1955-05-27

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinion):: May I
ask the Minister of Finance when he expects to be in a position to make an announcement concerning the proposed appointment of a royal commission to inquire into the economy of Canada?


Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Finance):: am not in a position to make an announcement at the moment, nor is it probable that I will be for some time; but if hon. members are thinking in terms of discussing the matter, there will be an item in the supplementary estimates for consideration.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It was not with a view to discussing it. It was with a view to eliciting from the minister whether we may expect an early announcement by the government about the appointment of the royal commission and its personnel.


Walter Edward Harris: Not for the time being, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Rowe:: A change of policy?


Mr. Drew:: That is a very informative answer.



CRIMINAL CODE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Erhari Regier (Burnaby-Coquiilam):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. Has the minister noticed the finding of the Ontario court of appeal in a perjury case, as reported in the Toronto Star of May 14? If so, is he planning to introduce any amendment to the Canadian Criminal Code to take care of the point successfully raised by the defence lawyers?


Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: The charge to which my hon. friend has referred, which was in effect dismissed by the Ontario court of appeal, was a charge of fabricating evidence laid under section 177 of the old code. Subsection 2 of section 171 of the old code, which contained a reference to proceedings before parliamentary committees, related only to proceedings for perjury under section 170 of the old code, and therefore was held to have no application in the case which came before the court of appeal. The fault which I have just referred to was rectified when the new Criminal Code was enacted.


Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops):: I should like to ask the Minister of Justice a question supplementary to that asked by the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam. Has the minister or his department given consideration to the implications of the findings in the judgment of the Ontario court of appeal, to the effect that parliament is not a court, with a view to introducing legislation or taking whatever action may be necessary to make it clear that parliament is a court?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: I indicated that in the reply, Mr. Speaker, which I gave a moment ago to the question of the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam. I said that in the drafting of the new code we had examined those sections of the old code in question and had endeavoured, I think successfully, to correct the point which was dealt with by the Ontario court of appeal in this case, in which the charge was laid under the old code.


Mr. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: Arising out of the minister's answer concerning whether or not parliament is a court of record, the minister mentioned an amendment that has come into effect. In the new code it is simply provided that it is an offence when perjury is committed before committees of the house or Senate; but the larger question as to whether or not parliament is indeed a court of record will be left in a very doubtful position unless an appeal is taken from the decision of the court of appeal of Ontario. After all, we have always accepted that parliament is a court of record.
4166	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry Would the minister consider either appealing that case on that point or bringing in an amendment?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: The question that was asked by the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam dealt with a legal point which had arisen in this Ontario case. We have been trying to get a copy of the reasons for judgment of the court of appeal of Ontario in that case, and failing that we have been in communication with the deputy attorney general of Ontario seeking confirmation of our own impression that the point involved in that case had already been taken care of by the provisions of the new Criminal Code. Now, not having seen the reasons for judgment of the Ontario court of appeal, I am not in a position to say whether they are capable of the more extensive implications the hon. member for Prince Albert is now imputing to them.
I am, however, rather inclined to think the Ontario court of appeal judges were dealing only with the interpretation of the relevant section of the old code in reaching the conclusion they reached in that case. The question was whether the accused, upon the facts, was guilty of an offence under section 177 of the old code. This question, again, turned upon whether those proceedings before a parliamentary committee were court proceedings within the meaning of this section 177 of the old Criminal Code; and not I think upon whether they were court proceedings in the larger sense in which my friend from Prince Albert now refers to them.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister will look into it, anyway.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. R. Pearkes (Esquimalt-Saanich):: May I direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. In his reply to a question yesterday he referred to the guided missile displayed on parliament hill yesterday as a "Nike". Was that a real "Nike" or was it just a wooden mock-up?


Hon. R. O. Campney (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, I did not attempt to dismantle the "Nike", and I do not know whether it was real or partly real. I do know it was purported to be a "Nike" without the booster, which would have made it about twice the length it was. However, I do not 

make a practice of examining all the shells we have on display or which we use.


George Randolph Pearkes: I hope all our weapons are not as phony as that.



PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. William Bryce (Selkirk):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. What progress is being made toward completing prairie farm assistance payments? Will the balance of the payments be made at an early date, in view of the disastrous financial position of many farmers?


Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture):: I presume the hon. member is interested in the Manitoba payments.


William Scottie Bryce: Yes.


James Garfield Gardiner: The total number of townships paid in Manitoba is 696; the total number of farmers who have been paid is 21,892, and the total amount of money paid is $3,909,025.50. There may be some cases that are still under inspection or reinspection where payment has not been made, but a very large percentage have already been paid.


William Scottie Bryce: You do not know how many more remain to be paid?


James Garfield Gardiner: No. That will not be known until all the checks have been made on the requests for reinspection.



SASKATCHEWAN


Mr. E. G. McCullough (Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Agriculture. Is it government policy to make payments under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act, as recorded in the Leader-Post of May 17, wherein Mr. W. R. Bird, director of prairie farm assistance, is quoted as having said:
If flooding makes a township eligible, then pay-merits will be made.
I was wondering if the minister would care to comment on when payments under this act will be made in Saskatchewan.


James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Bird, the director of prairie farm assistance, could have gone even further than he has gone in this statement. I read the statement in the press where he is reported to have said:
If flooding makes a township eligible, then payments will be made.

He might have said:
Where flooding has made townships eligible payments already have been made.
Payments are very considerable in the province of Saskatchewan. I gave the figures a few moments ago for Manitoba. Payments in Saskatchewan have been made to 2,628 townships and 85,156 farmers, and the total payment has been $20,756,025.25. I understand this represents payments to 75 per cent of the farmers in Saskatchewan. I think it will be recognized by every hon. member that fairly reasonable progress has been made, and that includes all the persons who would be eligible under the statement made by Mr. Bird.


Mr. M. J. Coldwell (Roselown-Biggar):: Will
the minister permit a supplementary question in order to clarify the position? There is some confusion regarding this statement. I understand that payments are not made on land which is flooded unless the land has been seeded; that land which is not seeded is not eligible for prairie farm assistance. Is that right?


James Garfield Gardiner: That is not exactly correct. In the first place there has to be an area which has no crop or has a low crop for some reason, below 8 bushels to the acre. That may be a township, or it may be 6 sections or more in a township, depending on the situation which the hon. member understands. In addition to that, the land has to be "cultivated land" but not necessarily seeded land. Cultivated land is defined in the act as seeded land or summerfallow land or land that is in grass that has been seeded down. Payments are made in accordance with these provisions in all the areas that have been flooded, and have been made up until now. I think that is a full explanation of how the payments are made.


Major James William Coldwell: To get it quite clear, in estimating the kind of land that is eligible is it fair to say that non-seeded land is not included?


James Garfield Gardiner: No; non-cultivated land is not calculated.


Major James William Coldwell: If the land is cultivated-


James Garfield Gardiner: In figuring the actual seeded acreage and the yield, which is less than 8 bushels to the acre or higher than 8, that of course is based on the seeded acreage.


Major James William Coldwell: Then land flooded but not seeded-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Major James William Coldwell: I want to get this clear, because there is confusion.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Could we not wait until another occasion arises to elucidate further how these payments are arrived at, because there may be other questions to be asked on other subjects?



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucester):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries. Is the minister aware of reports that large quantities of dead herring-I mean dead herring, not red herring-have been found in the fishing grounds in the gulf of St. Lawrence and the bay of Chaleur, and are causing great concern and alarm amongst the fishermen of the area? If so, are any steps being taken by the fisheries research board to determine the cause of the appearance of such large quantities of dead fish on the sea bottom?


Hon. James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries):: Earlier in the week the skippers of several draggers operating along the north shore of New Brunswick and in the bay of Chaleur sent several specimens of dead herring to the department, which they found while dragging for cod and haddock. We are sending two scientists from St. Andrews to that area to conduct an investigation.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Alexander Drew: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance in his capacity as house leader. When is it intended to call the next supply motion?


Walter Edward Harris: I have tried to set a pattern in the last few weeks of devoting Thursdays and Fridays to supply, and Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays to legislation and supply motions when necessary. I had in mind that on Monday we would begin with some legislation that we would like to get out of the way, and then go on with a supply motion. If it happens to be reached on Monday it will be dealt with; but on Tuesday if not on Monday.


George Alexander Drew: I think this is a matter in which the house has a special interest. The position of supply motions in regard to proceedings in the house is well recognized, and I submit that they should be heard first on any day they are to be called. I would ask the house leader to agree that if it is to come up

Inquiries of the Ministry on Monday, the supply motion will be called first and not left in suspense to depend upon any uncertain debate that might follow the prior introduction of other measures.
Could we have an assurance from the minister in that regard? After all, we have reached a point in the session when it is not only proper but desirable that members know when debates arising on matters of that kind are going to come forward.


Walter Edward Harris: I have just said that upon the conclusion of certain legislation the supply motion would be reached. I do not suppose I can make it more definite than that. I should have announced the legislation last night, as has been my custom, but I have abandoned that custom a little since we got into supply. But I can give my hon. friend a list of those items I would like to have discussed first, and then take the supply motion.


George Alexander Drew: I would point out that the minister is abandoning the long-established practice with regard to supply motions; and I submit that unless he is prepared to admit he is trying to juggle the business of the house in an unsatisfactory way, he should change his opinion.


Mr. St. Laurent:: Mr. Speaker, do you not think that language is rather unparliamentary, under the circumstances? Juggling is something it is not our custom to do.


George Alexander Drew: You have been juggling the business of the house all session.


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. I heard the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) say that, presumably I, had been juggling the business of parliament all session. Mr. Speaker, I assure you I can call plenty of witnesses in this house to show that I have accommodated the opposition more this session than they have ever been accommodated before.


George Alexander Drew: What?


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Edward George McCullough: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Has the minister received any requests for drainage or dredging assistance or other representations in respect to flood damage to farm land in Kipling district, resulting from the Canadian National Railways line preventing normal drainage? If so, what has been the nature 
of those requests, and what action does the government intend to take in assuming responsibility?


Hon. George C. Marler (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, in reply to the question of the hon. member for Moose Mountain I should say that the minister has received no requests for drainage or dredging assistance, or other representations in respect of flood damage in the Kipling district. Not having received any such representations, I am unable to state the nature of the requests that may be made or the action that will be taken when they are received.


Edward George McCullough: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct the question to the Minister of Agriculture, to whom I sent notice. Has his department received any requests in connection with the matter that I just referred to the Minister of Transport?


James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for having given me a copy of his question. In reply I would state that we would naturally not receive any requests in connection with drainage. All requests in connection with drainage in the provinces go to the provincial governments, and they are referred to the provincial government in Saskatchewan just as they are in any other province. The responsibility for drainage is with the provinces.
The provincial government representatives who were here called our attention to the fact that there are flood conditions in the Kipling area. They are included in the representations that were made to this government; but that is in accordance with the fact that it is a provincial responsibility.



AIR TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Ambrose Holowach (Edmonton East):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Can the minister give any information to the house respecting the airplane tragedy which occurred at the municipal airport in Edmonton yesterday?


George Carlyle Marler: The only information I can give is that an inquiry has been instituted in order to determine what were the causes of the accident.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Carlyle Marler: Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday last the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) asked a question regarding the Port Mann shops, and at an earlier date the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Hahn) asked similar questions in connection with the same matter. I regret the delay in answering both of them.
The management of Canadian National Railways now advises as follows. Reduction in the personnel employed by the railway for repair and servicing of rolling stock is explained by the dieselization of motive power, the cumulative effect of improvement in design and construction, increased capacity of freight cars, improvement in repair methods and practices, and the acquisition of much new equipment. As a point for repair and servicing of locomotives and cars Port Mann has been affected by the efforts of the management to maintain a proper balance between rolling stock and repair expenses and the volume of traffic. In effecting this reduction in personnel the legitimate interest of each employee affected has been properly protected in accordance with the governing wage agreement, and discussions have been held with the representatives of the appropriate labour organizations.



PRIVILEGES AND ELECTIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the hon. member for Northumberland-Miramichi (Mr. Me William), in his capacity as chairman of the committee on privileges and elections. When is it intended to have the committee meet to deal with that part of its terms of reference which has to do with the studying of redistribution?


Mr. G. R. McWilliam (Norlhumberland-Miramichi):: Mr. Speaker, I expect the committee will meet within a few days, after the steering committee is called together to decide on a date.

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



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
334. Departmental administration, $1,546,388.
(Translation) :
Mr. Dufresne:: Mr. Chairman, when the
Supply-Post Office
house adjourned last evening, I was dealing with the Post Office Department's plan to build a new post office building in the city of Quebec, at a place which I held to be unsuitable, for the very good reason that it was by no means in line with the recommendations of the town planning committee which had already set out a plan calling for the elimination of the block of buildings where the Post Office Department now intends to build. This plan would have had the effect of easing cross-town traffic conditions in Quebec city.
Mr. Chairman, there is no lack of suitable property for the construction of this building in Quebec city. In fact, does not the federal government own the property situate right by the one which has just been purchased and which, to my mind, would be a far more practical and adequate location for this new post office? Moreover, location on this site would not oppose the plans made by the town planning committee to improve traffic conditions in the lower part of Quebec city.
I would not like to be misunderstood in what I was saying yesterday. I was asking that the owners of these buildings, and more particularly those who live in any of these houses, be given sufficient time to move away.
This does not mean that I am opposed to the building of a new post office in Quebec city. On the contrary, I hope it will be built as soon as possible, and that it will serve to give some little work to the jobless, though it cannot be said, of course, that such a project is in itself sufficient to solve the very serious unemployment problem in Quebec city.
I do feel, however, that in all fairness the department should give sufficient notice to the present occupants of this property. This would only be in accordance with the law. Although I am not a lawyer, I have looked into the matter and I am told that whenever an eviction notice is served upon a tenant, at least 30 days' notice is required. In this case, barely three weeks' notice was given, probably in contravention of the law. As a matter of fact if these people are not out of their homes by Tuesday next, that is by May 31, they will be subject to prosecution.
I am therefore asking the government to reconsider this notice of eviction, and to give these owners of commercial premises, as well as those who occupy dwellings on this property, enough time to find new quarters.

Supply-Post Office
(Text) :
Can the Acting Postmaster General or the parliamentary assistant give us the assurance that this project of a new post office in Quebec city will be given more consideration as far as a site is concerned, so the recommendations of the town planning committee will be implemented? Can the Acting Postmaster General or the parliamentary assistant give us this assurance that more consideration will be given as far as the site is concerned? As I said a few minutes ago in French, the government owns another lot which is very near the one on which-


Mr. Pickersgill:: Mr. Chairman, it is not necessary for the hon. gentleman to repeat to me in English what he has already said in French. I was listening to him.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I thought it would be useful.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I can give no such
assurance. It would be quite improper for me to do so. If on the estimates of the Minister of Public Works the hon. gentleman wishes to put his question to the minister who would select a site if such a building were to be built, I have no doubt he will receive an answer. But as I explained to the committee yesterday on two or three occasions, it is not within the purview of the Post Office Department to select these sites. We express certain views about them but we do not select them. That is the business of another department of government.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I believe the acting minister can also recommend. If he cannot give me that assurance, or if he cannot give me a definite answer, maybe if he asks the deputy minister he might be able to give this assurance right now. Nevertheless, Mr. Chairman-
(Translation) :
Those were the few remarks I intended to make during the present debate and notwithstanding the various impertinent quali-ficatives which were attached to the speech I made last night and which I heard, I am perfectly at peace with myself since I am fully convinced that I fulfilled faithfully my duty in that respect. I was not elected to shower flattery upon the Liberal government when it acts contrary to the proper administration of a department and thus work against the interests of the country at large and in particular against those of the constituents which it is my privilege to represent. (Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I wish to
say about two sentences immediately about

the first part of the speech delivered last evening by the hon. member for Quebec West. I think every other member of this house will regret the reflections made by the hon. member upon the competence and sense of responsibility of the Postmaster General, and made in his absence. We on this side of the house-and particularly those of us who are on the treasury benches-know perfectly well how conscientiously and how devotedly the Postmaster General attended to all the duties of his department.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: That is exactly what I
said.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It was a totally unwarranted suggestion that the Postmaster General does not-


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Chairman-


John Whitney Pickersgill: -carry on his duties and exercise his ministerial functions himself. That is an unwarranted suggestion by any member of the House of Commons.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Chairman, on a question of privilege may I say that I do not think the minister has a right to attribute to me words that I have not used. He claims to say to this committee and to the Canadian people that the hon. member for Quebec West has chosen a time when the Postmaster General is not in the chamber in order to attack him. I want to ask the Acting Postmaster General to have a good look-and I only hope he can read-at what I said yesterday. If he does so he will find that I only said I had the greatest sympathy for the Postmaster General, who is obliged to work under such circumstances. I just said, Mr. Chairman, that I was sorry to see that the Postmaster General did not have the authority he was supposed to have in his own department, and that he only had to go by what the deputy minister was saying.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, the hon.
gentleman's words speak for themselves.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: They certainly do.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have no intention of
misrepresenting them or of interpreting them.
While I am on my feet I should like to say something about what was said yesterday by my hon. friend from Kootenay East and several other hon. members, because this is the only point raised so far that I intend to deal with. The others will be dealt with by the parliamentary assistant.
My hon. friend the Minister of Finance, my hon. friend the Secretary of State and I received a delegation this morning from the postal workers' brotherhood of Canada,

who made representations on the subject on which the hon. member for Kootenay East and several other hon. members spoke yesterday. We undertook to give those representations the most sympathetic consideration. At the same time we had a brief discussion about this question that was raised by two or three hon. members yesterday, regarding supervisory letter carriers. I understand that this delegation or certain members of it intend to have a discussion with the officials of the department with a view to ironing out any misunderstandings or difficulties that may exist in connection with the matter. We hope it will be worked out satisfactorily.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: On a question of privilege,
Mr. Chairman, may I say this so there will be no misunderstanding in this chamber, especially by the Acting Postmaster General who listened to my speech in French last night. I should like to read a few sentences of what I said-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: -so he will be aware of it.


The Chairman:: Order. I have already
heard the question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Quebec West, and I think it has been adequately disposed of. I do not think I can hear further elaboration of the same question.


Erhart Regier: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman. Did I understand the minister to say that we are unworthy members of parliament if we And fault with the actions of the deputy minister?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, sir, I said nothing of
the kind.
(Translation) :


Mr. Power (Quebec South):: Mr. Chairman, I would like to say a word or two on the subject of the future post office in order to set in their true light the facts stated last night by my friend, the hon. member for Quebec West (Mr. Dufresne).
For about two or three years, with other members from my district, I have been doing my best to get the Post Office Department and the customs division to erect in Quebec buildings befitting that city and suitable for the work performed.
Looking around the main railway station in Quebec city, we can see the site mentioned by my friend, where a block of houses burned down two or three years ago. To visitors arriving in Quebec city at the main station, it presents a scene of destruction reminiscent of bomb-gutted cities of Europe.
50433-263J
Supply-Post Office
About that time the city of Quebec homologated the buildings concerned, i.e., the owners were advised that sooner or later they would have to go and that any improvements they might make in the meantime to the buildings, etc., would not be taken into account in the assessment of the property, because the city of Quebec already had some plans with regard to that site. Because of this homologation, the Canadian government approached the authorities of the city of Quebec in order to ascertain if they were ready to allow the federal government to put up the building.
Negotiations were lengthy and finally, last summer, after I had obtained the Prime Minister's authorization and after the hon. member for Levis (Mr. Bourget) had received confirmation from the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters), we met with the authorities of the city of Quebec, including His Worship Wilfrid Hamel, the city engineer and other officials, and we agreed that the government would release certain lots for the broadening of St. Paul street, and would, for its part-


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Would the hon. member allow me to ask a question? Where are the certain lots he is talking about?


Charles Gavan Power: On St. Paul
street.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: On St. Paul street, in Quebec city?


Charles Gavan Power: Precisely, and that the city, for its part, would close off Marquette street, so that adjoining properties which belong to the federal government, as they are C.N.R. property, would also be included in the expropriated land or in the land which will be taken over by the federal government. The negotiations were friendly, and an agreement was finally reached but, for some reasons-


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: May I ask another question? When those discussions were held between the representatives of the federal government and of the city of Quebec, were the members of the town planning committee, which already had a project on hand, invited too?


Charles Gavan Power: My answer will be quite short. The federal government does not have to do business with local committees, not with the town planning committee any more than with the garbage collection committee or the roads committee. Constitution-

Supply-Post Office
ally speaking, we have to deal with the authorities representing the voters of Quebec city, that is the mayor of Quebec, Mr. Hamel, and the aldermen.
We came to an agreement with the mayor and his engineer. Negotiations were discontinued, probably because of the obstacles set in the way of the agreement by people who support the opinion of my hon. friend. Finally, in January 1955, the Minister of Public Works received the following letter, a copy of which I shall now read:
(Text):
Honourable Robert H. Winters,
Minister of Public Works,
Ottawa.
Honourable Sir:
I acknowledge receipt of your letter of January 18 concerning the land required by the federal government as the site for the extension of the new post office at Quebec city.
After perusal of your letter I am glad that all the persons concerned have now reached an understanding and will maintain the agreement concluded in my office when Mr. Maurice Bourget, member for Levis, the Hon. C. G. Power and Messrs. Drolet and Gardner-
They are officers of the department.
^discussed this matter with me as explained in my letter of December 28, 1954.
(Translation):
Therefore, as far as the federal government is concerned, he had the approval of-
(Text):


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: The letter is signed by whom?


Charles Gavan Power: Wilfrid Hamel, mayor of Quebec City. In so far as the federal government are concerned, they did business with the constituted authorities of the city of Quebec, not with any committees set up either by the council or anybody else. The city council apparently has approved of the action of the mayor; therefore the federal government has proceeded with the expropriation of the property.
I come to another subject raised by my hon. friend, and rightly, namely the brevity of time given in the notice to evacuate.
(Translation):
In that connection, I received a letter from my electors telling me that they were shocked that such a short notice should have been served. On that score, my hon. friend may be right. However, I would point out to this committee that for the last two or three years these people were subject to be notified at any time to vacate the premises. I then got

in touch with government authorities here, that is with the minister, his parliamentary assistant and the chief architect, after which I sent this answer to the people who had written me:
Brousseau & Frferes I.tee,
320-324 St. Paul street,
Quebec, Que.
Gentlemen:
I acknowledge receipt of your letter of May 9 in which you had enclosed a petition signed by the landlords and tenants of the premises expropriated by the Department of Public Works, for the building of a post office, on Henderson, St. Paul and Ramsay streets.
I must tell you that 1 am urging the Department of Public Works to proceed with the projected works as soon as possible. After conferring with the department officials I find that if the conclusions of your investigations were taken into favourable consideration, . . .
May I say here, by the way, that those gentlemen had been asking to be allowed six months before moving out.
. . . the work on the post office requested by the workers of the city of Quebec, as well as by their representatives, would be delayed for at least a year.
I am informed that the preliminary steps to be taken, such as the transfer of the vacated properties to the Crown Assets Disposal Corporation, the calling of tenders for pulling down those buildings by that corporation, preliminary soundings, etc., that are needed before laying the foundations, the calling for tenders for the erection of the building, required under the federal statutes, may very well take several months. Under those circumstances, it is essential that the premises be vacated as soon as possible.
I am nevertheless asking the department to extend the time-limits mentioned in the notice to vacate received by you for a period of time which, frankly, is bound to be short, and always so as not to delay the carrying out of the project.
Following this letter and my representations to the hon. Minister of Public Works, the latter agreed yesterday to extend the time-limit until the end of June. If the work is to start in October or November in Quebec, it is essential that the lots be vacated by June 30 at the latest.
That is the position. At least, that is how I understand it, and I am explaining it to my hon. friend.
(Text):


Mr. Michener:: I have a more or less minor matter to raise, Mr. Chairman, and I do so with some temerity for fear anything one says might be taken as criticism of the minister responsible for this department or of the government, recalling the asperity with which the acting minister rose a few minutes ago. However, I shall risk that and refer to the problem of the speedy and correct delivery of letters.
Before doing that, I have a word of commendation which I should like to express to

the Postmaster General's department for considering the problem of delivering mail on a business delivery basis on Avenue road north. There has been a change here from a residential to a business district. I believe delivery changes have been promised which will supply the business houses there with mail at a reasonably early hour in the morning instead of at two o'clock in the afternoon, which is perhaps sufficient for residential people but which does not permit the proper handling of correspondence in a business establishment.
One appreciates that there will be mistakes and delays in the delivery of mail at all times. There are a great many instances which come to the attention of members, and perhaps it is appropriate at this time to draw attention to one mistake which appears to have been avoidable. I do so just by way of keeping the minister and his associates on the job to see that deliveries are made as quickly, as well and with as few mistakes as possible.
The instance I have in mind is of a letter which was sent by trans-Atlantic air mail, addressed to 1525 Closse street, apartment 1, Montreal, P.Q., Canada. This letter was returned to the sender in London stamped, "Undelivered for the reason stated; returned to sender". Then there is an indistinct stamp saying "Place of destination required". I always thought Montreal was a place of destination. I would have thought any postal clerk would have regarded Montreal as a place of destination. In any event the letter was returned to the sender, put in an air mail envelope, addressed in the same way and delivered promptly to the party for whom it was intended. That is perhaps an extreme case, but that is an instance where there was no excuse for failure, which anyone recognizes must occur from time to time.
I should like to draw to the attention of the acting minister one or two things I can perhaps state at this time and which he can answer at his leisure, because I appreciate they may involve some research. The questions are as follows: What firm has the contract at present for the printing of Canadian postage stamps? How long has that firm enjoyed the contract? When were tenders last called for the letting of such contracts? Finally, what other Canadian firms are there capable of performing this service?


Mr. Poulioi:: I have just a word to say, Mr. Chairman, about the speech delivered last night by the hon. member for Quebec West. If he puts the deputy postmaster general in the same category as all the great Canadians
Supply-Post Office
whom he has attacked with such acrimony, he pays him a signal tribute.


Mr. Kirk (Shelburne-Yarmoulh-Clare):: I
wonder if it might not make the debate more orderly if I were to take a few moments now to answer some of the queries put forward last night. Perhaps it would save some hon. member from asking the same questions. First may I, on behalf of the Postmaster General, extend thanks to hon. members for their sympathetic and courteous comments regarding his health. May I say also that I, too, look forward most eagerly to his early return.
Many suggestions were made by the various speakers, all of which will be given serious consideration; and where it is found that action can reasonably be taken in the interests of the public service, this will be done. May I take just a few moments to refer briefly to a few of the matters on which I am able to comment at the moment.
The hon. member for Three Rivers referred to the service to suburban areas around the large cities. I am advised it is not always practical to give letter carrier service immediately because many of the necessary conditions may not have been met. In many cases the department has taken care of this problem in the suburban areas by the installation of group boxes, which will provide for the postal needs of these areas until such time as the various requirements for letter carrier delivery have been met.
The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam suggested that something should be done about the rather rapid turnover of employees in the Post Office Department. Not long after he spoke someone brought to my attention an article appearing in the May issue of the magazine Personnel. This article states that the average turnover for shop trades is 13-8 per cent; for non-professional clerical and administrative staff, 14-4 per cent; and in what is termed as sub-professional staff, 32 per cent. In the Post Office Department, other than retirement, we have an annual turnover of only 4-3 per cent for permanent employees and 15 per cent for temporary employees. Thus I do not feel that the Post Office Department has a very large turnover in comparison with industry and business generally.
The hon. member also made representations on behalf of the postmaster at Port Moody, in connection with the disappearance of $500 of post office funds. All I can say here is that the department must take disciplinary action where a postal official fails to protect public funds.
The hon. member for New Westminster dealt with the question of mail couriers. In

Supply-Post Office
his particular riding the situation is rather difficult because of the heavy population. The services are, however, advertised and tenders are submitted. Payment is made in accordance with the contract. If any particular contractor has had an unusual development in his area the department of course is always willing to renegotiate. My hon. friend referred to some rural mail couriers who work as much as 16 hours daily. If he will be kind enough to submit the particular case or cases where a man or men are working 16 hours per day I can assure him we shall be only too glad to make inquiries. This would seem to indicate that these particular routes should be divided.
He referred also to letter carriers doing work for which they received no pay, that is doing work as he called it in extra or spare time. In computing the time of the letter carrier the department not only takes into account the time he takes in serving his route, but also the time taken to prepare and handle his mail in the office.
My hon. friend also refers to the handling of certain items by the carriers in New Westminster. In this connection I would point out that carriers are not required to handle any parcel or book which weighs two pounds or more and that, further, their bundles are taken out for them and delivered at points on their route. As a matter of fact there is an average of over four relay boxes per letter carrier route in New Westminster, a rate that is higher than in most other cities in Canada. If any carrier considers that his walk is overly heavy or onerous, or he is unable properly to perform his duty within 40 hours a week, he may always make representations to his postmaster and the matter will be studied.
My hon. friend also referred to the periodical checks of letter carrier routes and indicated that these checks take place in July. I am informed that these checks take place twice yearly, one in the month of March and one in the month of August, so as to get an equitable picture. Again, if any letter carrier feels that his route is too onerous he may appeal to his postmaster and have the case investigated.
There was one reference I could not understand, and that was to letter carriers being "docked" $20 per month for clothing. I am sure my hon. friend would want me to correct him on that point. Uniforms are supplied to the letter carriers, without any cost to them. As a matter of fact, in addition to the uniforms they are given a cash allowance each year to enable them to provide suitable boots.

As I understood the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver East, there were two points at issue; (1) the receipt of magazines which he did not order, and (2) requests from the agents of the publishers for the payment of an amount relating to these magazines.
In regard to the first point, all my hon. friend, or any person who finds himself in a similar position, has to do is to mark the newspaper or magazine "refused" and hand it back to the post office. The post office will then return it to the publisher; and if after the first notification additional copies are received, these will also be returned and postage collected from the publisher in each individual case.
As regards the correspondence between my hon. friend and the publishers, this is a personal matter. The Post Office Department does not censor any mail and therefore does not know the contents of letters travelling between the senders and the addressees. Of course that being so, it is obvious that no action can be taken by the department unless a complaint is made and the supporting information given. At this time may I thank the hon. member for Nicolet-Yamaska for his comments concerning the decision in the Quebec courts, to the effect that a contract cannot be a unilateral proposition.
In regard to my hon. friend from Kootenay West, the point he raises has been dealt with in my remarks to the hon. member for New Westminster.
In reply to the representations made by my hon. friend from Kootenay East, I would point out that there are two classes of postal clerks, grade 1 and grade 2. Some of the positions in the smaller offices are classified as grade 1, on the ground that the postal knowledge required in these centres is not as involved and complex as in the larger cities. I understand that following a recent convention the employees' association is making representations in this connection, and the matter will be given due consideration when these representations are studied, after having been received.
Then the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace made reference to the estimate of additional revenue in connection with the 5-cent postage. We estimated at the time that we should break even for the fiscal year 1954-55. I stated yesterday that we have what I called an apparent surplus of approximately $5 million, accounted for mainly by the following:
1.	There has been an increase in volume which was not anticipated a year ago.
2.	Certain accounts for items supplied in
1954-	55 will not be paid until the fiscal year
1955-	56, and

3.	As he intimated, by efficient operation and careful arrangement of the service, the department has been able to effect financial savings.
In regard to the question of annual leave for letter carriers, I would say that the Acting Postmaster General made reference to that matter a few moments ago.
Then reference was made to the savings which could be effected by the discontinuance of the post office savings bank. While the annual cost to the department is estimated at $377,000, this amount could not all be saved if the savings bank was discontinued, because in this amount is a proportion of the salaries of operating employees and a proportion of the cost of buildings and equipment. The actual headquarters cost is in the neighbourhood of $150,000. I think in considering this matter one should give consideration to the following points:
1.	There are many Canadian citizens who prefer the post office savings bank to the chartered banks.
2.	That by having a post office savings bank we are able to give banking facilities to military camps and certain remote areas.
3.	That the savings bank provides the government of Canada with approximately $40 million at a low rate of interest.
With regard to my hon. friend's suggestion in regard to twice-a-day delivery for only five days a week, there are two points which came to my mind. One, it is not possible to give ten deliveries for the same cost as six. Appreciable additional expenditure would therefore be involved. Secondly, I doubt very much whether the public would welcome their mail being held from Friday afternoon until Monday morning and even Tuesday morning, when Monday happens to be a statutory holiday. There is also the possibility, may I say the probability, of congestion in the post office, as well as the inordinate amount of mail which the letter carriers would consequently have to handle on Monday mornings.
My hon. friend referred to his question being changed to an order for a return, and also to the time it has taken to give the information for which he asked. Had his question simply related to the date, the place and the amount of the loss it would have been a very simple question to answer, but he also asked whether court action had been instituted against specific individuals, and what was the result of such action, if any, in each case. This obviously necessitated a check of each file and in some cases the obtaining of information from the district offices as to the action which had taken place.
Supply-Post Office
The information has been obtained and, as hon. members know, the return was tabled this afternoon.
If my hon. friend is interested in the activities of the department from the standpoint of offences, prosecutions and results, may I refer him to page 5 of the Postmaster General's report for the year ended March 31, 1954, which was tabled early in January of this year.
The hon. member for Selkirk brought up the matter of mail delivery. We appreciate the difficult situation in which the people in the Norway House area find themselves from the standpoint of mail service, particularly during the break-up and freeze-up periods. The matter is being reviewed, and I can assure my hon. friend that it will have careful consideration.
He also made reference to li cent stamps. There is no such thing as a l\ cent stamp, but there is a bulk rate of 1J cents per item in connection with "householder" mail. The postage of these items is paid in bulk on the total number of items. This rate is given when the items are not individually addressed and which are therefore delivered much cheaper than is the case when an individual item must be delivered to a specific individual address. This service is available to all patrons who wish to have it.
The hon. member for Middlesex East showed his interest in the department by referring to the transportation of mail by means of highway post offices. This method of transportation has been adopted in many instances in the United States. It is more suitable to their method of operating, on account of the heavy volume of mails carried. However, the department has been watching this development with interest for some time. As a matter of fact some of our inspectors have travelled on the highway post offices in the United States, and I can assure my hon. friend that when the time arrives that this type of equipment can be used with advantage to the service, and from the standpoint of economy, further consideration will be given to the utilization of this and similar equipment.
May I thank the hon. member for Danforth for his complimentary remarks in regard to the postal service, and at the same time would mention that most of the figures he was quoting related to the fiscal year 1953-54, whereas in my opening comments yesterday I related my figures to the fiscal year 1954-55. I should also like to point out to him that the report for the fiscal year 1953-54 was tabled in January of this year.
I think, Mr. Chairman, I have covered in a general way the comments and suggestions

Supply-Post Office
made by the various hon. members who have taken part in this discussion.
Any individual cases which I have been unable to touch upon will be given the benefit of detailed study. With regard to the questions of the hon. member for St. Paul's, I wonder whether he would be good enough to send us the two covers to which he referred. I cannot give him full details regarding his question about the contract for postage stamps, but I can tell him that they are printed by the Canadian Bank Note Company; that the Minister of Finance calls for tenders, and that I think the contract is generally for a term of four years. The last tenders were called for some three years ago.


William Scottie Bryce: May I ask the parliamentary assistant one question. Is the Post Office Department making representations or recommendations to the Department of Public Works to provide a new post office in Selkirk?


James Ralph Kirk: This is one of these specific questions with respect to which in the time between ten o'clock last night and a quarter to four this afternoon I have not yet had an opportunity to study the file.


William Scottie Bryce: I do not blame the parliamentary assistant in any way, but the department has been asked for it for four years.


James Ralph Kirk: say I have not had a chance to look at the file. If the hon. member will give me until next week, after I return from Manitoba, I shall certainly have a look at it.


Mr. Hahn:: With respect to the question I raised relative to the hours of labour that are put in by some of these mail couriers, if the parliamentary assistant will turn to page 4134 of Hansard of yesterday he will see that I was referring to the holiday season only, not to the full year. This is the time these men require additional help in the sortation of mail.


James Ralph Kirk: Thank you.


Mr. Henry:: Mr. Chairman, at this time I should like to make a few remarks about the postal service in Toronto-Rosedale. I think it is important to demonstrate at the outset that the representations have come to me and have been made in a community service and non-partisan spirit. The area concerned is the Yonge-Bay-Bloor district of Toronto, and the representations are those of the businessmen's association of the area.
It so happened that during the Christmas season of 1954 they held one of their regular 
luncheon meetings, and I was pleased to be a guest. The subject under discussion at this meeting was "Christmas as applied to every day of the year". The very eminent speaker was Rev. Dr. Cecil Swanson, rector of St. Paul's church, which is within the district. The guests at the head table were diversified and representative of the community. In this atmosphere the men of the community raised their postal problems. I am not asking the Acting Postmaster General to approach their problems as Santa Claus would, but rather in accordance with the spirit of the talk, in which we were asked to apply patience and prudence. The aim is that all concerned may receive satisfaction, which I know can be forthcoming.
The basic problem of the postal service in Rosedale has been one which the businessmen have approached with great patience in the past. For many years, at the intersection of St. Clair and Yonge streets, owing to the depressed conditions of the 1930's and the labour and material shortages of the wartime period, there was a shortage of space and appropriate facilities. However in due time-I must say, without any particular representations from me as the elected member-notably in the year 1949, a great improvement was made. Then during the period of the last parliament a $3 million office building was erected in that district, which provides expanded and improved postal facilities.
I emphasize that this was done by the department in its good judgment on the basis of need, after patience and restraint on the part of the community. Postal service in the immediate vicinity of that part of Yonge street is much better, and I thank the Postmaster General and particularly the deputy postmaster general for what has been done there, because it is indeed much appreciated.
I must also report that in the Yonge-Bay-Bloor area we have postal station F, which is capable of handling perhaps the largest volume of mail in the Toronto region so far as branch stations are concerned.
This is what has been going on in the last number of years. But, Mr. Chairman, this section has now become something quite different from what it was before the war. It is now the uptown crossroads of metropolitan Toronto. It is also the uptown hub of the financial offices in so far as many large corporations are concerned. In addition, as the result of much public pressure it has become a redevelopment area for mid-town apartment dwellers. Here we have a condition of expansion in mid-century, within the twentieth century; and the postal service, like everything else, has had growing pains.

Previous to the beginning of the year, let us say, merchants in great numbers were picking up their own mail, and delivery was slower than necessary. There was also a shortage of staff and space because of the great expansion that has occurred. I do believe the deputy postmaster general has dealt with the matter on a short-time basis in a very sympathetic and satisfactory way, for the present. He was very quick to see, in the light of the report on the Toronto problem, that more staff and space were necessary. These were forthcoming, and in time I believe they will produce a great improvement there in so far as postal service is concerned. We believe that given time, with the new rental space, much will be provided that will be good for all concerned. In addition there will be more letter carriers on the walks to provide better service to merchants receiving their mail.
However, I would say this; that the split premises, one permanent and the other rental premises newly acquired, are not now large enough. These split premises cannot make for the best possible service in this important shopping and business area. I do think we have to look for something better. While the businessmen concerned are restrained in their representations, I know they feel the time has come when the department should think about one consolidated building for all postal services in this area.
We all realize that it is the function of the Department of Public Works to make this consolidation and on these estimates I do not want to go into detail as to that matter. However, I would point out that Rosedale was neglected with respect to its public facilities during the 1930's because of depressed conditions. In the 1940's it was restricted because of wartime conditions and the aftermath thereof. We now think that progress toward a new building is most important in this all-important area.
I ask the Acting Postmaster General to exercise his qualities of action which have been so apparent in the past in this department. We do not forget that when he took over as Acting Postmaster General in the fall of last year, action was taken to provide this department with more revenue, and with this extra revenue has come the means of helping to stabilize labour conditions within the department, as well as other matters of importance to the public. Before he ceases to function as Acting Postmaster General he might consider with the worthy deputy making a recommendation about the situation of which I am speaking, in terms of 50433-264
Supply-Post Office
public works. I have always found the Minister of Public Works co-operative.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I interrupted several hon. gentlemen on the other side when they were discussing the estimates of the Department of Public Works, and I do not think my hon. friend from Rosedale will feel that I am being unfair when I suggest that perhaps he too is going a little far.


Charles Henry: Mr. Chairman, I have tried to keep myself within the framework of the Post Office Department with regard to the recommendations the minister can make. I shall just accept "in a kindly way" the suggestion that I go no further with those remarks, but if the minister has trouble in convincing his colleague I would be willing to take a hand. In the past I have found him very helpful.
Just as we have solved the postal problems at St. Clair and Yonge streets, I hope ultimately we will have a better solution for the area of postal station F.
In conclusion I wish to pay a tribute to the businessmen particularly for their spirit of co-operation. Above all I wish to pay a tribute to the officials of the department, and in particular to the Postmaster General. It is my good fortune to have known them all for many years, and I have listened to some criticisms in this debate with disgust. I pay tribute to them as worthy public servants who have discharged their duties with all possible responsibility in the circumstances. With this I conclude my remarks.


Mr. Green:: Before the item carries I should like to ask the acting minister or the parliamentary assistant to explain to the members under what authority the Post Office Department is cutting down the holidays of postmen because they are late for work. As the minister knows, this question has come to a head in Vancouver within the last week, because there has been a meeting there of the executive of the Canadian postal employees' association. According to press dispatches the executive of that association took the position unanimously that the department had no authority whatever to impose penalties of this kind.
I understand that under the provision if a postman is more than three hours late over the whole of the year he loses one day of his vacation. For being late a total of three to five hours during the whole year he loses one and a half days, and he loses another half day for each additional two hours.
I have never heard of penalties of this kind being imposed by any other department of

Supply-Post Office
the government. The officials of this association claim that the penalties are much too severe. For example, one report states:
CPEA officers here feel the lateness penalties are too drastic and ''there's no reason" why milder penalties, such as fines or pay deductions, can't be imposed.
It seems to me to be going rather far for the Post Office Department to set up a rule of this kind. Surely it is not necessary to take drastic steps of that nature. These men are engaged in work which is very hard, and the men who deliver the mail are out in all kinds of weather. Cutting down their holidays in this manner is a good deal like the treatment that might be handed out to a child. It does not fit in with the conduct of government business. These officers claim that the civil service commission sets the holidays and that the postal department has no right to interfere with them. I would appreciate very much having an explanation from either the acting minister or the parliamentary assistant.


James Ralph Kirk: do not have it in front of me, but I believe there is a section of the Civil Service Act which permits departments to impose disciplinary penalties when necessary. I understand that some departments impose fines and others impose penalties of loss of vacation, to use the hon. member's term. As far as the department is concerned we have received a great many complimentary comments from our own employees, most of whom are punctual. They have felt that over a period of years they were being penalized because those who were late were, as we say, getting away with it. With that idea in mind a schedule was drawn up. I do not have the schedule in front of me, but I do believe the details as given in the newspaper are quite accurate. There is a three-hour leeway. We allow lateness up to three hours for which there is no penalty. After that-


Howard Charles Green: Three hours in the year?


James Ralph Kirk: Yes. But, of course, at the same time consideration is given to whether a person is held up because of an unexpected storm, or the breaking down of a bus, or something of that kind. Every possible reason for lateness is taken into consideration. These penalties apply to the people who persist in being late. We feel that in fairness to the other employees some disciplinary measure should be taken, and in fairness to the public whom we are trying to serve we feel our employees must be on time.


Howard Charles Green: Under what section of the Civil Service Act is this power given to reduce holiday time?


James Ralph Kirk: As
I mentioned, I have not the Civil Service Act in front of me, but I shall find the particular section and send it to the hon. member.


Howard Charles Green: What other departments of government impose penalties of this nature?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps that is a question that is a little unfair to put to the parliamentary assistant. I believe every department of government has some sort of regulations; certainly mine has. As far as I know they have never come up in the house, but I have had occasion to inquire about their details. One has to recognize that in running any big organization where punctuality is essential to the service of the public the great majority of the employees who are punctual would be unfairly discriminated against if there were not some penalty against that very small minority who are slack. As the parliamentary assistant has said, allowance is always made for legitimate reasons, and in addition there is a three-hour leeway.


William Earl Rowe: For the year?


John Whitney Pickersgill: For the year. It may be that the exact regulations of this department are not quite what they should be, I do not know, but we shall certainly look into that. The principle of the thing is that there must be some form of discipline, and I am sure the hon. gentleman who represents Esquimalt-Saanich would not disagree with the view that there must be some disciplinary regulations that will keep the employees up to scratch when they are serving the people.


Howard Charles Green: I am not questioning the
propriety of having penalties. What I am questioning is penalties in the nature of cutting down a man's holidays. I should like to know what other departments of government impose penalties of that kind.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I shall be glad to make inquiries.


Howard Charles Green: Are there any other departments which do?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I could not answer offhand.


Howard Charles Green: Could the minister let us have that information before the estimates are finished?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am afraid it would probably take me several days to get it. I should be glad to undertake to give it to the hon. gentleman and put it on the record, if he should wish that to be done.


Howard Charles Green: Is this subject being given any further consideration by the department at the present time?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes.


Edward George McCullough: Mr. Chairman, I want to express my personal regret that the Postmaster General is in ill health and unable to be here in the House of Commons. I think everyone who got to know him last year will agree with me when I say that he accommodated the house and was in every way a gentleman in this chamber. I regret that any hon. member, in any remarks he has made, has seen fit to indicate any reflection on him.
However, I do not think the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration needs to come to his rescue. I might just say that I think it might well be that the Postmaster General's ill health is partly due to the fact that he had an extremely difficult initiation as Postmaster General. I believe it seemed unfortunate to the house last year that right after the election, when we had the promise of cuts in taxation, the first thing the new Postmaster General had to face was a program by the Post Office Department to increase postage rates in Canada. Of course the result was that when he tried to pilot his estimates through the committee of supply there was a barrage of criticism from those who were opposed to such an increase in the taxation of our people. I think that situation to some extent could have some bearing on the health of our genial friend the Postmaster General.
There are some matters I wish to bring to the attention of the committee. First, I am happy to note that according to the statement of the parliamentary assistant yesterday our post office revenue is again showing a surplus to the extent of 17 per cent, having increased in the past fiscal year to approximately $151 million as compared with $129 million in the previous year. I might state that according to the report of the Postmaster General for the year ended March 31, 1954, there were only three occasions in the last 20 years when our Post Office Department showed a deficit. Those years were 1939, again in 1951 and in 1954, when there was a deficit of $2,474,000.
I think the parliamentary assistant has stated that the revenue return last year has resulted in a surplus to the extent of approximately $7i million. I am glad to hear this. I hope not only will there be economies in the department, but also that the services we have had in the past will be kept up to a high level.
50433-264J
Supply-Post Office
In this regard I want to extend my congratulations to the people in the Post Office Department far and wide. I come from a rural area where we have rural mail couriers. I know of no people who give finer service to the public and who show greater fidelity to their responsibilities. I think the old saying that the King's mail-now the Queen's mail-must go through is taken to heart by our rural mail couriers throughout the service. Perhaps that is a policy carried out by all those in the employ of the Post Office Department. In saying that I do not mean for one moment to say that everything in this far-flung public department is as good as it should be. I think the department should at all times try to give better service, and at the same time should try to cut any unnecessary expenditures.
There are one or two things I should like to point out. First, I am wondering whether some of the $7J million of surplus is perhaps the result of economies which mean curtailment of the service to our people. I have here the report of the Postmaster General dated March 31, 1954. I might say it is regrettable that while this report was tabled in the house on January 10, 1955, it was only today that I was able to get a copy of it. I was told the reason was that more copies were not in print, and I had to get one from the sessional papers office. That situation is rather regrettable, in view of the fact that it is for the year 1954. I think the fact that copies have not been distributed to the members of the house is an unfortunate circumstance.
This report states that in the last year- that is in 1954-there was a decrease of 57 in the number of post offices in Canada. I should like to know the reason for the closing of those post offices. Was it simply because the revenue return was so low, or was it because they were in neighbourhoods where they were no longer giving service to the people?
I do not agree with the statement by the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace yesterday, when he was asking the government to discontinue the service or operations of the post office savings bank. Too often, I think, we have coming from that corner of the chamber certain suggestions with regard to economies without any indication of how they may reflect on the service to our people.
Taking the figures from the report of the Postmaster General for 1954, I see that there has been an increase in the use of this facility of the Post Office Department. As an example, for the fiscal year 1945 the balance on deposit, in round figures, was $28 million, but by 1954 it had increased to $39 million.
4X80

Supply-Post Office
Again, we find that in 1945 the number of accounts was 222,250, whereas by 1954 the number had increased to 291,602. I think that fact shows that the people of Canada are making use of this service. I suggest to the parliamentary assistant that he do not take too seriously the criticism of the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace, but that he see that this service to our people is continued.
I want to bring another matter to the attention of the parliamentary assistant. It has to do with the names of certain post offices. In my own constituency of Moose Mountain, as listed in the report of the Postmaster General for 1952, there is listed the name Fairlight Station and again Kipling Station. Kipling used to be in my constituency. It is now in Qu'Appelle. I think those stations must have been named away back in the days of the early growth of the province. They are now fairly large villages, and since none of the mail going to these post offices is indicated as being for Fairlight Station or Kipling Station I suggest that the next post office directory merely list them as Fairlight and Kipling.
While I am talking about post offices I want to bring to the attention of the parliamentary assistant the need for post office accommodation to carry out the work of the department in Kipling. Last year I brought to the attention of the department and also the Minister of Public Works the fact that the people of Kipling have needed a post office for a long time, and have been promised one ever since 1952, prior to the election. I want to read a few words from page 3968 of Hansard of April 9, 1954. At that time I was inquiring of the Minister of Public Works whether or not something was going to be done about the construction of a post office at Kipling, and he answered me by saying, "You are going to get it."
I suggest to the parliamentary assistant that he talk to the Minister of Public Works and do something about that matter this year. I notice that in the estimates there is again an item of $25,000. I suggest that the parliamentary assistant do his level best to have restored the appropriation of $75,000 which was in the 1952 estimates, and that construction be commenced immediately on that post office.
There is one other matter I wish to raise having to do with post office facilities at Estevan, a growing town right in the centre of my constituency which may well be the hub of a great industrial area. Oil and natural gas are being discovered, and there are the coal fields and many other activities. The customs office is also in the present building,
Mr. McCullough (Moose Mountain).]
and of course it has become completely inadequate for the work that has to be carried on. I would ask the parliamentary assistant to see if he can get a vote in the near future so we can have a building which will be a credit to the department and will accommodate not only the customs department but also the Post Office Department.
I have nothing else to say, other than that I am very happy to have the opportunity to express my appreciation of the work of the employees of the Post Office Department. Wherever I have had occasion to deal with them they have been courteous. They have carried out their work with great fidelity to duty, and I think we can be proud of them.
(Translation) :


Mr. Brisson:: Mr. Chairman, during this session I have had occasion to ask the parliamentary assistant to the Postmaster General (Mr. Kirk) whether his department was planning to improve the summer and winter mail service east of Baie Comeau.
A month later, answering a question I had put to him, the parliamentary assistant gave me the welcome news that the Post Office Department, with the co-operation of the Clarke Steamship Company, had organized a more frequent service for the district stretching from Baie Comeau to Havre St. Pierre.
In this way, for the past month, the Seven Islands area has been enjoying mail delivery service six days per week. I thank the department for this improvement and feel confident that I am expressing the wish of every one of my constituents in expressing my most sincere thanks to the authorities for granting my request.
The second part of my request had to do with improved winter service. This will hardly be news to anyone, since the chamber of commerce of Seven Islands has made it known to everyone in Canada, especially in the province of Quebec, that the Seven Islands area and the eastern part of my riding was limited, in the case of third and fourth class matter, to a fortnightly delivery by the North Gaspe of the Clarke Steamship Company.
I	would therefore draw	the hon.
Postmaster General's attention to this anomaly which should be corrected without delay on account of the importance that the Saguenay constituency has acquired in our country. In fact, the population of the town of Seven Islands, which numbered only 1,200 people in 1950, now has 5,000 inhabitants, not including the floating population. Moreover, the department must not forget the importance

of the titanium mines at Havre St. Pierre, and Natashquan, where the extraction of ironsand is to start this summer. To point out the development of this part of my county more accurately, I need only add that several companies are engaged in lumbering operations and that its total population amounts to about 25,000 residents.
Now, I think it is normal for the Post Office Department to allow that section of my county an adequate mail delivery, because this is perhaps its only means of communication with the civilized areas, as there are neither roads nor railways there.
I would therefore ask the minister to do his utmost to grant that population air transport of all classes of mail, as from next winter.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I have a vivid fellow feeling for the hon. member. His county is near Newfoundland, where similar conditions prevail. The department will consider this request without delay.
(Text) :


Ambrose A. Holowach: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words on the first item of the estimates of the Post Office Department in order to bring to the attention of the responsible authorities a matter to which I have referred both in this and the last session of parliament. I wish to be fair. I think all hon. members will agree that the Post Office Department is a remarkable organization. I wish it were possible for me to be a little more complimentary, but unfortunately I cannot be so at this moment. However, I assure the postal authorities that I look forward to the time when I may be able to rise and throw a bouquet in their direction for having responded to the needs of the people of the town of Beverly, Alberta.
We in parliament receive the demands and requests of the people of Canada. It is our responsibility to give careful consideration to them, and on the basis of their merit and propriety we take action in order to meet those demands. In the case of the town of Beverly it seems to me that the requests of the people for consideration in the matter of expanded postal facilities have not been met. The story is long, but briefly it involves a fast growing community of some 4,500 people who at the present time have a little shack for a post office which has some 160 square feet of lobby space.
It is quite obvious that this is inadequate for a community with the rapid growth of Beverly, Alberta. The people there are very displeased and in some quarters quite angry.
Supply-Post Office
I brought up this matter during the speech from the throne debate last year and nothing happened. I brought it up again on the estimates of the Post Office Department at the last session of parliament, and again nothing happened. To be quite accurate, I did receive a letter from the Postmaster General informing me that the matter would be investigated. It does seem to take some time. In the meanwhile the people of Beverly, Alberta, are waiting patiently.
As I mentioned before, the people of that constituency are displeased. I am sure if one of the responsible officials of the department paid a visit to that community he would determine that my representations have been very mild. As a matter of fact if one of the officials went there I would suggest he go incognito. Perhaps he could wear a pair of those sunglasses that have a guarantee to the effect that even your best friend will not recognize you. I am sure whoever went would come back and make a firm recommendation to the public works department that something be done to alleviate that situation.
I mention in passing that comment has been made, I suppose by unscrupulous people, that the reason the community has not received these necessary facilities is that they voted the way they did. Of course I do not believe there is anything in that. The people insist that they voted right, and they would like to have that post office or extended facilities without having to pay the price of voting wrongly. I feel it is only proper that an investigation be made of the situation and steps taken to correct it. As I mentioned before, the people are patient and so am I, and I trust our patience will be rewarded shortly.


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Before we conclude discussion of the first item of the estimates, Mr. Chairman, I should like to make one or two further observations, in part adding to what I said yesterday and in part motivated by what seem to me the very unsatisfactory answers given by the Acting Postmaster General and the parliamentary assistant this afternoon.
When I was a youngster I dimly remember playing a game called post office, which seemed to be a happy occasion for those of us who were at a party. Listening to the hon. members who represent the post office here, I rather felt as if I were back in those more and more distant days of my youth, listening to people playing post office. Certain it is that they are people not sure just what they are doing, and who do not have all the facts at their fingertips. It is to be regretted

Supply-Post Office
that such persons are toying with the largest government department outside of the Department of National Defence.
I would say that yesterday I was quite perturbed to hear a number of hon. members take issue with the post office on the question of second class mail, the delivery of magazines and things of that sort. The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam, for example, said that the deliveries of a magazine called True Love had suddenly grown in the city of New Westminster from one bag to 12 bags. In the first place, I believe it is the responsibility of the people in that area to decide whether they want True Love or any other magazine.


Mr. Nicholson:: They should not ask the rest of the people to subsidize it, though.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Can you subsidize true love?


William McLean Hamilton: I am
very glad of the interruption by my socialist friend, because I can tell him that while this particular publication may not be sympathetic to his way of thinking, a great many if not all of these publications serve a very useful and valuable function in our economy and our culture. I am not necessarily suggesting True Love falls into that category, but a number of the others which were mentioned yesterday certainly do. I feel that for us to suggest that the information brought to the people of Canada by such magazines as Time, Life, Reader's Digest, and many others should be made more expensive to obtain through a change in the postal rates, for instance, is open to question.
I turn now to certain of the answers given to us. There is one thing apparent, that if you ask for something nicely the ministers do not give it to you very quickly, but if you lay on the whip in the house once in a while you sometimes get some response. I do want to thank the Acting Postmaster General and his parliamentary assistant for having this afternoon tabled the return for which I had asked some time previously, concerning thefts from the post office. I am interested in seeing that it reached the office of the Postmaster General on May 12. Presumably since that time the report has been under preparation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think the hon. gentleman must surely be mistaken. These returns go to the Secretary of State from the Acting Postmaster General.


William McLean Hamilton: quote the heading, Mr. Chairman: "Secretary of State", and underneath it says, "Referred to the hon. Postmaster General for report;

C. Stein, under-secretary of state." This particular statement is dated May 12.


James Ralph Kirk: It
was referred to the department on that date.


William McLean Hamilton: Yes. That was my statement, that it had been referred to the department on May 12 and it has taken from that time until now to be tabled. I would not expect the Acting Postmaster General, who is the full-time Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, to know anything about the Department of the Secretary of State, because he only held that position for a year and a half. It is hardly logical to expect he would find out anything about the department in that time, the type of forms he was signing or which were being signed for him by his officials. However, let us not be led down any garden paths by interruptions of that sort. Let us keep our eye on this particular situation.
In the course of his remarks this afternoon the parliamentary assistant said the return could have been made available almost immediately had it not been for the fact that I asked about court action in connection with these cases, so it was necessary to look into the matter to find out what action had been taken and what results had been obtained. If there is one damning piece of evidence that has come out in this house in respect to the operation of the Post Office Department it is that statement of the parliamentary assistant this afternoon, which shows the way they are handling their business.
Let us look for a moment at the information contained in this return. I knew in a general sort of way, by means of quick addition and certain information in the newspapers, that sizeable thefts were occurring in the post office. I had no idea, however, of the immensity of the thefts or their great numbers or the lack of follow through and the lack of investigation that is made evident by this report. Let me put the figures on the record.
Before I do so, may I say this is a summary that I made very quickly from the report. I hold this return in my hand and note that there are five and a half closely typed sheets, one line to a theft, covering thefts from the department since January, 1953. It was simply astonishing to me when I was given this information this afternoon, or perhaps rather than "astonished" I should say I was horrified. In order to make it as simple as possible for hon. members I have tried to summarize. Here is what I find: In 1953 there were 98 thefts from the post office: in 1954 the number almost doubled

to a total of 172, and in the first four months of 1955 there have been 58 thefts. In other words it is carrying on at a rate just slightly in excess of the 1954 average. There is a steady uptrend in thefts from the post office, with a tremendous increase between 1953 and 1954.
There is also a very definite increase in the large amounts being stolen from the post office. In 1953, while there were 17 thefts of $1,000 or over, there were no thefts of $10,000 or over. In 1954 there were 42 thefts of $1,000 or over and three over $10,000. In the first four months of 1955 there were 20 thefts over $1,000, and already there have been two of over $10,000.
Might I insert here, in parentheses, that the department also hides behind certain omissions from these figures. For example I would refer to one theft on December 16 from Britannia Beach, British Columbia, to which reference has already been made in the house. Opposite that, we find in the list of the amount of losses, the notation "bank money packet" but we know from the press that the amount was $44,500.


John Whitney Pickersgill: How do you know the press is right?


William McLean Hamilton: As
I remember it, at that point the press were quoting official sources. If my recollection is correct they were quoting post office sources.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am told the information was never made public by the Post Office Department.


William McLean Hamilton: shall attempt to verify that before my speech in concluded. But I would say this, that I remember rather clearly the Postmaster General, who was then in the house, giving me that information himself in answer to a question. It is rather difficult to look something up in Hansard and make a speech at the same time.
I do point out that, in addition to the particular amounts which are listed and which, in the last four months, if my addition is correct, total, $108,000, we see a rather frightening situation so far as the people of Canada are concerned in the matter of the care being taken of all the material they entrust to Her Majesty's mail.
It might not be too bad if proper action were being taken by post office authorities to deal with this situation. After all I cannot hold the post office responsible, in the final analysis, for the actions of a man who chooses to hold up a branch of the post office or to break in and steal things from it. But I do say that in many of these cases such action
Supply-Post Office
could probably be warded off if adequate precaution were taken by the department. I do say that probably many of these thefts take place as a result of inefficiency in the department. I would not wish to stand here and say however that my case was based alone on the high number of thefts and robberies from the post office. I turn therefore to the record of the post office in dealing with these situations-because, after all, it is one thing to have a man steal from me but it is an entirely different thing if he steals from me and I do not do anything about it. Definitely, beyond question, if that situation exists time and again the responsibility lies on my shoulders.
As I have said, in 1953, there were 98 thefts from the post office, but only 18 of those-less than one-fifth

have been dealt with by court action. In only that small number has any attempt been made in that field to deal with the situation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am sure the hon. member does not wish to be unfair. I am informed the Post Office Department in every one of these cases lays an information with the proper authorities. If there is a known suspect to prosecute, then prosecution is instituted. I am sure the hon. member knows that, once the Post Office Department has laid the information and has asked to have a prosecution carried out, it does not carry out the prosecution. The Post Office Department does not carry on police action; that is done by local, municipal or provincial police, or by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in those provinces in which they act as provincial or local police.


Mr. Hamilion (Noire Dame de Grace):: Mr. Chairman, the Acting Postmaster General would be better off as Minister of Fisheries, in view of the red herrings he is trying to throw into the debate. There is one thing certain, and it is this: if money disappears and if the post office reports it as a theft or a robbery, then that money did not walk out under its own steam. Someone has been responsible for it. And for the Acting Postmaster General to stand up in the house and say, "In every one of these cases we lay informations", gives the impression that the department is dealing with the situation efficiently and doing something about it. But the thing that worries me is the actual statistical information, figures which I am putting on the record and which show conclusively that the department is not doing anything about it.
I do not wonder that he brings in his red herrings. Let me return to what I was saying. In 1953 there were 98 thefts and, as I remember it, 18 -

Supply-Post Office


John Whitney Pickersgill: Eighteen convictions.


William McLean Hamilton: And
now we have another red herring interjected by the Acting Postmaster General. Let me put on record right now what I asked for, because I could foresee all this shilly-shallying and all these attempts to introduce devious side issues. And I understand that some people in this house are expert in the introduction of devious side issues.
My question was, first: Have any thefts of money, postage stamps or anything of value occurred in the Canadian post office since January 1, 1953?	2. If so, for each such
theft (a) where did it take place, (b) what was the amount involved, (c) what was the date of the theft, (d) has court action been instituted against specific individuals, (e) what was the result of such action, if any.
Now, I have been trying to get through this debate reasonably quickly, but this information has to be introduced to show the unfortunate way in which the Acting Postmaster General, by way of interjections, is attempting to make my exceptionally strong case appear as a weak one. He says that the only things listed here are convictions. My question specifically asks for, and the information filed specifically indicates that shown here is every case where court action has been instituted against specific individuals.
I now make a third try to put this information on the record, starting again with 1953, when there were 98 thefts and only 18 court actions, then turning to 1954 when there were 172 thefts and only 34 court actions-again something less than one-fifth-and in the four months of 1955 when there were 58 thefts and only 8 court actions. I might say in respect to 1955 that I realize there will probably be a few more court actions to come.
I cannot expect the Postmaster General to have money stolen from him one day and institute action against a specific individual the next day.
I do say most strongly that the situation is not comparable in any way with banking institutions which handle far greater quantities of money than the post office. The record of theft in the banking institutions of Canada is not in any way comparable with the bad record of the post office.
I repeat, Mr. Chairman, this record shows, first, that adequate care and attention is not being taken of Her Majesty's mail, particularly the valuable section; and, second, that the post office is derelict in following through, once a theft has occurred, in an attempt to find out the circumstances and prosecute those responsible for it.

In this connection, I come once again to the answer given in the house this afternoon by the parliamentary assistant that it would have been easy enough to tell us how much money had been stolen from them, but that they really do not know, without a great deal of work, what was being done about those thefts, who was being prosecuted and who was not, what action was being instituted, and so forth. If that is the situation, it is small wonder, Mr. Chairman, that we have reached the point where 4 out of 5 people who steal money, stamps or valuables from the post office can get away with it scot-free. Perhaps that is not the nicest thing to say. It is an unforunate thing, because it almost makes it look as though it is a good thing to go into the business of stealing from the post office. You have 4 chances out of 5 of getting away without being apprehended.
Let us look at some of the thefts of money that have taken place. There was a theft of $7,600 from the Killaloe station in Ontario on April 19. Please understand that I have no intention of reading this list of hundreds of thefts into the record. There was a theft of $29,453 in Toronto on January 31 of this year, a theft of $20,249 in Toronto on February 23 of this year, a theft of $30,710 in Toronto on November 28, 1954. It is unfortunate that I took 3 Toronto cases because similar thefts are occurring right across the country.
I should like to see the Acting Postmaster General rise in his place and give us a little more adequate explanation of the situation regarding the security of Her Majesty's mail than the wishy-washy answer which he gave us this afternoon, when he said, well, it was the responsibility of the local postmaster to look after this, and if he did not do right he was disciplined.
There was absolutely no answer given this afternoon-and I can well understand why- to my observations yesterday regarding the government T-4 return. I state directly, Mr. Chairman, that the question should be answered. There should be a complete answer to it. I realize it is embarrassing, but I think it is about time that the people who occupy the treasury benches face up to the mistakes that they make once in a while, or more often than once in a while, and when we ask a question in the house, give us a reasonable and honest answer without completely disregarding the question.
In the course of his remarks this afternoon the parliamentary assistant, in giving the reasons for the surplus this year, said that certain 1954-55 expenses which would normally be charged to the current fiscal year

would be charged to next year. I hope that before we leave the item he will give us some indication of the volume of those expenses that would be largely concerned in a surplus of $5 million. If government accounting has reached the point where large items amounting to millions of dollars can be transferred willy-nilly from one year to another, then it is rapidly becoming suspect. If the minister should rise in his place and say that they were only little items-I just mention that in passing-then the government answers in this house are becoming suspect.
Yesterday, points were brought out in connection with annual leave for letter carriers and whether they should be in the order of seniority, including supervisory letter carriers, or excluding them.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think the hon. gentleman was not in his seat when I gave an answer about that at the beginning of the afternoon.


William McLean Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I was either in my seat or immediately behind the curtain. I think I heard everything that was said this afternoon. I was just going to say that if I heard the answer right it did not seem to go into the details of the problem as they were set out yesterday. If my memory serves me rightly the acting minister said that he had certain representations made to him, and the matter was under study.


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, that is not correct. What I said was that the delegation received by my colleague, the Minister of Finance, my colleague, the Secretary of State, and myself, discussed this briefly this morning and that a meeting had been arranged between some of the people who were there who represented some of these organizations and some of the officials of the department, and that they had hopes of ironing this whole thing out very quickly. Therefore, it is under very active discussion between the department and these representatives of the employees organizations.


Mr. Hamilton (Noire Dame de Grace):: my memory serves me rightly-and I shall be glad to yield the floor for a moment to the Acting Postmaster General-the action was in respect to vacation time and the restrictions applying thereto.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It was a question of
priority of leave for supervisory letter carriers.


William McLean Hamilton: I am
delighted to hear that. I only hope that when the decision is made the information will be given to the house and that the government
Supply-Post Office
will not follow the all too frequent practice of releasing it to the press first and to the house afterwards.
May I just say one further word in connection with that? If equity is to be shown there is only one way that this situation can be dealt with, and that is to give equal treatment to all groups of letter carriers across Canada. That is the first point. The second point is to give no priority to the supervisory letter carrier, because his status, his responsibility and his position are exactly similar to that of the letter carrier himself. It is amazing, Mr. Chairman, that a matter such as this, which has been boiling for months, which has been the subject of representations to the Post Office Department headquarters at Ottawa on several occasions-I do not single out any one individual-on which I personally have worked for the past month and a half, should suddenly, by a coincidence, come to a head this morning, the day after it was brought up in this house.


John Whitney Pickersgill: On that point, of course, this meeting was arranged over a month ago. It just happened by accident to coincide with these estimates being before the house.


John Borden Hamilton: rather hoped I would get an answer like that from the minister. One would think it would be at least a mark of courtesy, when the department knows that a member is deeply interested in a matter, that he has been discussing that particular matter with the minister and with the minister's officials, that some member of his department would get in touch with the member and tell him what they were doing.


Mr. Weir:: I do not know why.


William McLean Hamilton: There are two hon. members over there who for one month have been sitting on top of this meeting-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman-


William Gilbert Weir: That is ridiculous.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. member does not seem to understand what really happened. An organization of postal workers was asked by the Prime Minister to meet the appropriate ministers. A meeting was arranged at the earliest date that suited those organizations and suited the three ministers whom it was appropriate to have there. It just so happened that these estimates came up the day before. It was the purest coincidence-a fluke, if you will. Certainly I do not see how it could be suggested that there is anything wrong or irregular in this, or anything disrespectful

Supply-Post Office
even to so senior and distinguished a member as the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace.


William McLean Hamilton: take the compliment in exactly the manner in which it was meant, and I assure the minister that anything I say about him that is complimentary is meant in exactly the same way. I do want to say, Mr. Chairman, that despite all the verbiage hung around this by the Acting Postmaster General it still seems to me that it is discourteous to a member who has been pressing the department in connection with a particular matter that that member should not be advised for over a month of even the fact that a meeting is going to be held or that discussions are going to take place on the matter. I am not going to labour the point much more, but I accept the apology of the minister, and I can only say that perhaps after this experience he will keep us better informed in the future.
Some reference was made in the reply this afternoon to the post office savings bank. I wish to say first to the hon. member for Moose Mountain that there never was any suggestion on my part that the post office savings bank and its facilities should be discontinued. I did suggest ways and means of more efficiently and more cheaply accomplishing that particular function of the post office to the parliamentary assistant, who gave a reply in that connection.
It is unfortunate that the government, having spent some hundred thousand dollars for a management report and having reorganized their department very largely on the basis of that report, subsequently finds it necessary to come to this house and argue against the conclusions of that report. The report specifically said that the saving if the post office savings bank were discontinued would be $377,000. This afternoon the department comes into the house and says, "Yes, but it is only $150,000 that the savings bank is costing us". When we pay for a report and organize a department on the basis of that report we should be prepared to stand on that report if it is a good report; and if it is not, we should not be reorganizing on the basis of it.
Finally there is the question of the two-a-day mail. I have never heard a weaker explanation or set of figures-or rather, lack of figures-given than this afternoon in that connection. The parliamentary assistant came in and said, "If we follow through with the member's suggested plan we will have a lot of additional expenditure". Then he stopped -a dead stop-and went on to refer to the

fact that he-presumably his department- considered the public would not approve of this measure.
Mr. Chairman, when we come into this house and sit here month in and month out doing our sincere best to do a job for the people of Canada and when we come forward with an idea which in our estimation is a sound and sensible idea, when we suggest that it is an idea which would not result in major increases in expenditure, it disturbs us, to say the least, that the minister should feel that he can come in as the Delphic oracle and announce without giving any reasons whatsoever just that it will incur additional expenditure. I ask the parliamentary assistant if he will stand up later and give this house some definite information, at least a few figures, as to where the additional expenditure would arise in this suggested course of having two deliveries a day for five days a week instead of the present course of having one delivery a day of mail six days a week. I pay no attention whatsoever to his statement that the public would not like the new system. Those of us on this side of the house individually are certainly capable of coming to some conclusions as to what the people want; that is what the minister has done. I feel that our views on that subject are at least as good as his.
Finally, as we approach five o'clock, before I resume my seat, I would ask the minister on this first item to tell us why his travelling expenses have had to go up from $35,300 to $100,400. Even with all the effort put forward by this government in finding new and fanciful ways of spending public money, that is an accomplishment of which he may well be proud.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, before you leave the chair-


William McLean Hamilton: Five
o'clock.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not think we should leave that innuendo on the record. Those are not the minister's travelling expenses; they are the departmental travelling expenses.


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. The committee will have to adjourn. It being five o'clock, the house will proceed to the consideration of private and public bills.
At five o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 374, to incorporate Petroleum Transmission Company.-Mr. Fairey.

Bill No. 373, respecting the Commercial Travellers' Association of Canada.-Mr. Michener.

[Stage Direction]
The house in committee on Bill No. 375, to incorporate Yukon Pipelines Limited-Mr. Mcllraith-Mr. Applewhaite in the chair.
Clauses 1 to 5 inclusive agreed to.
On clause 6 as amended-Power to construct and operate pipe lines.
Howard Charles Green: Does this clause 6 contain the amendment which was passed in the committee?


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Perhaps I should read the amendment which was made in the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines. I am told that it will be found at page 624 of the Votes and Proceedings on hon. members' desks. At the end of line 31 the following words have been added: provided that the main pipe line or main pipe lines for the transmission of gas and gaseous hydrocarbons shall be located entirely within Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Clause as amended agreed to.
Clauses 7 to 11 inclusive agreed to.
Preamble agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
S & M PIPELINE LIMITED
The house in committee on Bill No. 378, to incorporate S & M Pipeline Limited-Mr. Mcllraith-Mr. Applewhaite in the chair.
Clauses 1 to 5 inclusive agreed to.
On clause 6 as amended-Power to construct and operate pipe lines.
Howard Charles Green: There is a similar amendment to clause 6.
The Depuly Chairman: The amendment is the same as that in the preceding bill.
Clause as amended agreed to.
Clauses 7 to 11 inclusive agreed to.


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

Mr. P. T. Hellyer (Davenpori) moved: the second reading of Bill No. 406, to incorporate Stanmount Pipe Line Company.
Private Bills


Mr. Depuly Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


Howard Charles Green: Will the sponsor give an
explanation of the bill?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: Yes; perhaps I should make a brief statement with regard to this bill.
It is proposed that the Stanmount Pipe Line Company be organized for the purpose of transporting petroleum from the United States and Canada through Canada back into the United States markets. The route of the proposed pipe line will be from Beaverlodge field, North Dakota through the Tioga field, North Dakota through southeastern Saskatchewan to Cromer, Manitoba.
The length of the proposed line will be approximately 140 miles and will tie in with the Interprovincial Pipe Line Company system at Cromer, Manitoba. The size of the proposed line will be 10J inches, outside diameter, and will have an ultimate capacity of approximately 40,000 barrels per day. The estimated cost of the proposed line is approximately $6 million, about half of which will be expended in Canada.
The Interprovincial Pipe Line Company have indicated they now have enough spare capacity to accommodate the through-put of oil of the proposed line and have also indicated their willingness to transport this crude in bond via their Canadian and United States -Lakehead Pipe Line-lines to the United States markets.
A thorough investigation of the oil production available from the above mentioned fields, and markets which the proposed pipe line system will serve in the United States, has been completed. These fields are located in the Williston basin which has estimated reserves of 600 million barrels of crude oil and the area will develop rapidly when additional outlets are provided. Therefore, it is expected the available markets of 30,000 barrels per day along the Interprovincial Pipe Line route in the United States will ultimately be transported through the Stanmount-Interprovincial-Lakehead system. These markets of 30,000 barrels per day in the United States are for 40 degrees to 42 degrees API crude which is presently being transported by railroad tank car and truck, a much more expensive method of transportation than by pipe line. It is to be noted that no other pipe line services this area to eastern markets. In addition, any crude developed in southeastern Saskatchewan which meets the above specifications will be afforded an immediate market.
A Delaware corporation known as the Stanmount Pipe Line Company, Inc., has been incorporated and it is proposed that it will be

Private Bills
a wholly-owned subsidiary of Stanmount Pipe Line Company. It is further proposed that this United States corporation will build and operate the section of the proposed line in the United States.
It is intended that the direction of pumping be reversible in the proposed pipe line and, in the interests of national emergency, the existence of this pipe line system will make readily available to both the Canadian and United States governments the enormous crude oil reserves of the Williston basin. By the same token, Canadian crude can be made available to the United States.
The proven and semi-proven reserves of crude oil in the producing areas to be served by the proposed pipe line and the refineries to be served by this system make available desirable markets in the United States. In the opinion of competent engineers, these known factors justify the financing of this project. Expert evidence by highly competent pipe line engineers will be available when this bill is before the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.

Mr. J. L. MacDougall (Vancouver-Burrard) moved: the second reading of Bill No. 409, to incorporate Gillespie Mortgage Corporation.


William Gilbert Weir: I think we should have an explanation of this bill.


John Lorne MacDougall: Don't worry, you will have it.


William Gilbert Weir: Very short, though.


John Lorne MacDougall: I think it would be wise if I were to explain the bill, which is a very simple one, under three headings, sponsors, incorporators and reasons for incorporation.
Sponsors: The bill to incorporate the company under the Loan Companies Act is sponsored by R. Kerr Houlgate and Summer-field, Limited. The latter company has conducted a mortgage, management, commercial leasing and insurance business in Vancouver since 1905. Its business is specialized and it does not act as a real estate broker.
Incorporators:	The incorporators are
Harry Arthur Gillespie, for eight years a director of R. Kerr Houlgate and Summer-field, Limited and actively concerned with its mortgage business; Ian Hunter Bell, the Vancouver resident partner of P. S. Ross and Sons, chartered accountants; Allan Stuart

Gregory, a partner in the firm of Ladner, Downs, Ladner, Gregory and Lenox, solicitors for the applicant; Claude Frederick Dunfee, Vancouver branch manager of a life insurance company and a past president of the Canadian Life Insurance Officers Association; Dean Stewart Mansell, vice-president and director of Macaulay, Nicolls, Maitland and Company, Limited, a prominent Vancouver real estate and insurance firm.
The reasons for incorporation are as follows: Since July 1, 1953, R. Kerr Houlgate and Summerfield, Limited has acted as mortgage loan correspondent for the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company at Vancouver. It does not act simply as an agent in placing mortgages for the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company but rather places mortgages in its own name and then sells them to Metropolitan. This is an established mortgage practice in the United States, although less common in Canada. It is Metropolitan's method of doing business.
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has ruled that R. Kerr Houlgate and Summerfield, Limited cannot qualify as an approved lender under the National Housing Act and hence is ineligible to make National Housing Act loans. It continues to place a heavy volume of conventional non-national housing mortgages. The purpose of the incorporation is to qualify the new company as an approved National Housing Act lender.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on banking and commerce.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Friday, May 6, consideration of the motion of Mr. Argue for the second reading of Bill No. 304, to amend the Small Loans Act.
Mr. W. M. Benidickson (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to continue the debate on the proposed amendment to the Small Loans Act which was introduced by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) on May 6. The debate is reported in Hansard at pages 3535 to 3542. From the point of view of the Department of Finance it is not my purpose to defend in every particular the Small Loans Act as it exists at the present time. I did, however, indicate to the house that the Small Loans Act was created upon the recommendations of the banking and commerce committees of 1937 and 1938, and received over the years a great deal of attention from former members of the house. The present

act did make some very substantial improvements at that time. It did provide for the first time some form of government regulation. It has substantially, one might probably say to all intents and purposes, eliminated the unscrupulous loan sharks who were being investigated by our committees at that time, and I think it is safe to say that since its inception it has resulted in the availability of an adequate amount of legitimate capital for the small borrower who is not able to provide the normal type of security that is traditionally required by most of our chartered banks.
It may be, Mr. Speaker, that after 15 years it would be appropriate for the house to review the advantages and merits of the present statute. I would agree with the hon. member for Assiniboia that doubtless our chief interest and attention would be directed to the desirability and merit of the existing maximum rate of charge or interest. I would agree also that the house, if it were to make a review of the act, would probably also like to concentrate on the advisability of continuing the present ceiling of $500. Only loans up to $500 come within the regulations of the act.
Hon. members will recall that as recently as last year this house, in revising the Bank Act, took a very important step that has a bearing on the small loan field. I refer to the authorization given by virtue of the Bank Act revision to the chartered banks enabling them for the first time to lend money on the security of chattel mortgages. In his speech on May 6 the hon. member for Assiniboia commended the Bank of Commerce which, notwithstanding the lack of opportunity of taking chattel mortgage security, pioneered in what might be called the small personal loan field; in other words, the making of loans where the normal type of security that is usually requested by a bank is not available. I am thinking of non-business loans where a bank normally expects that the borrower will be able to present security such as bonds, shares, insurance equities and the like. This is a field in which the small loan companies are so active.
It is a little too soon to know to what extent the chartered banks are going to increase their interest in this type of lending because the act was only amended a year ago and reports in connection with this new type of business are not yet available. However, I think it will be obvious to members of the house that if the chartered banks do take a bigger share of the lending in this field it will doubtless be the fact that they will be taking the better share, and we will
Small Loans Act
still have before us concern about who is going to serve the poorer risks.
It is the view of the Department of Finance that it would be unwise on the part of this house to accept the bill now offered by the hon. member for Assiniboia without a very extensive review by the banking and commerce committee. I think it would be reasonable to take evidence from the chartered banks as to the extent to which they have taken a more active part in this field.
I believe that we would be required to give good notice to those, who are in this field, and there are many not only as licensees but as companies. It is our feeling that this could not be handled in an efficient way this session, being introduced as it has been at this late time.
In addition to that, I should like to point out to the house that in our view there are some features of the proposed amendments which obviously would not be acceptable to most members of the house. Indeed, I question whether, when considered by the sponsor, they would be very satisfactory to him. It is not clear in the proposed bill what the hon. member for Assiniboia has in mind with reference to the licensing provision, since no amendment is suggested in his amending bill with respect to the proviso in subsection 1 of section 5. This proviso states that a licence is not required by a money lender where the cost of the loan does not exceed 12 per cent per annum, which is equivalent to -95 of 1 per cent per month. If the maximum permissible rate under the act were reduced to 1 per cent per month, the effect would be that only those lenders charging between [DOT]95 of 1 per cent and 1 per cent would be licensed.
Furthermore, under subsection 1 of section 6 as it now stands, the maximum rate of interest after the expiry of the termination of the loan is to be 12 per cent per annum. Again, as I say, that is -95 of 1 per cent per month. Clause 2 of the bill of the hon. member for Assiniboia would permit a slightly larger rate, namely 1 per cent per month. For these reasons alone, I think it would be unfortunate if this bill were proceeded with at this time.
Hon. members are probably aware that the Small Loans Act is administered by the department of insurance which reports to the Minister of Finance. This department has a very strict policy, not only for licensing but for scrutinizing the charges of these companies and the annual statements that they present. I think it is fair to those in charge of this administration to say that they have probably been carrying out the supervision in this field in a cleaner and

Small Loans Act
better way than probably any other country of which we know. The department itself is most anxious to ensure that the maximum allowable rate is set as low as possible, but it has to be consistent with the availability of funds for those people who require the loans. It is true in recent years that the expense of doing business has risen considerably. At the same time it is known by the annual report that the volume of business of this type has also increased very importantly, and volume is an important factor in their cost ratios.
These features just tend to aggravate one of the problems that seem to be inherent in this business, and that is that a rate that may be too low for a company with a small volume of loans may be too high for a company with a big volume of loans. I believe that is borne out when one looks at the last report submitted to this house under the Small Loans Act. I refer to pages 12 and 13 of the 1953 report under the Small Loans Act, where it is shown that one company dominates the field in small loans to the extent of having something over $50 million of the $71 million of loans for 1953 governed by this act. This particular company made 530,000 loans in 1953 and the average loan was $226.
Now, I just want to indicate to the house what would happen to that business if this particular bill were accepted. I find that this company, which has the advantage of volume which is admittedly a necessity for profitable operation in this field, had total charges, that is charges or interest, amounting to $12-6 million. Their expenses were $6 [DOT] 6 million, leaving a gross profit of $5-9 million. They paid income tax of $2-9 million, leaving a net profit of roughly $3 million. If the interest were cut in half as proposed-this is by no means considered to be all interest but involves the work of drawing the security documents and so on, so that charges are a very important factor-this would be the effect on the balance sheet of this company. The income would be $6-3 million, the expenses were $6 * 6 million so there would be a loss of $300,000.
Now, of course, the sponsor says that companies of this type can cut their costs. This attitude is typical of the members of that party who believe they are able to run everyone else's business a little better than the proprietor. He gives a few illustrations. He said that for one thing they should be able to cut the cost of borrowed money, I do not know these people personally, but I cannot imagine these businessmen paying any more in interest than they needed to pay. The hon. member makes a comparison with the Bank

of Commerce and says there is a spread there between the cost of money in the small loans department of the Bank of Commerce as compared with the cost of borrowed money in the personal loan company field.
I hope all members of the house will realize that would undoubtedly be the case. The Bank of Commerce or any other chartered bank gets its money from depositors who are paid a very low rate of interest. The small loan company lender must go to the banks or other sources and borrow at the normal rates. He referred to advertising costs. It is not my purpose to say that advertising costs of these small loan companies are justified, but I will remind the hon. member for Assiniboia that when he read the brief the Canadian Bank of Commerce presented to the banking and commerce committee of 1954 he should have read what the general manager of that bank told the committee respecting advertising. He said that advertising was a very important thing in this kind of business. As reported at page 822 of the banking and commerce committee report, he said.:
The present basis is not sufficient to permit the necessary publicity and development in rendering service of greatest breadth.
He was saying that the rate they were obliged to charge was so low he felt they could not afford the advertising which would bring in the volume to increase the service.
In the same report on small loan companies I find that the only other company which has a large proportion of its money out in small loans rather than loans that are not covered by the act would be in this position if this particular amendment were adopted. It reported in 1953 an income of $669,000. Its expenses were $599,000. Its gross profit was $69,000 and the profit after tax was $37,000. If you cut this income in half there would be a loss of approximately $300,000, which is just about 50 per cent of its total income.
And every other licensee, every other company reporting under the Small Loans Act, has a smaller percentage of its business under the act than outside the act. I know the hon. member for Assiniboia suggested in his speech that we should have something in the nature of a government guarantee on loans to people who have not security, in a manner such as is now followed by the government in respect of home owners and owners of farms. I am not going to argue the merits of that proposal at this stage, but it would be obvious to him, too, that an undertaking of that kind would not be entered into until a great deal more study had been made of it than has been made to date.

And so what I am pointing out now is that in asking the elimination of the source of funds for these necessitous persons who want small loans, before any other alternative is available, he is making the proposal that the source of these funds obviously would completely disappear.
I, too, have read the brief to which the hon. member for Assiniboia referred, namely that of the Bank of Commerce before the banking and commerce committee last year. While the hon. member made some quotations from the brief, I feel that his quotations were extremely convenient from his point of view. While I am not particularly taking sides, I do think that for the purpose of information of hon. members it is very desirable that some of the other side of the coin be placed on the record. The general manager of the Bank of Commerce is reported at page 809 of the proceedings of the committee on banking and commerce as having said, with respect to these personal loans:
The charge is only to a small extent to recover interest cost: by far the greater cost is in direct operating expense quite apart from the cost of funds in use.
The hon. member for Assiniboia pointed out that the average yield, since the inception of the Bank of Commerce plan, was 10-46 per cent. But he did not say that in the same brief the general manager of the bank pointed out that after paying taxes and averaging the business done since 1936 the net profit to the bank was only -77 of 1 per cent. And I think it would be obvious to most members that not a great deal of capital would be available to borrowers if the net profit was to amount to only -77 of 1 per cent.
I would also remind hon. members that while this one small loan company which, as I said, is dominant in the small loans field under the act, had all its loans and all its business within the act, the Bank of Commerce in its personal loans department did only 30 per cent of its business on loans under $500. Everyone realizes of course that it is much more expensive to deal with a great many small loans, where the number of interviews, collection work and so on is just as great, than it is to deal with a fewer number of larger loans.
Then again the hon. member for Assiniboia picked out of the report of the committee on banking and commerce the reference to the loss ratio reported by the Bank of Commerce 

the reference to bad debts. He used the figure in the brief which was that of one-tenth of 1 per cent. But he did not inform the
Small Loans Act
house that the general manager of the bank, in presenting the same brief, said:
The payment record however has been achieved during a period of very high employment. Under such conditions it would have been less than prudent not to build up an adequate reserve for the future.
He said, at the time of presenting the brief:
Our reserve is now one-quarter per cent of funds employed. Losses currently appear to be running at about this rate.
The hon. member for Assiniboia also referred to an operating profit in 1952 by the Bank of Commerce in this department of 2-48 per cent. However, he did not point out to the house that after paying taxes the profit of the Bank of Commerce in this particular personal loans department in 1952 was only 1 -24 per cent. And he, further, had available to him the 1953 results which showed that the net profit by the Bank of Commerce, after income tax, in the small loans department was 1-11 per cent.
I think most members realize that this is not a particularly attractive business profit. To some extent I believe it indicates why other chartered banks, which the hon. member for Assiniboia was scolding for not entering the field, have been rather sceptical about it, particularly prior to the time the house authorized them to take security under chattel mortgages.
I reiterate that in my view the bill itself would not even carry out completely the desires of its sponsor, particularly in connection with the clauses overlooked that have reference to regulations. I do feel that while the house may very profitably look into a matter of this kind at the next session, through one of its committees, the remaining period of this session is not such that we could do an adequate and efficient job of-getting the proper amount of evidence before a bill of this kind could be accepted.


Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few moments to do a bit of thinking out loud in connection with this bill. I am not sure one can throw much more light on the principle we are discussing, but I would like to say at the beginning that even though the bill has deficiencies-and I admit there are deficiencies in it-it is still worthy of discussion; and I believe that out of this discussion there is likely to come some crystallization of views with respect to this whole business of small loans. For this reason I congratulate the hon. member for Assiniboia upon his enterprise in introducing the bill. If it does nothing more than point up the need for some institution to make small loans to people whose

Small Loans Act
credit has not yet been established, or who are not considered creditworthy, it will have served a useful purpose.
After the bill was introduced I took the trouble to look back over the record in Hansard of the discussion that took place when the Small Loans Act was passed. I recall particularly the content of the speeches of Mr. Ilsley and the hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Tucker) who spoke at some length at that time. I took note of the difficulties which it was thought they faced in that day in attempting to set a ceiling limit on interest rates under circumstances that might possibly dry up the source of funds and drive people into the clutches of the small loan sharks.
I think perhaps many of the fears expressed at that time were well founded. Evidently it was the experience of people in other countries that at any time they did attempt to set ceilings that were too low on these small loans, it did have the effect of drying up the source. There is no question about that. But even so, it does seem shocking in this day and age of comparatively easy money that people should have to pay 26 per cent and upwards a year for their borrowings. The present act does provide a ceiling limit of 26 per cent. It is supposed to be 2 per cent a month, but, as the hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Tucker) said when he spoke on the original bill, it does amount to something over 26 per cent yearly. As I say, it does seem shocking. That to me is usurious, if it is not usury. I do not know where the line is to be drawn between an ordinary rate of interest that is legitimate and usury; but certainly a rate of 26 per cent a year is usurious and indicates not only characteristics of leeches but I would go further and say bloodsuckers. I am afraid there are too many bloodsuckers who are anxious to live on the avails of destitution. That is exactly what it is. These people are prepared to take advantage of the fact that other people are often forced to come to them for accommodation, for small loans, that they simply cannot do without. To take advantage of them, it seems to me, is certainly invoking the wrath of the ancient prophets who said that these people grinding down the faces of the poor are the worst leeches known to society.
Well, as I say, it is still unfortunate and shocking that in this day such a thing should be. But I will say this. My reading and my experience have both proven that as soon as the Small Loans Act was passed it eliminated to a very large degree the leech or the bloodsucker. We are not plagued with such, as they are in some other countries. While I was in British East Africa last summer, it

was drawn to my attention that the rates of interest charged not only on small loans but on medium loans of medium length and on long-term loans were shockingly high, in some cases 50 per cent to 60 per cent, and that the rate on the ordinary commercial loan was something that we would not countenance in this country. They told me that the loan sharks thrived over there with no regulation whatsoever. Therefore, I do say that the Small Loans Act has done a pretty good job.
I am afraid I must agree with the parliamentary assistant to the minister who said that we have to be careful not to put a limitation on the rate of interest that would drive the funds out of the field and make it impossible for people to get accommodation. I am inclined to believe that this bill is putting the cart before the horse. I do agree with the parliamentary assistant that as soon as it is convenient this whole matter should be studied by a committee. It should be given the broadest and the deepest possible study, with a view to finding some solution to the whole problem.
I said that to pass this bill now might be putting the cart before the horse. The reason I say that is this. We should direct our efforts towards finding sources of funds that may be lent at smaller rates of interest than 2 per cent a month. Before we set a limit to the small loans that are now being made- that is, a limit smaller than the present one- we should investigate every possible means of extending and strengthening the credit union system. In my judgment, that is one of the finest measures for eliminating the sort of usurious charges that we have known in the past and about which we are now complaining.
Some of the provinces in the dominion are doing a good job in encouraging the development of the credit union organizations plan. It is an excellent thing. In this house we should give consideration to ways by which the dominion parliament and government can assist in extending and strengthening the credit union set-up. The second thing we should be considering is ways and means of extending the kind of thing which the Bank of Commerce has been doing for some years, and rather successfully. What they have done has shown what other banks could do efficiently and well.
I congratulate the Canadian Bank of Commerce on their personal loans division. While I am doing so, I should like to correct one thing which the parliamentary assistant said, perhaps inadvertently, in comparing the cost of the funds which are available for loan by the Canadian Bank of Commerce small loans

division on the one hand, and the small loans companies on the other hand. I think the parliamentary assistant did say that the cost of the funds obtained from the depositors of the Canadian Bank of Commerce would be much smaller than that borne by the small loans corporations. Well, the fact is, of course, that the Canadian Bank of Commerce does not lend the depositors' money through its small loans division. What it does is to create the loans at the moment they are made. All it needs to have is the cash reserve required now at a percentage of approximately 8 per cent, as required by the Bank of Canada. Naturally, their costs are much lower. I can understand what the hon. member has said, and the force of his argument. As a matter of fact, what I have just now brought before the house does strengthen the argument.
The cost of the funds of the Canadian Bank of Commerce small loans section is very much less than the cost of the funds that are lent by the small loans companies. My own feeling is that other banks could enter this field and by so doing could give a real public service. It might be possible to induce them to get into the field. If so, it would help to solve the problem to some extent, although there would be a group of needy individuals who yet would not be served. They will have to be the responsibility of some other institution or organization. My own judgment is that we may have to set up some institution in our land, maybe provincially or nationally, backed by the government, but not necessarily a government institution. I do not think it would be wise for a government institution to attempt it, but some institution backed by the government, an institution designed perhaps to consolidate the small debts of the people who have met with adversity and are really in need of credit, but whose needs are yet so small that they would not be an attraction to the ordinary lending institutions to bother with them. Perhaps I should include people who have not proved themselves to be creditworthy.
I am satisfied that such an institution would require government backing. I am also satisfied that in the long run it would lose money. But, Mr. Speaker, I point out that it would be cheaper in the long run to assist people through an institution of that kind than it would be to pick up the dregs after they have been forced into doing things because they cannot get a bit of credit.
There are thousands of people in our country who need a little money and who oftentimes need it quickly because of tragedy that has struck their families. Perhaps they have no place to go for it except to their friends. If they are not living with their
Small Loans Act
friends who have the wherewithal, what are they going to do? I am sure they would do everything they are capable of doing to manage their affairs successfully, but some people are just not built so that they can manage. Such people are managed and their affairs are managed for them by institutions. It looks to me as though it would be worth while thinking about some institution, government-backed, to help these people when they are in need with a small loan that may not be worth bothering about by some of these other institutions.
If we could get those three things working, it seems to me we might perhaps be able to put a limit of 1 per cent a month on these small loans without causing distress among people who have to go to the small loans companies to get their credit. I would agree with the parliamentary assistant to the minister that we should give this matter a most thorough and earnest study and bring it before a committee perhaps at the next session to see if it would be possible to work out provisions for meeting the needs of those people who have no credit standing but who are nevertheless human beings and ought to be taken care of, and not neglected. Otherwise it does not seem as if we are doing our duty to human beings. I congratulate the mover of this motion on the bill. I think his bill will serve a very useful purpose, although in its present form I am not sure it will do the job it is designed to do.


Erhart Regier: Mr. Speaker, I rise in my place to support the bill that is now before us. I was one of the lucky ones who in my high school days attended a separate school and had to make a rather thorough study of church history. While studying church history I was informed that for hundreds of years-as a matter of fact, for more years than was not the case -the teachings of the Christian church were that the charging of interest was something to be considered unethical. For many long centuries Christians were not allowed to charge any interest whatsoever.
I only regret that because of the members on the government side who were on last year's banking and commerce committee the introduction of a bill of this sort is at all necessary. I understand that the banks of Canada at that time expressed their willingness to enter the personal loans field if they would be permitted to charge, not 6 per cent as they are now permitted, but 12 per cent per annum on personal loans. However, some of those so-called monetary reformers who were on the committee raised their hands in holy horror at the idea of allowing the chartered banks to raise interest rates

Supply-Post Office
from 6 per cent to 12 per cent, and they were not allowed to do so. I regret that this happened because I feel that, if our chartered banks had been given authority to enter the personal loans field and to charge 1 per cent per month on loans which were secured by means of chattel mortgages, all major Canadian finance companies today would have disappeared and we would not have had to consider a bill of this sort.
The next matter I should like to raise is the question of whose money is being used by the finance companies of Canada. There was something to be said for a man when he decided to risk his own money and also being able to decide how much compensation he ought to have before he would decide to take the risk. However, that argument can no longer be applied to the finance companies in their operations at the present time. From all the information I have, finance companies obtain the vast bulk of their money from the life insurance companies and from the chartered banks of Canada. They pay in the neighbourhood of 4| per cent for this money. They use this money and charge 24 per cent for the use of it. According to my calculations that represents a charge for the cost of handling of 19J per cent. The hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) has placed enough evidence on the record to indicate that these finance companies, if they wished, would be able to operate at a much lower rate. If they were not able to operate, I do not think we who are supposed to represent the interests of the Canadian people at large should be unduly worried. I was the one who interrupted the parliamentary assistant, and I said we would like to see the finance companies out of business. We would be doing a real service to the people of Canada if legislation were so framed that they would be unable to continue operations, at least on the basis of charging 2 per cent per month.
Mr. Speaker, may I call it six o'clock?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. The hour for consideration of private and public bills having expired, the house will resume the business interrupted at five o'clock.

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



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
334. Departmental administration, $1,546,388.
; At six o'clock the committee took recess.
[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
William Alfred Robinson: Shall the resolution carry?


Mr. Nowlan:: Before the resolution carries there are one or two comments I should like to make on perhaps a different plane from that on which we were dealing with matters at five o'clock. The hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace was more or less in the sordid realm of criminal procedure as it affected the department. I should like to take the minds of the committee for a moment away from that mundane subject to the more aesthetic and artistic one of the administration of the department in so far as its choice of stamps is concerned. I am sure it will be a welcome relief to the Acting Postmaster General to get translated to that realm even for a moment.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was a stamp collector at a very early age.


George Clyde Nowlan: I am glad to hear that because some of the things I have to say will be things which have been told to me by stamp collectors. The Acting Postmaster General perhaps can tell me as a philatelist; I am not quite sure about the pronunciation but as long as we both agree that neither one of us is quite sure I shall not be called to order for mispronouncing it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is spelled the same way in Hansard.


George Clyde Nowlan: Seriously, I think there is
something that should be said to this committee with respect to this matter. We have had various series of stamps during the last few years. We have the fur-bearing series which has had animals depicted on the stamps of this country. On one of them I noticed an Indian or trapper of some kind nailing a beaver hide, I think it was, to a log cabin, but that beaver skin was much larger than the trapper himself. Then we have another one, which possibly might have some significance to the married men of this country, where I noticed an Indian warrior or an Indian buck squatting back of his tepee while the squaw is doing the work of nailing a deer skin to the front of the tepee. I am sure that is something which we all would hope to emulate but I am not so sure how practical it would be.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And how!


George Clyde Nowlan: "And how" is right. Now we have the wildlife series on which I am not going to make any extensive comments. I just wonder why we have these various

series of stamps in view of the omissions I think have been made by this department. I have some of the wildlife series in front of me. I am not going to elaborate on them for the moment or to elaborate on them at all. But certainly if anyone looks at the 4-cent stamp he will see what I mean. I hope that some time during the evening the Acting Postmaster General or his parliamentary assistant will satisfactorily define for the committee just what is depicted on that 4-cent stamp. I thought it was a muskox. Certainly it has that lonely and rather sinister and ferocious glare that you would associate with the muskox.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the minister of northern affairs could tell you that.


George Clyde Nowlan: I looked at the report of the Postmaster General this afternoon and I saw that in 1954 what was depicted on the 4-cent stamp was a mountain goat. But when I look at the stamp and the one reproduced in the report I cannot tell except that I think the mountain goat looks possibly more intelligent than the muskox. Then I had a note later on in the afternoon from a friend of ours in the press gallery who suggested that someone should comment on the fact that this 4-cent stamp had depicted on it a judge of the supreme court with a wig on. I think that is perhaps a reflection on the judges of the court, but nevertheless it suggests the difficulty in deciding just what is depicted on these stamps. When you cannot tell the difference between a muskox, a mountain goat and a judge of the supreme court, I would suggest that there is something slightly wrong or something askew with the engraving which is being carried on by the department at the moment. I noticed the reply of the acting minister this afternoon to the hon. member for St. Paul's, I think it was, wherein he said that the contract has been let for three years to the Canadian Bank Note Company Limited and will come up for renewal next year. I hope one suggestion made will be that the lithography should be improved there.
I may say that I have an editorial here. I know that one should not quote from editorials and I will not purport to quote from any editorials published in the newspapers of this country. But this is one which I know the parliamentary assistant knows quite well. It is a little paper whose publisher boasts of the fact that he spells his name with both a small "1" and a large "L". I refer to the Berwick Register. He is commenting on this 4-cent stamp and he says something to the effect that it becomes an adventure in speculation to see the reason for picturing the
Supply-Post Office
muskox on Canada's 4-cent stamps. Then he goes on to say that the muskox is a lonely creature, that he lives away up in the north and wants to be left alone; and why anyone should ever depict his countenance on this stamp and depict it in the way in which it is caricatured is something no one could understand. I do not want to go into prenatal influences or anything of that kind, but I will say this, that if any one of the mothers of this country had to lick many of these stamps, I hate to think what the effect might be upon unborn generations with this ferocious glare which one sees in these stamps.
A year ago we were criticizing the department for the stamps as far as Her Majesty was concerned. I can understand how difficult it was properly to portray her. I think it would be impossible for anyone to catch the radiant beauty, the charm, the character and the quality of Her Majesty and portray those qualities on a postage stamp. That would be an impossibility. I do not criticize the department particularly with regard to that matter but, in all seriousness, I say with regard to this series of stamps on which these animals are now being portrayed, I wonder in the first place why we find this being done. I suggest both to the parliamentary assistant and to the acting minister, both of whom were teachers before they entered the political realm, that the atlases and the nature books of this country can portray more artistically, more effectively and more beautifully the natural life of Canada than it can ever be portrayed on a postage stamp. You have a beaver which is so large that, when you look at it, you are not quite sure whether it is a mountain lion or a beaver. You have an Eskimo paddling a canoe which looks like a toothpick, and the whole situation of trying to depict the natural life of this country on postage stamps is, I suggest, something which is ineffective. I should like to know just what the explanation is. The minister may say, "We wanted to give publicity to the wildlife of this country". The minister of northern affairs issued a booklet not too long ago in which there were beautiful reproductions of the wildlife of this country. They are much more effective than any which can be put on a postage stamp. When Canadian editorial writers refer to this stamp as one which is discreditable to Canada and offensive to the artistic sense of Canadians, I suggest that the department should reconsider this whole matter of trying to depict the wildlife or the natural life of this country on postage stamps.
There is a particular reason why I raise this matter at this time. One can be sarcastic and one can poke fun at these stamps, and I think one should do so because there is a justifiable criticism. I am told by philatelists

Supply-Post Office
that the value of Canadian stamps has depreciated tremendously during the past two or three years because of the quality of reproduction we have had. There was a time not so many years ago-and the parliamentary assistant certainly remembers it and will be proud of it-when one of our Canadian stamps depicted the schooner Bluenose, a name which was remembered the other day in another connection. That was recognized throughout the philatelic world as one of the most beautiful reproductions that had ever been made. I am suggesting that in the quality of the work that is done today we are a long way removed from the quality of work which was done by the department at that time. This is a reflection on the artistic sense and the artistry and the professional skill of the engraver and the lithographer which I am sure is available to the department if they would make the proper inquiries concerning it.
I want to move from that to the matter which really motivates me in making this criticism. I am not interested in making criticism simply for the sake of criticizing, but I do wish to suggest that the department has been remiss in centring its activities on features such as that and missing the boat on other matters which should have been dealt with by the department. A year ago I raised this matter with the Postmaster General, and may I say here, as others have said, how sorry I am he is not with us and how much I hope that before too long he will be fully restored to health and back in this chamber. I discussed this matter with him at that time and we had rather extensive correspondence afterwards.
The Postmaster General was good enough to write me and to say that I had roused his interest in the historical life of the country to such an extent that he was authorizing the issue of a series of historical postage stamps which will come out some time in the future. I suggest to the Acting Postmaster General that more consideration should have been given to the matter of history prior to this. I can think of three particular events that in my opinion should have been recognized by the Post Office Department this year. It would have been much better to recognize them than to try to reproduce an Indian squaw nailing a deer hide to a frame while her husband sits smoking a pipe watching her do it. That may have some interest for tourists but I doubt it.
In Canada this year we are celebrating the 350th anniversary of the first settlement of white men north of the gulf of Mexico. It happened not in the United States but here in Canada, and happened in my own province and constituency. As a matter of fact the
[Mr. Nowlan.l
Postmaster General promised me he would issue a stamp commemorating that event but he said that after all they had these others in process and it would be two years before we could have the stamp I suggested available for distribution. We are celebrating the 350th anniversary in 1955 and although it will be a welcome tribute, shall we say, to see this stamp in 1957 it would certainly have been a lot better to have it in 1955. If you are going to continue the frankly and crudely cheap quality of the reproductions we see in our stamps today I still think it would not be too difficult to have a stamp issued between now and the end of 1955 to commemorate that event.
We are also celebrating the 200th anniversary of the return of the Acadians to the maritime provinces and the commemoration of their expulsion which occurred in 1755. Then there is another event which I would have thought would be of particular interest to the Post Office Department. I know it was brought to their attention by the Nova Scotia historical society. This is the 200th anniversary of the establishment of the first post office in Canada.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The 100th of the first one in western Canada.


George Clyde Nowlan: Well, 100 years from now we will celebrate the one in western Canada. But I would have thought the Post Office Department would have commemorated properly the 200th anniversary of the establishment of its own department, shall we say, because I have here extracts which appeared in the Boston Evening Post of April 28, 1755, announcing the fact that there was a post office in Halifax and that mails could be exchanged and circulated between Halifax and Boston. Many years ago the historic sites and monuments board, which comes under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, erected a plaque in Halifax commemorating the fact that the first post office was established in that city in 1755. As a matter of fact, the notice says, and it is of historic interest, that you will find the post office in "the first house without the south gate". You have to go out the gate and there is the house.
There are three events which I suggest, without any captious emphasis, should have been commemorated this year by a series of historical stamps. Although the Postmaster General is not here now-and we hope he will be back soon-he has said he is interested in this matter and I know there are others listening to me who are active in the administration of the department. I should

like to say to them in all kindness that I think we in this country are perhaps overlooking these matters of spiritual and cultural value and have been putting the emphasis on such things as the fur trade or wildlife, which may have a dollar and cents value. It may be a part of this materialistic concept on which I think we sometimes put too much emphasis. Perhaps it is because I come from an area where our roots are established-


An hon. Member:: In wildlife.


George Clyde Nowlan: We have our share of wildlife, too. Perhaps it is because I come from there and appreciate the value of history that I resent the way in which this country apparently is deliberately overlooking these matters which I think should be conserved and built up if a tradition of Canada and Cana-dianism is to be established as all members of parliament want to see it established. I will not labour the matter further, but I do urge upon the Acting Postmaster General that he review this matter and see if something cannot be done this year to commemorate these events to which I have referred. I also urge upon the administration of the department that in the future more attention be paid to our history. We have the historic sites and monuments board which the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources has reorganized and incorporated and which we hope will be a more effective force in the country than ever before. I believe it should be, and I think there should be the closest co-operation between the Post Office Department and the board so that national events such as the three I have enumerated, all of which, I suggest, are of national significance, will be properly remembered by the department in the issuing of commemorative stamps.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I think I have to assert my rights over the parliamentary assistant in this case for a reason that will appear in a moment. First of all, perhaps I should tell the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings that I am advised that the animal he mistook for a muskox was really the Acting Postmaster General listening to the speech of the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace. I must say that the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings has touched me in a very sentimental spot. The only profession I have is as a historian, and I am very much interested in the commemoration of these historic events. I think one of the best ways to do so is with postage stamps which everybody can see. I am not quite sure what little influence I may have
Supply-Post Office
in the Post Office Department from time to time, but whatever influence I have there, if I ever have another chance to have any such influence, and whatever little influence I may have in the government will always be directed in that direction.
In my proper ministerial capacity I was also very pleased to be told by the new director of the national gallery only this week that for the first time, so far as he knew, the national gallery was now being consulted by the Post Office Department about the designs for their stamps. I think that is a move in the right direction.


George Clyde Nowlan: It is.


John Whitney Pickersgill: 1 also think the hon. member's suggestion about close consultation with the historic sites and monuments board is an excellent idea. But the reason I rose instead of letting the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare rise was that I felt it was essential to disagree with the perversion of history that we had from Nova Scotia. Of course I know Nova Scotians will go on claiming that the first white settlement in North America north of the gulf of Mexico was at Port Royal, but we who are connected with Newfoundland know that when Humphrey Gilbert came there in 1583 there was already a settlement there and there has been one ever since.


George Clyde Nowlan: I should have said a permanent settlement.


Major James William Coldwell: When is the stamp to be issued celebrating the golden jubilee of the two western provinces, Alberta and Saskatchewan? Have arrangements been made, and when may we expect to see the stamps?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I understand arrangements have been made in that connection-


George Clyde Nowlan: Probably in the historic
series.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -and I believe it will be about the time of the anniversary.


Mr. Garland:: I am not as concerned with what is on the stamp as with the opportunity to use the stamp. I wonder if the Acting Postmaster General could say a word concerning the status of postal accommodation at air force bases. I want to apologize for delaying the committee by raising a matter of concern in my own riding, but I am sure similar situations must exist in many centres across the country.
Let me briefly outline the problem. The Department of National Defence has developed a very excellent air station at North

Supply-Post Office
Bay involving a capital cost of several millions of dollars. Everything has been provided there in a splendid fashion. There are churches, a school, a recreational hall, theatre, grocery store and all of the services that are normally required. When they were providing these things they also made provision for excellent postal accommodation. This is a real community that has developed at that base. It is on behalf of the people living in married quarters there that I should like to say a word.
This excellent accommodation has been provided, but that is as far as it has gone. The Department of National Defence requested the Post Office Department to appoint a postmaster there. The Post Office Department refused, at least that is my information, to make such an appointment unless the facilities would be made available to the general public. The Department of National Defence naturally, and quite properly, resist making their facilities available to the general public. I believe this problem, arising between two departments of government, should be worked out.
In the meantime, the people living in the married quarters, and the single quarters as well, of course, are without the usual postal services such as being able to buy money orders, stamps, the facilities of the savings bank, registered mail, etc. These people must travel three or four miles into North Bay or Gateway post office, to get these services that all of us have a right to expect these days. I am aware of the role of the armed forces postal service, but it seems to me this matter should be reviewed by both the post office and national defence departments with a view to establishing regular civilian postal facilities for the people of this important, and I might say completely modern, establishment.


Mr. Dinsdale:: The matter I have to raise tonight is a relatively minor, parochial matter compared to some of the issues the Post Office Department has been confronted with during these two days of discussion. I am genuinely sorry the minister is not able to be with us because I have been pursuing this subject with him now for two years. I believe he has been giving some serious attention to the problem, at least that was the impression I received during the discussion a year ago when we were considering these estimates.
The matter relates to the tendency for rural route deliveries in the prairie regions to decline. It affects my own constituency because from time to time a decision has to be made by the department to discontinue some of the rural routes that have been

established over a considerable number of years. In each case, the explanation given is that in this day of the universal use of the automobile farm patrons tend to go to the local post office to pick up their own mail rather than depend upon the traditional rural route delivery service. I fully appreciate that situation. The other main difficulty seems to arise from the impassable nature of certain rural roads in the western rural section.
I would point out again, Mr. Chairman, as I pointed out when we were considering this problem before, the roads in the western rural areas have always been of a somewhat indifferent nature so that problem is not one that has arisen in the recent past. There are still a large number of farm patrons living in isolated areas who do not have an automobile and are not able to handle the delivery of their own mail. I raise the issue I suppose because I still receive complaints from my constituency about the matter. In one area in particular, the town of Reston, three rural routes have been discontinued. I have received a communication that indicates that during the past winter some of the farm patrons have had to wait up to three weeks for mail delivery. The answer given by the minister last year, as recorded at page 4763 of Hansard for May 14, 1954, followed my question as to what was done in regard to the discontinuance of these rural routes and the possible solutions the department may have in mind to facilitate the delivery of mail to these relatively isolated locations. At that time the minister replied:
I am sorry but I have not that information, available at the moment because some of these routes have been readjusted. But I will be glad to look into this matter and if I have not the time to tell him before the end of the discussion on the estimates I will give him this information personally.
Unfortunately, I did not receive that information so I am repeating the question again this year. Just what are the trends in. so far as the discontinuation of these rural routes in the prairie regions is concerned? Has the trend continued during the past year and what solution, if any, is there for providing better mail deliveries to these isolated areas? Admittedly conditions in these districts are comparatively difficult. This is one of the reasons for the continuing exodus of the farmer from rural districts to the urban communities. This trend is particularly marked amongst the younger farm generation. If we are forced to discontinue postal services, that will only aggravate the problem of the de-population of our rural areas.
Closely related to this is another problem about which I should like to seek some information. This problem applies to the

house to house delivery in the rapidly growing suburban areas. It is a matter that comes to my attention from time to time, and invariably there seems to be some considerable delay before it is possible to provide house to house delivery in these rapidly growing areas around some of our expanding western communities. Then again we have certain areas in the west, particularly in the oil centres, where boom conditions prevail and where we have had a 100 per cent increase in population within the comparatively short time of three years. In one question that has come to my attention it has been pointed out that it is difficult to get the department to act by way of providing increased staff. If I mention the instance I have in mind I am sure the department will be aware of the problem, because it was a live issue around Christmastime last year. I refer of course to the town of Virden, Manitoba, which is the oil centre of our province. There was quite a furore over the lack of adequate staffing in that post office, which had resulted from the growth of population in the community in a short time to the extent of two or three thousand people. It may be, of course, that this was just a tempest in a teapot. However, I would ask just how quickly the department acts in meeting the difficulties presented to the postal service because of rapidly growing populations.
One final question. In the city of Brandon we have been waiting since 1951 for an extension to our post office. The matter has been under consideration for the past three or four years. I understand a promise was given, and I am wondering just how close to realization is the possibility of having very badly needed extended facilities in the Brandon post office.
Those are the only questions I have in mind. As I have said, perhaps they are parochial, but I would appreciate some information on these points.


James Ralph Kirk: Mr. Chairman, before replying to the last two speakers may I say a word in reply to some of the comments made by the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace. In particular, he referred to a question he asked on March 25 about T-4 forms. I remember the question being asked, and I also remember having the answer prepared. Then, I remember his sending me a note across the floor of the house and, as I recall it, it was my understanding that he was going to ask his question again. He did not do this and, of course, the answer was not given. However, I was under the impression I had given the answer to him. Apparently I did not, and for that I apologize.
Supply-Post Office
I now have the answer before me. However,
I do not know whether all these details should be read into Hansard. I am happy to send them to the hon. member now.


William McLean Hamilton: Let
me say at once that the parliamentary assistant did in the corridor show me a paper with information on it, and then asked for it back. My request in this instance is that the explanation for this set of circumstances be placed before the house.


James Ralph Kirk: Anyway, the matter is somewhat clearer now than it was before. I must say that I thought I had given the information.- However, these details are sometimes missed because when one is answering hundreds of questions one can forget minor things. My recollection is that the hon. member asked for information concerning income tax forms in relation to employees in the Montreal and Ottawa post offices. Then, in one of his notes he mentioned Montreal and Toronto. My information is as follows:
In Toronto the forms were duly processed in the Toronto post office after receipt from the treasury office and were all released on March 8.
In Montreal, according to information received from the postmaster, the forms were released as follows:
T-4 forms for regular salaries for full-time staff, March 18;
T-4 forms for the night differential for the full-time staff, March 18;
T-4 forms for the salaries of the part-time staff, March 18;
T-4 forms for the Christmas help, March 21;
TP-4 forms for the regular salaries for the full-time staff, March 18;
TP-4 forms for night differential for the full-time staff, March 23;
TP-4 forms for salaries of the part-time staff and Christmas help, March 23.
In Ottawa, all forms were released between March 1 and March 4.
Prior to this year of course these TP-4 forms which are required for employees in Quebec were not necessary. Prior to this year the night differential was liquidated in time, that is, by hours off rather than in dollars and cents.
Then, one other point; there is a month's delay in figuring out the actual overtime and the amount that has to be paid to an individual for overtime. All this meant additional forms to be made and to be filled out. Apparently it was not possible to do this

Supply-Post Office
with the same size of staff as quickly as it was done in the previous years.
The answer is quite obvious: Either the regulation has to be changed or additional staff must be added to get them out that much earlier. I hope I have given the hon. member all the information he requires.
In reply to the hon. member for Nipissing, may I say I understand there is an agreement between the Department of National Defence and the Post Office Department whereby in those cases where the camps are what are generally known as closed camps the Department of National Defence supplies the staff; and in those camps known as "open" camps, the Post Office Department supplies the staff. However, may I suggest that in this particular case I shall be glad to look into the matter and try to give the full details next week.
In reply to the hon. member for Brandon-Souris, I would say there is a trend over a period of years for the number of rural routes to increase, for the mileage based on the daily service to increase, and for the number of rural mail boxes to increase. However, in changing times, with more people having motor cars, with more people moving off farms, with some roads not being kept up as well as they were, while others are being kept up better, there will, of course, be rearrangements in routes. Each case has to be studied on its own merits.
With regard to his question about suburban areas, I think the hon. member will find that his question was answered this afternoon.
I am sorry I cannot give any definite information regarding the problem at Virden, or the particular problem in Brandon. I think he knows however that I shall be very happy to look into both of them. I hope he will not expect me to give the information to him next week, because I am going to visit the province, of which he is so proud, and the week will be a short one so far as my stay in Ottawa is concerned.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Is it possible to say whether there will be any rural routes discontinued this year?


James Ralph Kirk: think the only answer I can give is that no doubt some will be discontinued, and that there will be many new ones. Again it will depend on the individual situation, but if the hon. member has a specific case in mind I would be glad to look into it.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Nothing but rumours. On the specific Brandon point, I was referring to the matter of additional post office facilities in the form of a new buiding. Has the post office no information on that development?


James Ralph Kirk: The
only information I have at the moment is that plans are under study. More can be obtained as soon as I have a chance to look at the file.


William Gilbert Weir: In line with the exchange of discussion a while ago with respect to stamps, may I ask the parliamentary assistant if the department has prepared a stamp bearing the picture of the whooping crane, a migratory bird, which has become almost extinct. Might I say in that connection that sportsmen in the game and fisheries association of Manitoba have taken a good deal of interest in this. In fact one of them sent in a drawing of what he thought would be a suitable design for a stamp to commemorate the whooping crane, a procedure which was looked upon as a very patriotic effort on his part, and one which might help to preserve this bird from extinction. Can the parliamentary assistant say whether anything of that kind has been accomplished?


James Ralph Kirk: understand that a stamp depicting the whooping crane has been issued, and no doubt it was done as a result of the representations made by people who are as interested in the subject as the hon. member who has spoken.


Mr. Purdy:: Mr. Chairman, in the old days when we went to a burlesque show we would hear the song, I Wonder What's The Matter With the Mail; It Never Was So Late Before. I do not suggest that this is a burlesque show. I do not wish to say that this is the general song which is being sung by my constituents in this day and age. Nevertheless, it is a song that some of them must sing, and on their behalf I should like to say a word tonight. One group is rather recent, and I drew it to the attention of the department yesterday. The other group, however, consists chiefly of the residents in and around the suburbs of the hub of Nova Scotia, namely Truro. They have been singing this song for more than a year. In fact, they have been singing it ever since the new regulations went into effect a year ago last April. A few years ago these people received two mails a day. Then they got one mail delivery a day, which was not too bad. Then they were asked to pay another cent for postage, and instead of getting an improved mail service or a service which was at least as good as they were receiving before, they are getting their mail much later in the day.
I should like to say right here that the fault does not lie with the local postal authorities. We know they have gone as far as they can, and they have done everything possible having regard to the regulations

under which they must work. The problem rests right here in Ottawa, and with the Acting Postmaster General, his assistant and his departmental officials. To give our people as good a mail service as they had, to which they are entitled, the department must give them a little larger staff. On behalf of my constituents I make that plea.


William McLean Hamilton: There are two or three questions which remain to be cleared up. I would say in answer to the parliamentary assistant's observations tonight that all these forms to which I had reference should be filed by February 28; if not, the government assesses a penalty on the business firms not doing so. I can only hope that one department of the government is not collecting any penalty from another department in this particular case. I also hope that the same excuse which he gave to the committee, namely, that they did not have the opportunity to make it ready, will be acceptable to the Department of National Revenue with respect to all the other business firms across Canada if they choose to file between the middle and end of March.
Having said that, I should like to take the questions which I have asked to which answers have not been forthcoming and deal with them one at a time. I hope the Acting Postmaster General will not get mental indigestion by my so doing, which seems to trouble him at times. First of all, will he give us an explanation of the increase in travelling expenses in his department which have approximately tripled? They have risen from $35,000 to $100,000.


Mr. Kirk (Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare):: With respect to this item of $100,000 for travelling expenses, provision is made for travelling and living expenses of the Postmaster General, the parliamentary assistant, the deputy postmaster general and their staffs; the directors of administration and personnel and their staffs, who are required to travel on post office business, and includes those on training courses.
I might mention the training courses, which should explain the reason for the increases to which the hon. member has referred. A new management training plan has been put into effect, which calls for 16 new positions. Training courses are being put on at the Peterborough post office. There is also the travelling and living expenses for the investigation staff of two senior and three field investigators. These are changes, Mr. Chairman, that were recommended by the Woods-Gordon report.


William McLean Hamilton: understood the parliamentary assistant to say 50433-265
Supply-Post Office
that the primary reason for the increase in travelling expenses is those management training courses.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: Yes.


William McLean Hamilton: That is rather interesting. The parliamentary assistant told me that 16 people are taking the courses. There are 16 management trainees, and the increase in the expenses amounts to $70,000, which is roughly $4,000 per management trainee for travelling expenses alone, according to the answer just placed on the record.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: wonder whether I might correct that? I think there is a misunderstanding. With respect to these 16 training positions, we bring in 16 men and train them for a period. Someone else must replace them while they are in Ottawa. Then we bring another 16 to Ottawa or Peterborough, and another 16, and so on.


William McLean Hamilton: The
details in the estimates mention 16 management trainees. They are listed as new positions. That jibes exactly with what the parliamentary assistant told us the first time. I put the question, and he said yes. As soon as he sees where it leads him he says no. Is he going to give us a further explanation? Surely, it is not $4,000 a year for travelling expenses per man. That is rather steep.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: Sixteen people are brought in, and when you bring them in for training someone else must replace them. That requires 16 new positions. The trainees are changed 3 or 4 times a year.


William McLean Hamilton: The
answer is unsatisfactory, but I shall not pursue it any farther.


An hon. Member:: You do not understand English.


William McLean Hamilton: wish the Postmaster General and his assistant understood English as well as I do.
Let me take the next point, Mr. Chairman. During the afternoon we were led to believe that the $5 million surplus in the post office this year was largely owing to the fact, or certainly partially owing to the fact, that the expenses incurred in one year were to be paid in another year. May we have an explanation of that, because it is hardly sound accounting practice.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: While we are looking for the particular paper which contains the various items, may

Supply-Post Office
I say this. In previous years the items carried over did not approximate $700,000.


William McLean Hamilton: While the minister and his assistant are looking for the paper, perhaps I could receive more detail on the point which was raised this afternoon regarding thefts from the post office. It would be helpful to the committee if the parliamentary assistant could point out what effort is being made to improve this situation so that four out of five people who steal from the post office will not get away free.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think I can answer this question. This return shows every theft that has been made from the post office so far as they have been discovered. As every hon. member who has any experience in these matters knows, sometimes, especially where the thefts are committed by an employee of any organization, these thefts may go on for quite some time before they are discovered. Sometimes they are not discovered at all. Sometimes people who are responsible for these thefts are never discovered, especially when the thieves are people who break in and steal. I know this from personal knowledge because when I was a small boy my father was a postmaster and almost the last day before his resignation was accepted so that he could go to the first war the post office was robbed of quite a considerable amount of money, every cent of which he had to make up.


An hon. Member:: Did they catch the
thief?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Never; no trace was ever discovered of him. This happens quite frequently in thefts from the post office, as in other thefts in the country. The Post Office Department does exactly the same sort of thing as any other prudent organization does. It takes the best precautions it can to prevent such thefts. When any thefts are discovered, the police are informed at once and given any information that will assist them in finding the thieves. Whenever the thieves or suspects are found who can be charged, where there is enough evidence to warrant a prosecution, the department of government which has the responsibility is asked to prosecute. Of course, prosecutions for theft are carried on by the appropriate authorities which have the responsibility. I can assure the hon. member that the Post Office Department does not want to have money stolen from the post offices, that we do not encourage this practice and that we do everything we reasonably know how to discourage it. As far as the prosecutions are concerned, the Postmaster General's report for the year ending March 31, 1954, at page

5, gives the statistics that there were 305 prosecutions that year, 229 convictions, 7 acquittals, and 69 cases still in court. It sometimes happens that it is a long time before the thief is discovered. These things do happen, but I can assure the committee, as I am sure most hon. members believe, that every possible effort is made to remove the temptation to theft in the first place, to remove the possibilities of it within practical means, and if there is any possible way of finding out who the thief is, to prosecute him.


Daniel Roland Michener: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I might ask the minister a question, arising out of his reference to the report for 1954. I may have been negligent in not getting that report, but I have not received a copy of the report. When I was preparing for these estimates and considering them I looked among the reports and found that the last one was March 31, 1953. I should like to ask when was the report tabled and when was it printed, and has it been distributed?


John Whitney Pickersgill: It was tabled in January. Though I was the minister for the printing bureau, I do not know whether you would call it mimeographed, but it is not printed. There were only a few copies available at that time. I regret to say that between the Post Office Department and the printing bureau it has not yet been printed in quantity and distributed, and I am very sorry for that. I think perhaps there has been a little negligence in the matter.


Daniel Roland Michener: I am glad to share that opinion.


William McLean Hamilton: wish to refer to another point. I hope that the minister and his associates are still looking for the information in respect to the $5 million. I do not want them to forget that. This afternoon we asked for further details as to why it should be more costly to have two deliveries of mail a day for five days a week than one a day for six days a week. I wonder if we could have some more information on that.


James Ralph Kirk: With regard to the first question, the amount of the accounts payable that did not come in time to be paid at the close of the fiscal year are in round figures; printing, $200,000; mail bags and sorting cases, $350,000; uniforms, $50,000; electronic projects, $30,000; facing up tables, $20,000; miscellaneous bills, $50,000. As regards the second question, I do not know what I can add to what I said this afternoon to show that, if you make ten trips a week, it cannot be done as cheaply as when you make six trips a week.


John Borden Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I should like to put on record the very startling discrepancy between the annual report of the Postmaster General which shows 305 prosecutions and the return filed in this house which shows 23 prosecutions.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think the answer is that these were prosecutions for all sorts of reasons. I am not sure they are for the same year.


John Borden Hamilton: The
figures for 23 prosecutions were for the same period as quoted by the report. Your parliamentary return shows 23 prosecutions, and you show in the annual report 305 prosecutions. It is quite apparent that the discrepancy is largely due to the fact that you are prosecuting for such things as forgeries, defacing, used stamps and miscellaneous. I felt that we should put it in the record. I do not want anybody to be in a position to weasel out of the statement I made here that four out of five thefts and robberies in the post office at the present time are going unprosecuted. In that connection the minister has told us that they lay an information with civil authorities in the case of such a theft. Have they no investigating body of their own? They have not followed through when something is stolen. When something is stolen from you, you do your best to discover what happened?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Of course, investigations are carried on all the time.


William McLean Hamilton: Would the minister not say he has been markedly unsuccessful in the operation of this particular department when he is only catching the thieves in one case out of five?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would not be able to say whether it is markedly unsuccessful or not. It is obviously very difficult to prosecute someone whose identity you cannot establish. It is sometimes considered by the law officers quite useless to attempt to prosecute someone, even though you may have a very strong suspicion that he is the thief, when the evidence is so slender that the prospect of getting a conviction is very slight. Sometimes that is done, even in those cases when the department or the crown attorney, as the case may be, feels strongly that the person is the guilty person and it is felt that we ought to try to establish the guilt. In many of these cases there may be a suspect, but the evidence is very slight. Many of these thefts are of very small amounts in very remote places where the obtaining of evidence is not very easy. In a great many 50433-265J
Supply-Post Office
of these cases, as in the case I instanced out of my personal knowledge, there is no suspect at all.


William Gilbert Weir: Mr. Chairman, is there not another side to this? I have heard of cases where someone, perhaps an employee of the Post Office Department, committed an indiscretion and perhaps was found to have stolen some of the post office funds under circumstances which could not be accepted at all, but maybe there was some circumstance in his family and, having regard to the amount and the circumstance in which the theft took place, I am sure there are instances where the community has interceded on behalf of that person to avoid a prosecution and to ask the department not to prosecute. Maybe that is not right but it seems to me that I have heard of more than one case where a veteran, as an illustration, has been involved and where they lost their jobs but made complete restitution. In those cases, judging from the circumstances, I believe the department was justified in not continuing with the prosecution. That would explain some of the discrepancies my hon. friend mentions


William McLean Hamilton: Just in case that impression should be left with the committee of a great humanitarian government which is not prosecuting because they are sorry for people, let me tell you of some of the prosecutions they have made. In Insinger, Saskatchewan, $3.29; one person was prosecuted and got 2 years and 4 months. In Windsor, province of Quebec, $7.05; 2 people were prosecuted and they sent 2 juveniles to the detention home. Copper River, British Columbia, $13; 3 people were prosecuted and each got a 2-year suspended sentence.


Mr. Lesage:: In this case was there any housebreaking?


William McLean Hamilton: These were thefts from the post office.


Jean Lesage: With housebreaking?


William McLean Hamilton: should be delighted to file another request for a return in order to get this information but I think perhaps the minister might be able to obtain it for himself. I am quoting from information filed with the house at my request. If the minister is not satisfied with the information or thinks that it is insufficient, I leave it with him to get more. I have enough for my purposes.
Here is another one in Gwynne, Alberta, where for $2.38 they prosecuted and the man

Supply-Post Office
got two years. Then in Oakbine, New Brunswick for $7.67 they prosecuted 2 people. One man got a 1-year suspended sentence and the other was sent to a training school. I could go on down the list but I will not do so. However, I felt that the previous speech indicating humanitarian consideration should be knocked on the head immediately because it just is not so in these cases. If you analyse these thefts you will find that what is happening is that the great majority of prosecutions are in respect of amounts less than $100 and that few prosecutions are in respect of major amounts. I would not suggest that a man should consider stealing $2, $3, $4 or $5 from the post office, because he is likely to be prosecuted. If he really wants to stand a fair chance of getting away free, let him steal $20,000 or, as my friend suggests, $44,500, and then he stands a good chance of getting away free,


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I really must protest. Is the hon. gentleman suggesting that there is any deliberate intent on the part of anyone connected with the Post Office Department to connive at these thefts or any failure by anyone to do his duty in prosecuting? If that is the innuendo, let him state it openly because there is not a jot or tittle of truth in it.
.Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace): Mr. Chairman, I may just say that my previous observation was made because the hon. member for Portage-Neepawa-and I am glad his words are on the record-had definitely indicated that the department might be conniving and might be doing these things because of a particular situation in a particular instance. I felt that we should show that the department was prosecuting in the few cases where their investigatory work had managed to show up something. My criticism among others is the extremely weak investigatory work on the part of the department. The minister says that he cannot prosecute anybody unless they find the man. I suggest that they are spending a good deal of money apparently on investigatory staff. They are supposed to be doing this job and they are just not finding the people who commit these crimes. But let me not be blamed for the words of the hon. member for Portage-Neepawa.


Mrs. Fairclough:: While we are on this subject, Mr. Chairman, perhaps the Acting Postmaster General would enlighten the committee as to the situation with regard to losses in the Post Office Department and responsibility therefor. A few minutes ago he made some reference to losses which had

been made up in some years past, I take it, by a member of his own family. Perhaps he would tell us under what circumstances postmasters are now required to make restitution for losses by reason of theft or robbery.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: understand that there are certain rules and regulations which the postmasters are supposed to follow with regard to the protection of the funds in their charge. If the losses take place because they did not follow those rules or in other words if they did not give the funds the protection they are supposed to give, then it is their own personal responsibility.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: From what knowledge I have of industrial and commercial procedure, I am led to make the observation that most employees in industry and commerce today are protected by bond or are protected by insurance against robbery or theft and that if circumstances occur that are seemingly beyond the control of the individuals or even if there is some slight element of carelessness on their part, a thorough investigation is undertaken by the company which has them insured. I presume that in the Post Office Department run by the government they follow the policy of what is generally known as carrying their own insurance.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: That is right.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: But it would appear as though, under their own insurance, they did not pursue an investigation to the point of exonerating a postmaster from blame.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a matter of fact, from my own experience as Acting Postmaster General I can say that every week I sign three or four recommendations to the treasury board to reimburse postmasters because of various things that have happened such as fires, thefts or things of that sort, where an investigation has been made and the postmaster has carried out the precautions that are laid down in the regulations. In those circumstances the department accepts the loss but where there is carelessness or disregard of the regulations which all postmasters, of course, are supposed to be familiar with, then the blame is theirs. That is the law as it now is. Although I do not think any of us would have them right here under our hands, I should be glad to get for the hon. lady from Hamilton West the regulations setting out the circumstances in which the department takes responsibility and the circumstances in which the postmaster is held responsible.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I would be much more interested in a comparison of those regulations with those which are in force in some reputable bonding or insurance company.


John Whitney Pickersgill: We might try to make such a comparison.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I have in my hand a photostat that I should like to show to the Acting Postmaster General.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, no!


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Have you any copies?


Stanley Howard Knowles: I heard the Acting Postmaster General say, "Oh, no" in a very pained tone of voice. I hasten to assure him that there is no secret as to where I got this photostat. It was sent to me by an official of the Manitoba Historical Society in Winnipeg. I want to send this photostat across so the acting minister, the parliamentary assistant and the officials may look at it because of a question the Acting Postmaster General asked of me on February 28. It has taken me almost as long to provide the answer to the question as it takes the government to answer some of the questions we put on the order paper. On February 28, in reply to a question I had asked on the orders of the day about the celebration of the 100th anniversary of the opening of the first post office in western Canada, the minister said this:
... I would like to know what kind of postage stamps they used, and if the hon. member could supply me with some, because I could make good use of them.
I may tell the minister that I can only let him see this. There is a stamp collector in my home as well so that is where it must go after he has seen it. This happens to be a photostatic copy of a cover, as they say in the post office, which went from Red River, B.N.A., in 1855, to Mr. James Ross at Knox's College, Toronto, Canada West.


Mr. Martin:: It is not Knox's college; it is Knox college.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The Minister of National Health and Welfare seems to delight in interrupting me, and he delights to do it particularly when he is wrong. I would be glad if he would look at this photostat, too. In fact, the season is open for showing photostats to all ministers of the crown. It so happens that the person who addressed this letter to Mr. James Ross addressed it to him at Knox's college-K-n-o-x-'-s. This was before the minister's day.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Your pronunciation was bad. I knew there was something wrong.
Supply-Post Office


Stanley Howard Knowles: This was in 1855. We have had the minister around for a long time but not that long. "Red River" was of course the name of the settlement where we now have the thriving city of Winnipeg.


William Scottie Bryce: Selkirk. Keep the record
straight.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am afraid the point in the Red River settlement from which this letter was mailed was at the foot of what is now Market street in the city of Winnipeg. My friend from Selkirk and I can, of course, carry this on later. "B.N.A." refers to British North America, the province of Manitoba not having yet been organized at that time. As for the specific question-


Mr. Mcllraith:: Let us get on with the public business.


Stanley Howard Knowles: -that the minister asked me, namely, what kind of stamps they used, the reply is that they did not use any stamps. In place of affixing stamps this envelope was stamped twice with a rubber stamp. First there are the words "Paid 10", which the Manitoba historical society has determined means that 10 cents in United States money had been paid to cover the cost of delivering this letter all the way from Red River to Toronto. The route taken was down through Pembina and then to St. Paul, Detroit, Windsor and Toronto. There is also stamped on the envelope "6d" or six pence in a circle surrounded by the words "United States". Research seems to have ascertained that this was the way the United States postal authorities had of telling the Canadian postal authorities between Windsor and Toronto that the postage which had been paid included the Canadian postage which at that time was in sterling. As a matter of fact, I have on my desk some documents in which the minister may be interested giving still further history of what went on in those days.
I am happy to send this over to the minister in response to his question of February 28 so that he and those associated with him can have a look at it. I am still sorry that the department did not find it possible to commemorate this event by the issue of a special stamp. However, some of us are doing our best to commemorate it in another way by attending certain events which will take place in Winnipeg on Tuesday of next week.


Mr. Gagnon:: Mr. Chairman, in his speech yesterday the parliamentary assistant to the Postmaster General said, speaking about the building program of the department, that there are 181 projects for which plans are being prepared and studied further, both by

Supply-Post Office
the public works and post office departments. I should like to know if the Chicoutimi project is included in that figure.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: In
public works?


Paul-Edmond Gagnon: The parliamentary assistant said yesterday that there are 181 projects for which plans are being prepared and studied further, both by the public works and by the post office departments. I should like to know if the Chicoutimi project is included.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: The
hon. member for Brandon-Souris asked me a question about a building in his area, and unfortunately I did not have the details then. I promised to find out for him the first chance I have next week, and all I can say to the hon. member for Chicoutimi is that I will be very happy to do the same for him.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
335. Operations-including salaries and other expenses of staff post offices, district offices, railway mail service staffs, and supplies, equipment and other items for revenue post offices, also including administration, $82,103,422.
Mr. Robinson (Bruce):: I should like some information under this item. What plan is followed in connection with placing telephones in smaller post offices such as are found in towns of 2,000 to 4,000 people?


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: am informed that telephones are placed in all staff offices.


Andrew Ernest Robinson: Can you explain what you mean by staff offices?


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: It
is based on the revenue of the office. Speaking very generally, you might say that if the revenue is $10,000 or over you will find the offices have telephones.


Andrew Ernest Robinson: I take it there is probably a table or schedule that could be followed.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: the hon. gentleman will let me know the particular office he has in mind I will be happy to find out for him.


Andrew Ernest Robinson: Thank you very much.
Mr. Her ridge: Mr. Chairman, I rise to deal very briefly with a matter that has become somewhat of a hardy perennial as far as some of my constituents are concerned. But I must raise it again as they are concerned about it and are suffering great inconvenience because my repeated representations have

not received favourable consideration to date. For over 50 years the Post Office Department carried on a very satisfactory mail service on the Arrow lakes, but a few years ago the officials saw fit to discontinue it. For the greater part Of the region they made other very satisfactory arrangements through bus transportation, to Edgewood, and steamer service or other water transportation to serve the lower lake. However, the discontinuance of the former service has meant a great deal of inconvenience to some of the residents of the city of Revelstoke and in the district between Revelstoke and Edgewood. Because of this situation there have been representations made to me by boards of trade, farmers' institutes, fruit unions, lumber companies and many individuals, including some of the relatives of the parliamentary assistant who also support me wholeheartedly in my representations on this matter. I hope the parliamentary assistant will answer me satisfactorily because I am going to send Hansard to my constituents on Monday morning.
At any rate, this matter is of great concern to a number of my constituents who consider they are unnecessarily inconvenienced. The provincial government taxation and other offices are situated in the city of Revelstoke, and there is considerable correspondence between points on the lake, particularly from Edgewood north, to Revelstoke on the part of business people, lumber concerns, farmers and the residents generally. Under present conditions a letter posted in Nakusp has to go to Nelson by truck, from Nelson to Calgary by Canadian Pacific Air Lines and then from Calgary along the main line of the C.P.R. to Revelstoke, and this takes at least three or four days. As a matter of fact, it often takes up to ten days to get a reply to a letter sent from the Upper Arrow lakes to Revelstoke or vice versa.
This is a great inconvenience when it comes to paying taxes and dealing with the various branches of the provincial government at Revelstoke. I have been asked to urge the minister and his officials again to give consideration to making arrangements for a mail bag to go between Revelstoke and Nakusp twice weekly. For a short time, because of the discontinuance of the former C.P.R. steamer service, there was no service on the Arrow lakes, but now we have a service running three days a week between Arrowhead and Nakusp in the slimmer and in the winter months twice weekly. I urge the minister that consideration be given to providing for the carrying of a mail bag from Revelstoke to Nakusp, and return. When the mail reaches Nakusp it can then go on to Edgewood and lower points the following

day by bus, and from Edgewood back to Revelstoke the same way. This will be a great improvement in mail service. I cannot understand why it would involve a large expenditure. In that connection I want to point out to the minister's officials that in the area I have mentioned there was produced several million dollars' worth of forest products last year. I do think that the representations of the organizations in the district, and the many individuals, including the relatives of the parliamentary assistant, should receive favourable consideration.


James Ralph Kirk: May
I say that the hon. member who has just spoken is always so kind and courteous that one feels one should immediately carry out his particular request. In this case I wonder if I might take a moment to tell him that I knew he was very fortunate, and I think the whole house should realize by now how fortunate he is, that a relative of mine should be a neighbour of his.


Mr. Herridge:: They have been good neighbours for nearly 50 years.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: I
would certainly expect them to be good neighbours, just as I know they have good neighbours. We have recently appointed a transportation officer whose particular duty it is to look into situations such as this. In view of the representations, and in view of those particular circumstances the hon. member has mentioned, we might go so far, without being unfair to anyone else, as to ask him to look into that case as quickly as possible.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: There is a curious situation shown in the details on pages 444 and 445, which I should like to have explained. It rather looks as though there is an increase in the post office staff of approximately 1,000 persons. There are some 170 less railway mail clerks than formerly, resulting in a net addition to the staff of some 800 persons. Despite this fact, when we come down to the payment for unemployment insurance contributions we find the appropriation is precisely the same as it was last year. Is there any explanation for that?


James Ralph Kirk: I
believe the only brief answer I can give to that is that unemployment insurance is only paid in connection with temporary employees.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: You expect those to be in the same numbers as they were in former years, I take it? Then, the net increase of 800 persons shown is in permanent employees, is that correct?
Supply-Post Office


James Ralph Kirk: Yes,
I think that is correct.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I have another question. I find the appropriation for uniforms and letter carriers' satchels is double what it was last year. Does that mean this is the year when they get uniforms, and if so, has any consideration been given by the department to my suggestion of last year that this time they should make the uniforms fit?


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is a good idea.


James Ralph Kirk: The
answer is in the affirmative to both questions.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We shall see.


John Borden Hamilton: In
the details on page 445, there is an item I want to mention. I have been somewhat critical of some aspects of the post office operations, but I should like to say that in one case, that is mail bags, there has been a reduction of some $200,000. I feel that is a credit to the department. I know how it came about. It came about through the use, as I remember, of nylon in place of the old cotton material. I believe the Canadian postal department was ahead of other places in this development. It displays good forward-looking thinking.
Now, there are one or two other items about which I should like to ask. On page 445 of the details there is shown an expenditure of $4,302,000 for casuals and others. What does that represent? Perhaps I could make the question a little plainer by asking: What type of person is that being paid to? Is it a part-time employee or a regular employee?


James Ralph Kirk: This amount covers casual and other employees, and refers chiefly to the additional staff we have to put on during the Christmas rush.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: That
is what I thought it was. Let me say that I am the first person to admit that at Christmastime, certainly in my area, many people come to me and say they would like to have a letter of introduction to the post office to get a special job. I give them a letter which gives their name and address, and pass them on to the Post Office Department. None of the people covered by this item are regular civil servants. I believe it should be mentioned that this is the type of thing that we have to watch very carefully because it represents an opportunity for patronage. We have here an amount of $4,302,000, which, by selecting carefully the people who were paid, could amount to quite a contribution to the government's friends if they so wished.

Supply-Post Office
Now, would the parliamentary assistant like to explain the item of $1,400,000 for night differential payments for operating services? It is a new item this year. Since it is only a small amount it might have escaped the minister's attention.


James Ralph Kirk: I
mentioned earlier that the night differential is now paid in money rather than in time off. It is a new item because of that.


William McLean Hamilton: There is another item farther down, professional and special services, $132,825 in 1954-55 and $481,000 in 1955-56. This represents an increase of about three and a half times. I think it would be helpful if we could have an explanation of this increase.


James Ralph Kirk: The
main item in this amount is for studies and research on the electronic project which is being accelerated. It has now been advanced far enough to justify the installation of a prototype electronic sorter in the Ottawa post office. This item also allows for the construction of the automatic facing-up installation to which I referred earlier today.


William McLean Hamilton: Along the lines of my earlier question regarding the employment of casuals, could the parliamentary assistant inform the house as to what part of his departmental payroll is in respect of people employed through regular civil service channels and what part for people who are employed through other than civil service channels? We have already located some $4,300,000 in one item. What other payments in respect of staff does his department make which are not in respect of people employed through the civil service?


James Ralph Kirk: It
covers, as I mentioned earlier, Christmas help and it also covers people who are taken on to allow a postmaster in some of the smaller offices to take holidays.


John Borden Hamilton: Could the parliamentary assistant tell us how many people are permanent and how many are temporary who are covered by this item?
I know he has just said it covers Christmas help, and obviously they are temporary. I suggest a certain number of those people are permanent.


James Ralph Kirk: casuals are temporary.


Mr. While (Middlesex Easl):: There are two questions I should like to ask the parliamentary assistant. I notice in this report that the estimated total expenditure for this year is $133 million. What would be the gross
[Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace).)
estimated income? I intended to ask concerning the possibility of introducing the highway motor trucks similar to the railway carriages, by way of experiment. Have any investigations been carried on by the Post Office Department along these lines, and when and where will they be tried out?


James Ralph Kirk: This afternoon I thanked the hon. member-it must have been in his absence-for his interest in this new type of motor vehicle, and explained that our inspectors had looked them over in the United States and had travelled in them. I said that we have been watching developments with some interest, and that if and when the time should come when we could put such vehicles into service economically we would be only too happy to do so. I would not like to commit myself as to the last part of his question, and I am sure he does not expect me to do so at the moment. In reply to his other question may I say that the estimated revenue, in round figures is $155 million.


Andrew Ernest Robinson: At page 441 of the
details there is an amount of $192,000 for films, displays, advertising and other informational publicity. What types of publicity does this include, and what is the necessity for it?


James Ralph Kirk: The
hon. member is referring to films, displays, advertising and other informational publicity. This item covers postal exhibits, displays and floats, photography, meals of employees while on duty at these postal exhibits, promotional signs, and householder leaflets which we circulate in large cities with regard to Christmas mailing. Our whole object is to enlist public support and request partial sortings at points of mailing. The benefits are twofold, the first being that of speeding up delivery, and the second that of reducing costs.


Andrew Ernest Robinson: The purpose is to educate the public around Christmastime. Is it to try to speed up early mailing during that season of the year? Does it require $192,000 to do that?


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: It
covers all the films, displays, advertising and informational publicity across Canada. One of the most important points is trying to teach the people to address mail properly, to mail early, and to have large organizations arrange their mail in such a way that it can be handled more quickly. It also includes putting up signs in post offices, and the like.


Mr. White (Middlesex East):: Did I understand the parliamentary assistant to say that the estimated income of the department was $155 million?


James Ralph Kirk: That is right.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I am very much surprised by this statement. I remember that last year when we were discussing in the house the increase in postal rates the Postmaster General, with the assistance of two other members of the cabinet, tried to convince the house that the post office would operate this year at a loss. If my recollection is correct, without having before me the figures placed on record at that time, there were estimates varying all the way from $6 million to $14 million. Now we find that in the actual appropriation for the department for the current year the estimates are merely some $3,500,000 more than had been appropriated for the year before. If the minister's estimate of revenue for this year is anything approaching correct he is going to have a surplus of $17 million. Yet on this basis the government insisted it was necessary to raise the postal rates last year.
This comes as a surprise to me, but it bears out the validity of the arguments we made last year against raising postal rates. I could not let this opportunity pass without placing these remarks on record. I think what was said last year must now be given its proper value in the minds of Canadians. The position is an absurd one, based on poor budgeting, to say the least.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Loans, investments and advances-
543. To extend the operation of the revolving fund established pursuant to vote 541, Appropriation Act, No. 4, 1954, for the purpose of acquiring and managing materials and fittings to be used in the manufacture of mail bags, the total amount to be charged to the revolving fund at any time not to exceed $695,000; additional amount required, $270,000.
William McLean Hamilton: Before the departmental estimates are completed, I should like to make one observation which harks back to an earlier item. I refer to the interesting discovery that $100,000 by way of travelling expenses-


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order. The item to which the hon. member is now referring has already been passed. I would be prepared to have the discussion continue under item 543; but if the hon. member wishes to discuss items that have been carried, the consent of the committee would have to be obtained. The administration item was signed half an hour ago.
Sup p ly-A griculture


William McLean Hamilton: My
impression may be wrong, but I understood that when we had gone through the department we could make some further observations.


John Whitney Pickersgill: We have tried to be patient with the hon. member, and I think we must insist upon observance of the rules.


George Alexander Drew: Oh dear, dear!


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.	.

[Stage Direction]
Administration service-
1. Departmental administration (including advisory committee on agricultural services), $496,998.
James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


James Garfield Gardiner: I think that is the proper way to address the group gathered here this evening-


George Clyde Nowlan: How about calling it ten
o'clock?


James Garfield Gardiner: -because I have been listening for two days to a discussion which I think was intended to be heard outside the house, under the circumstances prevailing.


George Alexander Drew: Do I take it the minister is not speaking for the benefit of people outside the house?


James Garfield Gardiner: Both inside and outside.
Discussions during the session have covered quite a number of questions having to do with agriculture. I am afraid if I were to try to follow them through, and refer back to the many things that have been said, I would be called to order immediately. So I am not going to attempt to answer what has been said throughout the session, in spite of the fact that I have had no previous opportunity of doing so. But I hope during the time the estimates are under discussion on the individual items, by questioning and otherwise these matters can be covered.
However, it has been customary on the first item of the estimates to have a general discussion, and I presume that is desired at this time. Members of the house throughout this session have been suggesting that the Department of Agriculture should increase production to take care of an underfed world and at the same time maintain producers' returns at a high level. Attention must be and is being given to both suggestions, but I am sure it will be agreed that what is done in one direction will influence what can be done in the other. However, the last appeals

Supply-Agriculture
which have been made by farm organizations, particularly the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, are different from the appeals which have been made in this house, as I hope to point out.
It is the task of the Department of Agriculture to promote the production of food and clothing. We do so by calling together, as every hon. member knows, in the first week of December, in Ottawa each and every year representatives of the 10 provincial departments, the federation of agriculture, the farmers' union, the representatives of the countries with which we trade, and the press of Canada. At this meeting full information is given as to production of and markets for all farm products. This has been going on now for 16 years, and the results, if I may say so, have been rather marvellous.
The provinces co-operate with the federal officials in making available the latest information. The federal officials pass it on to the farm organizations. The effects of it are discussed fully by all; that is, all those who are present at the conference, before the press. The press and farm organizations co-operate in passing the information on to the farmers who become as well informed as to what can be marketed as any farmers anywhere in the world.
The result has been that the farmers for many years now have kept their production of perishable products, including meats, at levels which can be marketed and have stored their surplus in the form of grain, principally wheat, which is the nearest approach to non-perishable food which exists.
When we have been threatened by disease, either of our livestock or of other products, the Department of Agriculture has grappled with the disease. Two outstanding examples are our battle against foot-and-mouth disease and rust. Every expert in every country in the world agrees that we accomplished the most complete and most expeditious eradication of foot-and-mouth disease in 1952 ever brought about in any country. This saved the livestock producers millions of dollars and price control during the period permitted production and marketing to go on at a profit.
We had 18 years without rust, but a few years ago it became known that a new race of rust to which our wheat is not resistant was on its way north. The department at once entered upon the breeding of new wheat. We did not have sufficient wheat last year which was resistant to 15B rust, but we did have Selkirk developed and distributed over the entire area. It proved itself resistant to 15B over the entire area. We have retained the 3 million bushels produced in 1954 in

this country to be seeded in 1955, and if we have a reasonably good crop we should have sufficient to seed the spring wheat area in 1956.
By these and other methods we have assisted farmers to produce the greatest quantities of the staple foods, meat, dairy and cereal products ever produced in this country. The farmers produced 7 million tons more food per year for the last three years for which we have complete figures than for each of the last three years of war which was our greatest production up to that time.
Some years ago it was realized that the piling up of surpluses resulted in reduced prices and often in reduced earnings to farmers. This was particularly true if the quality was not high. Grading systems were established in co-operation with the provinces to maintain a high standard. Even though great care has been taken to maintain high standards in the home market, it was realized that this department should cooperate with the Department of Trade and Commerce to maintain as high standards on products shipped abroad. Legislation to improve these efforts is before the house now. This is only a part of our effort to improve our markets.
We realize that for all our products excepting wheat the home market is our best market. Immigration and an increasing birth rate have increased our population. Family allowances, old age pensions and increased employment and wages have increased purchasing power. Both have improved our home markets. Price support put on by this government has stabilized and maintained returns to farmers. The Canadian Federation of Agriculture made a submission to the government regarding these matters on March 3, 1955.
It is suggested in the submission that the world has changed from being a place of scarcity of food to being a place of surpluses, most of which are held in North America.
The farmers of Canada, therefore, have very wisely managed, with the help of the December conference, to have practically all of their surpluses in the form of hard spring high protein content wheat.
The Canadian Federation of Agriculture statement points out that prices of farm products have fallen further in North America than in other countries of the world. This is quite true, but prices in general after the drop are higher in North America than in other countries of the world, all of which indicates that since the war farmers in North America have had the highest prices in the world.

After making these introductory comments, the brief calls attention to two matters which are of outstanding interest to the farmers. The first is the condition of the dairy industry and the second, support prices.
The brief states that the introduction of butter substitutes, the importation of butter into Canada, the importation of cheese from New Zealand, the shrinking of world export markets for dairy foods, and other influences, have resulted in dairy producers across Canada suffering substantial economic loss.
I am inclined to agree that the importation of butter and cheese into Canada would tend to lower the returns to the producer and the net farm income is lower in the last 3 years than in 1951, but I would point out it is higher than any year from 1947 back. The shrinkage of foreign markets, however, came about partly because there has been a higher price level here than elsewhere. To have been compelled to sell in foreign markets could, therefore, have resulted in lower income. Nevertheless, the dairy industry does require support during these unsettled times.
Four recommendations are made by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. The first is that there be no further importations of cheddar cheese into Canada. We have already told New Zealand, as has already been stated in this house by the Minister of Trade and Commerce, that there is little if any room for outside cheddar cheese in Canada. We think, however, that the highest price which can be obtained anywhere for Canadian cheddar cheese can be obtained on the Canadian market if production remains at the level of the past three years. Experience shows that all the cheese which is presently being made in Canada could be sold in Canada at Canadian prices.
The second proposal by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture is that the present butter support price of 58 cents per pound be continued. That has been done. The plan followed by the prices board for the past six years of stabilizing the price on a basis of 58 cents to the producer relieves others of any risk. It makes possible a reasonable return to those who have the facilities with which to produce, and relieves the trade of any risks if they do not wish to carry butter themselves, from the summer to winter, and stabilizes the price to the consumer in winter.
The 58-cent support price on butter is the basis of the means by which the government undertakes to stabilize the dairy industry. The guarantee of the initial payment on cheese and the purchase of processed milk products on two occasions have helped. It is, therefore, somewhat disconcerting when critics greet the continuation of the support 50433-2601
Supply-Agriculture
with the inference that the taxpayer is paying for this help to the farmer. It has cost the taxpayer as such less than one-fifth of a cent per pound over the past six years to stabilize the price and practically all of that was because we cut the support down to 53 cents one year out of six. The 58 cents is paid by the consumer and he in turn has his wholesale and retail price stabilized throughout the winter.
The third proposal made by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture is that small surpluses be exported. We have made one small sale of butter and are investigating the possibilities of others.
The fourth proposal by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture is increased protection through increased tariffs. We have not increased the tariff on imports of dairy products.
Butter is only one of the farm products upon which there is support. The federation says there should be continuous support on wheat, oats, barley, corn, hogs, eggs, cheese, butter and concentrated milk products. There is support on all but corn and concentrated milk products, and even on concentrated milk there has been assistance, in that we have on two occasions purchased concentrated milk products in order to remove surpluses from the market for the time being.
The grain supports are put on by the wheat board and freight assistance on feed grain by the Department of Agriculture. The cheese guarantee is put on under the Agricultural Products Co-operative Marketing Act. The egg, hog and butter supports are provided under the terms of the Agricultural Prices Support Act.
The federation specialized on price support in their discussions at Edmonton last winter and in the submission on March 3. We thank them for their expressions of appreciation to us for what has been accomplished to date and have followed carefully their efforts to simplify the plan of price support by a formula. I have some doubt as to whether an algebraic formula is simple to the average farmer. I believe the simple words contained in our act:
In prescribing prices . . . the board . . . shall endeavour to secure a fair relationship between the returns from agriculture and those from other occupations,
-which are accepted by the federation as expressing, as they say, "exactly the objective of organized agriculture in Canada today", are more easily understood than an algebraic formula.
The algebraic formula which was presented to us is based on the years 1925-29. Ours is based on the years 1943-45, and the general

Supply-Agriculture
opinion of experts is that our years are more favourable to the farmer. But I am pleased to note that their formula proves our board to have arrived at about the same support price as the proposed formula would have produced, except that one would not be able to prove at which point between 65 per cent and 85 per cent of parity one should stop. The federation disagrees with the hon. member for Assiniboia when he advocates 100 per cent of parity. They say there should not be an incentive price. We agree. They ask that the support price be between 65 per cent and 85 per cent of parity.
No matter what formula one follows, living as we do alongside a great populous country whose products could flood our country if our prices were higher than theirs, one's last act must be to check their prices and bring ours into proper relationship with theirs.
The formula would produce 23-7 cents as half way between 65 and 85 per cent of parity for hogs. Our support is 23 cents. So we are only a decimal of one cent out from what their algebraic formula would produce.
The formula would produce 59-7 cents as 85 per cent of parity for butter. That is what they would set as the top level. There is a 12-cent duty on butter. Our support price is 58 cents. The U.S.A. support is lower and American butter does not come in because of the duty.
The formula would produce 25 cents as 70 per cent of parity for cheese. Our guarantee has been 24 cents and our support plus the Ontario government's support works out at 80 per cent of parity.
The plan we follow on eggs does not lend itself to the same check but the average price received for eggs since the plan was established five years ago is within the 65 to 85 per cent of parity range.
It is not suggested by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture that we should cover beef or cattle with a support price but the table shows 85 per cent of parity to be $19.60 a hundred for good steers at Toronto. That is the price we are getting and seems to support our practice of allowing the United States market to provide the support for cattle. That is the reason, of course, that the federation does not ask for a support price on cattle.
We are more than pleased to find, now that the federation has worked out a formula, it verifies the supports we have as being reasonable and meeting as nearly as can be the wishes of the organized farmer.
The Canadian Federation of Agriculture represents farm organizations in all the provinces of Canada. I am quoting from them rather than from the farmers' union, because
{Mr. Gardiner.]
the farmers' union has not yet established itself right across Canada. Their organization is strong in the three prairie provinces and is attempting to work its way into other provinces, but the federation is organized right across Canada. Their annual convention and submission to the government is most helpful in keeping us in touch with the point of view of the farmer. Even when we are not able to put into effect all the suggestions they make, a discussion brings out ideas which are certain to find their way into administrative activities.
No sound conclusion can be reached by comparing anything related to production or returns from farming, by comparing one year with the one before it or the one immediately after it. Take last year, for example, and compare the wheat production or the final returns with the year before, and the only sound conclusion you can arrive at is that there was a wheat crop failure on account of rust over a considerable area. But if one takes the average over three or four years and compares it with the average over any other three or four years, one can conclude whether prices, income or production are constantly on the upgrade.
I have before me a table which shows that, taking the average price on farm products for the four years before we came into office as the beginning, there has been an increase every four years since, until now the price on all cereals is from 24 to 3 times as high from 1951 to 1954 as in 1931 to 1934. The price on hogs is over three times as high, and the price on cattle over four times as high. The price on butter is 24 times as high, the price on cheese three times as high and the price on eggs almost twice as high.


An hon. Member:: May I ask the minister how long he is going to be? It is after ten o'clock.


James Garfield Gardiner: I have about two more pages.


An hon. Member:: Finish it.
Mr. Cold well: Is the minister going to put that table on the record?


James Garfield Gardiner: I shall put the whole thing on the record. I can put the table on.


Major James William Coldwell: It might be interesting to have the table on the record.


James Garfield Gardiner: I shall put it on the record.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Has the minister unanimous consent to have the table put on the record?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


James Garfield Gardiner: The table is as follows:

Supply-Agriculture
5. 5 55
R.C.G. and P.E.



CANADA-WHOLESALE PRICES

[Stage Direction]
-	Wheat No. 1 N. i	Oats No. 2 C.W. i	Barley feed No. 1 1	Hogs B 1, Toronto (live hogs and equivalent grades)	Good steers (up to 1050 lbs.) Toronto	Butter No. 1 Prints Montreal	Cheese No. 1 Montreal	Eggs Grade A Large (loose) Montreali per bu.	i per bu.	p per bu.	$ per cwt.	$ per cwt.	per lb.	t* per lb.	per doz.1931	59-9	31-4	37-4	7-39	5-93	26-9	11-7	34-332	54-3	26-4	32-2	4-66	5-23	22-6	9-7	30-433	68-0	33-9	39-0	5-54	4-47	23-3	10-1	28-034	81-8	42-8	48-2	8-60	4-85	24-3	10-4	31-535	84-6	34-6	36-0	8-94	5-79	24-9	110	31-21936	122-6	53-0	70-8	8-43	5-04	25-3	12-8	34-037	131-5	50-4	57-6	8-92	6-72	28-0	14-0	31-638	62-0	29-0	36-0	9-45	5-97	28-4	14-2	33-539	76-5	35-6	42-5	8-91	6-77	25-0	12-7	30-940	74-0	34-8	44-0	8-70	7-68	27-5	15-1	31-91941	76-7	49-1	59-8	9-93	8-70	34-8	17-0	34-642	94-7	49-2	59-8	11-79	10-29	36-5	21-5	40-643	123-3	51-5	64-8	12-65	11-76	36-1	21-5	44-844	125-0	51-4	64-8	13-96	11-50	36-5	20-9	40-645	125-0	51-5	64-8	14-34	11-65	36-9	21-0	43-31946	138-5	56-5	75-2	15-45	12-45	40-8	22-1	44-347	158-5	84-3	113-3	17-01	14-28	52-6	25-5	46-848	205-0	78-1	111-6	23-12	19-15	69-8	34-4	56-049	205-8	91-0	135-9	23-32	20-65	61-9	31-7	56-550	191-2	96-8	137-5	22-23	25 -84	57-9	29-5	51-51951	182-2	91-1	127-2	25-41	32-60	65-0	34-5	66-252	185-8	80-3	124-6	19-85	25-15	62-4	30-1	54-253	189-4	72-9	94-6	23-61	20-25	61-0	29-0	62-354	175-71 2	89-22	112-32	23-76	19-64	59-9	29-5	49-6Average-	1931-34...	66-0	33-6	39-2	6-55	5-12	24-3	10-5	31-01936-40...	93-3	40-6	50-2	8-88	6-44	26-8	13-8	32-41941-45...	108-9	50-5	62-8	12-53	10-78	36-2	20-4	40-81946-50...	179-8	81-3	114-7	20-23	18-47	56-6	28-6	51-01951-54...	183-2	82-3	114-9	23-16	24-41	62-1	30-8	58-11	Prices are Winnipeg cash closing prices basis in store Fort William. Prices are on a crop year basis; for example, 1931 price applies to the crop year 1931-32, etc.2	Average price for the period Aug. 1-Dec. 31, 1954.
Even if the dollar were only worth half as much, the returns would be greatly increased.
It is not remarkable that prices went up during the war, but it is remarkable that they have gone up a great deal more since the war than either before or during the war. Cereals have been 75 per cent higher; hogs, steers and butter have brought almost twice as much; and cheese and eggs 50 per cent more during the past four years than during the last four years of the war. This is remarkable as it is eight years since the end of the war. I doubt if there ever was an eight-year period after any previous war when prices for farm products continued higher than during the war. It is partly due
to the fact that we have been spending ten times as much promoting production and marketing in agriculture for many years as was ever spent for that purpose before this government came into office.
But our critics say the cash returns are up but what about the net income. If you average the last four years of net income with any other similar length of period, the results are higher net income in the last four years. The last four years for which I have the net farm income are 1951, 1952, 1953 and 1954. The average net return per year in that period is $1,726 million. The average net return per year for the previous four years is $1,484 million, which is higher than any previous four years. Of course, it is down for
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Agriculture
1954 because of our wheat crop failure and filled elevators, but even the net income for 1954 averaged with the preceding three years is higher than the average of any preceding four-year period. What has kept it that way?
We passed the Agricultural Products Cooperative Marketing Act in 1939. It makes it possible for any group of farmers to organize a pool to sell their product. The federal government guarantees them at the bank so that they can secure sufficient credit to be able to make an advance payment, sell the product, and make a final payment. One hundred and twenty co-operatives have been set up under this legislation which assists in stabilizing returns and returning the highest possible prices to the farmer. The last to be so organized is the cheese board in Ontario.
We put through legislation in 1943 which set up the wheat board in its present form. The wheat board has marketed our wheat in a very satisfactory manner since, with the result that for the first time in our experience surpluses have not driven the price down to the extent that profits could not be made.
We put through the Agricultural Prices Support Act in 1944 and it has operated since 1946. The board set up under it sets up agencies which offer to take delivery of surpluses at floor prices and put them back on the market in times of shortage. The board has a revolving fund of $200 million with which to operate which is kept at that level by amounts from the treasury. They have used $300 million over the nine years, and, with the exception of $70 million spent fighting foot-and-mouth disease, there has been very little which has not been returned to the fund.
Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Has the minister the exact amount which has not been returned?


James Garfield Gardiner: The exact amount is the difference between that amount and the $70 million taken off and about another $12 million on top of that $70 million. That is what has not been returned.
Activities under these acts for the past ten years have maintained and stabilized prices on wheat, livestock, potatoes, apples, beans, honey, dry skimmed milk, Cheddar cheese, creamery butter and shell eggs at higher levels than ever before. It is the fact that these prices being kept in reasonable relationship to the prices of what farmers buy has resulted in the average net income of farmers being higher in the last four years than in any previous four-year period.
Mr. Chairman, it being ten o'clock-


Harry Oliver White: May I move the adjournment of the debate?


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Shall I report the resolutions and ask leave to sit again?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Item stands.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported, read the second time and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: On Monday we shall take third reading of Bill No. 352 with respect to meat and meat products; second reading of Bill No. 411 with respect to national standards for agricultural products; second reading of Bill No. 5, to amend the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act; and second reading of Bill No. 410, to amend the Customs Act. On conclusion of that business we shall move to go into supply. If we achieve that end we shall continue with Department of Agriculture estimates for the rest of the day.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. I would point out that during the current session a committee has been discussing the revision of the rules. It is well known to everyone that in discussing this matter the committee has recognized a long-established practice that the motion to go into supply shall be the first order called on a designated day; and the proposed rules contemplate fixed days for a certain number of motions for going into supply. This is merely expressing a long-established tradition with regard to a practice of long standing, that the motion to go into supply at this stage of the proceedings affords the opportunity for certain stated motions.
One of the things that, it seems to me, should be recognized in this house is the desirability of dates being fixed so that members may make their own arrangements accordingly. Ministers and members find it necessary to be out of the house on various occasions and it should be possible for them to make those arrangements with recognition of important matters coming before the house. One of those important matters is a motion going into supply. I submit that it is simply a breach of a long-established practice to adopt a course like this. It is a practice which means that the motion going into supply is left hanging in suspense. No one knows when it will come up. I repeat the term I used earlier, namely that to adopt this practice is juggling with the traditions of this house and that at a time when an effort is being made to introduce rules which will be satisfactory to everyone.


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, those of us who are serving on the rules committee are, of course, obliged not to discuss the matter until a report is made to the house. I take it that that obligation does not devolve upon any hon. members who are not members of the committee.


George Alexander Drew: You told the press what was going on.


Walter Edward Harris: Under these circumstances I would not comment on what has been said except to say this. I too for a number of years have been trying to get an orderly system of dealing with the business of the house. In the course of the past two years, having had something to do with it, I have done what I could by arrangement with other parties to see if we could not have, as far as possible, an understanding as to the sequence of business so that it would meet the very point the Leader of the Opposition has made. I do not recall at any time it having been said that if the committee were to make the report that the Leader of the Opposition suggests it may be making, it is as a consequence of recognizing a tradition of the house. I do not recall that ever having been said at all in the committee or in the house. While I would be willing to meet any reasonable request, and I have done so over the past two years, I feel that for Monday at least we shall have to go on with the business I have indicated. It may well happen, if the legislation is out of the way, that the motion to go into supply will be the first order of business on Tuesday. I would hope it would be that way.


George Alexander Drew: On a question of privilege, I would point out that it is perfectly proper to discuss something that has already been fully discussed in the press and mainly on information given to the press by the minister himself.


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Applewhaiie):: Order. I think it is a usual thing for the house to have an informal discussion of the
Business of the House business for the ensuing day, and sometimes the ensuing week, at this period of the session. So far as the Chair is concerned, I think we are bound by standing order 17(2), which reads:
Whenever government business has precedence, government orders may be called in such sequence as the government may think fit.


James Sinclair: You are not the government and never will be.


George Alexander Drew: An arrogant government can do anything.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Applewhaite):: Order. The Leader of the Opposition having raised a question of privilege, which I think he was entitled to raise, dealing with the proceedings of the house, he has made his point and it has been answered by the Minister of Finance as leader of the house. I have no hesitation in saying that both hon. gentlemen would be out of order if they discussed the supposed report of the committee of the house which is considering procedure.


[Stage Direction]
It being fourteen 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]
334.	Departmental administration, $1,546,388.
335.	Operations-including salaries and other expenses of staff post offices, district offices, railway mail service staffs, and supplies, equipment and other items for revenue post offices, also including administration, $82,103,422.
336.	Transportation-movement of mail by land, air and water, including administration, $47,135,283.
337.	Financial services, including audit of revenue, money order and savings bank business: and postage stamps, $2,493,015.
Loans, investments and advances-
543. To extend the operation of the revolving fund established pursuant to vote 541, Appropriation Act, No. 4, 1954, for the purpose of acquiring and managing materials and fittings to be used in the manufacture of mail bags, the total amount to be charged to the revolving fund at any time not to exceed $695,000; additional amount required, $270,000.
[Stage Direction]

[Stage Direction]


Monday. May 30, 1955