Murdo William Martin: I think it approximates the current bond interest rate. I notice the province of Ontario is issuing a new loan at the present time. It is advertised in this morning's papers at 3 per cent.


Mr. Barnell:: I have had some inquiries and correspondence with regard to the income tax situation as it affects government annuities. As I understand it, government annuity payments are not deductible for income tax purposes.


Murdo William Martin: Would my hon. friend permit me to point out that this is really a matter not discussible under this item; it is a matter that would come under the Department of National Revenue.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: This is a matter to which I think the annuities branch could give some consideration. Undoubtedly if the matter were raised with the Department of Finance they would consult the annuities branch. I have pointed out in correspondence that while the payments are not deductible, as I understand it the annuities themselves are. I have pointed out that obviously it cannot work both ways and I have asked these people what they think would be the best arrangement. One man told me that he had taken the trouble to check this with a number of other people who were in the same position and they had all expressed the opinion that they would rather have the arrangement that applies in the case of approved pension plans

where the amounts are deductible. Has any consideration been given to that angle and what is the general attitude of the annuities branch toward this?


Murdo William Martin: As I have indicated, this is not a matter for this particular branch; it is a matter for the Department of Finance in the first instance, with the executive arm of government declaring its policy. This branch is just like any other department of government; it is subject to government financial policy. When we reach the particular item in the appropriate department I am sure my hon. friend will find it desirable to raise this matter again.


Mr. Jones:: Some time ago the government proposed doubling the amount of annuities that could be purchased, but as I remember the matter was withdrawn. Since then several people have written to me asking if the government is going to double the amount that can be purchased.


Murdo William Martin: I can only say that these matters are being studied and when the government has any new policy to announce it will have to decide the time and the occasion.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General administration-
176. Fair wages, conciliation, industrial relations, industrial disputes investigations, including the administration of legislation relating thereto, and for activities re promotion of co-operation in industry between labour and management, $471,694.
Mr.   Nesbill@: I should like to ask the Acting Minister of Labour two or three questions.


Murdo William Martin: Make them easy.


Mr.   Nesbill@: I shall try to accommodate the minister in that respect. I think my first question will be quite easy to answer. Has the Canadian government any regulation restricting United States labour coming to Canada to work?


Murdo William Martin: As my hon. friend knows, there is a free movement between the two countries which of course is subject to the immigration laws. For instance, there are a great number of Canadians living in my own community who work in Detroit and I sincerely hope that nothing will happen-some consideration is now being given in the United States to this matter-to prevent those citizens continuing to work in Detroit. While the number is smaller, there are some United States citizens who work in our city and the same is true of all border points generally. Subject to our immigration and wage laws there is no fundamental restriction.


Mr.   Nesbill@: Are there any United States restrictions preventing certain classes of Canadian labour working in the United States?


Murdo William Martin: Yes, there are.


Mr. Nesbili:: Could the minister tell us what they are?


Murdo William Martin: I do not think I can give all the details. First of all, I do know that people who are guilty of a crime of moral turpitude cannot get into that country, and there are certain other prohibited classes. As I said a moment ago, a committee in the United States is investigating this matter and I saw that it was sitting in Detroit the other day. At one time you could not take a job in the United States unless you had in being certain funds of your own or unless you intended to establish a business which you would conduct yourself or which would necessitate hiring help. There are some restrictions but I just cannot give all the classifications.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: What I had in mind particularly was construction labour or construction superintendents coming to Canada from the United States to work on construction jobs in this country.


Murdo William Martin: That is a matter for immigration.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Apparently the United States government is conducting some sort of investigation into Canadians working in the United States, and I would refer to an article in the Windsor Star of Saturday, July 16, with which the minister no doubt is familiar. That being so, possibly the Canadian government, the Department of Labour particularly, might consider investigating the same thing on this side of the line. It is my understanding that there are a good many United States companies, particularly construction companies, who set up subsidiary companies in Canada and then bring in United States labour, particularly managerial and supervisory staffs, foremen and that type of thing. This is particularly the case in southern Ontario, but my understanding is that it is happening in Milton, Toronto, Hamilton and other places. My suggestion is that the Canadian government should investigate this matter because there is plenty of the same type of labour available in Canada. This was particularly so last winter. I am quite aware that the unemployment situation has decreased considerably, but during the winter and fall and spring jobs are likely to be scarce and this practice makes it that much harder for Canadian labour to obtain employment. I am not suggesting that the government should start anything that might lead to acrimonious exchanges from both sides of the border,
Supply-Labour
but if the United States government is carrying on such an investigation it seems to me that the Canadian government might well look into this matter.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think my hon. friend and the government are fully in accord on this matter. As I indicated the other day and a few minutes ago, we are aware of the studies that are being made in the United States, but it is not desirable to create animosity between the two countries when we get along so well. Where a construction company wants to come into Canada to carry on a project we do not permit them to bring in a full labour force, apart from key personnel such as executive and managerial people, if Canadian labour is available. The department of immigration would work through the Department of Labour and we are actually carrying on the very practice to which my hon. friend asks us to give some study.


Mr. Winch:: There is another matter which I think could be raised under this vote. There is another angle about which I should like to ask the minister. It does not concern people coming in from the United States to work as superintendents or foremen on special jobs, and there is a great deal of that in British Columbia. What I have in mind, and I presume it comes under the same discussion, is that people have come into Canada, particularly western Canada, in great numbers over the past two years, not as foremen or superintendents, but actually as salesmen.
I am glad that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is sitting alongside the minister now. They actually come in as visitors and for periods of from two weeks to two months carry out high pressure sales campaigns for roofing, stucco and things of that nature.
As soon as we draw this matter to the attention of the Department of Labour or the department of immigration, they step in and tell them to get out of British Columbia, but two or three weeks later we find they are coming into Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba and doing the same thing. I know it has done a great deal of harm to established business in the province of British Columbia and I know it has ruined many people because they have lost hundreds or thousands of dollars through this high pressure business. Is that the responsibility of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration or does it come under the Department of Labour? No matter whom it comes under, can there not be more investigation and a closer check held on these people who are pulling these stunts in Canada?

Supply-Labour


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, my colleague has suggested that, while both the hon. member lor Vancouver East and I would be out of order, I should say a word on this. This is purely an immigration matter. We make it as easy as possible for visitors from the United States to come into Canada. The consequence is, and I think it always will be, that a certain number of people will abuse that privilege and come in purporting to be visitors but turn out not to be. When we find out about these persons, we do our best to get them out of the country as quickly as possible. A salesman who is coming in here as a salesman has to come in as such under the immigration regulations, and be processed in the ordinary way.


Harold Edward Winch: I would not want to be out of order, but attention has been drawn to this matter more than once in Vancouver. These people have been told to get out of British Columbia and go back to the United States, but a few weeks later we find they are back again in another province playing their same tricks.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I have just one more question along those lines.


William Alfred Robinson: As the minister pointed out, this discussion is actually out of order. He made a statement which, I take it, was made by consent, and perhaps that should dispose of the matter.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, I was in some doubt as to whether this question might come under this item; however, the last part of the item states:
Activities re promotion of co-operation in industry between labour and management.
The question I am going to ask is connected with that. Is the Minister of Labour or any of his officials aware of any labour contracts in respect to the Alaska highway, which is now completed, or the St. Lawrence seaway arrangements, in which United States labour working in similar jobs and alongside Canadian labour are to receive higher wages than Canadian labour?


Paul Joseph James Martin: We are aware of that. Of
course, each country establishes its own wage scales, and that is the situation.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I should like to suggest to the Acting Minister of Labour that under this item he investigate one of the other departments, namely, that of the Secretary of State, in connection with the civil service.
I find that this legislation dates back to 1900, when parliament passed a resolution outlining the ideas regarding a fair wage policy but, coming up to date, in 1953 P.C. 4138

became effective, which has a clause prohibiting discrimination in employment because of race, national origin, colour, religion or because the employee has made a complaint or given information with respect to such discrimination. I find that the civil service commission-


Paul Joseph James Martin: This does not come under this item. It is strictly out of order. I suggest the hon. member bring it up under item No. 178.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: In view of the minister's reply, I should like to ask this question. I know this is not regularly the minister's department, but does he not think he can do anything about this practice? Does he believe that having one employee receiving one wage and another employee receiving another wage working at the same time would lead to anything but discontent on the part of labour working under such conditions? It seems most unfair to me. I know, for instance, if I were working on the St. Lawrence seaway for $1.50 an hour and an American next to me doing the same job was getting $1.75 or $2 an hour, I would certainly resent it.


Paul Joseph James Martin: If it happens to be a United States contractor and the work is wholly performed in Canada, he must, of course, conform to the Canadian wage laws.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Then, from what the acting minister says, it is not a fact that if Americans are brought over to do labour in Canada on these construction jobs they receive more than Canadians?


Paul Joseph James Martin: It must be done according to Canadian law.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I am informed from several sources that is not the case. Americans coming over here get more money than Canadians for the same work.


Paul Joseph James Martin: They may receive more, but the wage at least must meet Canadian minimum wage standards.


Erhart Regier: I should like to ask the acting minister whether under this section any research is being done in connection with finding a solution to labour disputes in the field of public utilities? I think there is growing across Canada a conviction in the minds of the population as a whole that we have to find a better way of settling labour disputes in the field of public utilities. I know this is also shared by a great number of workers in the public utilities themselves.
I know this may possibly affect more the provincial departments of labour, but the federal government is also involved in the operation of public utilities. For instance,
I should very much like to see the federal

government take the lead in doing some research in perhaps finding out what other means would be acceptable to labour. I know that labour very tenaciously, and I think rightfully, clings to the right to strike, even in public utilities. However, labour itself in a number of those fields recognizes that it is an inhumane and almost impossible thing to do. Hospital employees will suffer a great deal of discrimination and what they may consider substandard working conditions and wages in order to keep the hospitals in operation, and so on.
I note that this section of the department takes up almost half a million dollars. I wonder whether any of that $471,000 is being spent in the field of exploring the possibilities of a new way out in this matter.


Paul Joseph James Martin: There is provision made for grants to several universities which are engaged in trying to find more satisfactory techniques not only in the field of public utilities but in other fields as well. I have in mind particularly the work being done in the department of economics, Queen's University, under Professor Cameron, some work being done at Toronto and in British Columbia. Therefore my hon. friend may be assured that not only tentative but active consideration is being given to this matter.


Erhart Regier: Did I hear the minister say that part of this allotment was to be used to provide such grants?


Murdo William Martin: It is paid under another vote, the economics branch. It is vote No. 174.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
178. Administration of the Canada Fair Employment Practices Act, $6,700.
Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: There is a problem I should like to discuss at this time. I have one of the announcements of the civil service commission of Canada before me, and quite a number of similar announcements have come in the mail recently. In part it has this to say:
Married women may apply, but will be listed for temporary appointment only unless they can satisfy the commission that they are required to be self-supporting. An affidavit to this effect must accompany the application.
I can understand that when this legislation was originally passed in 1900 the Victorian thinking of the era might require this sort of regulation, but surely in the year 1955 we should not be stipulating that while there must be no discrimination regarding race, national origin, colour or religion there may be discrimination regarding sex. I am sure all members will agree that woman's finest contribution is probably in the home, but in this day and age, with the electrical gadgets
Supply-Labour
they have in their kitchens, I think the government should not be the organization to say that no married woman will be permitted to work unless she makes such an affidavit. The language used in the announcement is:
Married women may apply, but will be listed for temporary appointment only unless they can satisfy the commission that they are required to be self-supporting.
Surely people do not work just for the sake of working. Anyone who works wants to do something with the pay cheque received every week, twice a month or once a month. People are paying for their homes. Certainly in this country you cannot live in the open in the wintertime. You must have some shelter, and the providing of shelter is beyond the means of a great many of the wage earners of Canada. If there is to be decent shelter, then in all probability the wife has to do some work. Would the minister indicate if he does not think that action should be taken against his colleague, the Secretary of State, who is responsible for the civil service commission, to see if something cannot be done regarding the discriminatory provision now found in most of the notices being issued in connection with appointments?
There are a great many capable women in the civil service. Does this mean that if these women decide to marry they will not be permitted to carry on their employment? Surely it should be recognized that the more people who do useful work in Canada the higher standard of living we will all enjoy.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I will be very glad to see that the Secretary of State and I have an opportunity to discuss this matter.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I think the Acting Minister of Labour should go further. I think he should have some opinion to express.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The Acting Minister of Labour will express no opinion until he has had a chance to pursue the matter further with his colleague.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
181.	To provide for the effective organization and use of agricultural manpower, including recruiting, transporting and placing workers on farms and related industries and assistance to the provinces pursuant to agreements that may be entered into by the Minister of Labour with the provinces and approved by the governor in council, $260,000.
Mr. Monteith:: I notice that the last amount in the item includes undischarged commitments of previous years. Could the minister give us some idea what those might be?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Those are delayed claims from the provinces that had not been received before the conclusion of the fiscal year.

Supply-Labour


Jay Waldo Monteith: I notice that the estimate for last year was $335,000. The amount expended is estimated to be $230,000. Therefore there would be roughly $100,000 in this $250,000 which would be presumed to apply to the year before.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Approximately.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
182.	To provide for expenses of the women's bureau, $24,600.
Mr. Small:: There is an item here of $24,000 for this year. Last year the amount was the same. In the first year of the operation of the bureau only $600 was spent, and last year the amount spent was $9,170. Now you are again estimating an amount of $24,000. I am not complaining about that, but as you do not spend the money is the amount of $24,000 simply put in there as a gesture?


Murdo William Martin: As my friend will appreciate, the distinguished woman who has been placed in charge of the bureau has not been on duty very long. Quite wisely, in my judgment, she is trying to make an assessment of the problem from the point of view of the work to be done. I gather she is in the process now of formulating plans which may reflect a different situation twelve months from now.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
183.	To provide for payments to implement a program for the rehabilitation of disabled persons, in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the governor in council, and administrative expenses connected therewith, $201,450.
Erhart Regier: Can the minister give us an idea of how many people received assistance or training under this scheme last year?


Murdo William Martin: As my hon. friend knows, this is a very important phase of the over-all problem of rehabilitation which arises out of the decision made by the federal government and the provinces three years ago, and it fits very much into the plans that we have very actively under way in the Department of National Health and Welfare. At the end of June there were applications for service from 1,554 cases. Service has been provided to 1,096, and about 300 had been rehabilitated.


Robert Hardy Small: Because of the remarks made by the hon. member for Charlotte on Saturday, I should like to point out to the minister that this item calls for an appropriation of $201,000. Last year the estimate was $197,000. The actual expenditure last year was $92,637, about half the amount of the appropriation. Now you are appropriating about $4,000 more. Would it not be more in keeping with economy if you would pare down the amount to about $100,000, because that is all that would appear to be required? It was said

that we in the official opposition are not on the job in checking up these things, and I should like to know why you have so large an estimate here.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Agreements have only been signed recently with the provinces, and there are a number of co-ordinators to be appointed.


Robert Hardy Small: It is being continued from year to year.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We are getting agreements now with the provinces.


Mr. Hodgson:: Is there any reason why you are going to spend more money this year than you have in the past?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think my hon. friend has already been answered by his colleague.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Vocational training co-ordination-
184.	Administration, $75,845.
To provide for carrying out the purposes of the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act and agreements made thereunder: to authorize the Minister of Labour to enter into agreements with any province on terms approved by the governor in council to provide financial assistance to vocational schools, and training under youth training projects and to provide for the expenditures thereunder and under vocational training agreements entered into in previous years-
1S5. Payments to the provinces, $4,320,500.
Mr. Gillis:: I would not want to tie up the acting minister under any circumstances, but I have a few words to say about item 184.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The acting minister will do his best to get untied.


Clarence Gillis: It has to do with vocational training. In the part of the country from which I come, it is a very important subject. I notice the estimates this year-


Paul Joseph James Martin: I appreciate that fact, too.


Clarence Gillis: I know you do. The grants to the provinces are down this year by $109,500, and the grants for capital expenditures, that is to assist in building schools, are down by more than $200,000. I have always held the opinion that the trend should be in the opposite direction. Now, I am not going into a long harangue on the matter, as I have done a good many times. But I would suggest to the minister and to his department that something is needed in the part of the country from which I come, Cape Breton island, along the lines of vocational training and, at this time, I believe the retraining of people who are being rooted out of the mining industry.
For many years we have been trying to establish on that island a trade training

school. It is something that is badly needed. The island is the biggest industrial centre east of Montreal, and has no vocational training facilities at this time. In the past, the difficulty has been in raising the necessary money to build a proper school. Despite promises by the provincial government in at least four provincial elections that the school was going to be undertaken, nothing has been done. I know the federal minister of labour and his officials have in the past tried, without success, to get an agreement on the matter of erecting a school, and then maintaining it afterwards. Some of the municipalities involved found it difficult to raise their share of the funds.
I would suggest to the minister that there is only about 40 per cent of our school population that go through high school, and there is only about 10 per cent that get to university. This means that 90 per cent of our school population is leaving school each year and going into the labour market without any training of any kind. It is nearly time we did something about it. If the national average for students getting through university is 10 per cent, then in the part of the country from which I come it is much lower. The only thing we have had to export during the last 20 years has been our young people. The least we can do for them, after putting them through high school or as far as they can get because of economic and other circumstances, is to give them training in a trade so that when they move out they have something to sell.
There are thousands of miners rooted out of the coal industry during the past three or four years-800 more a few days ago- who will have to move out. Instead of letting them sit down and draw unemployment insurance for a year or more until it runs out, proper facilities should be provided now to retrain them in some other kind of employment. It always looked rather ridiculous to me to find that year after year we are bringing immigrants here and placing them in various sections of Canada, while we have a section like that in which the people could be truly classified as displaced persons. These people have been uprooted, and they will have to move out. There should be some kind of organization on the part of the provincial and federal governments to see to it that these people are not only able to maintain themselves but are able to make their maximum contribution to our economy. There has not been enough done about it.
I know the minister has a broad social outlook and he made a recent visit to that
Supply-Labour
part of the country. He was very well received, and I have had a lot of commendation since-


Paul Joseph James Martin: Thanks to your hospitality
and that of the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria; you were both very generous hosts.


Clarence Gillis: I am sure we all benefited from the visit. I am just leaving these few thoughts with the minister. I could talk for an hour on this subject. I have discussed this matter with the Minister of Labour personally, and perhaps the acting minister can get together with him to see if something cannot be done about getting a trade school for that area, not only for the purpose of training these boys and girls who may make use of it in the future but for the purpose of retraining these men today who take a very dim view of life because they have lost their employment overnight. I leave these thoughts with the minister.


Murdo William Martin: I know the Minister of Labour is very interested in this matter. He asked me to assure my hon. friend of his deep interest in this problem. I can say with regard to the proposed provincial school that the federal government now stands ready, as it has before, to put up its share towards this particular school when the other governmental authority sees fit to put forward a proposition. I think we can sympathize with what the hon. gentleman has said about the closing of the mine, particularly that of the other day leaving some 700 individuals out of work. While there may be discussions going on now as to their contract position in terms of priority within the company as a whole, that does not alter the fact that there is a great advantage in this vocational training. I will certainly see to it that the Minister of Labour has an opportunity of reading the very sound observations made by the gentleman who has just spoken.
The government has not reduced this vote. It does appear in the estimates as though the vote actually had been reduced, but it only represents a reduction from expenditures provided for last year which included a grant of $350,000 for the Canadian National Institute for the Blind building in Toronto and $200,000 which represents a capital expenditure on vocational schools which have been completed. Since 1945 the government has paid something like $43 million, I think, for vocational training. There is now an annual appropriation of about $2 million. It is intended that this appropriation should go on for this year. There was no long-term contract made. We are meeting with the provinces in October, as my hon. friend knows, when the long-term aspects of this policy

Supply-Labour
will be reviewed and discussed. My hon. friend knows that the amount which is made available to us in Nova Scotia is somewhere in the neighbourhood of $300,000 out of this $2 million.
I thank my hon. friend for bringing this to our attention, and I assure him it will receive the most sympathetic attention.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I very briefly want to support the remarks of the hon. member for Cape Breton South because I have discussed the matter with a great number of people in British Columbia. There is some interest in this question, and the more you travel around Canada the more you find there is an unfilled need for skilled artisans, and at the same time we have these unemployed Canadian citizens of Nova Scotia. It is obvious that with the present construction program in industrial plants, in homes, building of highways and other things, there is going to be an increasing demand for skilled workers. I think this vocational training, and this construction program, provide an opportunity for a number of trained workers, and for those who have to be retrained. As I understand it, we might consider this item as the counterpart of university grants to look after these young men particularly, who are not able to take advantage of academic training. In my opinion our expanding economy, and the numbers involved who are untrained at this time, warrant an increase in this vote.


Mr. Blackmore:: I rise to support what has been said by the member for Cape Breton South in this connection. If I may say so, without being out of order, the time has come when the dominion's appropriations to the maritime provinces should be based on something more than just population, and the income those provinces are able to get from their economies. Surely when any province entered confederation it received the right to participate on equal terms in the good things Canadians as a whole can produce. In effect, that right is denied the maritimes.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I should interrupt to say that when I said $30 million I should have said $43 million.


John Horne Blackmore: Well, even at $43 million, the position remains the same.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I just wished to correct the record-because the hon. member suggests some good ideas, and I always listen to him.


John Horne Blackmore: How much of that goes to Nova Scotia? Is it just $300,000?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The total was $43 million and the annual appropriation is $2 million, of which $300,000 goes to Nova Scotia. It is on a per capita basis. The hon. member is now

arguing the question of need, a very important question; and I know that when the dominion-provincial conference takes place that matter will receive attention.


John Horne Blackmore: I hope it receives effective attention.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I shall do my best, as the hon. member knows.


John Horne Blackmore: The effective right to participate in the great volume of good things Canadians can produce is denied the maritime provinces, because under circumstances restricting them at present their capacity for industrial development is meagre. Consequently they cannot in any way substantially increase their population. This means that they have to go on being poor relations to the other provinces-and that is just not good enough. So I would say that much more generous goals should be kept in mind by the central authorities in Canada.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We may even give consideration to taking something away from some of the wealthier provinces-for instance, in view of the high revenues in Alberta, it might be possible there-and we might give some to the maritime provinces.


John Horne Blackmore: Let me tell the minister how he can do that. Let me tell him exactly how he can do it.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am sure my hon. friend will appreciate that I was just trying to help him along-and I know he is going to help me along.


John Horne Blackmore: I am sure of that.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am glad.


John Horne Blackmore: The minister helped me along in what he said. Now, if we had an instrument like the finance act of 1914, and under that finance act we created $500,000 right here in Ottawa, and put that $500,000 into the hands of Nova Scotians, we would with our present great surplus production not take a single cent away from any other province in Canada, but at the same time we would permit Nova Scotia to buy $500,000 worth of goods produced anywhere in Canada.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I was not making the suggestion; I was just raising a question.


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. May I draw to the attention of the Acting Minister of Labour and the hon. member for Lethbridge that at the moment we are not discussing the principle of grants to provinces, but rather the advisability of voting $75,000 for the

purpose of vocational training. I would ask both hon. members to restrict their remarks to vocational training.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We thank you, Mr. Chairman.


John Horne Blackmore: You seem to be terribly quick on the trigger. You do not let me get down to what I want to say before you stop me. But the important thing is this, that that $500,000 of created money could be used for vocational training-and I just wish to make that clear to the minister. We should not start taking moneys collected in taxation by or from the wealthier provinces, because that would be unfair to their people. But certainly it is grossly unfair to Nova Scotia, and to any of the other maritime provinces, to receive only the meagre pittance we offer them in respect of practically every single grant that goes from Ottawa to those provinces.


Erhart Regier: Mr. Chairman, some months ago I asked the Minister of Labour about the future of vocational training. I had a very good reason for asking, because two provincial ministers of education had expressed some concern. They were afraid that the federal department of labour might be contemplating withdrawing from the field of vocational training. In reply to my question the minister said, in effect-and I wish to be fair to him-that the reason the 10-year agreement had not been renewed, and had been replaced by one-year agreements, was that he was planning this conference with the provinces; and the acting minister now says that the conference will be held in October.
I am very pleased that this meeeting is to be held. However, at this time I wish the acting minister would state in no unmistakable terms that it is the intention of the federal government to continue to take a most active, and even a more active, part in the whole matter of aid for educational training.
The reason I appeal to the acting minister to make public some such announcement at this time, long before the October conference-although it is only three months away now-is that in this field of providing educational facilities you cannot plan on a year-to-year basis. The educational authorities back home need more assurance than that, and they are seriously handicapped when they find out that the new agreement will last for only one year, subject to a complete review of the whole situation.
I endorse what was said by the hon. member for Cape Breton South, and I would also like to add that the whole problem is
Supply-Labour
growing rapidly in intensity, not only because of the many thousands who are displaced by the complete collapse of certain industrial areas in Canada, but also because of the extension of the age to which people are able to live. We have more older people now than we had some years ago. I find in my riding a growing number of people around the age of 42 or 43 years who, very profitably, could get a good deal of help and a new lease on life if they were able to take advantage of vocational training. This is a matter that will have growing national importance and I appeal to the minister, if he is able, to commit the government at least to the principle of continued participation on a scale not less than has been the case.


Murdo William Martin: I cannot say any more than I have said. The matter will be discussed with the provinces, and they have been so advised. We have renewed the agreement for one year. The hon. member cannot expect me to go further than that at this stage.


Erhart Regier: That just adds a little more ammunition to the growing suspicion throughout Canada that this federal government is planning deliberately to get out from under.


Murdo William Martin: I assure the hon. member there is no justification for that statement. But it would be wrong for any member of the government to go to a conference, after having prejudged the issue. I have indicated our interest. We are going to discuss these serious matters, and the provinces have been so advised. But they would not expect us to say any more than I have said here today.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Shall the item
carry?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: One o'clock.


Murdo William Martin: Can we not pass this item?


Mr. Leboe:: Does not the Department of National Defence contribute a large amount to vocational training?


Murdo William Martin: They do with regard to their own personnel, yes.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I had hoped the acting minister would have been able to indicate that the federal government takes a great deal of pleasure in having participated in this program. We had a very long discussion about the defence production plans for the future. The minister pointed out that for the sake of the personnel involved it was necessary to have some indication that it was to be a continuing department. The

Supply-Labour
same thing applies to this department. The provinces have people who are involved who want to know whether the federal funds are to be cut oil or not. Unfortunately, there has been a feeling across Canada that the federal government is thinking of withdrawing from this very important field.


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend is not helping. He is interested in seeing this continued. I do not know why he says we are withdrawing. What I have said is clear. We have an agreement now with the provinces running for a year in some cases. With regard to the apprenticeship agreements, we still have some running for ten years. We are going to have a dominion-provincial conference in which this, health matters and financial matters are all going to be discussed. My hon. friend would not expect me, or any other person having to attend a conference like that, to prejudge. We have to look at the whole problem. The government is very interested in this program. It has been a great program. We want to work out satisfactory schemes with the provinces, but I am sure that if we all approach this conference in the spirit of the over-all responsibility we shall achieve great success.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I merely want to say that as a member from a rural riding I should like to emphasize what is not generally realized, namely, that this legislation does something for rural education that has not been done before. I live in a small community where we have a competent school with 300 students, who have received very valuable benefits. It is true that the provincial government and the local people have supplied most of the money; but in Saskatchewan, as in many places, there are people who like to get assistance from the federal government. Had the federal government not come forward with proposals that such and such be done I am quite sure we would not have that modern school with 300 students. It would be a great pity now if the federal government pulled the props away.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member is not helping the case.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I merely want to emphasize the fact that the acting minister should take notice of the comments made by hon. members from all parts of this house asking that this work continue.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I will.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
(Mr. Nicholson.]
The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.


Erhart Regier: Mr. Chairman, the acting minister has informed the committee that the matter of federal government participation in vocational training in Canada will be a subject to be discussed at the meeting in October between the federal government and the ten provincial governments. I have heard on numerous occasions that there is an inclination or feeling on the part of certain members of the cabinet that the federal government should vacate the field of federal aid for education because this is proving to be an embarrassment to the government. I do not know who those cabinet ministers are. I do not think vocational training enters the field of education and therefore I should like to feel that the cabinet is not considering vocational education as part of the problem which has to be met in regard to federal aid for education.
To the best of my knowledge all the provinces are now participating in and receiving help under this program, although there may be some of the smaller provinces which are not. I do know definitely that the province which feels most keenly about federal aid to education, the province of Quebec, is receiving aid under the vocational training program. I feel that the minister's answer is far from satisfactory to those who are charged with the responsibility of planning educational facilities in the dominion. As I understand it, the October conference is supposed to find ways and means of continuing after the expiration of the federal-provincial tax rental agreements. I understand that these agreements will not run out until 1957, and during what I think are our most crucial years in this particular field it would appear that those charged with responsibility at the local and provincial level of planning for technical education are left without any guidance.
Unless I heard him wrongly, the acting minister said that they will maintain interest. When you are a member of a local school board and faced with the problem of whether or not to spend millions of dollars on a building for a technical training school an assurance from the Acting Minister of Labour that the federal government will maintain interest is hardly good enough. I appealed to the minister before and I do so once again in the interests of vocational training in Canada.
The feeling exists in western Canada that the federal government is planning something new, which may well mean that in future years its contributions toward vocational education will be less than they are under the present arrangement. I can understand the

one-year agreements, but I do think an overall statement of policy is long overdue and has been ever since the expiration of the old agreements.


Murdo William Martin: Mr. Chairman, I cannot add anything to what I said this morning. For your guidance, sir, and the guidance of the rest of us in the committee, may I suggest that what has been said thus far, particularly by the hon. gentleman who has just resumed his seat, applies not only to the administration item with which we are now dealing but to the next item as well. Perhaps we can assume that we are discussing both items and that when we pass item 184 we will also pass item 185.
My hon. friend is perhaps a little confused and I may have assisted, quite unintentionally, in bringing about that confusion. We now have agreements covering apprenticeship training which will last until 1964. We have agreements of five years, I think, with regard to vocational training schemes in which the federal government participates with the provinces. This particular item covers grants in aid of technical education. My hon. friend nods his head, so perhaps he was fully appreciative of the facts of the matter.
I cannot say anything more with regard to that. We are having a dominion-provincial conference and it would be wrong and inappropriate for me to anticipate the discussions we are going to have with the provinces on this and a wide variety of matters. The government's policy following those talks will be announced by the government at the time and on the occasion it sees fit.


Mr. Montgomery:: The minister has suggested that we are discussing items 184 and 185 together. Would it be difficult to break down those items by provinces? Is there any fixed sum paid to each province or is it on a sort of dollar for dollar basis as the province spends it? I understand the minister to say that the vocational assistance agreements will continue for another ten years.


Paul Joseph James Martin: One year; that is the apprenticeship training agreement.


Gage Workman Montgomery: Is it under this item that the federal government contributes toward the salaries of instructors of vocational training?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Gage Workman Montgomery: That will continue only for 1955?


Paul Joseph James Martin: It depends; we will be taking it up with the provinces.


Gage Workman Montgomery: But the present agreements will run out in December, 1955?
Supply-Labour


Murdo William Martin: March 31, 1956.


Gage Workman Montgomery: There is an item under that which is new to me, the training of personnel for other departments of the federal government. Is that done in connection with the provincial institutions?


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is under our general vocational training agreement.


Gage Workman Montgomery: With the provinces?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes. We pay 100 per cent, of course, in that particular.


Gage Workman Montgomery: I presume the same thing applies in connection with the training of persons to fit them for the armed forces and that 100 per cent is paid?


Paul Joseph James Martin: One hundred per cent.


Gage Workman Montgomery: Using the equipment and buildings owned by the provincial boards of education?


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is right.


Gage Workman Montgomery: Is there any way of
breaking that down? Is there any report to which reference can be made giving the amount that is contributed by the dominion to each provincial vocational training program?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes; I can send it to my hon. friend. I do not have it broken down by programs, but I have here the total amount paid to each province. I could also send that to my hon. friend rather than labour the Hansard record with it.


Gage Workman Montgomery: Are you referring to page 255? The total amount for each program is here, but I should like to get the amount for each province. If you do not have it here I would be quite happy to have you send it to me later.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I do not have it broken down for each province in respect to the various programs of training, such as apprenticeship, the defence industries, supervisory training and so on. I do not have it broken down for provinces, but I have the total amount broken down. It is really a summary of the allotments and payments for all training programs by provinces.


An hon. Member:: Could we have that?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Could I just put this on the record?


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Is it agreed that this table be printed in Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The table follows:
Supply-Labour

May 18th, 19S5



SUMMARY OF ALLOTMENTS AND PAYMENTS FOR ALL TRAINING PROGRAMS BY PROVINCE

[Stage Direction]
Province	1953-54 Payments	1954-55 Payments Allotment to Apiil 30, 1955	Total Payments to April 30, 1955$	$	$	$Newfoundland	
85,070	431,145	411,232.53	699,626.03Prince Edward Island	
33,010	33,250	31,621.25	485,328.90Nova Scotia	372,300	350,037.16	2,737,743.45New Brunswick	
225,379	288,451	247,051.71	2,581,243.58Quebec	648,600	647,819.38	11,866,863.05Ontario	1,089,500	1,108,202.25	11,789,554.19Manitoba	277,000	178,700.57	2,286,192.54Saskatchewan	
241,086	317,500	325,695.36	3,636,619.32Alberta	520,500	461,118.04	4,510,885.25British Columbia	
275,575	301,200	263,901.44	3,225,129.66Northwest Territories	
1,500	9,000	5,165.07	6,665.07Total	
4,105,786 (')	4,288,446	4,030,544.76	43,825,851.04Amount for Armed Forces Tradesmen in 1949-50 was not broken down by provinces.	69,186.63
43,895,037.67
0) Does not include Sales Tax amounting to $8,450.
Note[DOT]

Disbursements to the provinces for each training programme are included in the summaries under the several headings, e.g., Apprenticeship, Correspondence, Vocational Schools, Youth Training, Unemployed Training, Disabled Civilians, Tradesmen for Armed Services, etc.
Gage Workman Montgomery: I do not think that is what I had in mind. Under youth training, how much would go to each province out of that $565,000? If the minister does not have that handy at the moment, I would be quite willing to wait for him to send it.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I can, with regard to youth training, tell my hon. friend that the total amount provided for is $541,451.39. I have not a table I can easily give to Hansard; but, if my hon. friend wishes to know, in his own province of New Brunswick the amount is $41,401.39 for training.


Gage Workman Montgomery: I should like to have the amount for each province.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Newfoundland, $44,050; Prince Edward Island, $7,000; Nova Scotia, $46,300; New Brunswick, $41,401.39; Quebec, $160,000; Ontario, $100,000; Manitoba, $17,500; Saskatchewan, $49,000; Alberta, $21,200; British Columbia, $52,000; Northwest Territories, $3,000.


Gage Workman Montgomery: That covers the youth training program only?


Murdo William Martin: Yes, that is the youth training only.


Gage Workman Montgomery: In reference to the other five, I am not anxious to take the time of the committee now, but would the minister have those tables?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I was in error when I said I did not have the tables here. I find I have them. Would it be agreeable if I tabled them, because they are extensive?


Gage Workman Montgomery: Yes.


Murdo William Martin: Well, I shall table them. This is going to destroy the orderliness of the Department of Labour's book.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: I might point out that when the house is in committee there is no provision by which documents can officially be tabled. Either the documents could be made available to the hon. member by the minister or, if so desired, they should be included in Hansard. Is it desired to have these tables printed in Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Yes.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Agreed.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The tables follow:
JULY	25, 1955	Supply-Labour	6725CANADIAN VOCATIONAL	TRAINING	PAYMENTS TO	THE PROVINCES,	1954-55Youth Training	Province	Payments on previous years commitments	Allotment	Expenditure to April 30, 1955	Total$	s	$	$Newfoundland	
Prince Edward Island	
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Northwest Territories	. 2,750.15 . 725.24 . 529.12 . 20,250.00 . 4,586.30 . 2,500.50	44.050.00 7.000.	00 46.300.00 41,401.39 160,000.00 100,000.00 17.500.00 49.000.	00 21.200.00 52.000.	00 3.000.	00	29,525.36 6,121.25 19,582.94 41,401.39 61.78 100,000.00 15,149.59 43,806.54 13,649.92 51,337.38	31,341.31	541,451.39	320,636.15	351,977.46
Apprenticeship Training			
Newfoundland	
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Northwest Territories	4,920.39 2,885.87 370.00	25.000.	00 60.000.	00 48.000.	00 314,000.00 75.000.	00 85,000 00 228,200.00 58.000.	00 800.00	18,312.59 50,112.89 44,910.67 309,861.06 68,284.76 77,463.94 209,438.25 55,436.19 799.13	8,176.26	894,500.00	834,619.48	842,795.74
Vocational Schools Assistance			
Newfoundland	
Prince Edward Island	
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Northwest Territories	. 15,003.22 . 7,517.53 . 649.27	66,600.00 25.500.00 106,000.00 89.800.00 638.100.00 597.500.00 116.500.00 *165,236.95 147.600.00 140.700.00 4,200.00	66,600.00 25.500.00 106,000.00 89.800.00 638.100.00 597.500.00 34,116 05 157,719.42 147.600.00 140.700.00 2,716.67	23,170.02	2,097,736.95	2,006,352.14	2,029,522.16Armed Forces-"K.-l"	New Brunswick	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Alberta	. 3,527 10	9,000 00 10.500	00 41.000	00 14.500	00 21.000	00	5,049 38 8,212 50 41,021 59 14,425 99 19,901 71	3,527 10	96,000 00	88,611 17	Excise Tax- 51157	89,122 74	92,649 84* Includes $27,736.95 carry-over from 1953-54.	
Supply-Labour
Excise Tax
448 30
62,442 86
TRAINING OF PERSONNEL FOR OTHER DEPARTMENTS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT			
	Payments on		Expenditure
Province	previous years	Allotment	to Total
	commitments		April 30, 1955
$	*	$ $Newfoundland.	$ 1,700.00	* 1,109.37CANADIAN VOCATIONAL TRAINING PAYMENTS TO THE PROVINCES 1954-55	Foremanship and Supervisory Training	Quebec	2 90	10,500 00	Ontario	400 29	4,000 00	2,783 53Alberta	1,000 00	960 25403 19	15,500 00	3,743 78**** *: 4,146 97Civilian Training	h "M" (Unemployed)	Nova Scotia	7,827 75	100,000 00	90,833 34New Brunswick	64,000 00	48,527 64Quebec	771 80	25,000 00	1 05Ontario	3,961 61	33,000 00	26,241 98Manitoba	47,500 00	47,411 17Saskatchewan	36,000 00	35,360 09Alberta	90,000 00	66,087 53British Columbia	15,000 00	9,513 84Northwest Territories	1,000 00	1,000 0012,561 16	411,500 00	324,976 64Excise tax	74 28325,050 92* 	
337,612 08Defence Industries-"K-2"	Nova Scotia	5,191 41	60,000 00	52,235 71New Brunswick	11,250 00	2,468 82Quebec	203 06	8,000 00	55 08Alberta	5,000 00	2,380 50British Columbia	15,000 00	4,854 455,394 47	99,250 00	61,994 56
67,837 33
	Rehabilitation-"	R"		
Prince Edward Island	750	00	Newfoundland	2,000	00	1,377	50New Brunswick	25,000	00	16,409	95Quebec	100,000	00	Manitoba	6,000	00	Saskatchewan	10,000	00	Alberta	6,500	00	3,569	58British Columbia	20,000	00	677	57270,250	00	22,034	60


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Mr. Chairman, I did not press this point before the lunch hour but, as we are still on it, the minister might go into a little more detail. We all enjoy listening to his musical voice when he is discussing his own department. I am sure that with this provocation he would outline in some detail the importance of the particular item. In view of the fact that ten years has passed since these arrangements were made, we should now look back and have some report as to whether they have been a worth-while investment.
Every member who has spoken has indicated that he thinks the work under this item should be continued and extended. I need not remind the house that all costs have increased very drastically since the arrangements were made in 1945, but I do not think that the federal government has proceeded to carry a fair share of the legitimate costs in connection with this item. The government should not have waited till now to indicate whether or not there is to be another ten-year period during which the provinces may count on extending their work.
If you take, for example, the courses under this vote for correspondence training, it is obvious that a tremendous burden would be placed on the provinces if they were to become responsible for working on correspondence courses for agriculture, including fruitgrowing and all the various other branches, in the building trade, with carpentry, electrical wiring, elementary joinery and so on. A great variety of commercial courses are offered. It is obvious that a tremendous amount of work and expense is involved in working out these programs. Certainly one set of courses is adequate for all of Canada. If the ten provinces now have to begin working at these courses and offering them to young people, it would place an unnecessary burden on the provinces. The hon. member for Cape Breton South pointed out some of the problems that exist in these areas. I come from an agricultural area where unfortunately a great many of the young people cannot look forward to taking over the family farm. Many of them have to go to eastern Canada to find employment and it is desirable that,-


Paul Joseph James Martin: May I point out to my hon. friend that what he is now discussing is continuing for five years. We have a five-year agreement with regard to vocational training. The point raised by the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam is, of course, another point. That is the point where the agreements have been renewed for one
Supply-Labour
year. That is going to be discussed at the dominion-provincial conference. It has already been discussed at the advisory conference and we are aware of the provinces' attitude. The point my hon. friend is discussing is covered by the five-year agreement.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minister might take a minute or two to indicate his opinion.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I shall take a minute to say that this has been a great scheme and it has done a great deal of good. It is one that has done all that my hon. friend has said, and more.


Clarence Gillis: I should like the minister to straighten out the matter of the capital grants to the provinces. The federal government makes a grant to the province of a certain amount of money. If some municipality wants a trade school established, it makes an application to the provincial government. How is the financing handled? Do the municipalities and the provincial governments have to bear an equal share of the cost or is the total cost of the establishment of a school borne by the federal government?


Paul Joseph James Martin: We make arrangement only with the province and the province has to pay half the amount.


Clarence Gillis: And I think the method they employ when a school is established is to assess each municipality in the area covered by that school.


Paul Joseph James Martin: How they raise the money is their own business, but they must pay half of it.


Clarence Gillis: The provincial government pays 50 per cent, 50 per cent is paid by the federal government, and how the provincial government raise the money is their own business.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Erhart Regier: Did I understand the minister to say that as far as the Department of Labour is concerned application is made by the provincial department of education for the establishment of a technical school in an area and not by the local school authorities?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The province submits its application for the particular project.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I gather that in effect we are
discussing items 184, 185 and 186 together. I have a question about a specific project. I have had some correspondence recently from the parents' education group at Comox about the vocational training school at Nanaimo, British Columbia, with reference to whether

Supply-Labour
the federal grant for that particular school is being continued, and asking me to argue for the continuance of it if there was any question about it. Can we get specific information on a project of that kind?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The allocation of the moneys which we give to the province, in this case the province of British Columbia, pursuant
to the agreement is made of course by the province.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: In order that I may be perfectly clear, under this plan the Department of Labour as such has no part in the decision as to the grant to a specific project?


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is right.


[Stage Direction]
Items agreed to.
Terminable services-
188. To provide for expenditures incurred in connection with manpower utilization programs, authorized by the Minister of Labour, including the development of programs for combating seasonal unemployment. $25,600.
Robert Hardy Small: This item provides for expenditures incurred in connection with manpower utilization programs, authorized by the Minister of Labour, including the development of programs for combating seasonal unemployment. Last year the amount of the estimate was $11,700. The estimate for this year is $25,600. Last year $9,168 was spent. There is an increase of $14,000 in that particular item. Last year there was an amount of $10,000 for allowances and expenses of members of the national advisory council on manpower and for other special conferences. This year that amount has been reduced to $6,000. On the other hand, there is an increase in travelling expenses from $1,000 to $4,000. There is an increase of 400 per cent in the amount for telephones and telegrams. Then there is a new item covering publication of informational material, $5,000, and another new item covering newspaper, radio and other publicity, $10,000. These items amount to about $20,000 out of the whole item. Has the reduction of $4,000 in the amount for the national advisory council and the transferring of the money for publicity uses been done with the advice of the council? Are they going in for a program of publicity to try to cure seasonal unemployment?


Paul Joseph James Martin: We work with the national employment advisory committee and naturally we take their recommendations as well as initiating ideas ourselves.


Robert Hardy Small: There was increased unemployment last year when this committee was working and they did not spend very much money. Probably that is partly the reason

why there was as much unemployment as there was. It seems to me that the right way to tackle the program is not through advertising and publicity. The council should spend the money where it can be most effectively used. I am not criticizing the amount. Whether or not it is enough, I do not know, but I do not think they are really tackling the problem in the way it should be tackled in trying to cure it by spending so much on publicity.


Paul Joseph James Martin: May I assure my hon. friend that this year this particular vote, which is largely an educational one, will have a reshaping in accordance with the general functions of the Department of Labour and the national employment advisory committee to see if we can make a contribution through this vote to solving the problem of seasonal unemployment if and when it occurs.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
190. To provide for expenses that may be incurred in the arranging for and the movement of workers from outside Canada to work on farms and other essential industry in Canada when Canadian labour is not available to meet the need, including costs connected with the supervision and welfare of persons already immigrated to Canada; administrative expenses connected therewith and to provide for expenditures under agreements with the provinces authorized by the governor in council, $466,873.
Donald Methuen Fleming: This item shows a substantial reduction from last year's appropriation, indeed, a reduction of about 50 per cent, although the expenditure of the past fiscal year of approximately $635,000 indicates that the appropriation of $878,000 was not all required. I think we should have some further explanation of this item. It is described as one to provide for expenses that may be incurred in the arranging for and the movement of workers from outside Canada to work on farms and other essential industry in Canada when Canadian labour is not available to meet the need. This item obviously is related to immigration plans. This year the volume of immigration is showing a substantial reduction compared with last year and it may be that that accounts at least in part for the proposed reduction in the appropriation, but I think there should be an ample statement explaining this large item.


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend will perhaps recall that when we were discussing the estimates of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration it was intimated, I think, that certain moneys were being transferred from this vote to that department, I think some $325,000 which was intended to pay for

the transportation expenses inland of recently arrived immigrants. The remaining portion of the vote is for the general administrative expenses of the Department of Labour officials in connection with their work, the maintenance of hostels, and so on.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister has not made too clear to me the basis of the reduction. He has indicated that part of the financial burden is being transferred to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, but I take it that the burden of meeting expenses with respect to the movement of workers once they have arrived in Canada is being cast entirely on this item. Am I correct in understanding that, and is the reduction not attributable at least in part to the anticipated and now evident reduction in the volume of immigration this year?


Murdo William Martin: I cannot say that was
definitely borne in mind.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Pardon?


Murdo William Martin: I cannot say that that was the case.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That is all very vague. Can the minister not be a little more explicit?


Murdo William Martin: My hon. friend knows there are occasions when the minister cannot be.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Those occasions are becoming altogether too frequent, Mr. Chairman.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I want to say a word or two about this item. While this vote may be justified in many cases, there have been a good many cases involving people who have been assisted who have been fly-by-night farmers.


Murdo William Martin: Fly-by-night?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Fly-by-night agricultural
labourers assisted by the government to come to Canada under an agreement to work on our farms, and then they have slipped away as quickly as they could. That is the experience of some farmers in my constituency.


Murdo William Martin: I thought my hon. friend had a timber farm. Are you not in an area where they grow timber?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: There are also many farms. Farming and forestry are allied in my constituency. The hon. member for Cape Breton South told us this morning about the displaced coal miners in his province and the unemployment there. I know the mining industry is expanding in the interior of British Columbia and they want good miners. I think it would be good policy for the government to use some of this money to transfer displaced coal miners from Nova Scotia to their own occupation in British Columbia and 50433-425
Supply-Labour
thus look after Canadians first. That is my suggestion, because there have been too many of these other people assisted improperly.


Murdo William Martin: There is another vote for that.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I will just conclude my remarks because I thought this was the vote. There have been a good many of these people who have been assisted, but who have not stayed very long on the farm. What do they do? They come into my constituency and stay a short time and then they are working in the mines. If you are going to spend any money on transportation, I suggest you spend that to transfer the Nova Scotia coal miners to British Columbia to work in the mining industry.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Unemployment insurance commission-
191. Administration of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940, including expenditures incurred in connection with the activities of the national employment service as delegated by the Minister of Labour in accordance with section 97 of the act. $27,108,517.
Harold Edward Winch: There are two matters I desire to raise under item 191, which concerns the administration of the unemployment insurance commission. I know that at this session there was a bill presented to consolidate and amend the Unemployment Insurance Act, but the two points I desire to raise do not deal with the act itself but rather with administrative policy under the act. Quite bluntly, Mr. Chairman, I am rather amazed to know that under the administration of an act of this nature the government or the unemployment insurance commission should enforce what amounts to despicable policies. One, I think, is definitely wrong, and the other is an absolute disgrace to our country.
The first point I should like to draw to the attention of the acting minister is the rulings being made as to where you live, and if you do not accept the job offered by the employment service, which is tied hand in hand with the unemployment insurance commission, then your benefits from unemployment insurance are wiped out. I am speaking on a matter of principle. It is not my desire to raise particular cases, it is the principle about which I am talking; but I am going to refer to the principle by giving an example.
I live in the city of Vancouver and have lived there now for 45 years. I know all the surrounding area. My own parents have had a home in White Rock, which is approximately 36 miles from the city of Vancouver. Here, we have a case of a woman who worked in the city of New Westminster on a parttime basis, but a part-time basis which enables her to come under unemployment

Supply-Labour
insurance regulations. For reasons which 1 do not need to go into now in any detail, she moved to White Rock. Before she leaves, she makes application for her unemployment insurance payments and gets it for one week. She moves to White Rock and wants her unemployment insurance. She also wants employment on a part-time basis. She is told there is employment in Cloverdale. Now, Cloverdale is between nine and eleven miles from White Rock. The employment is fulltime employment. She has to be on the job at nine and leave at five.
There is no transportation from White Rock to Cloverdale which would get a person to Cloverdale in time to go to work. The transportation there is not between White Rock and Cloverdale but between White Rock and Vancouver on the Pacific stage line; that is all there is. Since she cannot possibly get from White Rock to Cloverdale and back again unless she spends two hours early in the morning and two hours late at night-[DOT] she has children, by the way-she turned it down. What happened? Immediately she is notified by the unemployment insurance commission that she has lost her right to unemployment insurance because she turned down the job. I would not blame the minister for not knowing this, but the population of White Rock is 20 per cent higher than the population of Cloverdale. First of all, there is no transportation during business hours. I know it so well. I have lived there for 40 years in the summertime and I went to school there. I am giving this as one example of a principle. The unemployment insurance commission, for some reason or other, in some cases discriminates against a certain section of the country and indirectly tries to tell a person where they have got to live.
Now, sir, I say that is radically wrong. I want to tell the acting minister that I have made a very careful study of the example I have given, and I have taken it up through correspondence with the office here. They have given me the finest co-operation in investigating the situation. I say, sir, the principle is wrong in this case, and even although there is an appeal about it they do not know what they are talking about. If the acting minister cannot do it himself, I want him to have this entire situation investigated. I am convinced from the number of cases I have had that too often the unemployment insurance commission, tied in with the employment section of our federal government, is trying to direct, to an extent to which they have no right, where a person should live. If they do not coincide with the views of those who come under their jurisdiction, then those people are

completely discriminated against because they are eliminated from unemployment insurance benefits. I hate to say that, but that is my opinion. I wished to draw that to the attention of the acting minister.
My second point is one upon which I hope the acting minister will give an answer here now, even if he does not know the case itself. The principle concerns a great many of our citizens in Canada. Under the act, certain responsibilities are placed upon the government, the employers and the employees to make their contributions under the unemployment insurance provisions. I know of a Canadian citizen, Canadian born, who married in England. He brought his wife to Canada, and I do not blame him for that at all. I admire him for it. As happens in too many cases, there are troubles between the husband and the wife, which end in divorce. The wife goes back to England taking with her their daughter born of legal marriage. In England an order of the court is made. The father in Canada has to contribute toward the support of the child. I am glad to say that he accepted that responsibility in an honourable fashion. During all the years he worked he always paid the money for the support of his daughter, who has now reached the age of nine years.
Unfortunately however this man became unemployed a few months ago, and made application for unemployment insurance. I might add in passing that I have all the records. The unemployment insurance commission, established by parliament and administered by the government, told him he was a single man with no dependents. A single man receiving unemployment insurance would have a tough enough time to get by on the amount of money he receives, but most certainly a man who has a court order against him stating that he must support his child cannot pay anything on that order.
Yet I have the records to show that, so far as the unemployment insurance commission is concerned, this man is treated as a single man. Therefore he finds himself in the position where either he must starve to death, in which circumstance he could not contribute anything, or he must stand in contempt of court because of his failure to contribute to the support of a daughter born in legal wedlock.
As I said, I have the record of this case, and it reveals some astounding facts. His former wife took the child back to England. Recently the child has been in the United States with an aunt. This man can prove his legal divorce; at my request he is prepared to place the court order in my hands;

but he has already sent me a certain document indicating that, if his daughter were in the United States, the unemployment insurance commission could consider her as a dependent, and pay the money to him as a married man. However, because she was in England they cannot do so. Let me repeat that if the daughter were in the United States she could be considered a dependent, under the divorce order of the court, but if in England she could not be brought under the terms of the unemployment insurance provisions.
I do not care where the daughter or the wife is, the fact is that there is a court order which I can produce quickly if required, which states that he shall support his daughter. This he is prepared and always has been prepared to do. But now when he is unemployed this Liberal government administration of the Unemployment Insurance Act says, "When you are unemployed you are a single man." So he is left in a position where he is in contempt of court.
Sir, I think that is one of the most vicious, despicable things I have heard for a long time. I ask the acting minister to look into this case of the father against whom there is a court order to pay so much for his child. He can prove that he always paid it while he was employed, and has all the receipts to show it. I would ask that the minister take steps to see that the unemployment insurance commission accept him, not as a single man but as a man with a dependent, so that he may be given the status which would permit him to take care of his child, and not be held in contempt of court.


Erhart Regier: Mr. Chairman, I would like to add to what has been said by the hon. member for Vancouver East. My subject, too, is man's inhumanity to man. I refer to something which may be regarded by many as a minor item, namely the provision of public washrooms in the offices of the unemployment insurance commission throughout Canada.
I wrote to the minister and received a reply dated July 19 from the acting minister. I thank him for sending me this well-written reply. I think I can advance my argument best by using parts of his letter. Among other things he said:
As you are perhaps aware, it is not the policy of the government to provide public toilets in government offices.
It may be that conditions in Ontario are different from what they are in British Columbia. I do know that in that province every little two-bit filling station wishing to 50433-425i
Supply-Labour
cater to the public offers the facilities of public washrooms. While some of them may be locked, one can always obtain the key and gain admission. I know they are widely used by those who patronize the filling stations, as well as by others.
Then the restaurants in British Columbia are required by law of the province and by civic health authorities to provide washroom facilities. I regret to learn that the law in Ontario is not insistent in this respect-or, if it is, the provision is not being enforced very severely. However, when this big enterprise, the government of Canada, operates a huge establishment such as the Alvin building in the city of Vancouver, it seems that it cannot offer public washroom facilities:
The minister goes on in his letter to say:
Because of the heavy traffic in unemployment insurance commission offices, however, it was decided some time ago to provide washrooms for public use on an experimental basis in some offices. Unfortunately the rooms were frequented by loafers and other undesirable persons and the public in general hesitated to use them.
In view of this experience public washrooms, if provided, would have to be supervised by attendants, and the cost of providing, cleaning, supervising and maintaining them would therefore be considerable.
For this reason the treasury board would be unlikely to agree to provide them. In view of these circumstances I regret that it will not be possible to provide public toilets in the Alvin building.
I find this most regrettable. I agree it will cost some money to provide the public with clean and adequate washroom facilities. However, as I mentioned at the beginning, this is a little sample of man's inhumanity to man. Here are the unemployed in the wintertime lined up for half an hour and more. They need washroom facilities. They have to desert their places in the line-up and walk possibly one or several blocks to use a washroom. They come back and they have to take a new place in the line-up. Therefore, instead of spending only half a day waiting for their meagre handout, they may have to spend a whole day. Also, new applicants for placement are often subjected to long interviews in order to ascertain adequately their abilities and to see what line of employment they might best be fitted into. I think it is a disgrace. We require little corner filling stations and little restaurants to provide the public with accommodation. You can walk into any office building or the office of any firm with whom you have dealings and all you need to do is to ask for a key and they will quickly supply you with a key to the washroom on the floor. The federal government of Canada, with a huge undertaking such as the unemployment insurance commission has in the city of Vancouver,

Supply-Labour
says: "We cannot afford to give the general public adequate washroom facilities." I think this is a disgrace.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I just have one question to ask the minister on this item. This morning, if I understood the Acting Postmaster General correctly, he informed the house that a certain man registered for unemployment insurance under an assumed name with the assistance and co-operation of a senior official of the Post Office Department. Is that legal, or is it the accepted practice of the unemployment insurance commission?


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I am just wondering whether the minister wants to have all the questions that are related to this subject asked him before he replies?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Does my hon. friend really know what I want? I was going to listen to the questions and perhaps note them.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I am quite willing to go ahead with the question I want to raise now.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I think the minister is bursting to answer. I do not want him to stop.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I can honestly say I am not bursting to make any replies.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I will ask the minister a straight question. Is it legal and is it according to the accepted practice? Is it accepted as a practice by the unemployment insurance commission?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I want to know more about the facts of the case that we have just been discussing. I do not recall the instance referred to by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and I would prefer to get precisely what he said before giving a final legal opinion. When I do give a legal opinion, my hon. friend may be assured that it will be a pretty good one.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I will make it very simple. Is it legal to register for unemployment insurance under an assumed name, or is it the accepted practice of the unemployment insurance commission?


Murdo William Martin: If we do not know anything to the contrary, of course we take the man's word. With regard to the particular case, I should like to read what the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration said before I pass any judgment on it. Generally, the fact is we take the man's word unless we have some reason for not doing so.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: My point is this. Leave out the particular case. I asked a simple question. Is it legal for anyone to register under an assumed name?


Murdo William Martin: It is not illegal.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, the particular question I wish to raise is not related to any of the matters that have been raised previously, and perhaps the minister might not want to have too many unrelated matters to deal with.


Murdo William Martin: Perhaps in order to expedite the thing and to get it through quickly, I might say, with regard to the washroom problem, I know nothing about it. Like my hon. friend, I have a disposition to cleanliness and on that account I certainly will, in my capacity of Minister of National Health and Welfare, give it some attention. With regard to the problem the hon. member for Vancouver East mentioned-


Harold Edward Winch: Just before the minister answers that, may I give him something official because I made certain statements? I should like to place something on record. I hold in my hand a letter that was sent by the unemployment insurance commission to Francis Helden, British Columbia, and signed by Mr. E. Williams, supervisor. I quote the last paragraph:
However, in the case of your daughter, the information given you is quite correct as our regulations do not permit payment of the dependency rate of benefit for a dependent who has domicile in England.


Murdo William Martin: I know my hon. friend knows quite a bit about the Unemployment Insurance Act. With regard to the first question, he of course will agree that it is desirable that there should be a provision in the act that where employment is available in the particular community the person should take advantage of that before receiving benefit. My hon. friend might give me privately more of the particulars of the case to which he referred and I shall be glad to follow it through and see whether there is anything that can be done at this end.


Harold Edward Winch: Sir, I spent two months taking it up with the unemployment insurance commission.


Murdo William Martin: I shall be glad to spend perhaps the same length of time assisting my hon. friend, depending upon the merits of the case. After the insurance officer has given his judgment, my hon. friend knows there is an appeal to the court of referees, and then an appeal to the umpire. However, I promise my friend I shall give this matter my personal attention.
With regard to the second problem, I am sure we are all moved by the recital of the facts in that particular case. There is a regulation at the present time, as my hon. friend has just noted, which is precisely as he stated it, and the justification for it, I believe, arises

out of the fact that the unemployment insurance commission must be in a position to ascertain the facts. I know my hon. friend will appreciate that there are often abuses of the situation which necessitate a particular regulation.
In the case of the United States we have a reciprocal agreement through which there is a ready exchange of information pursuant to that agreement.
In the case of the United Kingdom, unfortunately at the moment a reciprocal agreement does not exist. I am informed that one of the senior officials of the unemployment insurance commission is now in England discussing this very matter so that there might be a reciprocal exchange of information that would place the unemployment insurance commission in the undoubted position of having all the facts. I can go further and say this. Perhaps this might give my hon. friend some satisfaction. The regulation under which the commission has acted in the kind of case recited is now under review, and it may be that as a result of that review remedial action in principle may be looked for.


Harold Edward Winch: I want to say I am very grateful for what has been said by the acting minister, that a high officer is discussing this in the United Kingdom and that the entire matter is under review. Most certainly, Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for that. But I do want to say I cannot understand the statement of the minister that they cannot find the facts in some instances. I gave the case only as an illustration of principle. The man has, and has produced before the unemployment insurance commission, an order of the court in Great Britain. He has, and has produced before the unemployment insurance commission, all the post office order receipts for the money he sent to Great Britain. What more proof does the unemployment insurance commission want?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I was not dealing with this particular case. I said that the regulation is now under review. I was saying that with regard to the principle involved the question is now being discussed by one of our officers in the United Kingdom.


Harold Edward Winch: Will the minister make an
investigation of what I have said? I know it is true because I have seen retroactive payments of this kind.


Murdo William Martin: If my hon. friend makes a statement in this house I am sure that it is based on fact.


Bert Raymond Leboe: If it were not for the urgency of the matter I have in mind I would not bring it up at this time. There has been some
Supply-Labour
correspondence with the village of Quesnel and the I.W.A. local there and, I think, Western Plywoods with regard to the establishment of a part-time unemployment insurance office at Quesnel. I do not think the department is really conversant with the hardship created by there not being an office in this town. When a claim for unemployment insurance is made it means the person involved must go 80 miles to the nearest office.


Murdo William Martin: I can tell my hon. friend that this matter is now being studied.


Bert Raymond Leboe: The department should take into consideration that when there is no employment office and people are looking for workers they go to the bar-rooms for their men. The married man who is home with his family misses the opportunity for employment. Someone looking for workers will not go around ringing doorbells; he goes to the bar-room and the result is that the single men get employment while the married men who are at home do not.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, I concur in what has just been said by the hon. member for Cariboo because I spent some years in that region and have gone into quite a few bar-rooms looking for men.


Murdo William Martin: I was just about to say that I did not think my hon. friend would go to a bar-room.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I have no hesitation in informing the minister that during the years when there was a labour shortage I went into worse places than that to find men. There has been a great growth and development in the plywood industry at Quesnel and I am glad to hear that the department is considering putting an unemployment insurance office at that point. It is most difficult, especially under winter conditions, for these men to have to go to Prince George to claim unemployment insurance.
Now that we are back on the item covering the unemployment insurance commission we are at the point at which the Minister of Labour took his departure and therefore I think it would be appropriate if someone were to ask the acting minister to convey our good wishes to the minister and tell him that we will be looking forward to his return and hearing his report on the meetings of the ILO and other adventures he may have had across the waters. Now that we have progressed some distance into the estimates I think we should also remember that the Minister of Labour said that he was leaving his estimates in good hands, and our experience has been that he was quite right.

Supply-Labour
During the current session, I was one of the members who spent some time discussing the unemployment insurance commission and this particular document I have in my hand is evidence of that. Therefore it is not my intention to go into any extended discussion on the general application of the Unemployment Insurance Act at this time. The matter which I wish to raise could be classified as unfinished business of the committee which discussed the Unemployment Insurance Act.
I refer to the situation that exists at United States military bases in Newfoundland where several thousand Canadian citizens are employed by various agencies of the United States government and are ineligible to receive benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act. There was considerable discussion on this matter in the industrial relations committee and it was indicated at that time that negotiations are under way with the United States authorities. The minister said that he would try to give a statement later on as to the progress made.
At that time I submitted that if it was not found possible to bring these negotiations to an early and favourable conclusion consideration should be given to providing some special arrangement to make these people eligible for benefits. I hope that the acting minister is in a position to make a statement along lines similar to that the Minister of Labour suggested he would make before the session ended.


Murdo William Martin: Mr. Chairman, I know that my hon. friend has been interested in this matter. He spoke to me privately about it and I have looked into it. As he says, employees of contractors working for the United States government in Canada are insured but Canadian employees of the United States government are not covered. I may say that since the Minister of Labour addressed himself to this problem a few weeks ago our labour attache in Washington has been in communication with the various departments of the United States government interested in this particular aspect of the problem. I hope that I am not overstating my hopes when I say that I think progress is being made in the representations which he is making, so much so that we thought it undesirable at this time to give active consideration to a special arrangement such as my hon. friend mentioned. Our labour attache has had satisfactory talks and we are hopeful about their outcome.
Before taking my seat may I thank my hon. friend for the good wishes which he extends to the Minister of Labour and which I shall pass on to the minister as he makes his useful

and necessary peregrinations throughout Europe while the rest of us listen to interesting speeches in the House of Commons. I thank my hon. friend for what he said about the Acting Minister of Labour.


Robert Hardy Small: There is an amount under item 191 for commission to Post Office Department. Could you give us the nature of the services rendered for that commission?


Murdo William Martin: Such as the selling of unemployment insurance stamps.


Robert Hardy Small: There is also an amount of $725,000 for postage. Do you have to pay a commission on services rendered in connection with the sale of the stamps? Do you have to give them a commission for selling them?


Murdo William Martin: It is a commission paid by the unemployment insurance commission to the Post Office Department itself.


Robert Hardy Small: That is for services rendered apart from selling stamps?


Murdo William Martin: Yes, for services rendered.


Robert Hardy Small: I should like to ask about two other items, which I think are related. There is quite an apparent saving if they do not turn up somewhere else in the estimates. One is the rental of office accommodation, which last year was $1,625,000 and is now $2,500. Under the other item, the amount for electricity, heat and water rates, which was $140,000 last year, is $2,000 this year. There is a saving of about $1| million. Could you give us the nature of the saving? It certainly is worth while.


Murdo William Martin: I should like to take credit for that on behalf of the Department of Labour, but that would not be justified. The Department of Public Works has taken over the responsibility for the premises covered by these apparent savings.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I have just one more question, to clarify something in my mind. Is it correct to say that the unemployment insurance commission does not object to applicants registering under assumed names?


Murdo William Martin: I was informed that was the case when I made that reply.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
192. Government's contribution to the unemployment insurance fund. $32,500,000.
Robert Hardy Small: This item concerns the government's contribution to the employment insurance fund. There is a saving of $1,250,000. Is this in anticipation that next winter there will be an increase in unemployment, and is the government taking cognizance of it in this way?


Murdo William Martin: No, this government is so confident of its record of good government that I do not think my hon. friend's anticipations could possibly be correct.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: As the minister has been telling us about good government, I wonder whether his department would consider some improvements in the Unemployment Insurance Act. If a man gets hurt on a job he gets compensation, but if he gets sick on a job he gets nothing. If a man needs unemployment insurance, he needs it more when he is taken sick than he does in the case of a lay-off. The only way you can get unemployment insurance is when you have been laid off.


Murdo William Martin: I do not wish to interrupt my hon. friend, who is usually relevant and orderly in his presentation, but I think it would be out of order to discuss this particular problem under this item. We did have a very prolonged discussion and a useful one, several weeks ago, and I would submit with much confidence that discussion of this point at this time would perhaps be a classical case of being out of order.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Mr. Chairman, this is a money item and it is a grant to the unemployment insurance fund.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, for unemployment. My hon. friend is not discussing unemployment insurance.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: I just wanted to bring to the minister's attention this question of employees who are taken sick while at their jobs.


Murdo William Martin: Referring to the question by the hon. member for Kootenay West, I am assuming that the unemployment insurance commission does not know that the person is giving a false name.


Mr. Zaplilny:: The question I should like to raise has to do, not so much with registration or the administration of the act so far as the commission is concerned, but a matter of co-operation between the unemployment insurance commission and the provincial government. I know it is not a matter about which this government can order anything done, but perhaps by discussion something can be done to alleviate the situation. Some time ago-I think it was in June of last year -in the province of Manitoba at least an arrangement was made between the government at Vancouver and the federal government under which employees of the provincial government, particularly the public works department, could be brought under the act, but it was left optional to the employees whether they should come under the act.
Supply-Labour
The difficulty that has come about is perhaps a mechanical one, but it is rather an important one. There are a large number of employees of the provincial government who were not informed as to that situation. Some of them, of course, found out from their foremen or whoever was in charge of the job and proceeded to obtain their books and have their stamps put in and so on. Others who did not do so, when they were laid off later in the fall, discovered that they were not eligible because they had not presented their books. A few of these cases have been referred to me and I found that they were in perfectly good faith. These men simply did not know that such a provision had been made for them.
The reason I bring it up now is that perhaps there could be discussions between the commission and the provincial governments concerned, and I speak specifically of my own province, which is the only one that I know of where the difficulty has arisen. Perhaps some suggestions can be made that all employees who have the option of coming under unemployment insurance be notified officially by the commissioner of the province, perhaps by attaching a note to the pay cheques. In that way every employee would know he had the privilege or the option of coming under the act.
That would avoid a great deal of correspondence and difficulty several months later when, on the one hand, these employees claimed they were not notified and, on the other hand, the employees of the provincial government claimed they were notified by word of mouth or by rumour. It seems a rather loose way of doing the job and perhaps at some time, when the officials of the commission and the provincial authorities have an opportunity to discuss the problem, the suggestion might be made that all employees be officially notified by letter that they have that option to exercise. Perhaps instructions could be given as to how they should proceed to obtain their rights under the act.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I shall see that it is passed on.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I have just one more question. I was interested in the minister's supplementary answer. I ask this question. He said the unemployment insurance commission did not object if it did not know. Would it ooject if it knew the official of another department was completing an unemployment insurance application in an assumed name for another person?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I can now understand the
cause of my hon. friend's curiosity, and I am

Supply-Labour
not complaining about it. I think I shall have to let that question stand and give it what I would call mature consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
193. To provide for the transfer of labour to and from places where employment Is available and expenses incidental thereto, In accordance with regulations of the governor in council, $100,000.
Clarence Gillis: On another item the hon. member for Kootenay West raised a question that interested me, and pointed out that there is quite a large vote. I appreciate his teamwork very much.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I appreciate his leadership.


Clarence Gillis: He pointed out that there is quite a large vote for the purpose of bringing in and caring for immigrants in Canada who might have to be transferred from place to place. Under this item I note there is a reduction of $100,000. The purpose of this item is to move people who are unemployed to where there may be employment for them. The hon. member for Kootenay West, who comes from Trail, British Columbia, where there is a big base metal development, smelting and so forth, suggests that on a good many occasions people who come to this country under the pretext of being farm labourers will spend a month on a farm and then will leave to work in the metal mines or in the smelter. He suggests that there may be room for quite a number of miners in the base metal industry in his area, and in my own area right now there are some 800 trained miners who are unemployed. According to a press report recently, the company has stated that there does not seem to be any possibility of reabsorbing that particular group of men into the industry.
I am wondering whether the national employment offices might not take a look at the possibility of absorbing some or all of these men in the base metal industry at Trail, British Columbia, or at Sudbury. I know that mining is mining, and a coal miner would have very little difficulty adapting himself to base metal mining because in my judgment it is a much easier job than coal mining. In my opinion the main purpose of the national employment offices should be to try to bring the area where employment can be had as close to the unemployed as possible. 1 am just provoking the minister's thoughts for the purpose of the record. I suggest the national employment offices should take a look at the possibility of absorbing that group of trained miners in some section of the Canadian mining industry. I think that is their job and I suggest it is better economics than to bring in people as farm labourers who are

not miners at all but who soon find their way into an industry where some training is required before a proper contribution can be made by the worker.
I want to say again that I appreciate very much the co-operation of the hon. member for Kootenay West in taking a long look straight across the provinces down to the section of the country that is afflicted and suggesting that there may be a possible solution. I think that is the kind of teamwork that is required between province and province to iron out some of the inequalities existing in the whole economic structure. I know the minister will take a look at this matter and I am reasonably sure the unemployment commission will also.


Murdo William Martin: The chairman tells me that is now being done.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Mr. Prudham:: Mr. Chairman, when the estimates of this department were before the committee last year several members expressed a desire to deal with the coal board first. I think it would be a good idea in order to avoid confusion on a discussion of the first item and also for the reason that we have different officials for the dominion coal board. If we could dispose of this first, I think it would facilitate the work of the board and the committee.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: What is the number of the item?


George Prudham: Item No. 234.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Is it agreeable to the committee that item 234 should be called first?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
B-Dominion coal board-*
234. Administration and investigations of the dominion coal board, $117,600.


George Prudham: Mr. Chairman, I think I should put a statement on the record at this time. The problems of the coal industry have been very much in the public eye recently and I think a statement of the situation as the government and the coal board see it would be helpful.
While there has been and continues to be a substantial increase in our requirements of this energy, this increase has been largely restricted to higher forms of energy such as electricity and liquid fuels. The main difficulty in the coal situation is that coal is losing some of its traditional markets to these more convenient fuels. In western Canada there are two different types of coal

and therefore of production and of marketing. The mines producing bituminous coal operate on Vancouver island and in the mountain areas of British Columbia and Alberta. The coal produced has been used almost entirely for steam raising purposes and the manufacture of coke. Most of these mines were opened to supply the railways, and some 70 per cent of the output has been sold for locomotive use.
In Alberta the coal costs about $6.30 per ton to produce, of which the labour cost amounts to about $3.45 per ton. The rate of production has been about 4 tons per man-day. This section of the industry has been badly hit by the conversion of steam locomotives from coal to oil and by the development of the diesel locomotive. Several mines have been closed. The railways claim that the change-over of fuel is a matter of economy and that to continue the use of coal would force them into a loss position and would lead to higher rates on all freight. This claim cannot be successfully challenged.
There is a market for industrial coal in Quebec and Ontario that consumed some 13 million tons in 1954. This coal is generally burned in large steam plants designed for the use of specific types of coal and operating at full capacity. There seems to be an idea that coal is about the same wherever it is found and can be used without difficulty in any type of plant. This is a basic fallacy and the facts should be more clearly understood.
A plant designed, for example, to operate economically on Nova Scotia coal with 33 per cent volatile matter and an ash that fuses at
2,000	degrees will not operate efficiently on western bituminous coal with 20 per cent volatile matter and an ash fusing point of 2,800 degrees. It is possible that it will operate in some fashion but not at a full efficient level.
The furnace equipment in Ontario and Quebec plants is generally designed for the type of coal that is most readily available. In Quebec, Nova Scotia coal or similar coal is usually supplied, while in Ontario most of the equipment requires a coal similar in characteristics to that produced in Pennsylvania and West Virginia. In the discussion of the estimates of the dominion coal board in 1952, I advised the house that a survey of the industrial coal users showed that approximately 1 million more tons of Canadian coal could be used by industry in Ontario. In that statement it was not made clear that of the additional capacity of 1 million tons, only some 275,000 tons was suitable for western coals, and much of this could only be on a part-time basis.
6737
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
I would say here that the Ontario industrial consumer is generally a patriotic Canadian and anxious to use our native coal if it can be done without restricting the output of his plant or costing too much. There are firms in Ontario who can use, and are using, western coal at extra cost to themselves as a patriotic duty, and I feel that their co-operation should be mentioned here and appreciated. It is clear, however, that the Ontario industrial market for coal does not offer much relief to the hard-pressed western bituminous operator.
To secure what relief is possible, the government this spring increased the amount of subvention payable on western industrial coal moving to Ontario to $4 per ton and has also provided assistance on industrial coal moving to Manitoba. By this assistance, a market for some 200,000 tons has already been secured. The provision of more subvention on such a movement would not increase the tonnage to any great extent at this time, for the reason that the use of this type of coal is limited by the performance required in existing furnaces.
Industry in western Canada requires a considerable amount of fuel and a large part of the market is still supplied with coal. Oil and gas have offered stiff competition, and as more of these fuels are brought into full production, there may be further gains at the expense of coal. Even in the coal market, differences in the cost of production and of transportation have led to a decrease in the supply by bituminous mines, and a concurrent increase in the supply of cheaper locally mined subbituminous and lignite coals produced by strip-mining. This picture is not bright, Mr. Chairman, but nothing can be gained by refusing to face facts. The dominion coal board and the technical officials of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys have these problems under continuous study, but it would be unrealistic to say that there is any solution in sight whereby, under existing circumstances, these bituminous mines could be brought back into full production. There will remain some market for this coal, particularly the better quality, but any large-scale development will have to await the greater industrialization of the west or the depletion or diversion to other uses of the gas and oil that is presently in surplus supply.
The other type of western coal, sometimes known as domestic, has in the past supplied the household markets. Drumheller, Edmonton, Lethbridge and Coalspur have been the major fields and have marketed large tonnages from Victoria as far east as northern
6738	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys Ontario. These coals are meeting severe competition. Oil, gas and propane have substantially reduced the outlets, while the lower cost coals produced by strip mining in other western fields have cut heavily into the remaining markets. It is difficult to see any improvement in local markets because of the availability of gas and these competing fuels.
The Ontario market has always looked attractive to these domestic producers, but as I have reported on previous occasions to this house the poor storage qualities, high freight rates and seasonal restrictions on supply have held back developments. To this must now be added the fact that the Ontario domestic market, which used some 6,500,000 tons of coal and coke in 1945, has fallen to 4 million tons in 1954 and is still falling, owing to oil competition. Suggestions have been made that assistance should be provided on the sale of coal in western Canada in competition with locally produced gas and oil. I am sure that hon. members will all agree that any policy of subsidizing one particular form of Canadian energy against another would be unsound.
We have, however, in the regulations issued this spring increased the assistance payable on these coals moving to Ontario by 50 cents a ton, and have been advised by the operators this measure will be of some assistance. I have intentionally given the gloomy side of the western picture, but there are other phases which are not so dark. Some of the major operators in the Crowsnest pass are endeavouring to diversify their operations. I know of at least two companies that are embarking on very intensive exploration programs for base metals in the area. Others are engaged in lumbering and in the oil business in order to stabilize their business and to provide more employment for the people of that area.
The coal industry in Saskatchewan has maintained and even increased production, and is looking forward to wider markets when the new power stations presently being developed come into operation. In Alberta contracts are being let for two new large power stations, one of which will use coal at once while the other will use gas at first but will revert to coal when a more remunerative market is found for the gas. Both of these plants, however, will use the cheap strip-mined coal available in the immediate neighbourhood. Neither of these developments will provide much employment for the trained underground miner. It would appear that we are facing a technological revolution in the coal industry, and the most that can be done is to soften the blow to the older type operations.
tMr. Prudham.l

In eastern Canada the picture, while not cheerful, is not yet so dark as the western picture. In New Brunswick, there is a comparatively small but flourishing industry that has maintained and even bettered its position by increasing the efficiency of its production. The Nova Scotia situation is somewhat different. The railways have in the past provided an outlet for a substantial part of the production. The gradual change-over to diesel propulsion has reduced the railway market and promised to eliminate it in the not too distant future. This has been difficult for the mines on the mainland, in the Joggins, Cumberland and Stellarton areas because the railway outlet is particularly important to them. The closing of some of the older mines in these areas due to increasing physical difficulties in mining has kept output in a fair relation to the demand, but the future is uncertain because of the prospect of decreasing markets.
I made an interjection the other night during the consideration of the estimates of my colleague the Minister of Transport in reply to a statement made by the hon. member for Cape Breton South regarding the railway market. I stated that the industry in Nova Scotia had, in recent years, not fully supplied the market available on the Canadian National Railways. This was a true statement, Mr. Chairman, although perhaps I should have elaborated on it a little more at that time. The fact is that the entire maritime area of the Canadian National Railways is supplied by Nova Scotia coal. There is a considerable market available for Nova Scotia coal on the Canadian National in Quebec and Ontario, but the railway requires a sized and well prepared coal. With the increase in mechanization and the mines becoming deeper, the production of slack coal by the major company in Nova Scotia has been decidedly on the increase in recent years. The result is that if the major company were to supply all the coal market available on the Canadian National, that is the sized coal, it would not be able to dispose of all the slack. It is for that reason the railway market has not been fully supplied.
The mines on the mainland are, as I have said, facing decreasing markets owing to the increased cost of production. This is partly due to the depth of the coal and troublesome mining conditions. Mainland coal gets a fair local market, but oil is becoming more and more competitive. A subvention is available on this coal and some of it does move to Quebec under assistance. It may be that this market could absorb some further amounts, and I am sure the producers are endeavouring to secure other outlets.

Cape Breton remains as the most important area, in view of the number of employees and the comparative isolation from other sources of employment.
This area has not had any serious marketing difficulties until fairly recently. The mines have been undergoing a change-over to mechanical production, and the teething pains of this conversion have lasted longer and have been more severe than was expected. The mechanization plan, as submitted to the dominion coal board in 1948, was designed to increase the over-all output to some extent, to double the efficiency of production, and therefore substantially to reduce the cost and reduce the total labour force. It was expected that as the output increased from the improved efficiency the lower cost would enable the coal to find wider markets. At the same time the working force would gradually decrease, with the increasing production per man-day, and by the natural wastage through retirement and old age they expected to keep the industry in a healthy condition.
This program has not been realized. Production per man-day is only now beginning to increase slightly, while cost of production has actually increased over the period-* although a change is now evident with a slight drop in these costs.
Production from Nova Scotia mines in
1953-	54 was 2-15 tons per man-day. In
1954-	55 it increased slightly to 2-25 tons per man-day. This has meant that the coal at present costs has not been able to find wider markets. In fact, it has only retained the present outlets through the provision of greater amounts in subvention. The labour force has not declined through natural causes, as was planned, but has been held at a high level in order to maintain output. In this period, while a wider market could have been established, oil competition has grown more and more serious and now threatens a large proportion of the industry.
Over the last year there has been some improvement in efficiency of output and this is continuing into the early months of this year. This improvement together with the relatively high labour force is tending to increase the over-all production of coal. Unfortunately the opportunity to establish a wider market through lower costs has largely disappeared and outlets that would have been available have been lost to oil. Under these circumstances, it may become necessary to reduce total output to the market demands. In any event it is essential to do everything possible to retain the present market through reducing costs. This can only be accomplished in the opinion of the operators by the 50433-426i
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys closing of at least one of the highest cost collieries. This mine was closed on June 30.
There has been a request for further assistance by government to find wider markets. Recently the government agreed to extend subvention assistance up to $2.50 a ton for a trial shipment of 100,000 tons to Great Britain and a trial shipment of 20,000 tons to Germany. I understand that the shipment to Great Britain is presently moving, but that the sale to Germany has not yet been completed. I wish to emphasize that that assistance was extended on a trial basis only in order to see if they could get a foothold in those markets.
At the present time, Nova Scotia coal is moving as far west as Ottawa and supplies almost all the market from here east for coal of this type and characteristics. There is some imported coal used in Quebec but a careful investigation by the dominion coal board has shown that almost all is of a type and kind that is required for special purposes that cannot be filled by the maritime product. The cost of subvention on most of this coal is about $4.75 per ton although the over-all subvention for 1954-55 was $2.96. To find markets further west would cost from $5.75 per ton up to $7 and $8 in subvention assistance. In the last fiscal year, the subvention on Nova Scotia coal has been $8,689,018. There has been a payment of $224,555 under the Canadian Coal Equality Act; and also if you wish to delve further, there has been $350,000 in freight assistance for coal under the Maritime Freight Rates Act. In total, this amounted to over $9 million, or about $1.59 per ton on the total production.
In the Alberta and British Columbia area the subvention paid on bituminous coal only was $1,864,413, and on the domestic type alone, it was $499,465, a total of $2,363,878. These payments amounted to $2.67 per ton of bituminous coal moved, or 85 cents per ton produced, and $3.35 per ton of domestic coal moved, or 21 cents per ton produced. On all Alberta coals, the average subvention per ton of coal moved was $2.79 and on the overall production it was 52 cents. The industry also has the protection of 50 cents per ton tariff on imported bituminous coal.
The royal commission on coal in their conclusions recommended that the subventions as then existing should be maintained in principle, but added that the amount of assistance should bear a reasonable relation to the cost of imported coal. Good grade American bituminous coal is available at about $3.75 per ton at the mines or $8.25 to $8.75 at lake and river ports. The subventions I have outlined, together with the
6740	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys other assistance and the protective duty which is practically 15 per cent ad valorem, would seem to conform to this recommendation in a generous fashion.
The future of this basic industry depends upon the early realization of improvement in efficiency and reduction in cost that will enable it to retain the present outlets and capture a fair share of the new requirements.
The story would not be complete unless it was also pointed out that this loss of coal markets has not been confined to Canadian coal. Imports of bituminous coal from the United States have fallen from 22,753,000 tons some five years ago to only 15,683,000 tons this last calendar year. It is evident that the same competition faces American coal as is playing havoc with our own production even although the cost differentials as against oil are much less.
The government is doing everything reasonably possible to help the industry over this difficult transition period. The amount of money you are being asked to vote is somewhat higher than last year. In addition government agencies have been instructed to purchase Canadian coal wherever the cost is up to 10 per cent more than imported coals.
I might add that even before this directive was issued, out of a total of some 1,040,000 tons of coal purchased by government agencies, some 730,000 tons was of Canadian origin. We have also endeavoured to maintain markets for coal by requiring every government agency proposing to change to or to instal oil to submit their plans to the dominion coal board for investigation of the relative costs and of other factors.
The future of Canadian coal lies more and more in development of industry and in the growing demand for electric power. Co-ordination of these demands and the development of larger units of production would help through the lowered costs and greater efficiency of the larger units. Recommendations to this effect have been made by a consultant retained by the dominion coal board, Dr. Christie, to study the maritime situation, that is, the maritime power situation, and these have been passed on to the provincial authorities for their consideration.
The coal-fired turbine offers some hope for the future, but it must not be forgotten that these technical advances cannot be forced beyond a certain pace, and this project is no exception. It should also be remembered that this new engine may be found to operate more cheaply on lower grades of coal and that its development and use would not increase the outlet for higher grades.


At the present time the machine is not operating pending changes in design. As a result of the initial test runs, it became evident that certain modifications and adjustments were needed for the heat exchanger. It was thought advisable to make these adjustments before the test runs were completed so that more accurate data could be obtained. When these modifications are completed, test runs will be made over a sufficient length of time to determine the efficiency and the fuel costs for the use of locomotive or stationary engine purposes.
The Department of Mines and Technical Surveys is asking for $110,000 this year for this project, which will bring the total expenditure to approximately $600,000. I might add that the developers of the project say that at no time have they been hampered by the lack of money. Every assistance has been given to the project and we are convinced that it could not be pushed faster. It is hoped that when the tests are finally completed commercial interests will undertake the development of a prototype locomotive or power unit.
From time to time we read about possible new uses for coal. There is no doubt that coal contains the basic building blocks necessary for the manufacture of many synthetics, also many chemicals such as ammonia and materials for fertilizer and a host of other uses.
Throughout the world research and experiments are being carried on. The fuels division of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys is keeping in close touch with these developments, and we are doing a considerable amount of research on our own.
About 50 employees of the branch are devoting most of their time to coal problems. There is a small-scale experiment on the hydrogenation of coal, but most of our efforts are directed toward assisting the industry in their briquetting and preparation problems.
In addition to the work on the coal-fired turbine, which I have mentioned, we have several teams in Alberta, British Columbia and Nova Scotia working with the companies on problems of mining, with special attention to pressure problems related to mining at depth.
At the present time natural gas is in plentiful supply in Canada and it is a more convenient and a cheaper source of material for synthetics than possible coal derivatives.
In conclusion, I am convinced there will remain a sizeable market for Canadian coal. This may increase substantially over the next 10 or 20 years as our country expands.

In the immediate future, however, there will be very serious changes and transitions within the coal industry.
The greatest challenge facing the coal industry at the moment is that of reducing the cost of production in order to meet competition. You cannot separate the cost of production from the marketing problem. If the industry is successful in reducing costs, the markets will be correspondingly improved.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Chairman, the outline given by the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys is not one to convey any substantial measure of encouragement to the people who are dependent upon coal mining as the source of their livelihood, nor to those who may regard the production of coal as an essential part of our general economy.
The minister has said that it would not be wise to give any unduly favourable impression as to the situation which would not be supported by the facts. I should think everyone will agree with that. Nevertheless, there must be a recognition of the fact that coal is one of the basic requirements of the economy of this and of other countries, and what is even more important is that it is a key industry in the province of Nova Scotia, where it employs some 10,000 to
11,000	miners.
The difficulties that are befalling the coal industry in Canada are not unknown elsewhere. They have been encountered in the United States where the coal industry has been so much a part of their great period of development. There has been, however, a different situation in the United States. In yesterday's New York Times I read an article under the heading "Recovery on the Way in Coal Industry." This very long, well-written article on the situation in the coal industry in the United States does not suggest for a moment that their troubles are over; but it does point out that there has been an improvement and that there has been a vigorous attempt to seek new markets as well as to employ coal in new ways.
They have achieved some substantial improvement there by doubling the export of coal, and of course they have seen an improvement related to the use of coal for the electric utilities and the steel mills which have been increasing so much in production within the past year. The fact does remain, however, that in the United States they are now apparently on the upgrade. The situation there is not one which presents some of the problems that we have here.
Undoubtedly, one of the major aspects of our problem is the fact that some 60 per cent of the whole consumption of coal in
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys Canada is within 200 miles of the cities of Montreal and Toronto, while the supplies of Canadian coal are a very long distance away from those centres.
It would seem that one of the things that must be borne in mind in any examination of this subject is that coal is likely to be in the future, as it has been in the past, a steady, continuing source of vital fuel supplies. There are more glamorous fuels; there are more dramatic types of fuels, such as gas and oil; but those can be readily exhausted within comparatively short times in terms of the history of nations. I am not suggesting for a moment that the time is short in the life of human beings. But in the long range of national history these could be diminishing resources. We are likely to look to coal in the years ahead as we have in the past.
One of the things which must be borne in mind in dealing with this coal problem is that in Nova Scotia, where it is more vital to the economy of that province than it is to Alberta, vital though it may be there, many of the mines are submarine mines. If as a result of continuing displacement of the use of that fuel those mines cease to be worked they might be lost forever. There is, moreover, a very serious problem that can arise if whole communities in Nova Scotia, dependent as they are upon the production of coal, find it necessary to seek work elsewhere and the skill and family traditions of association with that type of work are lost. It would be most difficult to restore our position in the production of coal at some time in the future.
There can be no question but that the difficulties are tremendous. This is something which is of concern not only to Nova Scotia, to the maritime provinces and to the western provinces as well where coal is mined; it is something that is essentially a part of the whole Canadian economy. The coal industry is at the crossroads, and unless something is done to revitalize it the impact upon the lives of many Canadians is going to have far-reaching consequences, and there could well be serious dislocations in some parts of our economy.
The minister has said that we must look to greater industrial expansion in the areas where coal is mined. That is one place where at a time like this the government can contribute to the solution of this problem. Almost one-half of the money being spent by the government goes directly or indirectly into some aspect of national defence or the preparation for defence. A great part of that money is allocated in the form of special undertakings under the direction of different
6742	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys departments of government but mainly under the Department of Defence Production. We have urged that the government facilitate the decentralization of industrial production through the influence it has through contracts of various kinds for defence and other production. The minister has stated that this is the course which they see as an immediate solution. If that is so surely there should be a greater effort on the part of the government to encourage industry in those areas where coal is now produced.
Another use of coal on which the minister has touched is for the production of electricity. The minister stated that the services of experts have been sought for the purpose of considering the possibilities in this type of development. He tells us that this information has been passed on to the provincial government for their consideration. No one has been a stronger advocate than I of the full exercise of their constitutional jurisdiction by the provincial governments, but certainly there are some cases where a development of this kind could be stimulated as part of the general development of those essential power requirements in connection with our defence and other production.
If it is a fact that the report made by the experts who inquired into this subject suggests the practical possibility of the production of electrical energy from coal, then it might well be that in co-operation with the provinces, just as the dominion government has co-operated recently in the production of electrical energy in New Brunswick, suggestions might be made as to the ways in which this could be done to the advantage of employment in those provinces and the general economy of Canada. I have suggested before in this house during the discussion of this subject that we might well consider the successful production of electrical energy in Germany and Russia from coal, particularly from low-grade deposits of coal where the gas is actually burned underground and power produced at most satisfactory cost levels.
Then again there is the possibility of a wider employment of coal for chemical and synthetic production. I do not intend to enlarge on that. Everyone knows that there has been a very wide employment of coal in the chemical field, and today many of the things we use in the form of ordinary consumer goods are the chemical by-products of coal.
There are possibilities of positive developments along this line. Undoubtedly the situation is serious and it is likely to become much more serious unless positive and vigorous


policies are adopted by the government. The subventions which have been paid by the government-and increased subventions are now being asked for-have not prevented a reduction in the use of coal as the result of increasing competition by other fuels. Since 1950 coal has played a substantially smaller part in supplying Canada's total energy requirements. Coal production has declined by 22 per cent, but this decline in production has not been evenly distributed. From 1950 to 1954 the Alberta output declined by 3,257,000 tons or 40 per cent; the British Columbia output declined by 24 per cent; the Nova Scotia output declined by 640,000 tons or 10 per cent, while coal production in New Brunswick and Saskatchewan actually expanded after world war II. The pattern is not uniform, and the problem is one that affects the whole Canadian economy.
It is fortunate in many ways that the reduction has been smaller on a percentage basis in Nova Scotia than in some other parts of Canada, in view of the dependence of that province upon coal production for its financial resources and for employment. However, the threat continues with the possibility of greatly increased use of gas and oil-particularly of gas-in the great industrial centres of central eastern Canada, and the threat will become more serious in the future. If western Canadian gas is supplied to the Toronto and Montreal areas, or if under any mutual arrangement other gases are supplied in those areas in exchange for western gas, the demand for coal would undoubtedly be diminished to some substantial extent.
Therefore this problem is one which calls for vigorous and positive action which will encourage the industry to maintain its position during the intervening period until the time when wider use may be made of coal. It is something in which all Canadians must feel a direct interest, even if they come from provinces which are not dependent on coal for employment or their local economy. The fact that the economy of the maritime provinces is lagging is largely related to this problem. Therefore we must all take an equal interest in finding a temporary solution that will maintain the coal industry and, above all, maintain the employment of Canadians engaged in that activity and trained for that work. We must also be looking to the future for the wider employment of that fuel in the years ahead.
There is one subject the minister did not mention. In this country we have resources unparalleled in their quantity in any other country with a similar population. Few nations with any population, large or small,

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
have comparable resources. It has been said before, and it should be said over and over again, that if we use our own resources in Canada for the employment of Canadians in this country, then we need not worry about the optimum of population, to use that ugly word. We can feed far in excess of 100 million people; we can clothe that number; we can keep them warm; we can provide all the things that are needed. Therefore one of the ways of meeting the problem with which we are confronted is a positive, selective and well-organized plan of immigration which will in itself promote the consumption of these fuels in the areas where they are produced.
Not only should immigration policy be directed to the selection of the right type of immigrant. It should also be directed to the encouragement of the settling of newcomers to Canada in areas where a decentralized industry could give them employment, and in that way make economic use of the resources we possess. Undoubtedly there should be a greater use of coal in the years ahead if we encourage a wider development of industry in those areas close to the coal itself, whether that be in the maritimes, in Alberta, in British Columbia or in any other part of Canada.
There is another threat with which we are confronted, and that is the deepening of the St. Lawrence river, which most of us hail as a great advantage to Canada. It is of tremendous advantage to the general economy of Canada, and undoubtedly of the greatest advantage to the part of Canada close to that development. Nevertheless the deepening of the St. Lawrence river and the construction of the St. Lawrence seaway is going to make coal from the United States even more competitive with Canadian coal than it is at the present time.
This merely serves to emphasize the need for balancing encouragement in other fields as well. The natural resources that are coming into production, such as iron and the other base metals which will be encouraged by the St. Lawrence seaway, should be fabricated as much as possible in this country. That fabrication should be encouraged by government policies which will make it advantageous to process those raw materials to the most advanced point practicable in Canada, for the employment of Canadians here in our own country.
These are, of course, general statements. It may very profitably be said that this is a practical subject which can be solved only by cold realities. That is true. It can be solved only by cold realities interpreted in dynamic policies. The realities are that people will employ the type of fuel they find
most suitable for their own requirements. The realities are that they will undoubtedly turn to some of the fuels that can be more readily transmitted to the furnaces of industry and to the homes of our people generally.
The minister himself has touched on certain demands that will increase employment in our mineral areas by increasing the consumption of coal. There are policies directed to the wider fabrication of our resources of other kinds which would increase that demand. Above all, there are policies of encouragement of this industry by methods that may be found satisfactory elsewhere. The minister has spoken of an experimental shipment of fuel overseas. People in other countries need fuel. Many nations are without it. Let us press for the wider marketing of that fuel overseas because, particularly in the case of Nova Scotia, it is at the seaboard.
Whatever the methods, let us approach this subject recognizing that it is not something of interest only to Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Alberta, British Columbia or to any other area of Canada as a local problem. It is part of the problem of all Canadians, relating to the development of our resources and the employment of our own people. Whatever immediate solutions are found, I submit that the best long-term solution is to encourage the fabrication of our own resources, which will expand the need for fuel for industry and other purposes in this country, and to follow policies that will populate this country with suitable immigrants who can make homes here and thus help to create employment with the almost limitless resources we possess. The solution of this problem is part of the great challenge facing all Canadians to fabricate our resources in Canada and to expand the whole development of our country by intelligent and understandable policies of Canadian production for the advantage of Canadian citizens in our own country.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Chairman, I listened to the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys with a great deal of interest, but I do not think he left very much encouragement with the house so far as the rehabilitation of the coal industry is concerned. However, I will say that it is only within the last few years that the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys has done anything in the matter of trying to get a better understanding of the coal industry on a national basis. I spent a good many years in the house talking about coal, but what I said just went on the record and that was the end of it. However, I will say that since the formation of the dominion coal board and since the minister took over
6744	HOUSE OF
Supply

Mines and Technical Surveys the department an attempt has at least been made to understand and do something about an industry that was in pretty bad shape when the department began to take a square look at it.
For a good many years this department was something like fisheries and the post office. If there was someone who had to be given a seat in the cabinet so as to satisfy the requirements of geographical representation he was generally pushed into this department so he would be out of the way. If some federal department had taken the interest years ago that is being shown today, when we are locking the door after the horse has been stolen, we might not be discussing the kind of thing we are talking about today.
I listened with a great deal of interest to the Leader of the Opposition and the generalizations he made with respect to our resources and the coal industry. Generally speaking we are all agreed on what the problem is, but I would point out to him that so far as decentralization of industry is concerned, practically every year for at least twelve years, until I got discouraged, I had a resolution on the order paper suggesting that the government should undertake decentralization of industry so as to make for a better balanced economy and to provide protection in the event of the kind of war we may anticipate in the future. But like other resolutions it was discussed, what was said went on the record, and it was forgotten. What the Leader of the Opposition has suggested may be a good long-range program, but at this stage of the game I do not think it is going to solve the immediate problem.
This business of the coal industry being in difficulties is not something new. I have taken a look at some of the reports made in connection with the industry over the years.
I took a look, for example, at the report of the royal commission set up in 1926 under Sir Andrew Rae Duncan. If you read that report you will see that it deals with exactly what we are talking about this afternoon, markets, costs, the stepping up of production and the difficulties of marketing our coal in competition with United States coal. In 1932 another royal commission under Sir Andrew Rae Duncan was established by the government of Nova Scotia. In his report he makes a pretty thorough survey of the industry. He points out exactly what was pointed out in 1926 and what we are saying today. He refers to the need for economies, reduction in costs, the stepping up of man-day production and the difficulties of meeting competition. At that time, of course, he recommended a reallocation of collieries and the concentration of production. That program [DOT] [Mr. Giffis.l

was carried out. That is why you have two or three mines operating on one shaft. But it did not solve the problem. Of course many of the recommendations made by Sir Andrew Rae Duncan were not carried out, particularly those having to do with welfare plans and so forth.
Then came the Carroll commission, the latest one, which produced a pretty comprehensive report in 1946. Of course it was a minority recommendation in that report that resulted in the setting up of the dominion coal board. The board has done a very good job in so far as its powers will permit it to do so. It is an efficient and effective organization at the national level, but I should like to remind the committee that regulation of the coal industry either in the east or the west is not the prerogative of the federal government. Coal as a resource is under the direct control of the provincial governments with respect to the operation of mines, the letting of leases and costs of production. These are matters that are outside the jurisdiction of the dominion coal board or the minister's department. These matters are under the control of the companies operating the mines and the provincial governments which lease the property to the companies. To some extent the miners' union must also take some responsibility so far as policing the whole operation in the interests of the men is concerned.
I make this statement because many times you see newspaper reports that are very misleading. With respect to matters that come within the exclusive jurisdiction of the province or the management of the company you will find the federal government being attacked because they are not doing this and this and this. I do not say that to defend them, but merely from the point of view of clarification in order to get the question in its proper perspective.
The Carroll commission report made a lot of recommendations, one of which was the setting up of a coal board. The coal board has at least provided a national body to do research and keep in touch with the industry east and west. In my judgment it has done a lot to implement the recommendations of the Carroll commission. There were some 14 very important recommendations. I have a return in my hand indicating which ones were implemented and which were not and the reasons why. It is a very comprehensive return, because it shows that practically all the major recommendations of the Carroll commission report were carried out. That is as far as the dominion coal board could go.
Another matter is dealt with in the Carroll commission report that I have mentioned to

the minister a good many times. I refer to the fact that a lot of United States coal is coming into the country and being used in markets that were held prior to 1939 and 1940 by Nova Scotia coal. In coming into the Ontario market that coal is receiving the regular subvention rates that prevail at the present time. The rates have changed a bit because freight rates have changed, but when freight rates changed the subvention rates were increased to offset any increase in freight rates.
At page 130 of the Carroll report the commissioner makes an observation that I have made a good many times in the house with reference to United States coal. He points out that while during the war it was necessary to drop the Ontario market as far as Nova Scotia coal was concerned because of the shift in our market to bunker coal, it was distinctly understood that when the war was over the Dominion Coal Company was going to import coal from the United States to supply the Ontario market simply for the purpose of holding their customers in the aftermath of the war. The commission had this to say:
During recent years the company has sold a considerable quantity of coal purchased by them from the United States. The tonnage reached a high figure of 1,964,136 short tons in the year 1944, which approximates the tonnage of Dominion coal sold in the same market prior to the war. It would appear that this condition was due to a declining production in the Nova Scotia mines and also an increased demand for Scotia coal from the steel industry. The net profit realized by the company on United States coal for 1944-
And so forth. The loss of that market was not due to any decline in production in the Nova Scotia mines. The commission is in error there. I think what has happened has been that instead of carrying out the original intention of handing back that 2 million ton market in Ontario to Nova Scotia, the same company that is operating the coal mines in Nova Scotia has been importing this coal. I want the minister to clear this up before we finish his estimates this time. I also want him to explain to this house who is the Dominion Import Company, located in Montreal. Is it a subsidiary of Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation, and how much United States coal has it imported into this country from 1954 up to date?
The Carroll report is very definite that they imported approximately 2 million tons of United States coal in 1944, and according to this report they marketed it in a market which belonged to Nova Scotia previous to 1939. There is no use trying to fool ourselves. There is no use trying to protect somebody who is not doing what is right. I am not prepared to either kick around the minister
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys of mines or the provincial government of Nova Scotia if the people who are mining and marketing that coal in this country are not playing ball with the Canadian people or the Canadian government. It is not doing anyone any good to try to screen people who are trying to pull that kind of sideline stunt with respect to that industry.
Now, that is not my statement; it is the statement of the royal commission headed by Hon. Mr. Justice W. F. Carroll, whose report was tabled in this house in 1946. I want the minister to clean up that particular angle. If there is a market there for 2 million tons, a market which previous to the war belonged to that company, then the minister wants to clear that up, because that market certainly should have gone back to Nova Scotia coal. If it had, we would not have the problem we have today in that particular industry.
Another thing I should like to point out is that during the time the Carroll commission sat there appeared before that commission representatives of the coal operators in the United States. They presented a brief to the commission on behalf of the Consolidated Coal Company; the Hanna Coal and Ore Company; North American Coal Corporation; Pittsburgh Coal Company; Rochester and Pittsburgh company, and the Valley Camp Coal Company. If you read this brief you will find that the coal policy of the United States is very much tied up with the valuable market they have in Canada. It is a pretty powerful influence when you are dealing now with a coal policy in Canada in connection with a declining industry. I can understand the decline of the industry in British Columbia, where something replaced coal in the economy of the province. They have a steel industry, and they have their forest products. In Alberta there is the oil development and natural gas. In those provinces the industry became a casualty through our own products.
But this is not true in Nova Scotia. Our main competitor in Nova Scotia is United States coal. It is outside fuel that has been imported into this country. While natural gas has had some effect and oil has had some effect in the dieselization of the railroads, nevertheless the main competitor for Nova Scotia coal today is coal that is coming from the United States. Do not forget, as this brief presented to the Carroll coal commission points out, the coal that comes into Canada from the United States is coming from the largest mine with the highest production, the most highly mechanized mine with the lowest cost.
In western Canada the industry became a casualty to our own natural products, but in Nova Scotia the reverse is true. We are
6746	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys becoming a casualty at this time, and we have been under difficulty for a great many years, because there has been an unrealistic policy on the part of the government concerning the importation of United States coal. I just want to leave that with the minister, because you have to take a look at the United States position. They are putting approximately 24 million tons of coal into this country every year, and they are doing it in a planned way from the cheapest areas and with freight assistance from the United States government.
As the Leader of the Opposition pointed out, the St. Lawrence seaway is going to create further difficulties for the Nova Scotia coal industry. I said that in the house. In fact I was the only man in the house who opposed the St. Lawrence seaway for that particular reason. Do not forget that right now water-borne coal from the United States is getting up into the Ontario markets along the lakes. Large import companies in Montreal and throughout Ontario, with quite a capital investment, are storing huge amounts of United States coal. This is all water-borne at the present time, and at a very low rate.
Of course some of these companies have their own on-company service rate, which is pretty low. It is five mills per ton mile; that is the rate from Rouses Point down to Moncton. Our own service rate from Sydney up to Moncton runs up to 11 mills per ton mile. The United States is given a freight rate break in this country, unless it has been changed very recently. I know that two years ago I tried very hard to find out why United States coal was shipped from Rouses Point down as far as Moncton at five mills per ton mile while our own coal from Sydney to Moncton was costing about 11 mills per ton mile.


George Prudham: I think my hon. friend would like to be correct. This five mills per ton mile to which he was referring was the old rate the railways charged for handling coal on company service. It had no relation to commercial freight rates at all, and has since been changed. The Canadian National has a rate for coal moved on company service that varies from point to point. The Canadian Pacific is carrying coal for their own service at seven mills per ton mile now.


Clarence Gillis: I had a long discussion and a very thorough understanding with Mr. Donald Gordon and his officials on this particular question. There was not any doubt in his mind, nor was there any doubt in the minds of members of the committee at the time, that it was a pretty rank piece of discrimination. The difference between the on-company service rate in Canada two years


ago on the movement of coal from Rouses Point to Moncton, and from Sydney to Moncton, added a burden of $2.40 a ton on Nova Scotia coal that we were putting into Moncton. That matter went before the cabinet, and the last intimation I had was that a representative was going down to see the railway officials at Montreal to see if some straightening out could not be done. This agreement the railways had with the government, I do not know how many years ago-


George Prudham: Is the hon. member referring to railway coal?


Clarence Gillis: The on-service rate. I understand it was abrogated by the C.N.R., without consultation with the government. An effort was going to be made to straighten it out. However, I point this out only to show that in this matter of competition the Canadian industry, so far as Nova Scotia is concerned, can never be competitive with coal from the United States. The thing we have to determine, so far as our industry is concerned, is whether or not it is essential to the community. If it is essential to the community then it has to be supported and maintained. If it is not essential to the community then it should be scrapped. But I am reasonably sure that the Nova Scotia industry is essential to the community.
Anyone who talks about meeting competition, so far as Nova Scotia coal is concerned, with coal from the United States, is not being realistic, because that can never be brought about. You will never cut costs in that industry to a point where you can meet competition from the United States. I am sure the chairman of the coal board, who has taken a long look at the problem, will agree with that statement. The mines in Nova Scotia are deep, submarine mines. They are getting old. There is a very long haul, high pumping costs, high pressures they have never even thought about in the United States. In other words the Nova Scotia industry is a high-cost industry, and it cannot be compared with the industry in the United States, because they do not have those costs over there. They do not have the high pressure; they do not have the gaseous conditions we have; they do not have our difficulties in ventilation, our long hauls, our high pumping costs, our power costs, because our mines are submarine and their mines are not submarine.
There is no comparison between the two industries, and there never will be any comparison so far as production costs are concerned. To continue to talk about competition in the laid-down costs of this commodity, competition with the United States commodity, as it might be used by the Canadian National Railways in either the central or

the eastern region, is unrealistic. It cannot be done. I do not blame the C.N.R. for talking along those lines. They are running a railroad, and it is their job to make money. If they do not, they have to come before a committee of this house and tell why. But it is up to the dominion coal board and the minister to realize that the problem is not one of competition. The problem is whether that industry is worth maintaining; whether we need it, and I am sure you will say that we do need it.
Second, I think the attitude of the company is wrong in setting a production target of 7,500,000 tons a year. That is an unrealistic target and cannot be attained, certainly not in the industry they have today. If they were sensible and fixed a production target' of 5 million tons a year; if they planned for that production and improved their methods, it might be done. But it should be understood that' they should not try to reach for the moon and sweat it out of the hides of the men, in an effort to attain a production target that is absolutely impossible in the kind of industry they have today. I think a 5 million ton industry is a reasonable one down there, and I think there is a market for that amount of coal from that province for a good many years to come; and it would not be hard to get. The people who operate should put their cards on the table and be frank with those who want to help them rather than make a lot of wild statements such as we see from time to time. They are just putting up a smoke screen.
Then as to the development of power in the maritime provinces, it must be said that the federal government did try to do something along those lines. At least it sent in a thermo-power expert in the person of H. E. Christie, and he reported back in August of 1954. I imagine his report was made to the government. A second report was made to the dominion coal board on September 20. I shall not take time to read them, but they point out very definitely that in the development of thermo-power in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, someone must be prepared to give up sovereignty. It is pointed out that the development of small units all over the place is not economical.
He does not give any new data. What he says, we have known for a good many years; but now that we have it from an expert we believe it. He believes if they would concentrate at some point in the three provinces and develop a large power project from coal, there is a possibility of meeting the power demands of the three maritime provinces by some centrally placed industry, managed,
25, 1955	6747
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys handled and supported by the three provincial governments. Which two of the three will give up their sovereignty, I do not know. It will be something like the United Nations, everyone wants to do everything, but no one wants to give up a little power. But this is a matter which should be followed up. The coal board should follow it up and develop thermo-power in the maritime provinces. That would be a partial solution.
Personally I do not think we have hit our real competition yet. While we are struggling with the competition we have today, the time is not far distant when Alberta natural gas will be coming clean through to Quebec city. If that ever happened-and certainly it is something we should think about, so far as the coal industry is concerned-it would be serious. I know they would have financial difficulties, difficulties which may never be met. It would be a doubtful proposition to tie the great industries of Quebec to a natural gas supply that has to be brought
3,000	miles across the country by pipe line. A lot of things can happen to a pipe line. Unless you have a stand-by, to link yourself up to natural gas from Alberta to maintain the industrial set-up in Quebec and Ontario in my judgment would be a pretty doubtful proposition.
I think that was clearly demonstrated during the war, when southern Ontario depended upon American natural gas. When the Americans wanted it for themselves they shut off our supply, and there was a great scramble all through this part of the country when people were trying to convert their heating units from gas back to coal and oil. There was quite an upset, and I do not think many people will forget it.
However, we must plan for that. If natural gas is coming into that end of the country two or three years from now, then it is the responsibility of the federal government, the provincial governments and the operating coal companies to sit in and make plans now. They should not wait until the pipe line is down in this part of the world and then start hollering for relief. These things should be planned ahead.
I have spoken on this subject a good many times and I do not intend to take long today. I shall have some questions to ask the minister as we proceed with the items, because there are two or three things he should straighten out. When the minister answered me a few nights ago, or when he picked up the discussion the Minister of Transport and I were having on the matter of the Canadian National Railways purchasing Nova Scotia coal, the minister came out flat-footed and
6748	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys said the company could never supply the available market of the C.N.R.-period. I am glad to know that he completed the statement this afternoon and said it was a matter of getting the right size of coal and a matter of being able to meet the competition, as Mr. Gordon said.
I should like to say this to the minister. The big difficulty today seems to be the high percentage of slack the Dominion Steel and Coal company is producing. That does not surprise me, because if one goes back into the records ten years ago, when we were discussing the heavy equipment to be used underground in those mines, he will find that I said at that time that one of the factors that would be wrapped up in that operation was that they would get 70 per cent slack production. You cannot send heavy equipment into a mine that far underground, with the pressures they have, and start to chew it up without pretty well pulverizing the coal.
I always felt that type of equipment was very unrealistic in coal mines such as we have in Nova Scotia. I know in all of my experience underground-and I worked underground a long time, not, mind you, as a guy who walked around and looked around, but as a miner who dug coal-it was impressed upon me that I should get the coal as big as possible. You were continuously probing for methods and explosives that would cut your coal and blast it in such a way as to get it as large as possible, because that is the kind of coal you can market. I had no difficulty in seeing that this heavy equipment would pulverize the coal underground, and I am not surprised. They may have to change their methods of mining.
1 could ask a lot of questions, Mr. Chairman. I know not much can be accomplished by making a speech on this business. There are one or two things the minister should keep in mind. First, this is not a new problem. Second, our main difficulty, as far as Nova Scotia is concerned, is competition with United States coal. Our potential difficulties may come from natural gas, but right now and in the past it has been United States coal.


George Prudham: And oil.


Clarence Gillis: And oil within the last couple of years. But what we have lost to oil would not make very much difference in marketing the coal we can mine in Nova Scotia if we could meet United States competition on the railroads. There is a huge market there. Millions of tons of coal were imported by the C.N.R. last year and used largely in the central market. I think a market can be

found for our coal under the present subvention arrangements, provided we get the right type of coal. That is the company's business. That is not my business nor the minister's business. We cannot make that coal for them. That is their business.
The minister, through his department, even if the coal board has to be expanded, should be recognizing and planning for the fact that not only coal is going to be in difficulties in a few years. We have developing in this country four or five different potential fuels. If we allow them to grow up in a hodgepodge way, one competing with the other, they will all be in difficulties and we will not have any fuel industry. I believe the time has come in this country when we should have a body like the coal board, but expanded.
I believe there should be a regulatory national body in this country. The personnel of that body should take a look at the hydroelectric industry, the natural gas industry and the coal industry and determine, after a survey of the country, where these different fuels could be applied to the best economic advantage. Let us not forget for a minute that just around the corner is atomic energy. We should ascertain whether, in the light of the possibilities of atomic energy, we are being smart in spending so much money in developing other fuels and other types of power that may become obsolete in a few more years, rather than sticking to the old, conventional thing until the real thing is ready.
That type of body is needed in this country. To enable that type of organization to function we need legislation that would lay down a national fuels policy; we need a body that would be able to sit down with the government from time to time to map out, to plan and to bring some sanity into our whole fuel industry of the future.
The upset in coal, in textiles and in other industries comes about because nobody has taken a square, national look at the industry; that is, national in all its aspects. Fuel and power are basic to the whole economy of the country. They are in trouble. Many people will say this is nationalization. Anyone who takes that position is just talking sheer nonsense. I am not suggesting that you should take over anything. I am merely suggesting that you have a planning and regulatory body composed of competent people, who could guide the fuel and power requirements of this country so the maximum good will accrue to the country.
That is not nationalization, socialization, or anything else. It is exactly the kind of thing you had to do in the air with Trans-Canada Air Lines. What kind of picture

would you visualize in this country today if there was not some regulation in the air? It would be crazy. Take the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Not many people in the country would tune in very often unless there was some regulation of the air waves. Nobody is interfering with anybody's freedom. I merely suggest that we have a fuels industry, which I think is much more important than any other industry in this country, because without fuel and power the country would stagnate. To raise the hue and cry of nationalization when I suggest a national fuels policy along these lines is to be unrealistic. You have the machinery now. You would merely have to add to it people who are familiar with atomic energy and other types of fuel.


George Prudham: You would need wartime powers to regulate it.


Clarence Gillis: You would not need powers to do that, but you would need an agreement with the provinces. It is not something the federal government can do alone, but the federal government can give leadership.


George Prudham: We are doing that.


Clarence Gillis: If you are, I am glad to hear it. It is one of the things that is absolutely essential at this time. I do not want to be quarrelling with the minister. In fact I like to get along with people.


George Prudham: We have a committee now.


Clarence Gillis: Good. I am always glad to help in these matters because I really want to see things done rather than have to fight about them. If the minister's department is doing that kind of thing I am very glad to hear it.
After the minister finished speaking this afternoon one of the members sent over a note to me, in which he said, "This sounds to me like a funeral oration on the coal industry." I do not think that. I think greater interest is being shown in it today than ever before in this country. Many people are taking an interest in it. The fact that the Leader of the Opposition recognized the importance of the matter this afternoon was also of some considerable encouragement, because most members know that in the past I have made many speeches on this subject and have moved many resolutions, but I received very little vocal support on it.
I say that this industry, rather than dying today, is on the way back. I believe it is going to come back and make a contribution in the future that is not visualized today. I do not think we can depend upon oil and gas to the extent we are apparently doing at this time. I can see this country expanding; and if we ever have 100 million people,
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys as is visualized by the Leader of the Opposition, we are going to need a lot of fuel. There is no sure way of knowing how long our oil or gas will last, but you can measure with some degree of accuracy your solid fuels.
I have taken longer than I intended, but I shall have a few more remarks to make at the appropriate time.


John Horne Blackmore: Mr. Chairman, after three hon. members get finished telling something that is not very hard to tell, there is but little left for the fourth speaker. I represent one of the really great coal-mining constituencies in Canada, and naturally I feel most unhappy about what is taking place in respect of coal.
I appreciate the force and validity of all the minister has said as regards the industry, and I realize that right now things look pretty dark. But I do believe that something can be done, I think it is important that we keep our coal industry in such working condition that at least in case of emergency it might be able to supply a serious need. I believe there are possibilities of devising ways and means whereby coal can be processed into a wide variety of substances which are now being produced from other raw materials which perhaps we cannot spare as easily as we can spare coal.
I believe I have said about all there is left to say in a constructive way. It is hard for anyone in the Lethbridge constituency to be convinced that when 15 million tons of coal are brought in from the United States every year, it is not possible to obtain just a little more of that market for Alberta. As the hon. member for Cape Breton South has referred to Nova Scotia I think I would be most presumptuous if I tried to talk for that province after the hon. member has finished. I shall leave Nova Scotia's case in his hands.
Ever since I came here, almost 20 years ago, I have believed that the story given to me in explanation of why so much coal was brought in from the United States just was not quite as sound as it seemed. I have always felt that there was a lot of window dressing, or perhaps camouflage would be a better word. I think things have been done in respect of the coal industry of western Canada which did not need to be done. I have always felt that we should have had a larger share of this market. I am sure it would have been better for Canada if we had. It must be remembered that we have this year an adverse trade balance of something like $650 million with the United States, speaking from memory. Last year we had an adverse trade balance with that nation of something over $350 million. When we realize just how serious that is for Canada
6750	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys I think we all can readily see that we would be well advised to do everything possible to get Canadian coal into the Canadian market.
In saying that I do not criticize the minister, as I realize that practically all I have talked about happened before he came on the scene. Probably when he took office there were dirty corners to be cleaned up, and he has been quite energetic in trying to clean them up. But what I have said is a reflection upon those who have been in charge in times past. I have always done my best to get more Alberta coal into the markets of central Canada, and I urge the minister to exert himself to the very limit to accomplish that objective.


Mr. Carter:: Mr. Chairman, while we are on this item I should like to say a few words about the operations of the Dominion Steel and Coal company at Sydney, Nova Scotia, in so far as the people of my riding are concerned. In the majority of the settlements in my constituency the available wood supply has been practically exhausted and my constituents are now almost completely dependent upon coal for fuel. As the shore fishery has declined, more and more fishermen have been forced to seek shore employment in various construction jobs far from home, and it is no longer convenient for them to return home to cut wood for the winter's fuel supply.
_ These two factors should result in an increased consumption of Sydney coal in Newfoundland, but I doubt whether such is the case because the price is too high. Coal is purchased at the company loading pier at Sydney for around $9 to $10 per ton, but the fishermen of my riding, who live only 200 to 300 miles away by sea, have to pay $18 to $25 per ton for this coal. As a result many fishermen try to make do with one ton of coal per year, though the very minimum for comfort is from three to five tons per year. A fisherman who can afford three tons of coal per year is regarded as fairly well off, and some even try to manage with half a ton per year.
The large spread between the purchase price at Sydney, Nova Scotia and the consumer price in my riding results in the main from two factors. One is the lack of storage facilities in Newfoundland outside of St. J ohn's, and the other factor is the antiquated loading facilities used by the company at their Sydney pier, which downgrades the quality of the coal from 100 per cent screened to 75 per cent screened and 25 per cent slack. Because we have no central storage depots, our fishermen are forced to purchase their coal in the autumn. This is
[Mr. Blackmore.l


Mr. MacEachen:: Mr. Chairman, the closure of No. 1-B colliery at Glace Bay at the end of June brings into sharp focus the urgency of the problems that now face the Nova Scotia coal industry and, indeed, illustrates very clearly the public anxiety that is attached to any reduction in the working force of coal miners of Nova Scotia. The principal reason for closing this colliery was the diminishing market, which in this current year experienced a decline of half a million tons. Of course I join with the minister in expressing the view
6752	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys that you cannot speak realistically about markets unless at the same time you consider production costs, because these latter obviously determine the rate at which the producer can put his product on the market.
The case of No. 1-B colliery is worthy of some analysis, because it represents a point of departure or a point of crisis in the coal industry in Nova Scotia. For that reason I want to spend a few moments talking about the recent experience of this colliery. The costs of production for this colliery for the year 1953 were substantially higher than the average cost of producing coal in the other Cape Breton coal mines. But at the same time, if the costs of production of this colliery had been brought down to a level comparable with the costs in all the other coal mines in Cape Breton, we would still have the problem of disposing of half a million tons of coal. To put the problem another way, No. 1-B was for the past year the high cost colliery, but if its costs had been at the same level as other collieries the present problem would still be in existence, and the problem of disposing of half a million tons of coal would still be present.
At the conference held in Halifax this spring, which was attended by representatives of the provincial and federal governments, the management and the united mine workers, no one disputed the assertion that it was impossible to dispose of this amount of coal in the domestic market at the current subvention rate and at the price at which the producer could put his coal on the market. Therefore the decision to select No. 1-B for closure was simply because it happened to be for the past year the high cost producer. Because in the present situation an immediate general reduction in cost was not forthcoming, and because when there was no disposition to increase the subvention rate beyond its present level, there was a sudden realization of the need to turn away from the domestic market and to seek markets in the United Kingdom.
I think at this point the house should be made aware of the excellent co-operative arrangements that existed among the provincial government, the dominion coal board and the management in developing a new market for coal in the United Kingdom. I believe the initial overtures were made to the fuel board in the United Kingdom by Premier Hicks of Nova Scotia, who was keenly aware of the serious problem in the coal industry, and his initial overtures were of course followed up by officials of Dosco and the dominion coal board.


It is sometimes said there is no market for Nova Scotia coal in central Canada, but when you speak about any market at the same time you have to speak about the price at which this coal can be sold in the central Canadian market. I illustrate this point by reference to the fact that there is a market with two large consumers for 800,000 tons of coal between lake Erie and lake Huron. I am not saying it is the only market, but there is a market of that magnitude with two consumers in that area, and apparently Nova Scotia coal meets the requirements of those particular consumers. But in order to dispose of that Nova Scotia coal it would require a subvention rate of $8 per ton to make the coal competitive with United States coal. As you know, at present the maximum subvention rate is $4.75 a ton, and is costing approximately $8 million a year.
I believe that most serious Nova Scotians are resigned to the fact that there is a limit beyond which this subvention cannot be increased. It seems the most sensible course is to anticipate a gradual decline in the production costs of coal. On two previous occasions in the house I put forward the view that there were untapped productive contributions within the work force itself. My views on the subject were supported by the experience of No. 1-B colliery this spring. Before the announcement of closure of this colliery, daily production was running about 1,400 tons. When the company gave notice to the provincial government that it proposed to close the colliery because of high costs of production, daily production increased to 1,800 tons, and I am informed that it reached and may have even exceeded a daily rate of production of 2,000 tons.
I think it is important to point out that this rather significant decrease in production costs occurred without any change in mining conditions, without any change in the number of the work force, and without any new managerial practices. I am told that the result of this increase in daily production was to reduce the cost of producing coal in that colliery by $2 per ton. This rise in daily output and the accompanying decrease in production costs represents in my mind a change of attitude or a real stimulus provided to these coal miners by the threat of closure. If this outcome were possible under these precarious and unstable conditions, then I should like to ask what could we expect to have if this problem of production were tackled on a wider basis, and if there were brought into play an organized and intelligent approach to the question of human motivation and the problem of labour-management relations?

This phase of the problem was touched upon at the recent convention of united mine workers at Truro by one of the miner delegates, who was reported in the press as having said that management must so arrange things that its employees will have the will to work. I think it would be a mistake to put this expression "will to work" in the narrow context of greater physical effort. It means much more than this. It embraces a cooperative approach in the field of labour-management relations and the setting up of organized channels by which the work force can contribute ideas as well as muscles to the productive efforts of the Cape Breton coal mines.
Because I have advocated this type of labour-management co-operative endeavour as a partial solution to the problem of the high costs of the Nova Scotia coal industry, I want to bring this illustration before the house to remind members that there is something within the human attitudes of the Cape Breton coal mine miners that if properly brought into play can tackle the problem of production much more quickly and more efficiently than any type of machinery or mechanization.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, at six o'clock I was speaking about the improvement in productivity that had occurred in No. 1-B colliery shortly after the announcement of its imminent closing. I pointed out at that time that this improvement in productivity had occurred without any increase in the number of personnel, or any change in managerial techniques, or any change in the physical conditions of mining. I went on to point out that this development should be an example of the type of labour-management approach to the problem of productivity in coal mines generally in Cape Breton island.
I believe that at present a basis exists for this type of approach. The executive of the U.M.W. has shown a completely responsible attitude in this situation. Last year the executive was endorsed by the rank and file in maintaining the existing wage contracts in so far as increases were concerned. In addition to that in certain collieries, including No. 1-B, pit committees were organized in an effort to use the productive knowledge of experienced miners. I believe this responsible approach should be extended and
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys developed on a broad front, which would be a new productive relationship in the collieries of the Cape Breton coal industry.
I want to say a word, Mr. Chairman, about the subvention policy, because the continuation of this policy is so essential to the welfare of the coal industry. As is well known, the subvention is a transportation subsidy for the movement of Canadian coal to make it competitive with the United States product. It seems pretty clear that this subvention, in its origin, was an adaptation to the coal industry of the national policy of tariff protection. It was clear that a protective tariff could not be applied to the Canadian coal industry because Canadian production could not satisfy Canadian coal requirements in full, unless we were prepared to accept a highly uneconomical operation of certain Canadian coal mines. The subvention was therefore introduced in order to guarantee markets for Canadian coal in certain parts of Canada and, at the same time, maintain a suitable level of employment in the coal mines of Canada.
It seems also clear, if an examination is made of the origin of this subvention, that it was really a quid pro quo given to the Nova Scotians, or the extreme end of the country, as a substitute for tariff protection that could not easily be applied. Viewed in that light, in my judgment the subvention is not only a commitment to sustain a certain level of production in the coal industry, but also represents a commitment to sustain a certain level of employment in the industries in the extremities of the country. At present, however, especially having regard to the importing of residual oil, the subvention is becoming less adequate as an instrument for maintaining this industry.
At the present time the future of the coal industry in Nova Scotia is not very bright. It is asserted that by 1957 the Canadian National Railways will be using no Nova Scotia coal, and as has been pointed out by other hon. members there are sources of competition. I think Nova Scotians generally will be compelled to fight vigorously for the survival of this industry. If the economy of Nova Scotia were developing on other fronts, if other industrial opportunities were opening up, then we could face the prospect of a decline in the coal industry because what we lost in coal would be made up in development elsewhere. This, of course, is not true of the present state of the Nova Scotia economy. It is quite all right to suggest in general that workers move from a declining industry into an expanding industry. Indeed, such a transfer is sometimes argued, and properly so, as eventually contributing more to productivity and human welfare.
6754	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
However, the coal industry is the basis of the industrial economy of the whole province, and a transfer could only occur from Nova Scotia to other parts of Canada. Such a solution to the problem of the Nova Scotia coal industry fails to take into account the real social and political problems that are involved. I used the word "political" in the widest possible sense. I think it should be pointed out also that if we agree that the economy of all Nova Scotia is dependent upon the coal industry, the economy of the eastern section of Nova Scotia is even more vitally dependent upon this industry. At the time we are facing this crisis in the coal industry in eastern Nova Scotia we are faced with adversity in three communities that are now in a very precarious position as a result of the changes brought about by the construction of the Canso causeway, in which project both federal and provincial governments have interests and commitments.
I would think, sir, the wise course for both the federal and provincial governments would be to start consideration of the alternatives that could be provided to build up the economy of Nova Scotia. I believe the problems confronting the eastern end of the province arising from the coal industry and the Canso project should be a proper area for the joint resources planning of the federal and provincial governments.
A very interesting project, in so far as the island of Cape Breton was concerned, was completed some months ago with the announcement of the results of the joint inventory of the forest resources of Nova Scotia. This inventory was initiated by this government and the resources, in so far as the island of Cape Breton is concerned, are very promising. It has now been confirmed that there exist in this part of Nova Scotia ample sources of supply for the requirements of a rather large pulp and paper plant.
At the same time it is also becoming evident that there are very interesting mineral indications in the Cape Breton Highlands national park. At the moment this area of the province is closed to development, because its terrain is used for recreational purposes.
Last summer I understand the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys had two survey parties within the confines of the park in an effort to verify these interesting mineral indications. I do not know what the results of these surveys have been or will be, but I think they will serve to confirm what has already been determined by private prospectors; that there are, in that area of Cape Breton, mineral deposits of commercial proportions. Because of these factors we are not completely at a loss with respect to


alternative sources or alternative methods of economic development in the eastern area of Nova Scotia. But because the federal government is committed, through its various policies, to the coal industry; and because the provincial government is committed to the same industry because of its control over natural resources, it seems to me this would be a very suitable time for some co-ordinated effort to be made by the federal and provincial governments to explore further the prospects of forest and mineral development in this part of Nova Scotia.
I think if we allow ourselves to be deluded into believing that the problems of the coal industry will be solved within a short time, we are not facing the facts as they have been outlined by other speakers this afternoon. And may I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that both the federal and provincial governments make a real start soon at what X would call joint regional or area economic development, by trying to co-ordinate efforts to develop the forest wealth of eastern Nova Scotia and the mineral deposits to be found within the confines of Cape Breton Highlands national park.


Mr. Lusby:: Mr. Chairman, in opening my remarks I should like first to compliment the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys upon the statement he gave this afternoon at the beginning of this discussion. I do not compliment him because he painted a cheerful picture, although on the other hand I should like to say that the hon. gentleman off to my left somewhere, who apparently considered the minister's statement as a sort of funeral oration, very considerably mistook its import. But I do think the minister gave us a plain, unvarnished and undistorted statement of the conditions facing the Canadian coal industry today.
Mr. Chairman, there is one thing we cannot afford, and that is to adopt a spirit of false complacency with regard to this matter. I say that with some conviction, because recently I have been studying the report of the dominion coal board for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1955, with, so far as I was concerned, particular reference to the present state and the future prospects of the Nova Scotia coal industry. These annual reports, I may say, always command the close attention of all those hon. members who, like myself, represent constituencies in which the mining of coal is a very important element of industrial activity, for the role of this federal agency in respect of the Canadian coal industry is a weighty one and is likely to become more so.
Although this latest report is not entirely without encouraging features, and although

during the year the Nova Scotia coal mining industry as a whole actually increased production over the previous year, yet I do not see anything in that report which can in any way encourage a spirit of easy optimism in my part of the country. And even if the report were more cheering than it actually is, certainly we in Nova Scotia would have very great difficulty in persuading ourselves into any such spirit of optimism. Events in our province during past months and the past year-the closing of some mines; slack times in other mines, the whole climaxed by the closing of No. 1-B colliery at Glace Bay, Cape Breton-all these are things which confirm only too clearly that our Nova Scotia coal industry is passing through a period of uncertainty and even of crisis. Therefore I think it fitting at this time once again to draw to the attention of the house the importance of the Nova Scotia coal mining industry to the whole economy of the province.
I realize that in all I am saying, possibly to a large extent in everything I shall say, I shall be repeating what other speakers before me have said both this afternoon and this evening. Nevertheless I think these are matters which bear repetition. They should be driven home with the utmost emphasis.
For some years we have seen the coal situation progressively deteriorating. It has been forecast repeatedly that by the middle sixties, about ten years from now, increased population and industrial activity throughout Canada will again, in spite of the competition from other fuels, arrest this decline in the coal industry and raise the demand for coal to a level sufficient to ensure the continuing operation of our mines on at least their present scale.
We may still hope that prophecy will prove ultimately correct. Nor, I think, with all deference to atomic power or any other developments, is there as yet any real indication that in the foreseeable future coal will cease to be a major source of energy in this country. But as we read the latest reports of the dominion coal board, to which I have just referred, we in Nova Scotia find the outlook for the immediate future summed up in one ominous sentence: "The markets for Nova Scotia coal are in a dangerous condition".
Therefore it behooves us to remember that ten years can be a long time in the history of an industry; and if we simply wait for a general expansion of Canadian population and industrial activity over a decade-inevitable though I believe such expansion to be-to rectify the coal situation, coal mining in the meantime may diminish to an extent such as to render it impossible to revive to a point
25. 1955	G755
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys even approaching its present level. Unfortunately collieries, like coffin lids, tend to close with a very considerable degree of finality.
Let me therefore emphasize again that to Nova Scotia the loss or the extensive curtailment of our coal industry must constitute a staggering blow to our entire economy. Often enough-too often-in the past we have lost individual enterprises, perhaps a factory here or a factory there, and in time made good the loss, at whatever cost of temporary dislocation and hardship. But there is no form of industrial or other economic activity at present foreseeable in Nova Scotia with which we can hope in any real, adequate measure to replace a vanished or drastically curtailed coal industry.
Carried to its fullest extent, such a catastrophe would affect directly perhaps a fifth of our population, and certainly the ramifications would extend in some degree to nearly every segment of the remainder. First and foremost' to be considered, of course, is the miner thrown out of work, as were several hundred of them when No. 1-B colliery at Glace Bay was closed. This of course includes the miner and his dependents. But the consequences would reach infinitely farther, and include the merchant whose customers can no longer buy, the farmer whose market for his produce shrinks, the lumberman whose sale of pitprops becomes a thing of the past. Yes, Mr. Chairman, so far would the consequences reach that it is hardly an exaggeration to say that the loss or further serious curtailment of our Nova Scotia coal industry would be felt in one way or another by every resident of the province. I have said that our primary concern must be for the miner himself and his dependents. I think that is the view of every member in the house. To any man the loss of his means of livelihood is a disaster, and that is particularly so when it means that no longer can he follow the occupation in which perhaps most of his productive years have been spent.
Coal mining is, I know, beset by the same difficulties in western Canada as it is in the east, and I certainly do not wish to be accused of minimizing the seriousness of the situation anywhere. But I think it is not unfair to say that in the west the shock of the decline of the industry has at least been cushioned by the ability to absorb many of its displaced workers into an otherwise soaring economy; perhaps, ironically enough, into those very oil and natural gas developments which have played so striking a part in the enfeeblement of the coal industry.
On the Atlantic seaboard the opportunities for the displaced coal miner to shift to other

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys local forms of employment exist in no comparable degree. Although we are not without promising prospects of future expansion in several of our basic economic pursuits such as fishing, lumbering and the mining of base metals, to name a few, there can be no sure or immediate hope that any large numbers of personnel displaced from the collieries can be readily absorbed into other phases of the industrial life of the areas concerned.
What, then, is the alternative? Is it to be migration to other, distant regions of Canada? If that is to be the remedy, it is one that must carry with it dire consequences; the depopulation of long-settled communities, the abandonment of established homes, the breaking of family and other social ties, hardship and distress to individuals, and certainly an appalling economic loss to the province of Nova Scotia.
Much, it is true, might be done for many individuals under such circumstances by the inauguration of an extensive program of retraining to refit them for other trades and callings; and certainly I cannot urge too strongly the importance of providing all facilities necessary for the purpose of carrying on such a program to whatever extent may from time to time be required. If, indeed, by such retraining all or most of the displaced coal miners could be taken again into the industrial fabric in the areas where they have lived, or even in other parts of Nova Scotia, we in that province could face with considerably more equanimity the prospect of a further decline in employment in our collieries. But, as I have said, the possibility of any such extensive absorption is certainly not promising. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, no program of retraining or rehabilitation, thought it would certainly prove of inestimable value in many individual cases, could be considered as more than a secondary remedy, one which necessarily would fall far short of providing a complete answer to the whole situation.
That complete answer, that primary remedy, if I may call it that, can be found only through the united efforts and co-operation of all those concerned-management and labour, whose responsibility it is to reach and maintain the utmost possible peak of efficiency in production, the provincial government, this government-through their united efforts and co-operation, to continue the Nova Scotia coal industry on at least an approximation of its present level through the years immediately ahead, until such time as the inevitable expansion of Canadian population and industrial activity, aided, we hope, by such developments as the coal-fired

gas turbine engine and the successful economic adaptation of coal to uses other than as fuel, may place the industry again in a sound condition.
Although, as I have suggested, management and labour have a fundamental role in the attainment and maintenance of the maximum possible degree of efficiency in production-and that is certainly an essential, as was pointed out just a few minutes ago-and although management has the primary responsibility to find sales outlets, yet it is, of course, self-evident that in the present state of the industry a considerable degree of governmental assistance is also a requisite. In this chamber we are chiefly concerned with the nature and extent of the assistance furnished by the federal government.
I do not wish at this time to dwell upon all the various ways in which the government renders assistance to the Nova Scotia coal industry, but I should like to make some very short comments upon that form which normally, perhaps, one thinks of first, namely, subventions. The importance of that assistance is shown by the fact that in the last fiscal year over $8,500,000 were expended in subventions to aid the movement of Nova Scotia coal to markets, an increase of more than $1,500,000 over the previous fiscal year. I think the minister gave the exact figure. This government is also to be highly commended upon its recent decision to extend this form of assistance, on an experimental basis, it is true, to overseas shipments in the hope of thereby enabling Nova Scotia coal to find new outlets in Britain and Germany.
I note that in its latest report the dominion coal board refers to high subventions as an unhealthy factor in the coal situation. True as that statement is from many points of view-and certainly it would be infinitely preferable to have no need for such assistance -I should like to emphasize that the loss or further drastic decline of the Nova Scotia coal industry would inevitably precipitate a far more unhealthy condition. Certainly I think the corpse of a dead coal industry would poison the entire lifestream of our province.
In passing, I should like to say that the government is also to be commended upon the 10 per cent preference in cost which it has afforded to Canadian coal as against other coal for use in coal-burning government installations. The minister mentioned that item this afternoon.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I have been dwelling intentionally, yet I do not think unduly, upon the dark aspects of the situation. I am glad to note from the report of the dominion coal

board and from other quarters that, apart altogether from long-term possibilities, there are a number of encouraging factors also. The upswing of general industrial activity even now materializing under the beneficent trade and fiscal policies of this government, the stiffened fight to retain the domestic market for coal, the prospects of greater use of coal in the maritimes for the generation of electricity by steam, as outlined in the Christie report, the news which indicates that the perfection of the coal-fired gas turbine locomotive-and with it the regaining of lost outlets for coal-may be far nearer than we had thought; all such matters brighten somewhat a generally sombre picture.
I am not unmindful of the fact that the minister mentioned the other day, and repeated today, that the turbine is still in the experimental stage; but still the news indicates the possibility of the imminent perfection of the coal-fired gas turbine locomotive. But, as I said before, it will require the united efforts of all concerned, the intelligent combination and exploitation to the full of every favourable factor, to preserve the Nova Scotia coal industry from further decay. It is my hope that this government will continue to take a leading part in endeavouring to bring about an efficient correlation of all those efforts into a comprehensive plan, including, I may add, the study of every feasible means of formulating a workable energy policy for the country, which the dominion coal board calls a necessity for any long-term solution of coal problems.
With reference to the whole subject, and the matter of continued government assistance to the coal industry, I should like, Mr. Chairman, to close by quoting one more statement from the latest report of the board:
It is to be remembered that the Canadian coal industry is basic and one upon which our economy is still largely dependent.
Implicit in such a statement, Mr. Chairman, is the truth that the preservation of the Canadian coal industry is a matter not merely of local or provincial, but of national, concern.


George Prudham: I wish to thank hon. members who have spoken, for their constructive speeches. I agree with most hon. members who have spoken that the coal industry is in a precarious position. It is difficult to be optimistic about the future of the industry. But the very fact that members on all sides of the house, the unions, the companies concerned, the provincial governments and the federal government are really facing the hard, cold facts of the situation is a hopeful sign.
The Leader of the Opposition referred to [DOT] the necessity of developing new industry and
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys the discovery of other minerals. The Department of Mines and Technical Surveys has made considerable efforts during the last couple of years to promote the search for and discovery and development of other types of minerals in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and with some success. Our airborne magnetometer survey in New Brunswick coincided with and in large measure contributed to the discovery of base metals there.
As one hon. member stated, last year we had helicopter survey parties in Cape Breton national park. It is true that under the National Parks Act no exploration is permitted within the park, but we thought it worth while to make a reconnaissance survey of the area. Preliminary reports were not too encouraging, but I believe the showing of mineralization in the area is such that the provincial government should consider requesting that some of that park area be withdrawn and revert to the province in order to discover if there is any worth-while mineral wealth in the area.
I have not consulted with my colleague the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, and perhaps he will not agree, but I do not think the large area in the centre of Cape Breton national park is especially suited for recreational purposes. While it may be suitable for the preservation of game, I believe the beauty spots could be maintained while at least a good look was taken at the possibilities of mineral development.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South referred to the problems of the industry with special reference to the loss of markets to United States coal. He stated that the Canadian Import Company was a subsidiary of the Dominion Coal Company, and implied that they were more interested in importing coal than in selling Nova Scotia coal. The officials of the dominion coal board tell me they have made a point of inquiring if the Canadian Import Company is a subsidiary of the Dominion Coal Company, and they say it is not. I do not know who owns the company, and we do not know how much coal they bring into Canada.
I have the figures here for the total imports into the province of Quebec last year from the United States. These are approximate figures which the dominion coal board obtained from customs clearances at the various ports. Under the first classification of special coals we find that coke and gas coal importations amounted to 543,000 tons. They tell me that Nova Scotia possibly could supply one-third of that amount. Low volatile coal under the trade name of Pocahontas: industrial, 30,000 tons and domestic, 23,000 tons. Nova Scotia could supply this type ot
6758	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys coal. High volatile stoker coals, mostly low ash: industrial, 139,000 tons and domestic,
198.000	tons. They say Nova Scotia could possibly supply a small portion of this. High volatile, high fusion ash, slack and nut slack,
307.000	tons. The Canadian industry cannot supply this.
Then the second classification covers high volatile screened coal, 187,000 tons and high volatile slack and stoker, 63,000 tons. The Nova Scotia industry probably could supply this if the price were right and they went after the business. Then there is railway coal, which is large sized coal which Nova Scotia cannot supply at the present time, totalling 1,103,000 tons. Possibly some of this would be beyond the present subvention rate, but I am not sure. This approximates a total consumption of imported coal in the province of Quebec of about 2,593,000 tons. Total imports were 2,075,000 tons, and they tell me the balance was probably accounted for by using stockpiles.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South has stated that during the war the Canadian Import Company brought in coal from the United States on the understanding that after the war the market would revert to the Nova Scotia industry. I would point out to him that since 1939 the cost of Nova Scotia coal has increased by at least $6 per ton, which is a major factor in curtailing sales in Ontario.
I believe he made the statement that it would be unrealistic to say that the Nova Scotia industry could meet competition by decreasing costs. I do not think they can fully meet competition, but they can go quite a long way toward meeting it. I believe that if the industry is going to survive it will have to lower costs still further. Right now in some instances they are scarcely able to meet the competition of imported coal at the pithead.
I believe a great deal can be done to reduce the cost of production although I cannot put my finger on just where the trouble is. I sometimes think the force of circumstances will be more effective in bringing about improvement in production than good intentions have been in the past. The industry is certainly facing a battle for survival, and I believe that now more than ever before everyone realizes that they have a responsibility.
The hon. member for Inverness-Richmond made some very good suggestions and I do hope that the industry will be able to implement some of them. I believe that in the field of human relations, employer-employee relations if you will, there is room for improvement. I have been down through the mines in Nova Scotia; I have been in the wash houses when the men came off shift, and
[Mr. Prudham.l

I have been underground, and I must say that you cannot find a more honest and conscientious group of workmen anywhere. I have been associated with management, and I know that some of these men are actually working themselves into their graves. I can think of one or two who will have to slow up if they are going to be much use to the industry for much longer. I believe that all the way through these people are sincere; nevertheless there is room for closer co-operation, and I think we would all be surprised at the result if some of the suggestions made here this evening were carried out.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South mentioned the need for an energy committee in Canada. We have that now within the government. It was started about a year ago. They have had several meetings. The committee consists of representatives of the various departments concerned with energy development or the use of energy in various forms: national defence, the defence research board, the Department of Transport, the Department of Trade and Commerce, the Department of Finance, the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys and the Department of Labour. All have key men on that so-called energy committee.
True, we have not the powers my hon. friend thinks would probably be necessary to direct this development of energy in Canada, but he himself said earlier in his speech that we must not forget that the responsibility for the development of resources rests primarily with the provinces. In turn the provinces let out the development of those resources to companies and individuals. Unless this parliament is prepared to give tremendous powers to some minister or some board. I do not think we could direct the industry. We can do it in an educational way. We can gather the information and present it to the people concerned and try to direct it in that way, but we cannot push people around. I forgot to say the dominion coal board is represented on that committee. The chairman of the coal board is the chairman of the committee.
The hon. member for Lethbridge still has his eye on the Ontario market for domestic coal from his area. I do not propose to go into that in detail. One thing to remember is that our western domestic coal will not store well. It has to be delivered when the customer wants it, and there is sometimes difficulty in bringing about that arrangement.
The hon. member for Burin-Burgeo referred to the high cost of coal in Newfoundland. I do not know where the responsibility lies. He suggests that the Dominion Coal Company is largely responsible, but I have

the idea that probably the people in Newfoundland handle the distribution of their coal and have dealers there. I have been told by people who claim to know the situation that there is quite a bit of difficulty in the various ports in having that coal handled economically. Various interests and unions are concerned. Someone told me while I was in Nova Scotia last week that in some ports the port officials or the union, I do not know which, insist that the coal be unloaded in very small buckets in the way it was done perhaps 50 years ago. If modern equipment were installed the cost could be greatly reduced.
His suggestions were good, and I hope everyone concerned has a very close look at the Newfoundland situation. We are not extending subvention assistance this year to coal moving to Newfoundland because we do not think it is necessary. We think that market can be held by the Nova Scotia coal industry without assistance. If it cannot there is something wrong, because it is their natural market.
The hon. member who has just spoken made some very constructive suggestions. I shall not take the time of the house now to make any further comments, except in reference to one thing the hon. member for Cape Breton South mentioned. He paid a compliment to the present officials of the coal board and to the minister for the way the problem is being handled at the present time. I wish to thank him for those compliments, but I did not like his reference to officials and ministers who have gone before. I think that was hardly fair. Although I have been associated with this industry for only a few years, I know that many people have conscientiously struggled with this problem before. I have here an extract from a book that was written by Dr. Charles Camsell, a former deputy minister of mines. He was also chairman of the dominion fuel board at one time. It reads:
The dominion fuel board, another of my responsibilities from its creation, was always a headache. It was a very necessary board, because of the unfortunate location of our coal fields relative to the great consuming centres of the country and the concentration of our population in the coal-less areas. The difficulty of overcoming the handicap of geography is illustrated more acutely in our fuel problem than in any other field of domestic economic relations. The problem of coal still remains, and indeed seems to become more acute as time goes on. There is not a great deal that can be done about it, because geography refuses to be changed.
Those are the words of a man who struggled with this problem years ago.


Clarence Gillis: He did not struggle very much. He just blamed it on geography.
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys


George Prudham: Anyway, the subvention policy has been followed by this government and other governments for almost 30 years. One of the officials here this evening mentioned that when United States coal was being sold for 90 cents at the lake ports, a subvention was provided to make Nova Scotia coal competitive with that 90 cent coal at that time.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Chairman, I just want to assure the minister that I was not casting any reflections on past administrators. I said it was the first time since I had been in the house that the problem was really taken hold of and the minister was making an attempt to at least understand it. For the last 16 years, all during the war period and until a few years ago, we did not have to sell coal. It was a problem of finding coal. But in the last four or five years we have been getting back into a peacetime economy where we have to sell coal, and we are getting into difficulty.
I should like to ask the minister a few questions while I am on my feet. First I want to straighten the record as between myself and the hon. member for Inverness-Richmond. When the hon. member for Inverness-Richmond was making his analysis of the closing of No. 1-B colliery, he stated that when the coal conference took place in Halifax the cost factor was the one that was stressed in regard to that colliery, but even if that cost factor had not been there at all there still would have been no market for the coal produced in that colliery. That was in contradiction to what the minister said in his statement, and I agree with the minister. The minister stated that there was a market in the Canadian National Railways for the product of that mine if they could give them the quality of coal they required. I just wanted to straighten out that particular point, because it is an important one.
The second question I should like to ask the minister is this. He stated that the board was not in a position to give us the names of the operators of the Dominion Import Company or, to a large extent, the amount of coal they imported. That is rather strange, because I understand the federal government has to issue a permit to that company to import coal from the United States. That permit naturally would have to set out the personnel of the company. Does the minister still insist he does not know the names of the people who form that company, and whether it is a subsidiary of the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation?


George Prudham: Investigation by the coal board establishes, I believe, that it is not a subsidiary of the Dominion Coal Company,
6760	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys although there might be one man who is on both boards. To the best of the knowledge of the coal board no permit is necessary for the importation of coal. We have records of all movements of coal where a subvention is involved, but so far as other movements are concerned we do not get the details of the operations of various companies. We have the total through examining the customs clearances.


Clarence Gillis: It is a rather strange set-up that anybody can start an importing company on his own and just notify the government board that he is entitled to certain drawbacks, particularly when he gets a drawback of 49 cents out of a duty of 50 cents on metallurgical coal.


George Prudham: No.


Clarence Gillis: Is that not what the minister said, that it is not necessary for anyone to get a permit in order to go into the business of importing coal?


George Prudham: They do not get any assistance in any form from this government.


Clarence Gillis: Does the Dominion Import Company in Montreal get any assistance?


George Prudham: None whatever.


Clarence Gillis: What I have in my mind, Mr. Chairman, is that two years ago I saw a photostatic copy of an advertisement of the Dominion Coal Company advertising the sale of Kentucky coal in the province of Ontario. That advertisement was signed by the Dominion Coal Company. Therefore, it is my assumption that if there is not a chartered import company, the Dominion Coal Company as such must be in the import business themselves. The statement I made on the subject which the minister attributed to me was actually read from the report of the royal commission under Mr. Justice W. F. Carroll in 1946, setting out the position that the Dominion Coal Company had imported approximately 2 million tons of coal and marketed it in the province of Ontario, which was the normal market under subventions for Nova Scotia coal previous to the war.
I want to get that matter straightened out, because I have no doubt in my own mind that this particular organization imported coal in 1944 and marketed it in central Canada, and that the same thing is still being carried on whether they are doing it by the back door or by the front door.


George Prudham: We do not know of any Dominion Import Company. There is a Canadian Import Company. I believe that is the one the hon. member has in mind.


Clarence Gillis: That is correct.


George Prudham: As I understand it, until about the end of last year this is the way the Dominion Coal Company operated. They have a salesman who goes out in November and starts to take orders for next year. He sells all the coal he can, and in recent years he has sometimes sold more coal than the Dominion Coal Company was able to produce. In order to hold the business he had to supply coal to satisfy the sales he had made. I am told by officials of the Dominion Coal Company, and I have to take their word for it, that at no time has any imported coal replaced one pound of Nova Scotia production. I believe them when they say that. I believe the union when they tell me sincerely what they have to say. I have no reason to disbelieve what the company says, and I think that is a fact.


Clarence Gillis: Well, I do not believe it. We had a market for about 2 million tons of coal in the province of Ontario in 1939 and 1940, and I think that is the normal market for Nova Scotia coal under the present subvention arrangement. I know the fight that was put up to build up the subventions. It was started, mind you, by Hon. Gordon Harrington under a Conservative government in Nova Scotia. There was a struggle to build up the subventions to a point where we could get at least 2 million tons of coal into that market. We succeeded in doing that. I had no objection to the company trying to hold their customers in that area during the war when our coal was diverted to other uses.
I talked to the general manager of the Dominion Coal Company in 1940 for a whole evening on this particular subject. He told me what they were doing, and I reminded him not to forget that we did the same thing from 1914 to 1918 and lost the Montreal market. I pointed out the difficulties and struggles we had to regain that market, and told him not to forget that if they were relinquishing the Ontario market they should only do so under some agreement that the market would be returned to Nova Scotia when the war was over. That man passed away later, and I have no doubt that if he had been alive we would not be arguing about this matter today. I believe these people intended that that was what should be done.
We are not going to settle the matter tonight, but I still maintain that there is a market for Nova Scotia coal in the Canadian National Railways if the Dominion Coal

Company can supply the grade of coal required. I say that regardless of the question of cost, and the improvement of the product is their job.
I should like to ask the minister another question. Let us settle this business of the coal-fired turbine engine. That has been tossed around for two years now as something that was going to solve all the problems. The pathetic part of that kind of propaganda is that when you have a thousand people whose means of livelihood depends on that industry and something like that comes out in the headlines in the newspapers, they get the idea that there is some hope. But they get a shock a year later when nothing happens.
I should like the minister to put his official opinion on the record, and he knows the situation, with respect to whether he thinks that in the foreseeable future the coal-fired turbine may be an instrument that can be used on the railroads of Canada and which will restore the markets for coal in the railways. How long does the minister think it is going to be before that takes place? Would he also clarify the point whether the present engine, if and when it is perfected, can be substituted in diesel units now in operation? If a locomotive has a diesel engine, can that engine be exchanged for a turbine engine if and when the turbine is perfected?
I ask that question because I have an editorial in my hand taken from the Halifax Chronicle-Herald, a very responsible newspaper. If you read the editorial it would lead you to believe that all that stands between the development of the coal-fired turbine engine and the restoration of the market for coal on the national railways is $1 million, and that if somebody can find $1 million they can put it on the rails. I think it is pretty nearly time some sanity was brought into the thinking on this subject, and I should like to have an official statement from the people who know.


George Prudham: The hon. member has given me a big order. The coal-fired turbine is definitely an experiment. I know that for several years the men of our fuels division, Professor Mordell of McGill University, Mr. Forsyth of the Dominion Coal Company and others have thought it shows a great deal of promise. We must not forget that it took 50 years to develop the diesel engine to its present state of perfection. We do not have an engine yet. We just have an experimental unit that shows promise. It was put into operation some months ago, and it ran very well. However, certain weaknesses showed up and they thought it was better to tear the machine down to correct those defects before the tests had been carried through to 50433-427
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys completion and in order that more accurate data could be supplied to a locomotive company or some other private industry that might be interested in the development of a prototype engine.
I am not going to stick my neck out and say how soon it will become a practical engine. I do not know whether it will interchange with diesels, but I believe that is what they have in mind, that it would fit a conventional chassis. The Nova Scotia government had their men keep a very close eye on it, and they even intimated that at the right time they might consider spending some money on this development. So far as this department is concerned, we are presently only going to carry it through the experimental stage. The actual, practical application of the machine will have to be considered at another time. At the moment we are doing everything we can to carry it through this period to see if it really has merit and to see what, if any, value it will have from the standpoint of saving fuel or what value it will be to the coal industry.


Clarence Gillis: While we are on the subject, I have a clipping in my hand here from one of the local newspapers. It was published within the last couple of days and this is the headline: "Claim coal dust runs locomotive." This could be a good way of getting rid of a lot of the dust we have in Nova Scotia. The dateline is Berlin:
An East German state-owned factory at Potsdam has completed the first locomotive to be driven with coal dust, the communist East German news agency ADN reported Sunday. The agency said the locomotive could reach a speed of about 60 miles an hour while pulling 600 tons weight, and do a 300-mile journey on 18-5 tons of coal dust.
Well now, is the coal board familiar with any such development? You know, we are getting a high percentage of slack and the difficulty is in selling our slack. I would be interested in finding out just what kind of engine they are operating in that particular locomotive; or is it just propaganda?


George Prudham: We sent one of our scientists from the fuels division to Europe last year to observe any work that was being done on coal beneficiation or the development of engines, etc. He did not tell me about that one. We will have to look into it.


Clarence Gillis: There is another matter I should like to get straightened out, and the Minister of Public Works is connected with this one. During the consideration of public works estimates he was questioned by an hon. member as to why, in a new public building in Woodstock, New Brunswick, the coal board had recommended against the use of coal as a fuel. I was rather surprised to hear that
6762	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys the coal board would do that kind of thing. The Minister of Public Works was going to get me the answer, because I said there must be some pretty broad considerations if the coal board considered making that kind of recommendation to the minister. Before the minister could get me the answer his estimates were completed, and I think perhaps this would be a good time to ask the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys to tell us if that is correct. I believe there would have to be consultation with public works in regard to the fuel needs in regard to the building, and why would they recommend oil as against coal?


Robert Henry Winters: Before my colleague answers that, I think I should correct a wrong impression. It was not the fuel board that recommended we should use oil instead of coal. We discussed this with the coal board and on the information that developed we thought oil should be used. It is the responsibility of our officials.


Clarence Gillis: On the recommendation of the coal board.


Robert Henry Winters: No, not upon the recommendation but on the strength of the facts that developed from the study by the board.


Clarence Gillis: I was rather startled when I heard the Minister of Public Works say that on the recommendation of the coal board-it is in Hansard-this was done. The minister would have to take responsibility for the type of equipment installed, but I got the impression from the minister that, since the building was designed for oil, in consultation with the coal board and upon the recommendation of the coal board it was decided that the design of the building should not be changed for heating purposes, and that oil should be used. In effect it was a recommendation against the use of coal in a building in the maritime provinces.


George Prudham: I think I can throw a little more light on that. For a number of years there has been an interdepartmental committee which reviewed fuel problems for the Department of National Defence. This committee made a careful assessment of national defence installations and advised the national defence department of their findings in accordance with the government's fuel policy. The final decision, of course, was left with the Department of National Defence. On March 8, 1955, there was a cabinet directive that stated that before fuel-burning equipment in any government building or building under government control which consumed 500 tons of coal per year or more was changed from coal to other fuel, the department concerned would consult with


the dominion coal board or the interdepartmental fuel committee on the cost of the various fuels and other relative factors.
This committee started to function almost immediately after the cabinet directive, and the question of the fuel in the Woodstock building was one of the first items that came before it. It came before the committee on May 20. I understand that prior to that meeting officers of the Department of Public Works had carried out a study of the relative costs of fuel for that building on their own, and according to their calculations there was quite a large saving by installing oil-burning equipment. Before the new committee set up under the cabinet directive began to function, that oil-burning equipment had already been installed. Although they were able to show that there possibly was not as large a saving by burning oil, it was considered that since the equipment was already installed it should be left there.


Robert Henry Winters: I just want to make sure there is no onus on the coal board for that decision. The statement I made appears in Hansard at page 6392, July 19, 1955, and reads as follows:
It is an oil heating system. We considered coal, and took the problem to the coal board to obtain their views. We came to the conclusion that the differential was such that we should go along with the oil installation.


Clarence Gillis: The minister was reading from the wrong page. The question I asked him is at page 6395, and reads as follows:
I should like the minister to clarify something he said a few minutes ago in his exchange with the hon. member for Victoria-Carleton when referring to the new public building at Woodstock. Did I understand the minister to say that this building was being heated by oil on the advice of the dominion coal board?
The minister's answer was as follows:
No. Perhaps I did give a wrong impression. It is the policy of the government to check the heating systems of all public buildings with the coal board and unless the economics of the situation are pretty compelling we lean towards the use of coal.
That is a policy which any maritimer would support at this stage. In this instance the building was designed to be heated by oil and after the system was installed the matter was brought to the attention of the officials and we asked the coal board to study the problem to decide whether or not a change should be made. After a study was made of all aspects of the problem a conclusion was reached that a change should not be made from oil to coal.
That is exactly what the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys has said. Then I said:
Of course the minister's department did what I think should have been done, but we might as well clear up what were the economics of the situation. What were the reasons why the coal board, which is set up and designed to secure coal markets and that kind of thing, made a decision like that?

Then the Minister of Public Works said he would get the information. The Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys clarified the situation to this extent, that while there was interdepartmental consultation the committee had changed, and the Minister of Public Works installed oil-burning equipment. Naturally when the coal board was referred to again they said, "To tear it all out and put in other equipment would create some further compelling economic factors." But I think there was something wrong with the view taken by the Minister of Public Works in the beginning. With this coal controversy, and the shortage of markets, they designed a building to burn oil in the maritime provinces, and within 60 miles of Minto coal. I think the minister's department should come in for some castigation in that instance.


Robert Henry Winters: The information is now en route to the hon. member. He will be able to judge for himself.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, I have no extended remarks, but there are two or three questions I should like to ask before the item carries. I should like to know whether the minister has readily available any figures on the current annual production rate of coal on Vancouver island, and whether in that connection he has any contrasting figures from five or ten years ago.


George Prudham: We have figures for British Columbia as a whole, but not the island alone.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I should have liked that information. It has been suggested to me that the current annual production rate is running at something like 900 tons a month, as contrasted with 9,000 tons a month not many years ago. Perhaps those figures are close enough for the purpose I have in mind.
As the minister probably knows, that reduction in annual production is not because there is not more coal on Vancouver island. My understanding is that there are still substantial reserves of it. A year or two ago it was suggested to me by someone in the power production field, someone whom I considered v/ell qualified to speak, that it might not be too long until on Vancouver island, having reached the limit of our available hydro sources, once again we might be turning to the use of coal for power purposes.
For certain reasons I find myself interested in some of the references made to the possibility of the use of coal for power in the mari-times, because some day we may be able to take advantage of that experience on Vancouver island.
In that same connection I recall that during the meeting of the standing committee on external affairs earlier this year, when we 50433-427J
25, 1955	6763
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys had as a witness General A. G. L. McNaughton, chairman of the international joint commission, he made some reference to power development by steam. His reference is found at page 101 of the proceedings of the committee. The general, of course, was referring to the value of downstream benefits of water released under regulated flow. But he does state here with reference to the lower Columbia basin that-
-the newest and latest in pressure steam plants being built in the basin, the best one on tide water, running at base load, will cost 51 mills per kilowatt hour at the bus bars.
He goes on to say that some in a little less favourable position are producing power at about 6 mills. I wonder if the minister can give us any idea whether steam power is being produced in Nova Scotia or other areas of the maritime provinces today at any figure that compares favourably with or approaches the ones I have mentioned. If not, what steps are being taken by the coal board, or any other federal agencies, to encourage the production of power at those rates in the maritime areas?


George Prudham: It is perhaps beyond the terms of reference of the coal board to make studies of comparative costs of power production. But in order to assist the industry in Nova Scotia a year ago we engaged the services of Dr. Christie to make a very thorough and comprehensive study of power development in the maritimes area. His reports were turned over to the provincial governments, in the hope that they would be assisted in their efforts to produce cheaper power from coal. Copies of those reports are available to hon. members who wish to have them.
We are assisting in the experimental development of the coal-fired turbine, which possibly can be adaptable to power production. I did not hear the hydro costs the hon. member mentioned, but it would not mean much anyway. I do not think coal-fired power plants can compete with hydro in Canada.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: 
George Prudham: In order to produce cheap power you must have cheap coal. That is something they do not have on Vancouver island or in Nova Scotia. If I remember correctly the power plant in the city of Edmonton, which formerly burned coal, now burns gas and produces electricity at somewhere around 5 mills. I think they paid about $3 a ton for the coal. When you compare that with the cost of coal in Nova Scotia or on Vancouver island, of somewhere around $9 a ton-it approximates that, anyway-you are a long way from producing cheap power with that high-cost coal.


Clarence Gillis: I went over the Christie report carefully. A year ago I had a discussion on this subject with the general manager of the steel company at Sydney, Mr. Anson. The steel company operates a large thermo-power plant from the town of Glace Bay, which pretty well supplies the needs of the industrial areas of the island. They are extending the whole line up toward the strait of Canso. You can burn splint or anything else that will burn in one of those thermo-power plants. Mr. Anson told me that at that large plant in Glace Bay, which is close to the mining communities, they were putting power on the site far cheaper than any hydroelectric power company in Canada could do it. If we were successful in attracting any industry into that area to ease the unemployment problem, they could and would sell power to any industry that might come in there cheaper than they could buy it anywhere else in this country.


George Prudham: Good.


Clarence Gillis: I had that from the general manager of the steel company. They are producing that power from coal that is produced in the area, which the minister considers very high-cost coal. Mind you, you can use a lot of the waste by pulverizing it, and that sort of thing. There is no shortage
LMr. Barnett.]
of power in that particular area. The impression has gone abroad that there may be, but there is not; and it is cheap power. It is available. I wanted to say that because it is only a short time ago since I talked to that man about it.


Bert Raymond Leboe: I understood the Calgary Power and Light company-I believe that is the name-in Calgary were going to put a thermoelectric plant at Wabamun. I think by burning coal they were able to compete with their own hydro power from the river at Calgary.


George Prudham: Mr. Chairman, they are going to burn gas, I understand, for the first 10 years, but that plant will be sitting right on a coal bed. The cost of the coal is the cost of stripping it, $1.50, $2, or somewhere around that figure. Maybe it will go to $3 a ton, but it is very cheap coal. I believe they will be able to produce cheap power under those circumstances. Another power plant is being built in Alberta at Forestburg, where strip coal is very cheap. I have heard of that coal having been sold in trainload lots to get rid of the surplus at about 60 cents a ton. Although I do not think they could survive at that price, they do sell it as low as that.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: If I noted correctly one of the statements the minister made earlier today, he said that at the present time gas is a cheaper source of synthetics than coal. In view of that statement can the minister tell us what research projects the government has initiated to discover how cheaper synthetics can be produced from coal at the present time?


George Prudham: Some years ago the department of mines started on a co-operative project with the United States bureau of mines. It was agreed at that time that the United States would carry on the study of coal if our department would undertake the study of bitumen. In view of the fact that we have the Athabasca tar sands in this country, we set up a high-pressure hydrogenation plant here to carry out our part of the undertaking. With the change of government in the United States I understand their coal research program was discontinued. When we heard that that was about to take place, we sent some of our men to see whether we could salvage the research they had done up to that date. They came back with some very valuable statistics and information. We are . carrying on a very small-scale experiment on the hydrogenation of coal, the start of which was salvaged from the United States laboratory.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: When I was at the Montreal road establishment last year I noticed a research project under way with respect to bituminous tar sands. Perhaps that was one of the reasons for my question. It appeared to me that if our national research council were doing research into certain aspects of the oil industry, certainly it would be fairer if in some way we were undertaking some research work into alternative uses, other than fuel or power, which we might have for coal. In view of the situation in the coal industry, which the minister so frankly admitted earlier today, it appears to me that there is room for a very strenuous program of research into possible alternative uses for these products.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Administration services-
208. Departmental administration, $487,991.
Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: A year ago when the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources was being set up, the hon. member for Churchill and I had a difference of opinion that was never cleared up to my satisfaction. A year ago when we were winding up the estimates we were in a hurry to get away, and I did not take the time to discuss the matter.
On December 8, 1953, I mentioned incidentally that the minister's department had performed a very useful service in connection with the development of the north country. I had visited the mines branch some 10 or 12 years ago, but just before I spoke that day, to refresh my memory I checked with the mines branch to confirm the opinion I had that the original research work that made it possible to develop this very rich and very unusual ore at Flin Flon was done by the old department of mines.
I mentioned, at page 721 of Hansard of a year ago, that when this ore was discovered there was no known process that would enable any mining corporation in Canada or the United States to separate the valuable deposits; and it was here in Ottawa, in the old department of mines and resources, that civil servants worked out the process that made it possible for the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company to proceed with this very large development.
I want to make it very clear that I have very happy relations with the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company, and that my purpose in raising this point is in no way to take away from any contribution they made. This company contributes upwards of $2 million a year to the revenue of the province of Saskatchewan. It provides a very valuable source of employment in my constituency.
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys The hon. member for Churchill said, as reported on page 726 of Hansard of December 8, 1953:
One of the reasons I rise tonight is to correct something the hon. member for Mackenzie (Mr. Nicholson) said. In speaking of the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company he said that their process had been worked out here in Ottawa. Far be it from me to take anything away from the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys in Ottawa, but credit must be given where credit is due. This is one process that was worked out by private industry. It was worked out not in this country at all but somewhere in the vicinity of Arizona. Many tons of ore from the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company were shipped by rail down to a university in Utah or in Arizona, and tr.e process was worked out at that time.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Will the hon. member say who worked out the process?


Mr. Weaver:: The name most commonly connected with it is that of Professor Coolbough.
I was a bit surprised that my statement was challenged, and the next day I checked with the mines branch of the department and drew their attention to what I and the hon. member for Churchill had said. I explained that if I should apologize to the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company I was anxious to do so immediately, and I said I had phoned to see if Mr. Anderson was still at mines and resources. Some years ago a friend of mine, a geologist in the department, took me through the establishment and introduced me to a number of people. Like the personnel of most departments, the personnel there were most anxious to impress members of parliament with the fact that the work they were doing was worth while. I was told that it was Mr. Anderson who had done the fundamental research that made it possible to break down this rich ore containing copper, gold, zinc, silver and a number of other minerals.
In due course I had a full report from the department which was signed by the head of the mineral dressing section, Mr. L. E. Djingheuzian, and when we came to discuss the third reading of the bill I read part of it into the record. As I understand the English language this report confirmed what I believed and what I had said, that the fundamental research work was done here. A couple of days later the hon. member for Churchill rose on a question of privilege and insisted on reading the whole report, contending that the report proved his point of view. I am not going to take the time tonight to read this four-page report, but I would like the minister to tell the committee at this stage whether I should apologize to the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company.
I am going to be a guest of the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company when I visit my constituency next month, and I am
6766	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys anxious to apologize to them if the information which I received from the department of mines and resources was misleading. I am sure the hon. member for Churchill will be happy to check with the officials of the department to see if he was wrong, because this report states very clearly that away back in 1920, 35 years ago, application was made by the Mining Corporation of Canada, which owned this property, asking mines and resources to help them.
Would the minister answer my question now? If he has not the information available I should like him to answer when we are dealing with the mines branch, item 210.


George Prudham: I do not have the information. The main consideration is that a process was found, whether it was found by our department or by the company. The mines branch works with private industry all the time, helping them with their problems of ore separation. The main thing is that a process was found that made this country immensely richer. The hon. member says it has made the province of Saskatchewan richer to the extent of $2 million per year. I do not think it is worth arguing as to who was the first to discover the process; but if the hon. member really wishes the information I shall be pleased to look into it and forward it to him.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I have the report here, which I shall be glad to send to the minister.
I think it makes a great deal of difference whether the department gives a member of parliament misleading information. Any information I have I received from the minister's department. If his department gave me misleading information I think they should correct it. I shall be glad to send this over to the minister, and when we reach the item for the mines branch I hope the minister will make it clear that either I was right or I was wrong.
I have no desire to embarrass the department but I am most anxious to maintain amicable relations with this company which has a very good record in my constituency. It has spent large amounts of money and has contributed most generously to the tax revenues of Canada through the payment of corporation taxes. I am most anxious to correct any misstatement I may have made. Either that statement is misleading or it is not. It was prepared at my request, and I understood it to support the statement which I had made in good faith on December 8. I think the minister should indicate whether he will clear this now or when we are on item 210, or perhaps let it stand until tomorrow.


George Prudham: I do not quite understand why the hon. member feels so keenly about it.
Mr. Nicholson.]


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minister went to Flin Flon and took sides in this particular issue. He explained how right the hon. member for Churchill was and how wrong the hon. member for Mackenzie was. Many people from my constituency were at the affair when the minister took sides.


George Prudham: My officials are not thoroughly familiar with the case, but they state that both the company and our mines branch had a hand in it, so probably the hon. member and the hon. member for Churchill should call it a draw.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I have no intention of calling it a draw. On December 8, 1953, in good faith I gave the minister's department credit for having done the original work which made possible the use of this ore. I also gave the Whitney interests credit for spending some $50 million after they became interested. They shipped quantities of ore down to one of their plants in the United States, but I stated that the original research work was done in Ottawa by civil servants. If the minister cannot give credit to those civil servants he should say that the work was not done. Either the hon. member for Churchill was right or I was right, and I think the minister is the only one who can decide which of us is right.


An hon. Member:: You both are right.


George Prudham: Far be it from me not to give credit to members of my department when it is due. It just happens that we do not have that information here, and I am not sure we will have it by the time we reach the other item. If I can do anything to satisfy my hon. friend tomorrow or some other time I shall be glad to endeavour to do so.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: A year ago the minister went to Flin Flon as guest speaker on a most important occasion. Friends of mine were at the meeting, and they told me that the minister went out of his way to discuss this particular issue and came down on the side of the hon. member for Churchill. If the minister wants to have it that way and wants to declare that the four-page report which he has in his hand is misleading, that his officials had no business preparing and submitting such a report, that is all right with me. I want the minister to make that statement publicly, and not go to Flin Flon and make the sort of speech which apparently he made there.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: If the minister is not prepared to make that statement tonight I submit that the item should stand.


Mr. Green:: I should like to ask the minister one or two questions with regard to the natural gas pipe-line situation. The first question has to do with the potential market for natural gas at the lakehead and in northern Ontario and also, of course, what natural gas would mean to those two areas. I raise this question because when the minister spoke to the fourth annual oil-well drilling safety clinic at Banff on May 6 of this year, he mentioned this particular subject. I refer to this portion of his speech. He said:
There has been criticism of the position taken by the federal government that the pipe line route should be north of the great lakes. But one needs to make no apology for such a policy when the interest of Canadians is being best served. The department which it is my responsibility to administer is well informed as to the prospects and potential markets for gas through northern Ontario. We know that this route with probable sales of gas, offers many advantages in spite of some of the difficulties of terrain and greater distance to markets than a route south of the great lakes.
The acting deputy minister, Dr. Hume, also dealt with this subject in his speech given to the Montreal branch of the Engineering Institute of Canada on February 24 of this year. I quote an extract from Dr. Hume's speech:
Also reference has been repeatedly made to the barren waste of northern Ontario. Anyone familiar with the riches of resources of this area both in mineral and forest products recognizes the value of developments there and the need for fuel. Northern Ontario may well become one of the richest parts of Canada. It has enormous developed and potential resources and it already holds a strategic position in the economic life of this country. To deny it fuel by building the gas pipe line south of the great lakes would be a blow at national unity. Fortunately no such plan has ever been given serious consideration by Trans-Canada Pipe Lines officials and no such proposition has had to be considered by the board of transport commissioners.
Could the minister give the committee a summary of the information gained by his department concerning the potential market for natural gas at the lakehead and in northern Ontario, and also give us an idea of what natural gas would mean in assisting the development of those two areas?


George Prudham: Mr. Chairman, I know that over a million tons of United States coal is consumed in that area by industry.


Howard Charles Green: A year?


George Prudham: Yes, a year. A ton of coal is equivalent to about 27,000 cubic feet of natural gas. By approaching an estimate in this way it would indicate that there is quite a large market for natural gas in that area, probably around 80 billion cubic feet a year, if that gas were completely to replace coal and oil being used by industry.
67G7
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys


Howard Charles Green: Where is that coal coming from at the present time?


George Prudham: The United States.


Howard Charles Green: It is all coming from the United
States?


George Prudham: There is some Canadian coal sold there too, but I am referring to the United States coal in that area.


Howard Charles Green: Then another question has to do with a suggestion the minister made in the same speech to which I referred, concerning a larger pipe line to the east by an all-Canadian route with a spill-over into the United States at Niagara. The minister said:
With all new pipe lines into areas of undeveloped gas markets the first few years are likely to be somewhat difficult. This fact was recognized in negotiations between Trans-Canada and federal government officials. It is my belief if early markets are too small in central Canada to justify the largest size pipe line that will give the most economic results, that a spill-over into New York state should be a component part of the project. This would be advantageous to central Canada as well as New York state because obviously the greatest economies would be achieved by using the whole pipe line to near capacity. Thus, the export at the end of the line is much more attractive than export at intermediate points. This would be comparable to the Westcoast project. There, export into the United States Pacific northwest must be an integral part of any gas pipe line built to Vancouver and for the same reason, namely to achieve a more economic result.
The minister went on to give some details. He said:
Similarly the spill-over into New York state would make possible a very advantageous arrangement for Canada in that gas might be taken on a storage interruptible basis. This means that in the summer months and on holidays and week ends when consumption in central Canada is low, a spill-over into storage in New York state would enable the line to function at capacity. Delivery need not be made during peak consumption periods provided the volume delivered in off-peak periods fulfils contract specifications on the basis of a stated amount of delivery per year. Such an arrangement need not interfere with large interruptible deliveries to industry in central Canada. Nor need it interfere with storage of gas in off-peak periods to the storage fields of southwestern Ontario where a supply to meet winter peak demands can be maintained.
That seems a very significant statement, and I must say that I heartily agree with it. I think it is very sensible, but can the minister give the committee this evening some amplification of those particular remarks?


George Prudham: Mr. Chairman, Trans-Canada Pipe Lines is not the responsibility of this department, and to that extent I believe the discussion is getting somewhat out of order. However, this department has given scientific and geological information to the Trans-Canada people and to other companies who have come to us for consultation. We have also
6768	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys endeavoured to assist in any way possible the Department of Trade and Commerce or any other interested party within the government. We have also had discussions with the fuel controller of Ontario, who has been here on different occasions seeking information about gas reserves, storage basins in Ontario, and so on.
All our studies have led us to believe more than ever that the policy as laid down by this government is sound, that we should have an all-Canadian line and that the Conservative policy as advocated by the hon. member for Calgary South is not in the best interests of Canada. I know my hon. friend does not agree with his colleague; nevertheless the hon. member for Calgary South has been very vocal all across the country. We believe the information we have been able to gather proves that his plan is not in the best interests of Canada.


Howard Charles Green: Has the minister's department arrived at the opinion that this plan of having a large pipe by an all-Canadian route into Ontario, with a spill-over into the United States at Niagara, is the best plan?


George Prudham: Well, Mr. Chairman, I do not think I could answer that specifically. Personally I have enough faith in Canada that I believe we should build for the future as well as for today. When you are making an expensive installation like a pipe line, I think some thought should be given to the needs of the market ten years from now as well as those of today. I am reminded of some evidence that was given before the parliamentary committee by one of the vice-presidents of Trans-Canada Pipe Lines. He said the Ontario-Quebec market was a potential billion foot a day market within ten years. If that is so,
I think some thought should be given to a pipe line of adequate size to meet the needs ten years from now.


Howard Charles Green: In the part of his speech which I read a few moments ago the minister stressed having the line big enough so there would be an excess over the requirements of the Ontario and Quebec markets which could be sold in New York state. Is that considered to be the best plan? As the minister will remember, he emphasized the value of having a spill-over and indicated that that would be the most beneficial type of gas pipe line to build from Alberta into eastern Canada via an all-Canadian route.


George Prudham: Are you asking me if I have changed my mind?


Howard Charles Green: I am asking if that is still the opinion of the minister's department.


George Prudham: I have had no reason to change my thinking.


Howard Charles Green: On July 8 the Prime Minister-


George Prudham: Mr. Chairman, I believe this discussion is getting a little too far out of order. My department is not charged with the responsibility of handling the trans-Canada pipe line. The Minister of Trade and Commerce has that responsibility, and I do not think we should go further into the discussion of that problem on these estimates.


Howard Charles Green: The minister's department-


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Perhaps you will permit me to say at this stage that this same question has been worrying me for some little time. I have checked Hansard, and I find that on the 14th of July there was considerable discussion of a trans-Canada pipe line on the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce. I think at that time the Minister of Trade and Commerce was not too sure it was in order then, either, but apparently the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra convinced the Chair that it was.
I think all hon. members will realize that we are trying to do the best' we can at this end of the table. We do not always know exactly how far the responsibilities of one department go and when the next takes over. It is quite obvious to me at least that petroleum and natural gas are mines products. It is also obvious that there is a stage somewhere where the transport of these products ceases to be the responsibility of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys.
I am certainly not suggesting now that any discussion of natural gas and its marketing is out of order, but I am going to ask all members to restrict' their remarks and particularly their questions to the minister to matters which come within the ambit of the duties of the department, because it is quite obvious that the minister of one department cannot answer questions either of policy or of fact if the answers are to be found in some other department. I think somehow we can handle this subject without too much difficulty if that is borne in mind.


Howard Charles Green: I have only one more question. The minister has already said that his department has given careful consideration to this whole question, and of course it is the department which is in a position to give expert advice. On July 8 the Prime Minister explained to the house that there were three different alternatives under consideration by the cabinet for the piping of natural gas from Alberta to Ontario and Quebec, and he intimated that there was one that was preferred to the other two. Is the plan which is preferred the one the minister and I have just been discussing, namely a large size

pipe line from Alberta to Ontario by an allCanadian route with a spill-over into New York state?


George Prudham: So far as the government is concerned the matter is still being very carefully studied, and in due course the Prime Minister or the Minister of Trade and Commerce will announce the government's decision.


Howard Charles Green: The Prime Minister made it clear that' there was one of the three alternatives which was preferred by the government. I am asking the minister whether that is the particular plan which he and I have been discussing.


George Prudham: As I remember the Prime Minister's reply, he reminded the hon. member-


Howard Charles Green: I did not ask the question.


George Prudham: -that provision had been made for the needs of Vancouver by giving approval to a project that would build a line larger than was necessary for the needs of Vancouver with a view to a spill-over at the end in order to provide cheaper gas for that city. As I remember it, he said that seemed like a good plan for Vancouver, and he did not elaborate. When the Prime Minister is ready to give the government's decision he will announce the final conclusion.


Howard Charles Green: The Prime Minister said there were three alternative plans, and he was not replying to me. The question was asked by the hon. member for York South. The Prime Minister said, as found at page 5862 of Hansard:
There are three alternatives that are being very carefully Investigated and about which, of course, the commitments of many different interests are required. There is one that we prefer to the other two. There is a third that we do not like as well even as the second. The officials of the Canadian company are endeavouring to get the commitments that would provide for the implementing of No. 1. They are also ascertaining whether, in the event that is not possible, they could get the commitments that would be necessary for the implementation of No. 2. That is the situation. I hope we shall not have to fall back on No. 3.
I am asking the minister whether the plan he and I have been discussing this evening is No. 1 of these three alternatives, or whether it is No. 2 or No. 3.


George Prudham: I think you had better ask the Prime Minister.


Howard Charles Green: I thought perhaps the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys would be in a position to answer that this evening.


George Prudham: No, I am not in a position to do so. The Prime Minister or the Minister 50433-428
25, 1955	6769
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys of Trade and Commerce will make an announcement when a decision is reached.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I am quite sure you expect me to say that I had not intended to speak this evening, but I have intended to speak. I have been waiting for an hour, and I want to speak for about three minutes. I am usually pretty short, crisp and to the point.
I rise particularly to repeat my plea that these estimates be referred to the committee on mines, forests and waters. That committee has been in a state of suspended animation for about ten years, and I think it would be an excellent thing if the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys were referred to that committee. It would relieve the main committee on estimates, which has a heavy duty in studying other departments for which there are not particular committees suitable to deal with their estimates. It would also provide an opportunity for members of the house to hear about the work the officials of the department are doing. There are many excellent officials in this department who are doing important and interesting work, and I think it would be a great advantage to members to have the opportunity to hear what they are doing and to ask questions of them.
We should also get an explanation of the' objectives involved in the work they are doing. The work of this department, like that of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, is very closely related to development in Canada generally, to economic development particularly and to the production of things in various fields. Therefore I think it is very necessary that members should be well informed on the work of a department like this.
I have one other small matter I should like to mention. I think the minister has received requests from small mining operators and some unions in British Columbia and also in Ontario for consideration of the establishment of a custom smelter. I am not competent to say what merit there is in that suggestion, but I do know that in British Columbia a lot of these small mines are handicapped to some extent by the fact that the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company finds it inconvenient to take their ores because of their complex nature, the time of delivery and things of that sort, when these people would like them to sell them. It creates a problem, particularly for these small operators.
The suggestion has been made that consideration should be given to the building of
6770	HOUSE OF
Supply

Mines and Technical Surveys a custom smelter for small operators. I should like the minister to say whether this question has been given consideration. I know it also comes to some extent within the jurisdiction of the provincial government. Has he discussed this suggestion with the minister of lands, forests and mines of British Columbia? Has any consideration been given to it, and has he any information to give the house with regard to this request for this type of small custom smelter to meet the needs of the small operators in the mining industry?


George Prudham: No, this department has given no consideration to the establishment of a custom smelter, because we do not engage in any development work. This would come within the scope of provincial responsibility. At the moment I do not recollect that we have been approached by the men mentioned.
My hon. friend also suggested that more information concerning the work of this department should be placed before the members. We do issue this pamphlet every year containing a summary of the activities of the work of the past year. The same work is being extended this year on a somewhat different scale in the various regions, but I should like to know if hon. members think this is a good idea and worth the money it costs to publish it.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: It is an excellent booklet. I have read it thoroughly myself. I think it has been published for the last two years, but that is not quite the same as having the staff of the department before a committee and the members permitted to ask questions and go into the activities of the department thoroughly. I should like the minister to say what he thinks of the idea of having his estimates referred to the committee on mines, forests and waters, and in that way making an effort toward bringing this corpse-like body to life?


George Prudham: It is worthy of consideration.


Bert Raymond Leboe: I wanted to speak for about three or four minutes on this item, and I was wondering if some hon. members are calling it ten o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: Go ahead.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: I think I am right in stating that the committee is suggesting to the hon. member that he continue.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: In view of the fact that the minister has a very poor memory tonight regarding his speech in Churchill a year ago, I should like him to refresh his memory during the night. He might refer to Hansard for


December 8, December 10 and December 11. I would appreciate it also-


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but we seem to be somewhat at cross-purposes. I thought he was rising on a point of order, and I had already seen the hon. member for Cariboo.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I was supporting the suggestion of the hon. member for Cariboo, Mr. Chairman, that we call it ten o'clock. It is now past ten o'clock, and I ask that you call it ten o'clock. I am asking the minister to have this information when we proceed with his estimates tomorrow.


Bert Raymond Leboe: There is a chorus of ten o'clock around me and I think, Mr. Chairman, you should ascertain the wishes of the committee.


Walter Edward Harris: I have been listening very attentively, Mr. Chairman, and I only heard one person call it ten o'clock. It was the hon. member himself, thinking perhaps we asked him to call it ten o'clock. I do not think anybody in the house did. If my hon. friend would continue I am sure we would be interested in hearing him.


Mr. Thomas:: I insist upon it being called ten o'clock.


Walter Edward Harris: May I just say one word? I admit there was no understanding that we would sit beyond ten o'clock tonight. I should point out to hon. members that it has been customary in former years to sit extra hours in the closing days of the session. I do not think we have sat beyond ten o'clock more than perhaps four times, and I may be right if I say three times. This is a department in which a great many people are interested, it is true; but we have had, I think, something approaching five hours on it. I am not going to say that is more than average, but certainly it is average and I see no reason why we could not continue tonight in order to dispose of this department. This would leave, I may point out, at least two more days of debate at this rate on what we have left. I think hon. members could perhaps accommodate the rest of the house by continuing at some length tonight rather than calling it ten o'clock.


Ray Thomas: I am quite willing to go on; but so far as accommodation is concerned, I would point out to the minister that on many occasions when members on this side have requested that it be called ten o'clock, at two minutes or three minutes to ten, that request has been denied. I think it is a two-way street. If they desire accommodation we will give it to them, but we would like a little accommodation, too.


Walter Edward Harris: I am sorry if at any time I have not done what I thought hon. members wanted done. I have done my best during the past five or six months to do that. So far as calling it ten o'clock is concerned, I admit that I have asked on four or five occasions, and two or three have been refused. On others, I have not asked and others have refused.


Ray Thomas: I am not referring to the minister in that respect. It is a general thing that when members on this side would like to call it ten o'clock rather than break into a speech for five minutes, that privilege has been refused.


Walter Edward Harris: Could we all agree that we go on tonight, anyway?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: No, Mr. Chairman. The Minister of Finance was not in the committee. While he was out the committee was informed that the minister whose estimates are now before the committee has some information that is very controversial, and he is not in a position to discuss it. I suggest it is now ten minutes after ten and we should report progress and carry on with these estimates now before us the next time we meet.


Walter Edward Harris: If it is a question of information that my hon. friend feels could not be given until tomorrow, would it be possible to proceed with some other department for a short time? We have, for example, the supplementary estimates of the department of northern affairs. We have disposed of the department, but there are a few supplementaries and perhaps we could dispose of those?


George Prudham: If it will please the hon. gentleman I should be pleased to put this on the record, if it is not already on the record. It is a report of our department dealing with the item in which he is interested. I have not read it completely but it is a report issued by our department, and we will stand behind it. I do not know how it compares with what the hon. member for Churchill said or any speech I made in Flin Flon. I do not remember having referred to it during that speech. It seems to be important to my hon. friend, and I shall be very pleased to put it on the record.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: That is the whole point. The hon. member for Churchill put it on the record. He said it meant one thing, and according to my understanding of the English language it means another thing. I said in the house on December 8 that the minister's department did the original research work and made possible the breaking down of this ore. The hon. member for Churchill 50433-428J
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys said that was not done here, it was done by the company. The minister, when he was speaking at Flin Flon, was on the side of the hon. member for Churchill and against his own department. Before this item passes I want to read what I said, what the hon. member for Churchill said and what the minister's officials say, and explain to the committee who is right and who is wrong.


George Prudham: This is a report by an engineer, a scientist. The hon. member for Churchill is an engineer, and personally I would not be able to interpret the report and say whose argument is more valid or if there is a conflict between the two statements. I do not think many members in the house would be able to do so. Why not call it a draw? It is not important. The main thing is that a method was found for separating that ore, and this country has benefited from it. I cannot understand why my hon. friend is so sensitive about it. What difference does it make?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The only reason I am sensitive is because I made a statement in the house, in good faith, on information from the minister of the department; and the hon. member for Churchill, for some reason or another, found it necessary to take part in the debate and say that the hon. member for Mackenzie was misinformed and that this work had not been done by the department. Now, all I ask the minister to decide is read what I said and what the hon. member for Churchill said and what his officials said, before this item carries, and make it clear who was right, whether the work was done here or was not done here.


George Prudham: As I said, I am not a mining engineer and I would not be able to decide which argument is correct.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I am sure the minister has some people in his department who understand the English language. 1 am asking that before this item carries someone who understands the language should read this over and give the minister a statement that he can understand and give to the house. When he spoke in Flin Flon he certainly understood the English language well enough to say that the hon. member for Churchill was right and the hon. member for Mackenzie was wrong. Since there were friends of mine there, they have a right to know whether I was right or wrong, and before this item is carried I am asking the minister to make that clear.


George Prudham: If my hon. friend has faith in the reports of this department, as we have, then I shall be pleased to put it on the

Supply-Northern Affairs record. It is a report of our department. I shall do that, if it suits his purpose.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: It is now 10.15, and we have spent 15 minutes and have not been able to do anything.


Mr. Mcllrailh:: You spent 15 minutes.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I insist that the minister be permitted to read this report and be able to express an opinion before we proceed with the rest of his estimates.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order. I think perhaps the time has come when I should point out to the committee that hon. members have the right to ask any questions they like, but there comes a time when they cannot insist upon having further answers. Answers given by a minister may be most unsatisfactory, from the point of view of the hon. member asking them, but there does come a time when an hon. member must accept those answers as all he is going to get. I am afraid I cannot let this opportunity pass without making this comment, that when an hon. member says he insists upon getting an answer from a minister before the item is permitted to pass, he always has the alternative to oppose the item.
However, I must draw the attention of the hon. member who has just spoken to the fact that he has had an answer several times, that he may get the same answer again, and that he cannot insist upon getting the answer he wants if the minister does not decide to give it.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: You will agree, Mr. Chairman, that I have not asked for this repetition. All I ask is that you call it ten o'clock, which it is my right and privilege to do. I ask you now to call it ten o'clock. It is now 15 minutes after ten.


Walter Edward Harris: Before we do that, I said a few moments ago-and my hon. friend did not object to it-that we might proceed to some other items.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: That was ten minutes ago.


Walter Edward Harris: If I may say so, with respect, the hon. member has been doing all the talking since that time. I understood we were going to take the time to pass other items, if the hon. member really insisted that this item should not pass. That being so, if the committee is agreeable we might proceed to the supplementary estimates on northern affairs and national resources.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Then item 208 will stand, by consent.
Item stands.
IMr. Prudham.l



DEPARTMENT OF NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES

Edward Turney Applewhaite: Having called the items for this department in the supplementary estimates, and there being no discussion, that completes the supplementary estimates for the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. What item does the house leader suggest that we call next?


John Horne Blackmore: Mr. Chairman, while we are waiting, I wonder when it was announced that we were going to take the remainder of the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. We were not told on Saturday night that that was proposed for today, and we have not been told during this day that it was to be done. How could hon. members who were particularly interested in these estimates have known that they were coming up? It is most irregular.


Walter Edward Harris: I announced these on Friday for Saturday; and on Saturday I announced all the remaining estimates for today.


John Horne Blackmore: I did not read that.


Walter Edward Harris: Well, then, I must apologize for not having made it clearer on Saturday night. Now, if hon. members would accommodate Mr. Speaker for just a few moments, we could take his estimates under the heading of legislation, and dispose of them. And if hon. members wish to have information as to the proceedings for tomorrow, perhaps I can give it now. We do wish to carry all the other estimates tomorrow, and I would arrange them in any sequence which is convenient. But I think we ought to continue with mines and technical surveys, then take Secretary of State and national revenue, then continue with finance and privy council, and anything there may be left.


John Horne Blackmore: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to be unfair about this matter, but it is easy to make parliament appear ridiculous. I have been here long enough to know that. If we want to run over ten o'clock; if we want to have it understood that we are going to run until two o'clock in the morning, or three or four o'clock, all right; but let us pass a regulation so everybody will know what is going to be done.
It is dangerous to have people think we are going to stop at ten o'clock, and have them go home or be resting, or doing other things they may wish to do, and then go through a lot of estimates we did not expect to be going through. I think that is exceedingly dangerous.


Walter Edward Harris: I accept my hon. friend's suggestion, for my part, and agree that tomorrow night we will go past ten o'clock.


John Horne Blackmore: Would it not be wise to bring that up tomorrow morning, at the opening of the sitting, so everybody would know?


Walter Edward Harris: This is the committee of supply, and it would be the committee that would decide to sit beyond ten o'clock tomorrow, unless we completed the work before that time. But I accept my hon. friend's suggestion, as he himself has put it, to have an expeditious disposal of public business.


John Horne Blackmore: Well, I am not just sure where we stand even now. Is there any reason why tomorrow, at the opening of the sitting, we could not introduce a special motion indicating that we would run past ten o'clock, so it would have publicity and everybody would know it would happen? That is the orderly way to do it.


Walter Edward Harris: These things are normally understood, without formal motion. There is no understanding at the moment, but it has been suggested and it will be followed up, and the various parties will be notified.


John Horne Blackmore: Did we not pass a resolution some time ago that we would close at ten o'clock?


Edward Turney Applewhaite: May I say a word. This whole discussion is out of order, because there is nothing before the Chair. But might I suggest this to the members of the committee. Even those who are most faithful, as some are, to the services of the house, still find they are not under the strain that those of us have been who occupy positions at the head of the table. During the last three months of the session we find it impossible to get away even for an hour or two in the evening, let alone ever get out of town.
I think I have noticed in the six years I have been here that by almost implicit consent the usual thing when the end of the session is within, say, a week's sight is that on items which are not greatly contentious we have gone over the ten o'clock hour in order that we might get through. It does not require a regulation; it does not require a motion. All it requires is the unanimous consent of those of us who are left, the faithful members of the house, at the end of the session, to wind up the session and that we think it can best be done by trying to clean up the small matters which are often before the Chair at or about the normal closing time. Now, with the permission of the committee, I shall call legislation.
Supply



LEGISLATION

[Stage Direction]
The Speaker of the Senate-
194.	Allowance In lieu of residence. $3,000.
John Horne Blackmore: How long are we going to run tonight? Are we going to run until tomorrow at three? There has to be a time.
I wonder what that time is going to be? I do not see why we cannot do that.


Walter Edward Harris: The idea was that if we passed all the items of the Speaker we would adjourn, unless all hon. members wanted to go farther.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Edward Turney Applewhaite: That completes
legislation. There are five remaining estimates of the Department of Justice.



DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

[Stage Direction]
170. Administration of the office of the commissioner of penitentiaries, including $40,000 for grants to recognized prisoners' aid societies, as may be approved by the treasury board, $398,326.
John Horne Blackmore: Are we going on all night? We have utterly lost the meaning of the words "unanimous consent" in this house. There were four hon. members on their feet doing everything but throw clubs, trying to get up to call it ten o'clock, and we were utterly disregarded, just run right over. That is all a dictator does.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Horne Blackmore: Oh yes, it is easy to "haw, haw, haw"; it is easy to do that when certain foolish men are at large.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order. I find myself in the unfortunate position of being responsible for what goes on in the committee of supply when I am at the head of the table. I am afraid I must point out for the sake of the record that at no time did I see four members, or at any time more than one member, on his feet at one time trying to say something about ten o'clock. There was a discussion as a result of which I think it was quite well understood and quite well agreed that a certain department would be dropped and we would proceed to other items which we have since discussed and passed.
I wish to make this quite clear. There has been no attempt on the part of the chairman this evening, or I think any other evening, to overlook or overrun any member of the house. There has been some difficulty at times in ascertaining the sense of the committee, because when people sit in their seats and call out it is a little hard to decide whether they are saying "go on" or "no" or what. But I was of the opinion that there was unanimous agreement on the part of the committee that we should drop one department and take up another, which we

Supply
did. At this stage of the game, having passed the items I have called, I shall now ask leave to report the resolutions and ask leave to sit again.
Item stands.
Progress reported.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported, read the second time and concurred in.


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

[Stage Direction]
General administration-
175.	Annuities Act-administration, $1,015,522.
176.	Fair wages, conciliation, industrial relations, industrial disputes investigations, including the administration of legislation relating thereto, and for activities re promotion of co-operation in industry between labour and management, $471,694.
177.	Canada labour relations board, $5,275.
178.	Administration of the Canada Fair Employment Practices Act. $6,700.
179.	International labour conferences, $62,480.
180.	Labour Gazette, authorized by Labour Department Act, $134,322.
181.	To provide for the effective organization and use of agricultural manpower, including recruiting, transporting and placing workers on farms and related industries and assistance to the provinces pursuant to agreements that may be entered into by the Minister of Labour with the provinces and approved by the governor in council, $260,000.
182.	To provide for expenses of the women's bureau, $24,600.
183.	To provide for payments to implement a program for the rehabilitation of disabled persons, in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the governor in council, and administrative expenses connected therewith, $201,450.
Vocational training co-ordination-
184.	Administration, $75,845.
To provide for carrying out the purposes of the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act and agreements made thereunder; to authorize the Minister of Labour to enter into agreements with any province on terms approved by the governor in council to provide financial assistance to vocational schools, and training under youth training projects and to provide for the expenditures thereunder and under vocational training agreements entered into in previous years-
185.	Payments to the provinces, $4,320,500.
186.	Payments to the provinces for capital expenditures for vocational schools, buildings and equipment (previous year's commitments), $100,000.
Government employees compensation-[DOT]
187.	Administration of the Government Employees Compensation Act, $71,795.
Terminable services-
188.	To provide for expenditures incurred in connection with manpower utilization programs,
authorized by the Minister of Labour, including the development of programs for combating seasonal unemployment, $25,600.
189.	To provide for payment to the national film board for educational films for exhibition, $24,000.
190.	To provide for expenses that may be incurred in the arranging for and the movement of workers from outside Canada to work on farms and other essential industry in Canada when Canadian labour is not available to meet the need, including costs connected with the supervision and welfare of persons already immigrated to Canada; administrative expenses connected therewith and to provide for expenditures under agreements with the provinces authorized by the governor in council, $466,873.
B-Unemployment insurance commission-
191.	Administration of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940, including expenditures incurred in connection with the activities of the national employment service as delegated by the Minister of Labour in accordance with section 97 of the act. $27,108,517.
192.	Government's contribution to the unemployment insurance fund, $32,500,000.
193.	To provide for the transfer of labour to and from places where employment is available and expenses incidental thereto, in accordance with regulations of the governor in council, $100,000.
A-Department-
General administration-
670.	To provide for expenses of the economics and research branch-further amount required, $6,900.
671.	Annuities act-administration-further amount required, $35,000.
672.	Administration of the Canada Fair Employment Practices Act-further amount required, $2,000. Government employees compensation-
673.	Administration of the Government Employees Compensation Act-further amount required, $1,240.
B-Unemployment insurance commission-
674.	Administration of the Unemployment Insurance Act. 1940. including expenditures incurred in connection with the activities of the national employment service as delegated by the Minister of Labour in accordance with section 97 of the act-further amount required. $262,500.
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND TECHNICAL SURVEYS B-Dominion coal board
[Stage Direction]
234.	Administration and investigations of the dominion coal board, $117,600.
235.	Payments in connection with the movements of coal under conditions prescribed by the governor in council, $10,000,000.

[Stage Direction]
National parks branch-
National parks and historic sites services-
693.	Administration, operation and maintenance
-further amount required, $10,000.
694.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $963,740.
695.	National battlefields commission-to provide for special works at national battlefields park, Quebec-further amount required, $16,708.
696.	Contribution to the David Fife memorial society, $2,000.
697.	National museum of Canada-further amount required, $47,454.

Northern administration and lands branch- Northern administration division-
Northwest Territories, including Wood Buffalo park and Eskimo affairs-
698.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $1,122,130.
Forest conservation and wildlife management, including Wood Buffalo park-
699.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $25,500.
Forestry branch-
700.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $175,000.

[Stage Direction]
The Senate-
The Speaker of the Senate-
194.	Allowance in lieu of residence $3,000.
195.	To provide, notwithstanding anything in the Senate and House of Commons Act, the Financial Administration Act or any other act, for payment of indemnity during the present and subsequent fiscal years, in such amount as the treasury board may direct, to or in respect of a member of the Senate for each day on which that member did not attend a sitting of the Senate because of public or official business, illness or death, and in the case of death during or subsequent to the second session of the twenty-second parliament whether or not the Senate is sitting at the date of death, to authorize the payment of the indemnity aforesaid together with immediate payment of the portion of the allowance for expenses mentioned in subsection (4) of section 44 of the Senate and House of Commons Act, the estimated amount required for 1955-56 being, $20,000.
196.	General administration, $452,684.
House of Commons-
The Speaker of the House of Commons-
197.	Allowance in lieu of residence, $3,000. Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons-
198.	Allowance in lieu of apartments, $1,500. Members of the House of Commons-
199.	To provide, notwithstanding anything in the Senate and House of Commons Act, the Financial Administration Act or any other act, for payment of indemnity during the present and subsequent fiscal years, on the recommendation of the board of internal economy and in such amount as the treasury board may direct, to or in respect of a member of the House of Commons for each day on which that member did not attend a sitting of the House of Commons because of public or official business, illness or death, and in the case of death during or subsequent to the second session of the twenty-second parliament whether or not the House of Commons is sitting at the date of death, to authorize the payment of the indemnity aforesaid together with immediate payment of the portion of the allowance for expenses mentioned in subsection (4) of section 44 of the Senate and House of Commons Act, and any such payment made except a payment of the portion of the allowance for expenses, shall be deemed, subject to section 6 of the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act, to be part of the sessional indemnity of the appropriate member for the session in respect of which it is paid, the estimated amount required for 1955-56 being, $25,000.
Supply
200.	General administration-estimates of the Clerk, $1,369,031.
201.	Estimates of the Sergeant-at-Arms, $717,937.
202.	Subscriptions to publications of the commonwealth parliamentary association to be distributed to members of the House of Commons, and to provide for the Canadian share of expenses of the commonwealth parliamentary association. $10,000.
203.	To provide hereby, notwithstanding anything contained in the Financial Administration Act or the provisions of the Senate and House of Commons Act respecting the independence of parliament, for the payment out of the consolidated revenue fund to each member of the House of Commons appointed by the governor in council to be a parliamentary assistant (which appointment shall not render such member ineligible or disqualify him as a member of the House of Commons) to assist a minister of the crown in such manner and to such extent as the minister may determine and to represent his department in the House of Commons in the absence of the minister therefrom, a salary of four thousand dollars per annum and pro rata for any period less than a year, $56,000.
204.	To provide for an allowance to the deputy chairman of committees, $2,000.
General-
205.	Printing of parliament, including salaries of staff of the joint distribution office, $295,120.
Library of parliament-
206.	General administration, $305,543.
Pensions and other benefits-
207.	Pension to the unmarried sister of the late Colonel Harry Baker, M.P., $700.
The Senate-
675.	To provide, notwithstanding anything contained in the Senate and House of Commons Act, for the payment to each member of the Senate who attended the first part of the second session of the twenty-second parliament, which commenced on January 7, 1955, and ended on April 6, 1955, of an amount representing the actual transportation and living expenses of such member while on the journey between Ottawa and his place of residence after the Easter adjournment of parliament on April 6, 1955, and on the return journey from his place of residence to Ottawa at the end of the recess which commenced on that date, or at any other one time during that session, $5,500.
676.	General administration-further amount required, including authority, notwithstanding anything contained in the Senate and House of Commons Act, to pay actual transportation and living expenses incurred by members of the Senate special committee on traffic in narcotic drugs in Canada while attending meetings thereof, held at a place other than Ottawa, $15,000.
House of Commons-
677.	To provide, notwithstanding anything contained in the Senate and House of Commons Act, for the payment to each member of the House of Commons who attended the first part of the second session of the twenty-second parliament, which commenced on January 7, 1955, and ended on April 6, 1955, of an amount representing the actual transportation and living expenses of such member while on the journey between Ottawa and his place of residence after the Easter adjournment of parliament on April 6, 1955, and on the return journey from his place of residence to Ottawa at the end of the recess which commenced on that date, or at any other one time during that session, $20,000.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, July 26, 1955