1955-07-16

Mr. Speaker:: Yesterday the hon. member for Kamloops complained of non-compliance with an order of the house. His words can be found at page 6179 of yesterday's official report of debates. On June 23 he asked a question which, under the provisions of standing order 44, was passed by the house at the request of the minister as an order for return. He took particular objection to the reply given to part 3 of his question, the said reply reading as follows:
Yes, in 29 cases by seven different trust companies. The names of the companies and the number of appeals by each may not be disclosed by reason of section 54 of the Dominion Succession Duty Act.
The hon. member contended that section 54 of the Dominion Succession Duty Act had no application whatsoever to the situation and did not in any way preclude an answer being given as requested. It does not come within my province to decide whether section 54 of the Dominion Succession Duty Act prevents the minister from answering the question otherwise than he did. It is a debatable matter and standing order 10 says that "Mr. Speaker shall not take part in any debate". Citation 116 of Beauchesne, third edition, also states:
The Speaker will not give a decision upon a constitutional question nor decide a question of law, though the same may be raised on a point of order or privilege.
I would refer hon. members also to citation 310 of Beauchesne, third edition, which says:
It is not imperative for the Minister of Justice or the Solicitor General to reply to questions seeking information upon legal points arising out of measures before parliament or relating to matters of public interest. They are the legal advisers of the government and in that capacity are confidential officers, and nothing could be more inconvenient than that they should be liable to be interrogated by members as to the advice they have given or may be called upon to give to any department of government, or as to their opinion upon the construction of a statute or other document, or upon abstract questions of law which need to be judicially determined.
The hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. Fulton) further asked me, and I quote his words as they appear at page 6179 of Hansard for July 15, 1955:
Therefore I ask you, sir, under the precedent of citation 445 in Beauchesne. second edition, to see that the necessary order is made discharging this order so that another return in corrected form may be brought down.
May I say immediately that in my view never at any time can the Speaker make an order discharging an order of the house. The only way to discharge an order of the house is for a member to move that an order be discharged. Of course, in this case one cannot move to discharge an order which has already been executed. Citation 395 of Beauchesne's third edition tells us that once a document has been placed on the table and recorded in the Journals, it becomes the property of the house. An action to discharge an order for return must be made before the return is to be tabled on the same basis as, according to citations 665 and 666 of Beauchesne's third edition, motions to discharge orders affecting the progress of bills are made.
Furthermore, a motion to discharge an order is similar to a motion to withdraw and would have to be made, I believe, according to standing order 53, by unanimous consent of the house. The hon. member referred to citations 445 and 450 of Beauchesne's second edition which are citations 388 and 389 of Beauchesne's third edition. These citations refer to specific cases where information sought has not all been provided or where information having been sought was not given. It states how the house asserts its authority to obtain satisfaction for the fulfillment of its orders. The wording of these citations is taken from May. If hon. members look at May, either the twelfth edition at pages 562 and 563 or the fifteenth edition at pages 256 and 258, hon. members will find that at the bottom of the page there are footnotes which refer to the Journals and Hansard from which these specific cases were extracted. I took the trouble, and found it very interesting, to go into the Journals of 1834, 1835, 1841, 1876 and 1820, and also Hansard for these various periods. I find that the house ordered certain officers to produce certain documents. In one case it was the clerk of the peace of Carnarvon. The reason the

Speaker's Decision
clerk was not producing the documents was because he felt the expense for producing such documents should be paid by the house, whereas a member suggested it should be paid by the member who moved the motion. In another case, the man involved was a witness who had appeared before a committee and had refused to produce a book which was in his possession.
Now, I do not think I should deal with all these particular cases. I believe the hon. member should be satisfied with the reasons I have given so far. I would perhaps refer him further to May's fifteenth edition, which gives the general theory, and which is to the effect that returns may be asked for, but if there is a failure to comply, however ample the power of each house to enforce the production of papers may be, a sufficient cause must be shown for the exercise of that power, and if considerations of public policy can be urged against a motion for papers, it is either withdrawn or otherwise dealt with according to the judgment of the house. In this case, if the hon. member wishes to complain further about the non-compliance with the order, it is not a point of order or a point of privilege, and he must do so by moving the proper motion if he deems that advisable.


Mr. Fulton:: I am grateful to Your Honour for the consideration you have given to this matter and the information you have given the house. Naturally, I accept your ruling with respect to the possibility of your making an order that this return be discharged. I would say only that in referring to May's twelfth edition, which is the one referred to in Beauchesne's second edition, I find there at page 562 the following:
A return which has been presented has also been ordered to be amended.
It occurs to me there may be some possibility of further action along those lines, and that I may request an order of the house that it be amended at' a later stage.
Then I also note in citation 452 of Beauchesne's second edition:
When papers are presented, an order may be made that they be taken in consideration on a future day, and on the consideration thereof a motion may be founded.
I have no such motion right at the moment, because I wished to hear Your Honour's ruling; but I refer to that citation now, indicating the possibility of action along those lines. Otherwise, if no such action were taken, it seems to me there would be a pretty effective iron curtain of secrecy around the things we are trying to do. So I just mention that.


Mr. Speaker:: Would the hon. member repeat the number of the last citation in Beauchesne's second edition.


Edmund Davie Fulton: It is No. 452 at page 138. I mention it to Your Honour by way of notice, because I was waiting for Your Honour's ruling and I had not prepared anything at the moment along these lines. But I give notice now that something along these lines may be brought forward.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps the hon. member would look at May's seventh edition, because since May refers to cases which happened between 1820 and 1876 it would be well to look at the edition of May, which is closer to the period. The seventh edition was published in 1873. And if the hon. member would look at page 561 he would find the following, indicating what the old practice was with respect to these returns. It says:
In the commons, when a minister of the crown has any papers to present, he goes to the bar, and, on being called by the Speaker, he brings them up: and they are ordered to lie upon the table: but papers are also presented by other official persons. When such papers are brought up, they are generally ordered to lie upon the table, as a matter of course: but upon the question that they do lie upon the table, a debate has on some rare occasions, arisen.
Now, when the hon. member looks at citations 445, 450 and 452 in Beauchesne's second edition he will find that he is dealing with the procedure as outlined in May's seventh edition, as I have just indicated.


Edmund Davie Fulton: With respect, the reference in Beauchesne's second edition is to May's twelfth edition; and it is in the twelfth edition I find the reference to the fact that a return which has been presented can also be ordered to be amended. Then citation 452 in Beauchesne's second edition, to which I referred, has no reference to the specific authority upon which it is founded. So I assume Beauchesne was merely expressing his own opinion as to the practice of the house which would be followed.
However, the matter is one which, so far as I am concerned, I would prefer to go into further, and see if some action along these lines does not lie.



QUESTIONS


Mr. Macnaughlon:: 1.	How many certificates of Canadian citizenship were granted to persons who formerly owed allegiance to other countries, in 1954 and 1953?
2.	What is the nationality breakdown of these figures?
3.	How many certificates of Canadian citizenship were granted in 1953 and 1954 to stateless persons? In which countries had they been born?
4.	What new arrangements have been created in Montreal for the reception, hearing and granting of applications for Canadian citizenship?

5.	When were these arrangements made and what results have been obtained?


Mr. Pickersgill:: 1.	1954, 19,545; 1953, 13,562.
2.	See table attached.
3.	See table attached. Countries of birth were Poland, U.S.S.R., Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Roumania, Hungary, the Baltic countries and others.
4.	A court of Canadian citizenship has been established by the government of Canada with facilities at 1247 Guy street, Montreal, for the sole purpose of receiving and hearing applications and presenting certificates of Canadian citizenship. The judge of this court has assisting him three commissioners with authority to hear applicants. This court has been established in order that applications in Montreal may be dealt with as expeditiously as possible.
5.	May 1, 1955. During May and June, 1,157 applications were received, 1,504 certificates were presented and 4,309 applicants have been heard.
Persons naturalized by country of former nationality Calendar Years 1953 and 1954
	1953	1954
Austria 	191	254Baltic countries 	435	1,398Belgium 	158	212British Commonwealth	3,454	3,568China 	2,044	1,425Czechoslovakia 	424	563Denmark 	132	169Finland 	165	156France 	89	120Germany 	371	439Greece 	181	186Hungary 	294	430Italy 	317	568Japan 	155	132Netherlands, The ....	356	783Norway 	163	200Poland 	2,328	3,303Roumania 	237	288Sweden	101	114Switzerland 	122	137U.S.S.R	328	416United States 	640	570Yugoslavia 	245	570Other Asian 	57	58Other European	44	42Others 	7	10Stateless 	524	3,434Totals 	13,562	19,545
Source: Department of Citizenship and Immigration.
Questions


* STAMP VENDING MACHINES
Mr. Diefenbaker:: 1.	Are stamp vending machines operating throughout Canada subject to control or inspection by the Department of the Postmaster General?
2.	Has the Postmaster General been informed that in one or more cases such stamp vending machines are selling Canadian stamps in stamp folders printed outside of Canada and bearing the description "U.S. Postage Stamps"?
3.	What does the minister propose to do to prevent a recurrence of such or similar abuses?


Mr. Pickersgill:: Mr. Speaker, this question is marked to be answered orally. The short answer to the question is that stamp-vending machines operate under a permit issued by the Postmaster General in each individual case. Machines are subject to the control of the department, but not necessarily individual inspection. Any complaints are investigated. Representations have been made on other occasions that these stamps that were sold were in folders bearing the indication "U.S. stamps."
The hon. member for Prince Albert was good enough to speak to me about this question before he put it on the order paper and told me he was going to ask for an oral answer because he thought it was of sufficient general interest to require more than merely a formal answer. It appears that someone who wrote to him went to one of these stamp-vending machines in Jasper Park Lodge and bought a four-cent stamp for 5 cents. This is the stamp to which the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings (Mr. Nowlan) took exception the other evening. There was some discussion as to what was really represented on the stamp. I have examined it again, sir, in the light of day, and it bears a striking resemblance to the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings waiting for parliament to prorogue. The folder does say on the back, however, "U.S. postage stamps, sanitarily packaged. Save a trip to the post office. Printed in U.S.A."
Well, I think it is highly undesirable to have stamp-vending machines selling Canadian stamps in Canada in folders of this kind. As far as this particular case is concerned, an investigation will be made right away.
I think I should tell the house at the same time that the post office has had a good deal of difficulty with these stamp-vending machines; and not only the post office. I myself have had two experiences at airports where I have lost as much as 15 or 20 cents and got no stamps at all. It rankled with me. That is why I am pleased to announce that treasury board the other day approved the purchase by the post office itself of machines which we believe really will work, and which are going to be operated

Inquiries of the Ministry
in the lobbies of post offices and certain other buildings in which you can put 25 cents and get five 5-cent stamps.
I might say that if at any time any hon. members run across any other cases of these machines that do not work properly the post office would like to know about it.


Mr. Winch:: May I ask the minister a supplementary question? I understood the minister to say that the department has obtained or is obtaining machines that will work efficiently to put in airports and other public places. I have been, as the minister perhaps knows or does not know, in touch with the Post Office Department here for almost a year over the matter of an American coming up and selling machines in the province of British Columbia, and in Vancouver in particular, on a basis which I thought was very unfair, because those who purchased and invested their money do not know-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Harold Edward Winch: I am sorry, sir. May I ask this question, because I always abide by your rulings. What is going to happen to Canadian citizens who have invested money in the present machines? Are they going to be actually wiped out? Is there any possibility that Canadian citizens who have invested in the old machines are going to lose their investment?


John Whitney Pickersgill: All the machines that are in existence at the present time, except one or two owned by the Post Office Department on an experimental basis, are owned by private individuals. The Post Office Department does not intend to interfere with these machines in any way except in cases where they do things like this one at Jasper. As long as the machine works properly and you get a four-cent stamp for five cents, or whatever the terms may be, and the machine is operated properly the owner will be allowed to go on operating it.



WHEAT-STORAGE AND FINANCING OF 1955 CROP

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. M. Nicholson (Mackenzie):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce if his attention has been drawn to a Canadian Press dispatch in this morning's Gazette forecasting a big wheat crop in western Canada, and also stating that countries like India and Turkey are expecting big crops. Will the minister consider seeing that our Canadian farmers are given assistance in providing storage and financing until they are able to sell their 1955 crop?


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I think it is a little early to count our blessings in connection with the western wheat crop as much can happen between now and harvest. For the first time in several years the western producer has empty farm storage available for this harvest, and I believe the situation will not cause any greater difficulty than the producer has encountered in the past few harvests.



STENOGRAPHIC STAFF


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Speaker:: On Thursday the hon. member for Hamilton West (Mrs. Fairclough) asked the following question as reported on page 6108 of Hansard:
I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State. Can the minister say why it is that this year for the first time considerable pressure is being put on the sessional stenographic staff to say whether or not they are available for work with the civil service commission during the recess. In explanation, I should say these forms have always been given to the staff but this year the stenographers are being pressed to make their applications to the civil service commission.
This question should not have been addressed to the Secretary of State (Mr. Pinard) but to the chief of the stenographic branch or to myself. This is done to help those who wish employment during the recess to get employment with the civil service commission and for that reason the sooner the forms are completed and returned to the civil service commission the better. We do not have to worry about those who do not wish employment during the recess.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Applewhaite in the chair.
PUBLIC ARCHIVES AND NATIONAL LIBRARY Public archives-
343. General administration and technical services, $349,638.


Mr. Knight:: Does the minister under whose jurisdiction this matter comes intend to make a statement with regard to the library?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No sir, I had not any intention of making a statement. I think the activities of the national library are adequately described in the annual report.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I think someone should say a word on this particular matter. I am mainly interested in the library.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the hon. member would wait until we get to the library item; this is the archives item.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I thought it was the library item which had been called.


Mr. Herridge:: I should just like to express the appreciation of the members of this group for the courtesy and co-operation of the archivist and his staff. Many of us here are, somewhat like the minister, interested in history. We have not the capacity to deal with history that he has, but we take an amateur's interest. On that account we often seek information from the public archives, and we have found the archivist and his staff most co-operative and most willing to put themselves out to make searches and try to provide material that is required. I thought that before the item passed someone should express our appreciation of that service.


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say just a word very largely in support of that which was said by the hon. member for Kootenay West. I also on occasion have received very considerable co-operation from the national archivist. I should point out to the minister that, because of the plans for new buildings which would include the archives, I think more consideration might be given to more extensive use of the microfilming process as opposed to straight storage of documents. In discussions with the department it has been indicated to me that they feel it is cheaper to store documents on occasion than it is actually to microfilm. My experience has been-and all the information I have been able to obtain also has been-that in almost every case over an extensive period of time the storage of documents is a more costly process than microfilming.
I can envisage a situation arising in the next 20 years or so in which, if we follow the procedure of storing documents, rather than microfilming, we shall have packed the new building to the rafters and have to start all over again building more buildings. That matter should be taken into serious consideration looking well ahead into the future. I would also be interested if the minister is in a position to state whether he has any information, in addition to what I have said, as to microfilming versus the storage of documents.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, of course, as I know the hon. member would agree, there are certain types of documents one would never want to destroy because they have great historical value. But, speaking generally, I think we are storing far too much paper here in Ottawa and building far too much space to store more paper, and I heartily agree with what the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace pointed out with 50433-395
Supply-Public Archives regard to microfilming. There are some documents that are not even worth microfilming. There are many that ought to be used for fuel because they have no continuing value. There are a great many others that can be kept in a very small space with microfilming and the originals destroyed with large savings, in my opinion, to the public treasury. We hope that, when the public records building at Tunney's pasture is completed in October-as we hope it will be-this microfilming program which has been under way for some years will be greatly accelerated. I thank the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace for drawing attention to this matter.


William McLean Hamilton: One
more question, Mr. Chairman. What provision, if any, has the government made for protection of valuable documents in the event of an all-out war? In various countries of the world, in a realization of the destruction which would result from any war, provision has been made well outside the populated centres for underground storage facilities. One example of that is about 100 miles outside Washington, and there is another in Europe, where they have utlized a series of underground caves. It would seem to me that the government has in its possession in the archives now documents which, as the minister has suggested, are quite irreplaceable, and I am wondering what consideration has been given to protecting these documents if and when the need should arise.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is one thing I happen to know about personally. When I was clerk of the privy council we felt that the orders in council passed since confederation should be protected by having a set of microfilms as well as the original orders. I believe that work is virtually completed. It is being done on a current basis and the originals and the microfilms are kept in different places. That does not quite meet the hon. member's point. I may say that I am advised his point has been under consideration by my colleague who is in charge of civil defence. I think there is a great deal in what the hon. gentleman says. Reproduction can be done with microfilm very cheaply, and we should do everything we can to see that valuable records or at least reproductions of them continue to exist.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National library-
344. General administration, $119,097.
Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Is the minister going to make a statement on this item?

Supply-National Library


John Whitney Pickersgill: I really do not think that anything I could improvise on the spur of the moment would be half as good as the excellent report made by the national librarian, which I think all hon. members have.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I do not know whether that might be considered as a broad hint that I too should make no contribution to this debate.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I assure the hon. member I was speaking only for myself.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: In your case there might be some truth in it. However, Mr. Chairman, in spite of the fact that the weather is hot and in spite of the fact that we hope the session is drawing rapidly to a close, even if one makes a rather meagre contribution I think that at least an attempt at some contribution should be made on a subject which to my mind is a vital one in the cultural life of our country. After all, we do spend a great part of our time on very prosaic and material money matters, and important as they are I think we should devote some time to the cultural side of life. In that regard I have made some efforts of which I hope various ministers across the way have taken note.
I have read the report and I agree with the minister it is an excellent one. I agree that the full report rather precludes the necessity of asking any detailed questions with regard to this new institution, an institution of which, I may say, we are looking forward to being very proud. In the absence of my leader, the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, may I also mention that this is a project which has always been close to his heart.
I am also glad that we have been given a picture of the architect's model of the very fine modern building which we hope will soon be ready for use. Generally speaking I am, of course, in support of all libraries, and needless to say I support a national library. I have even gone so far as to claim in the house on various occasions that the government was perhaps giving support to things less worthy or less needed than libraries are.
To my mind libraries in this or in any country are the main source of adult education, and I think it is unfortunate, but it is proven by statistics that we are not a reading people in Canada. Perhaps we have not reached that stage of leisure or of affluence in which we can afford to spend much time on reading. We have picked the stones, we have cut out the stumps, our agricultural land has been put on a productive basis, we have established industries, and surely now we have some time, some leisure, to devote to reading. Surely we also can afford to spend

some money. In that regard may I say that with the present price of books a good deal of money is necessary if one is going to maintain a private library of his own.
I had a discussion with my hon. friend from Winnipeg yesterday on the matter of free enterprise. We were talking about a public health insurance scheme and I pointed out to him that a book had been written by a friend of mine, Jim Wright of Saskatoon, entitled "The History of Saskatchewan over the Last Fifty Years". He asked me if I was going to buy it. I said I hoped to but at the moment I was going to use the public library where I could obtain it at no direct cost to myself. The price of the book is $5. It is a very good investment, and I hope to get a copy in due course.
But here is a form of public or social enterprise which, like the post office, I think even my Conservative friends look upon as being a very worthy one. It is a place where people can receive adult education at practically no cost, even if their opportunities have been limited in their youth, and it is one of the best public institutions I know. I said that on the whole Canadians were not a reading people. I am not going into the statistics that prove that fact although I could dig them up. I have travelled across the country and have been in every province except Newfoundland from which my hon. friend-I was going to say from which my friend comes-


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is where he wants to go.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: -but I shall change that and say which my hon. friend, rightly or wrongly, represents. I was down in the eastern part of the country, and it is a part of the country which is very clannish. If you say anything about one of the provinces you will get the inhabitants of all provinces in the group down on your neck irrespective of what political party they happen to follow. I was visiting a town there this year not too far from where my honourable and genial friend, the Minister of Public Works, comes. It is a pretty little town and there is a bridge in it across a stream or river. I was told by an informant that the town had the greatest per capita individual wealth of any town in Canada, and I think he had the statistics to prove it.
I had to spend an hour or two there and I walked around and looked at the fine residences and the signs of prosperity on all sides. However, it is a small place and after a while I thought to myself that I would go and read a book until train time. I met an old gentleman on the street and I said, "Excuse me, but could you direct me to the public library?" He looked at me in amazement and said, "Public what?" I said, "Public library". I said, "I have an hour or two to

spend and I would like to look at a book or paper in the public library." He said, "We have never had anything like that here." I said, "What do you do when you want to get some books?" He said, "Well, they keep some in the drugstore over there." I knew very well the kind of books they kept in the drugstore. I have seen them before.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. member for
Kamloops knows too.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I said, "Have you no books in this town which are available to the public of your town or to a stranger who comes here?" He said, "There is the high school up there." There was a fine high school up on the top of a hill. I did not want to bother the high school people. He said, "I believe there is a little room above one of the stores where the I.O.D.E. have a few books." I gave up and went over and sat by the river and looked at the natural beauties of the water running under the bridge.
That is a story that is typical of a great many places not only in that part but in other parts of the country. I am proud and pleased to say that my own province is very well provided with libraries and books. There is the question of the cost of books. I assert again that it is a great thing when there is available to anyone, irrespective of his means, a source of information and education such as is provided by a public library.
Perhaps one of the greatest satisfactions which I shall derive from the fact that there is to be a national library will be the guidance and assistance which that library can give to provincial libraries, the encouragement which it could give to the establishment of libraries in other parts of the country. I am well aware that it is rather difficult to decentralize an institution of this sort. I do not think it could be done. After all this is a national library and is something which pertains to Ottawa, the capital of this nation. I do not think we could have a lot of little national libraries all over the country. I do feel the very fact that we have a national library is going to be a spur, and give an impetus, to this thing, the lack of which I have just deplored, that is to say interest in books generally.
One may ask, what sort of books? One can be accused of being priggish. One could say, why is your type of book any better than any other type of book? I am not going into that whole story. I am not going into the question of censorship. I had a go with the Minister of National Revenue over that some time ago, without too much success. I want to make this point, even if it is not in direct 50433-3951
Supply-National Library
line with what I have said. I am particularly interested in reading for the young people of this country. I feel it is a deplorable situation that if you give a boy or girl of high school age about 25 or 30 cents, there is almost only one type, I was going to say of literature, but I should say reading, which that child can obtain at that price. In that regard we are miles behind the mother country, and at the moment I am talking about the British Isles. We are miles behind them in the matter of bookstores and the availability of books, particularly books suitable to be read by the youth. In almost every business block in a town in Britain, and more particularly in Scotland, you will find bookstores and secondhand bookstores. You will find lines of people looking over the books and taking something home. In my opinion, which may not be worth much, the type and quality of the literature available in those stores is tremendously superior to anything we have in the same type of place in this country.
Well, those are thoughts that I think perhaps are useful. There are one or two matters in regard to the recommendations of the royal commission on arts, letters and sciences that I should like to mention. Many things have been quoted from this report to prove almost anything. Not long ago we did have some discussion when the matter of the parliamentary library was up, as to the necessary qualifications of libraries, and particularly national libraries, in which the government or the board, whatever it may be, had some responsibility to the public. I would draw your attention to the third recommendation which is under the heading of federal libraries at page 327 where it says that the library of parliament laboured for years under the disadvantage of operating with staff members of low academic qualifications.
It is a source of satisfaction to myself that a good many of our best students now are going into the library profession, and I call it that with some significance. I hope that more of them will. I should like to see a system of scholarships, if there is no other way. A plea was made here yesterday for some assistance in the training of another fine professional group, namely nurses, and I should like to see some assistance given to the training of these people, particularly in view of the fact we now hope under the national library system to extend our library facilities.
I shall not delay the house by quoting this particular item, but I do want to put it on the record so that he who runs may read, and may be able to turn up this volume and

Supply-National Library read the recommendations which are to the effect that librarians, of all people, are people who should have professional qualifications. Paragraph 4 of the recommendations on page 328 reads:
As the library of parliament is at the moment the only library comparable in any way to national libraries in other countries it seems to us of particular importance that it should be enabled to maintain appropriate standards of service in all departments.
The report was speaking about the parliamentary library and they put that little clause in to show that, in their opinion, a national library when established would be subject to the same recommendations.
I was interested in this to back up what I said a moment ago; that is to say, the library will also offer immediate and valuable services to all Canadian libraries, as well as a bibliographical guide. I put this in the form of a question, and I could have waited to put it later but the minister may take note of it as I go along. Amongst the recommendations of the commission is No. 9, found on page 330, where it says:
The various steps already taken in appointing a national library advisory committee, in setting up a bibliographic centre and in compiling a union catalogue and bibliographical guides, are, we understand, regarded as measures preparatory to the creation of a national library.
My question to the minister would be this. In view of the recommendation, what progress has been made in that particular direction and along those particular lines? I could talk at some length on this particular subject, and perhaps at this stage of the debate it would be better not to do so. Perhaps, as the minister suggested, my contribution would be of no particular importance. I do want to emphasize that speaking for myself, and I think I can speak for my party and certainly for my leader, we in this house believe that there are more sources of life than merely bread. We do believe in things which are cultural rather than purely physical and material, important as those things may be. In my opinion, this creation of a national library is one of the finest steps along that direction that this government has devised and put into effect over a great number of years.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I have before me, Mr. Chairman, the architect's model of the proposed national library and archives building. I am sure that when it is complete it will be one of the buildings that will be a real source of pride to all Canadians. However, I cannot believe that we are about to spend so much money on a project of this sort, without providing any air conditioning-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, Mr. Chairman, later today if the program set out last night is carried out, my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works will have his estimates before the committee. There is nothing I can do about air conditioning, as long as I am Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Again, we have the buck being passed, but I suggest that the minister-


John Whitney Pickersgill: I suggest, sir, it is rather
an affront to the committee to suggest, when a minister asks to have the rules adhered to, that it is buck passing.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I merely wish to say that the minister responsible for this building has a responsibility to the Canadian people and to the people who will work there, to recommend to the Minister of Public Works that air conditioning-


Mr. Winters:: The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is not responsible for this building. The Minister of Public Works is.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minister is to be responsible for the national library, and the minister should make a recommendation to the Minister of Public Works that air conditioning be provided. I think from the point of view of the valuable books to be placed in the building and the Canadian citizens who for the rest of their lives will be working in the building, it is most unsatisfactory that a proposal has come forward to construct a building of that kind without making provision for air conditioning.
That is all I wish to say now about the question, but I suggest the minister who is responsible for the library should use all his influence with the cabinet to see that this stupid policy is not adhered to. I suggest that in terms of dollars and cents it is false economy to build that sort of building in this climate, without making provision for air conditioning.


Mr. Hamilton (Noire Dame de Grace):: Mr. Chairman, I have a question to ask about the national library. The library report goes at length into the very good job that is being done in the formation of a national union catalogue in microfilm, covering millions of volumes. I do not see in the estimates however any amount which could be connected with the expense of doing that particular job, and I am wondering where it is to be found.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I direct the hon. member's attention to the details at page 453, where there is a reference to the publication of lists of current Canadian publications and bibliographies, with an amount of $12,500 set

opposite. There is also the item for office stationery, supplies and equipment.


Edmund Davie Fulton: And one for photostats.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes; and, as the hon. member for Kamloops reminds me, one for photostats. It is part of the general administration.


William McLean Hamilton: Who
is doing the work?


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is done by the staff of the national library. While I am on my feet I would point out that the hon. member for Saskatoon talked about the national library being established. That national library was established by act of parliament in 1952 and has been in existence since January 1, 1953. The fact that it does not have the kind of building we want it to have does not mean that it is not already in existence. It is housed in the present archives building- very inadequately, I admit. And I certainly hope my colleague the Minister of Public Works will be able to go ahead with a building as quickly as possible. However, I must say that, after our experience here in the last few weeks, I have grave doubts about air conditioning.


William McLean Hamilton: The
use of any material indexed and filed determines the value of that material. Obviously it is useless to spend money, time and effort on the indexing of material if no one is going to refer to the index, or if no one is going to use it.
As one who is interested in this project of a union catalogue which ultimately will list all the books in all the libraries of Canada, and as one who feels that this project can be of very considerable value to many people in Canada, I turn to certain information in the report of the national librarian. He tells us, in connection with the union catalogue, that on March 1 of this year it consisted of over
2,900,000	cards representing very close to six million volumes-5,968,000 to be exact.
In the preceding paragraph however he tells us that in the past year they were asked to locate only 2,189 titles. Of these requests more than half, or about 60 per cent, came by telephone from libraries in Ottawa, and only 40 per cent of the inquiries were received by mail from outside this city. This indicates that a worth-while project, and one which could be justified only on the basis of a somewhat extensive use, is not being used as it should be. Obviously if we are going to go on indefinitely, receiving from outside Ottawa only two or three inquiries a day, in connection with a project which, by the time
Supply-National Library it is completed, will cost many hundreds of thousands of dollars, the project is going to be of questionable value.
If the inquiries can be increased, the project becomes more valuable.
I would recommend most highly to the minister that steps be taken to advise other libraries across Canada, as well as scholars and universities, of the existence of this catalogue, and thus encourage its use. I know, of course, as the minister knows, that some attempt has been made to have this done. But I suggest that attempt has not been sufficient, and that the reference to the catalogue in the middle pages of the report of the national librarian is inadequate.
Often, and I suggest rightly so, we have criticized the government upon the existence of sizeable staffs of public relations experts and information officers of one kind or another. If those gentlemen are going to continue in the government service, then I suggest one of the projects some of them might find interesting and helpful is that to which I have just referred. That would be the project of publicizing the existence of this union catalogue and developing a sizeable increase in its use. Because at the present time, no matter how good the catalogue is, it is close to valueless because it is not being used.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I would ask the minister to clarify his comment. I gather he is opposed to air conditioning in the new building; is that correct?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister has an unfortunate habit of making flippant remarks.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: It is very important that the Canadian people have a reply.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, if my hon. friend wishes to have a serious answer, then my serious answer is that I have the greatest confidence in my colleague the Minister of Public Works. I have plenty of responsibilities myself, as a minister of the crown; and I do not go around trying to usurp the responsibilities of my colleagues-and I do not intend to. If the hon. member wishes to put his question to the Minister of Public Works, when his estimates are before the house, I am sure he will receive a courteous and comprehensive reply.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: In connection with this library being built at the request of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, may I ask if the people working in the library are not to have some say as to the type of building to be constructed. Is that to be left entirely to the Minister of Public Works? He is a very competent engineer and an able
6254	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Library
man, but are not those decisions arrived at by negotiation? Is not the Minister of Public Works prepared to accept a recommendation from a colleague who has a very competent staff that is responsible for the operation of the national library?


Robert Henry Winters: Why do you not ask me?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I am asking the minister if there is not some consultation. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration should indicate whether he has any say, or whether his opinion carries any weight in connection with the building of the new library.


Robert Henry Winters: I can answer that. The answer is yes.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Apparently the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration cannot answer it.


Robert Henry Winters: Because it is my responsibility.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Frequently I have been accused of having far too much influence. This is the first time I have ever been accused of having none.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
345. Payment to the national library purchase account for the purpose of acquiring books, in conformity with section 12 of the National Library Act, $40,000.
Edmund Davie Fulton: I should like to ask one or two questions on this book-purchasing item. In section 1 the act provides for this bookpurchasing account. There was to be $40,000 paid into the account last year, 195455, and a further $40,000 paid in this year. Has the same amount been paid in every year since the passage of the act?


John Whitney Pickersgill: There have been just the two. The act came into force on January 1, 1953, and there were no appropriations except for the bibliographical centre. When the estimates for 1953-54 were prepared this, amount was included, if I remember correctly. 1 am advised that 1954-55 was the first time the item was included. This is the second. Until there is adequate housing for the books, it is not intended, of course, to expend money except when the national librarian believes it can be done advantageously to get books that might not be available later, or might be more expensive. Where the price is not going to change, I do not think there is much point in getting and storing books where they are not very useful.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I take it this fund is being used only for the purchase of books of historical or other interesting value. It is not for the purchase of books currently published


because I understand they are filed automatically, or placed in the library automatically.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is, those that are published in Canada.


Edmund Davie Fulton: This would cover the purchase of books published outside Canada as well as the purchase in Canada or elsewhere of books of historic or literary or other value and interest.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is correct.


Edmund Davie Fulton: One other question. I notice
in the report for this year under the heading, "books purchased from time to time", it is pointed out that the purchases are still on a small scale; but the national librarian goes on to report that the most interesting purchases made during the past year were from newspaper files on microfilm. I have no objection to the purchase of newspaper files on microfilm or in any other form which are of historic or literary interest, but I am just wondering whether that is the proper use of the funds of the book-purchasing account, because, as I read the act, it states the purpose of the account is to acquire books for the national library.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Would the hon. member look at section 2(b)?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Has there been an amendment?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No; section 2(b), the definition section.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I see.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think that is the answer.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The definition of the word "book" includes newspaper film. That satisfies the point. What is the amount now in the fund, or what will be the amount after this $40,000 is authorized?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am told that when this $40,000 is deposited it will be roughly about $65,000. In other words, the balance at present is about $25,000.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The sum of $15,000 has been expended to date?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: My hon. friend brought up the matter of the purchase of books. Needless to say, these books will be purchased all over the world. I was wondering about the use of Canadian publishing houses in this regard? No doubt, some of them can be purchased from Canadian publishing houses at a greater price than they can be obtained, say, from Britain directly or from the United States. This raises another very important

matter to the readers, to the libraries and to the citizens of this country. I am all in favour of the establishment of a Canadian publishing industry, if possible, but I think it should stand on its own feet. I am well aware that certain, shall we say, United States publishing companies open branch offices in Toronto. If you want to buy a book from them, or if you want to buy it from a Canadian source, you pay about 10 per cent extra for that particular privilege. In other words, many of us have discovered that by sending directly to the mother publishing firm, if I may use that expression, in the country of origin, we can get the books in here, pay the postage on them-and fortunately there is no duty now on some of these books-and discover that we are ahead.
Many of these publishing firms seem to think they are an infant industry, like some of the other industries I could talk about, and they need protection. Their protection in this case is produced by the extra price they take out of the pockets of the Canadian consumers, and when I use "consumers" I am thinking of the readers or the libraries, as the case may be. It is just a question to what extent our libraries, universities or individuals are justified in buying books from the Canadian source if the expense is greater in that direction. I know this cannot be taken as a direct question to the minister. I have not addressed it in that way. I was just bringing it to his attention because this is a matter on which I have heard a good deal of discussion among certain people whom I know.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I may just say a word in reply to the hon. gentleman. This government did take off the sales tax on books, I think it was last year. I thought that was a very wise and forward-looking move, and it was hoped-


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I recommended it.


John Whitney Pickersgill: So did I. It was hoped that the benefit of this reduction would be passed on to the consumers and that in turn, with a lower price for books, there might be more books bought and that publishing in Canada might become a little more profitable. But there is a sort of vicious circle in all this business, which the hon. member himself has indicated. Perhaps I should not say "vicious" circle, except in the technical sense of the term. The fact that there is perhaps not the demand for books in this country that we would like makes it more difficult.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: If I might interrupt, perhaps the high price might be one of the reasons.
Supply-National Film Board


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is one of the reasons. We thought that by reducing the tax and thereby reducing prices somewhat over 10 per cent it might help.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Has policy yet been determined with respect to the inclusion of books in the national library to be purchased out of this book-purchasing account? What I have in mind is this. Is it the intention of the national library to contain the most complete selection possible of all books of literary, scientific or historical interest, whether or not' they are available elsewhere in Canada; or is it the policy that the expenditures from this fund will be made for the acquisition of books only which are not available elsewhere in Canada?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think one could not really draw any hard and fast line. It is intended to try to make it as complete a collection as is possible of all books published in Canada, except for certain types of books that the hon. member for Saskatoon described, and certain other types of books that the hon. member for Kamloops is familiar with, most of which I believe are not published in Canada. It is intended to secure all serious books published in Canada or about Canada. We feel we ought to have all of these in the national library, if they are available, even the rare ones published many years ago, centuries ago, in fact.


Edmund Davie Fulton: For that purpose the parliamentary library will form part of the national library.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Quite.


Edmund Davie Fulton: There will be no overlapping?


John Whitney Pickersgill: There will not be overlapping in the proper sense of the term. There are obviously books which will be required for constant use in the parliamentary library which will have to be duplicated in the national library, but there will not be any duplication of books which can be easily transported between the two. Arrangements are already under consideration to provide for the greatest possible facility in transporting books between the parliamentary library and the new national library building when it is erected. That is one factor that my colleague the Minister of Public Works is taking into account in making arrangements for the new building.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
242. Administration, production and distribution of films and other visual materials, $3,193,730.
Edmund Davie Fulton: Could the minister give us a progress report on the building in Montreal. I am not asking for a technical report such

Supply-National Film Board as would be furnished by the Minister of Public Works, but when is it anticipated that the new headquarters will be occupied and what changes, if any, have been found to be necessary as construction progresses?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am informed that one unit of the building will probably be ready some time in October or early November. I believe this is the unit in which the technical laboratory will be located and it is hoped to move some of the staff just as soon as the building can be occupied. It is felt that some more space will be available for occupancy in January and that the main occupancy will not be until April of next year.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Apparently the cost of the actual operation of the film board this year is to be dollar for dollar what it was last year, and I do not think that should be allowed to pass without comment. Apparently the minister has been able to avoid an increase. Would he care to comment on that? Has he not been faced with any increase in costs, or has it been necessary to curtail the activities in order to keep expenditures in line?


John Whitney Pickersgill: It would depend upon the interpretation which one places on the word "curtail". The population of this country is growing and in one way and another I have tried to advertise the desirability of its further growth. With an increase in population to provide the same services per capita you obviously must have some expansion in the government services every year. It was felt that perhaps we could cut corners here and make economies there, and I must say that some of those economies were found to be a little painful by the people in charge of the national film board. But they are making an honest and courageous effort to do everything they can, without impairing the real service, to keep costs down to the figures of last year.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think they are to be commended for doing so.


Mr. Castleden:: Is the new building being air conditioned?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I really think I must insist on my point of order.


George Hugh Castleden: I merely asked a question.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not know; I have never inquired.


Robert Henry Winters: In some parts the temperature and humidity will be carefully controlled.


George Hugh Castleden: The minister said he was rather doubtful as to the advantages of air conditioning and I just wanted to let him
[Mr. Fulton.J
know that as the result of the weather of the last few weeks we are very much in favour of it. Is the 1954-55 annual report ready for distribution?


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is not available yet. I think that would be moving even faster than the minister is accustomed to move.


George Hugh Castleden: Then I shall have to use the report for the year ended March 31, 1954, although it is now July, 1955. I would say that generally we commend the national film board for the work they have done. This work being largely educational, we feel it is a matter of government concern. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration will appreciate the value of having the Canadian people educated, and visual education is one field the value of which cannot be overestimated in providing information to Canadians, particularly adult Canadians. I think the minister is to be commended upon this report which shows that the distribution for the previous year included some 195 showings with some 13 million people in attendance. The showings abroad must have been of value in advertising Canada and I doubt very much if this would have been done under a private enterprise system.
I have had some contact with film councils and film groups in my own and other provinces and I can only offer commendation for the co-operation we have received from the department. There has been complete cooperation with the provincial department of education, certainly in Saskatchewan. The work of this branch is to be highly commended. There are those who are somewhat opposed to the government carrying on this type of work but it might be noted that the film board has made use of private film companies for the production of some 20 films which were completed the previous year by such firms. Could we have the names of those firms, with the information being brought up to the end of the year 1954-55?


John Whitney Pickersgill: In connection with complete films, there were Graphic Associates Limited, Lew Parry, Peterson Productions; and for partial production and processing, Associated Screen News, Cinema Pictures Limited, Communications of Canada Limited, Crawley Films, Graphic Associates Limited, Peterson Productions, Rapid Grip and Batten, Shelly Films Limited, Wild Life Productions. Those are Canadian companies. Then there was some partial processing done in the United States but I do not imagine the hon. member would want that.


George Hugh Castleden: I wanted the number of
completed films which had been made by private firms during the past year.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There were three different firms, and four films were produced.


George Hugh Castleden: What is the picture with regard to productions by the national film board for television use across Canada?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Roughly 78, in both languages.


Edmund Davie Fulton: In the details on page 347
under "Distribution of Films" we find items covering administration, Canadian non-theatrical, commercial, international, etc. Would the minister say what is meant by Canadian non-theatrical? Is it everything except what is shown in a commercial theatre?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Everything except what is shown in a commercial theatre or is used for television.


Edmund Davie Fulton: That would really cover mainly the distribution of films in the rural areas?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think that is really the biggest part of the film board's work.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Can the minister let us know the comparable figure, if any, expected to be received by way of revenue from the sale and leasing of films? Does anything come under that heading during the current year?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The estimates for this year?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Does the hon. gentleman mean non-theatrical or all revenues?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The total revenue expected to be received by the film board for the current year, or the figures for last year if the estimate for this year is not available.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The actual amount for 195455 is $196,195 for rentals and royalties; sales, $1,016,502. I think this is misleading because it includes sales to government departments. The rentals and royalties are, of course, all outside. I have another revenue summary here. The theatrical revenues are, for Canada, $10,593.16; United Kingdom, $3,609.15; United States, $12,148.05; others, $8,583.40; making a total of almost $35,000. Then for television inside and outside Canada the total amount is $122,800; print sales and rentals, $82,000; total revenue, Canada, $144,000; abroad, $95,800.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I notice that there was an item last year for research which was not repeated in this year's estimate. I paid an interesting visit 18 months ago to the film board offices here, and although I have no technical knowledge in the field, I was very much impressed by the evidence I was shown of the research and development being done by the film board into new methods of producing and 50433-396
Supply-National Film Board
processing films. I am wondering whether that has been discontinued, as would appear on the surface, or whether this is now found in some other detailed items.


John Whitney Pickersgill: 1 am told that this $5,000, which struck me as being a very small amount for research, is really the salary of one man who was specially engaged last year and no longer is. The ordinary research is part of the general services vote. It is carried on this year on approximately the same scale as last year.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Mr. Chairman, I was unfortunately called out and did not hear the question asked by my colleague. Has the minister told the committee at what stage the new building is at Montreal, what is the estimated cost, when it will be opened, and how many of the staff will be at Montreal and how many will be retained here?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think that all the questions except the last two could be asked of my colleague the Minister of Public Works, because I do not know the answers and I ought not to give them if I did. As for the last question, the great bulk of the staff will be in Montreal but there will have to be some staff here at Ottawa. As I think the Prime Minister indicated early last year, the present plan is that the chairman of the board, the government film commissioner, should be in Ottawa.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Mr. Chairman, I understand that it has not been proposed to provide air conditioning in the building. Is it too late to recommend that for the consideration of the Minister of Public Works?


John Whitney Pickersgill: That question was dealt with when the hon. member was not here.


Mr. Montgomery:: Has the film board offices in each province, or is it approaching a new policy of opening offices in some of the provinces? If so, what provinces and what are the duties of the officers?


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is an office in every province. In most provinces there is more than one office.


Gage Workman Montgomery: Would the minister mind saying what they do? Do they distribute or act as agents?


John Whitney Pickersgill: They are for distribution.


Mr. Hansell:: I have a question or two in respect of films produced for television purposes. Would the minister care to tell us for what particular use these television films are produced? I know they are produced to be televised, but what I mean to say is this. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation evidently has a film production department

Supply-National Film Board of its own to produce films for its own television. I am wondering if there is not a duplication there, or where the line of demarcation comes between the responsibilities of the national film board for films to be televised and the responsibility of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for the same service for the same use.
Perhaps the minister can enlighten us on that. In so doing would he mind telling us whether any of the films for television purposes are on the commercial market for independent television stations throughout Canada? In other words, would the national film board produce films to be televised by independent television stations?
While I am on my feet, I should like to ask another question of a different nature, and then I shall not have to get up twice. The minister has given us some figures respecting some revenues which have accrued to the national film board by way of rentals and probably sales of films. I should like to know in a little more detail the relationship which exists between regular theatres throughout Canada and the national film board. The national film board productions are used by the local theatres throughout Canada. Are they sold outright to the theatres or are they rented to them? What system is used? Would the minister say, if it is possible to give the figures, what commercial revenues accrue to the national film board for production of films that are used throughout Canada in local theatres?


John Whitney Pickersgill: If I might answer the last question of the hon. member for Macleod first, I did just give that figure. I admit that I gave the figures in a fashion that was not easy to follow, but I think they will be quite clear on Hansard. Coming to this rather more difficult question of the distinction between the film activities of the C.B.C. for television and those of the national film board, the C.B.C. does have a news film service. It also has certain productions shown by the C.B.C., which are put on film because it is easier to televise them that way. I really should not go into this part of it because I do not know much about the C.B.C. I do not happen to own a television set, so I am not really a good critic. What the film board does is to provide the films that are requested by the C.B.C. In other words, we are simply a supplier just as someone else might be. This is arranged by discussion between them. Documentary films or films of that sort, for which parliament has entrusted the responsibility to the film board, are used by the C.B.C., but of course the C.B.C. can reject anything it wants to. Nothing is imposed.


As to the extent of the use of these films by independent stations, I do not think the question has arisen. As the hon. gentleman knows, under the present policy there is no duplication of stations and the C.B.C. network programs are shown by most of the independent stations. I do not think any independent station has approached us. I am told I am not up to date on that, that some of the local stations throughout the country are booking with our local distribution offices in addition to what is provided by the C.B.C. network, and I presume they pay for them. I hope they do.


Ernest George Hansell: To amplify the question respecting commercial revenues from local theatres a little, what I had in mind was whether those revenues are sufficient to give a profit to the national film board, or can we say that in a roundabout way we are in reality subsidizing the production of these films for use in local theatres throughout Canada? If we are, it would occur to me we are subsidizing to some extent the motion picture industry.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think the hon. member has put a proposition which is a logical fallacy. We certainly are not making a profit out of the films that are shown in these theatres. We have made arrangements with the exhibitors to get as much as we can manage to get them to pay, and they presumably will not pay more than they think the films are worth as an attraction. To be quite blunt about it, I have some doubt whether they are a great box office attraction. The reason we are anxious to have them shown, and perhaps the prime reason why the film board exists, is that we feel that there ought to be some Canadian element in these cinemas and that, even if we do not make a profit out of it, because of the effect of the constant viewing of these things on the mind and personality of Canadians it is desirable that a small fraction at any rate of what Canadians see in the cinemas should be Canadian.


Ernest George Hansell: I agree with that.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minister did not answer the question of the hon. member for Yorkton regarding the amount paid Crawley Films for their productions. Has the minister the information available as to the amount paid Crawley Films over a number of years?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder whether the hon. gentleman would mind if I took note of the question and answered it later. It is sometimes rather difficult to do this arithmetic without delaying matters. I will undertake to do it.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I should like to make a suggestion in connection with what the minister just said as to the desirability of having some Canadian content in Canadian theatres. I appreciate the very excellent technique and artistic methods of some of the film board productions that I have had the opportunity of seeing. I wonder, however, whether they have exploited to the full the possibility of documentary films on Canadian voyages of exploration and discovery. There are some most dramatic and thrilling chapters of Canadian history.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Starting with John Cabot.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I can imagine the hon. gentleman is interested in that, but I think there are other more romantic and thrilling voyages of discovery that could be filmed. What progress has been made along these lines and what emphasis has that part of the program received? There are the voyages of Samuel de Champlain and the discovery he made when he went down the Mississippi river. Then there are the voyages down the Fraser and the Thompson rivers.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There has been an attempt to recreate that kind of thing on film strips. I imagine it would be a pretty expensive thing to do as a real film. Historical reconstruction is always very expensive and you never can be quite sure how it will turn out. I do know of course that there have been a good many scenic films made that have indicated the routes of explorers and that sort of thing. I have no doubt some of the members of the committee have at different times seen some of these scenic films of the Arctic and that sort of thing, that are quite remarkable.


Ernest George Hansell: The questions I asked and the comments I made were not put forward with any idea of being critical at all because I think the productions that are shown in the local theatres are very worthy. I also think that there has been an improvement in their technical development over the years. I think more of them should be shown. I think that the local commercial theatres are doing some service to the country not only by showing national film board productions but also showing occasionally short films in the interests of community chest campaigns and that sort of thing. I think these things are very commendable. Not long ago the Minister of National Health and Welfare was the subject of a film in which he advocated adherence to national health week. He started off by laying down the telephone and then talking to the audience. I do not think there was anybody on the telephone when he put the receiver down. It was all part of the production, but it was quite a nice little thing. I 50433-3964
Supply-National Film Board
think the Canadian people appreciate all these things. I did not rise to make harsh criticism but merely to get some information.


Edmund Davie Fulton: If the minister could give us some antidote to Davy Crockett he would be doing a national service.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a matter of fact the minister, ably assisted by the cartoonist in the Montreal Gazette, did his best. If I might revert to the question of the hon. member for Mackenzie, over a period of the last eight years Crawley Films have had business totalling $144,857, an average of approximately $18,000 a year. That is for complete films. It may well be there have been other services they have rendered. They are a most excellent firm, even if they are engaged in private enterprise.


Mr. Barnett:: I should like to say first of all that I heartily agree with the views that have been expressed that it is a very refreshing and enjoyable experience to see films in our local motion picture theatres that have a Canadian content. I have a question with respect to the working conditions of the production staff of the film board. Can the minister tell us what the policy of the film board is with respect to the application of overtime to holiday leave in the film board?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Of course the film board does try to avoid overtime as much as it can because working conditions down in the old sawmill where they are trying to operate are not what we would like them to be. But there are certain sections where there has been quite a lot of overtime, and where arrangements were recently made by the treasury board to provide for the payment of overtime. These sections are the laboratories, engineering division and sound department. In other departments so far, the usual civil service practice of giving compensatory leave has been followed. We do not want the work to be delayed, and on that ground we may have to give consideration to extending overtime pay somewhat farther.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Just to make sure I understand the minister correctly, I understand that in certain categories of work direct pay is being given for overtime work?


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is correct.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: In respect to the application of holiday leave to overtime work, is the policy being followed there that which generally prevails in the other departments of government?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Precisely the same.


William McLean Hamilton: In
the first instance, I am a little bit unhappy


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a matter of fact, if the hon. member would permit it, I should like to give some consideration to this question. I have not attempted myself to reconcile the public accounts and the annual report. I assumed that there was no reconciling to be done. I think he has suggested there is, but I do not think I could do it here and now. Perhaps I could take his question under advisement and undertake to give an answer.


William McLean Hamilton: think that will be satisfactory, Mr. Chairman. I am not going to labour the point. I do not want the minister to think I am being unfair to him. I do wish that in a case like this, where almost $3 million of government money is involved, we could have a little bit more control on the part of the minister over the details, not the final details but the administrative details of this situation. For example, we have turned up a situation here, and in reply the minister says, I was not aware that there was any difference and I have not attempted to reconcile the public accounts with this situation. It is a bit of a lacuna which one would not expect to find in the case of good business administration.
I would point out also one other shortcoming in so far as the estimates are concerned, Mr. Chairman. Many of the subsidiary operations of the government show in their estimates a figure for the amount of revenue which they expect to receive. They show their gross expenditures and then the revenue, coming down to a net amount which parliament is asked to provide. A case in point, perhaps not the best example, would be the Canadian international trade fair, where we get an adequate detail of the expenditures, less a deduction for revenue and then a total amount which the government is asked to provide. Here, we are

given information only regarding the amount which parliament is asked to provide. We have to go beyond the estimates to get the information.
Now, looking at the financial picture generally, one observes that the film board report of March 31, 1954, shows an excess of income over expenditures and the transferred balance was $149,343. I think we might make a preliminary reference to the C.B.C., and transfer to this organization all the criticisms which have been made of the C.B.C. practice of showing a surplus which is very largely based on funds voted by parliament. I would make my case on that basis, because it is a parallel situation.
The film board essentially shows an excess of income over expenditures; but it can arrive at that only because of the very healthy vote of $3 million made to them by parliament.
There are two or three other questions, of which the most interesting I believe is this: Would the minister tell us about the censorship of national film board films by the censorship bureau of the province of Quebec? I am asking the question now so that, if the minister wishes, he can obtain information during the lunch hour. The question is as to how much censorship is done. Perhaps he might tell us first of all whether any is done, and if so, what the film board pays for the service.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think I can answer that question summarily because I happen to know quite a bit about it. The government of Quebec did not in fact censor film board films until quite recently. They advised us that they felt that film board films ought to be subject to the same censorship as other films. Actually there were one or two other provinces, notably Alberta, where our films were subject to censorship. In most provinces it is assumed-at least I take it that it is assumed, realizing of course that I should not speak for provincial governments-that films made by the film board do not need to be censored.
I exchanged correspondence with the premier of Quebec, as a result of which we reached a modus operandi saving our constitutional position on both sides. We said that as a matter of practice we would submit to the censorship, and the premier agreed that we would have one print of each film censored. If we would undertake to have one print censored we could exhibit as many as we liked. We pay the cost of having one done. So, from the standpoint of the treasury it was a very satisfactory arrangement. It also meant that from their standpoint they were not going to have their office cluttered up with a very considerable number of prints
Supply-National Film Board of films exhibited in that province. I think we pay $2.50 for every ten-minute reel, and others correspondingly.


William McLean Hamilton: should like to have confirmation of one statement the minister has made. According to the minister the payment made by the federal government to the province in connection with censorship is in respect of one print only.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is right.


William McLean Hamilton: Presumably, therefore, irrespective of how many other prints go into the province, no payment in respect of censorship is made.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is right.


William McLean Hamilton: And
the minister confirms that?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes.


William McLean Hamilton: Could the minister give some information on a somewhat technical problem connected with their building in Montreal, but which affects directly the film board. Has he had any assurance recently that extraneous noises, particularly from the airport next door, will not prove a source of inconvenience in making films in the new location; or has there been done any investigatory work which indicates that there may yet be a problem?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I visited the building when the snow was on the ground-and at this time I admit that does not sound very recent. At that time, however, I had the good fortune to be there in the company of the architect. I shall not attempt to reproduce what he said, but he did explain to me the precautions being taken to make sure that extraneous noises were excluded. I had heard these stories about the proximity of Dorval, but he said it would not matter where the building was. You could have it in Ungava, if it were feasible to build it there.


William McLean Hamilton: Even Twillingsgate?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. member must
take a lesson in pronunciation. There is no "s" in "Twillingate".
I am told that any noise would interfere with really satisfactory work of this kind. However, I was assured they were convinced that what they were doing was satisfactory. And of course they are following patterns established elsewhere, and what they are doing is not unique. It was expected that it would be quite satisfactory.
6262	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Film Board
Again, that is not my responsibility, but rather that of the minister who is erecting the building. But of course we do want it to be satisfactory.


William McLean Hamilton: Would the minister tell us whether the national film board expects its relationship with the C.B.C. to continue for at least several years into the future so far as the present volume of supply of news films and releases for use on C.B.C. television is concerned?


John Whitney Pickersgill: We do not do news films at all.


William McLean Hamilton: Do I
understand you do not do any processing whatsoever of that type for the C.B.C.?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, except once in a while as a convenience.


William McLean Hamilton: In
'Other words, you do some. Could the minister give us some information about Canadian films shipped to the United States for processing? How much of that is being done, and why?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I understand that what is done in the United States is colour processing, and it is done there only when the facilities existing in Canada are taxed to capacity.


William McLean Hamilton: It
is now one o'clock. Perhaps the minister would use the hour and a half to find satisfactory answers to my questions with regard to financing. He said he would look into the matter.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the hon. member misunderstood me. What I was asking for was to have the week end to consider the question. I, too, am human, and I would like to spend part of the next hour and a half eating a meal. I assure the hon. member that I will have to take a little more time to look into the public accounts, if I am to answer properly. Of course the hon. member recognizes that the question he asked relates to the public accounts for 1953-54. I have been somewhat more concerned with trying to find out what is going on now than with making comparisons between the public accounts and film board reports before I became minister. I confess frankly that I had not done it at all. However, I would like to be sure what I am saying is correct before I attempt to give an answer.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.


The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.


The Deputy Chairman:: National film board, item 242. Shall the item carry?


William McLean Hamilton: Mr. Chairman-


John Whitney Pickersgill: If the hon. gentleman has one or two other questions perhaps he could put them now and I shall try to deal with them all together.


William McLean Hamilton: think my questions at one o'clock had pretty well summed up the position on the national film board. If we could have the answers to those questions it would be helpful.


John Whitney Pickersgill: 
John Borden Hamilton: Essentially that was the point I was making, Mr. Chairman. I leave it in the hands of the minister. When consideration is being given to that I would hope that consideration would be given to a more adequate breakdown of the information being made available. I pointed out earlier this morning that the only detailed breakdown in which we can see how much is being spent for salaries and how much is being spent on various classifications has no relationship to the various departmental items under which we are asked to appropriate money here for the film board. Perhaps next year the information can be brought to us in a more easily understandable form, and in a form more in line with normal accounting practice. It would be helpful.
My last observation in connection with the national film board, Mr. Chairman, is to

urge, if it is possible, that their information be got out more promptly. The last report which is available to us from the film board is for 1953-54, covering operations which ended on March 31, 1954. At no place in the report is there a specific indication of the date of publication, but we do know from the back that it did not leave the queen's printer until 1955, which is nine months after the end of the period, which makes it very difficult for us to approve expenditures here extending into 1956, when the last information we have is in respect of 1953 and early 1954.
If the film board could be impressed with the necessity of supplying us with more up-to-date information in more understandable form in so far as their finances are concerned, it would be an improvement.
I thank the minister for digging out the information and bringing it back to the committee at this time.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Citizenship-
642. Citizenship registration	branch-further
amount required, $167,435.
Edmund Davie Fulton: Will the minister give the committee an explanation of the necessity for this further amount? In connection with what part of the branch does it arise?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, sir, this item for the citizenship registration branch is exclusively for the new federal citizenship courts established in Toronto and Montreal. I gave an answer to the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Macnaughton) which will appear in Hansard of today, which will indicate the really remarkable results we have achieved in two months in the court in Montreal. The only thing I can say about the court in Toronto is that it was started a month earlier. There were a considerably larger number of cases to be dealt with in Toronto, and I believe they are now on a current basis. I do not want to boast about it, but I do not think anything the federal government has done in recent weeks is more gratifying than the establishment of these two courts. One of the most gratifying features, sir, is that we are pretty sure, with the possible exception of overhead, by which I mean the rent of the buildings, they are going to pay for themselves. They may turn in a modest paper profit. But what is really important is that when a person has been here five years, and is otherwise qualified for citizenship, his case is now dealt with promptly in both Toronto and Montreal instead of having time lags of as much as two years. I do not blame the
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration provincial governments and I do not blame the local authorities in the courts, but the delays were inexcusable from the point of view of the public. That situation does not exist any longer.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, I am sure the committee, and in particular the members from the two cities concerned, will share the pleasure of the minister that the result has been as he has outlined it and the arrears are caught up. Does the experience there indicate that the expenditure involved would justify the establishment of similar courts in other places in Canada? Are there any places in Canada where we have the same sort of problem?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No other place has been drawn to my attention, sir. I specifically inquired about Winnipeg, Hamilton and Vancouver, which are the three places where one would be the most apt to experience a similar situation. Whether the local courts in these places are more efficient than they were in Montreal or Toronto, or what the reason is, I am told that in all these places the cases are dealt with very expeditiously and very satisfactorily indeed. The federal government does not want to go into this activity if it is not necessary, because certainly in the smaller places the $10 fee would not begin to pay for the cost if one had to set up a whole separate apparatus. We do not want that. On the other hand, in Toronto and Montreal it is no doubt the most efficient way to deal with the situation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian affairs branch-
Welfare of Indians-
643. Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $350,000.
George Hugh Castleden: Will the minister give us a breakdown of this $350,000 extra item that he wants apparently for materials and supplies?


John Whitney Pickersgill: This item, sir, is simply to pay for the additional materials and supplies to assist Indian farmers and those Indians normally employed as farm labourers on non-Indian farms who were affected by the economic situation last winter. The fact that employment was scarcer last winter bore more heavily on the Indians than on most other people because probably there are a larger number of people among the Indians who are marginally employed. When there is full employment they get some employment, but when there is less than full employment they find themselves with less to do. In many cases on the prairies they suffered as
6264	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration did other farmers because their crops were not satisfactory. We had not estimated adequately for either of these items and this is simply to supplement the amount which was included in the main estimates.


George Hugh Castleden: Heretofore when an Indian required any extra amount the usual procedure was for a charge to be made against the band fund. Apparently this indicates that the government is going to assist the Indians directly because of the unfortunate economic condition which exists. I am very pleased to know that this is going through. Can the minister give us a breakdown as to the provinces and areas where this may be spent?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not think it is possible to give a breakdown of a supplementary estimate like this. This is just in addition to an amount which was already appropriated when my main estimates were passed. We underestimated-this is a new estimate of what will be required up to March 31 next year. We thought it was prudent to ask for money now rather than wait until next March and perhaps have to borrow from the Department of Finance in the meantime.


George Hugh Castleden: What will be the procedure whereby needy Indians will receive this?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The circumstances in each reserve will be considered. Perhaps I should not let the observation of the hon. member pass without an explanation. Where the Indians have considerable band funds and it is felt that they can afford to look after their own relief, they are allowed to do so, but we do not feel that it is good business to have the band funds reduced unduly where there is real need.


George Hugh Castleden: This assistance will be made available without being made a charge against the band funds?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Where there is real need.


George Hugh Castleden: I want to thank the
minister for the attention which was given to the matter which I raised with regard to the Caughnawaga situation. His officer gave an excellent explanation of the situation there. I believe there are about 95 families concerned and I have discovered that many of those have no idea at all of what is going to happen to them. I suggest that the official be given some assistance in the giving of actual information as to what the plans are with regard to the confiscation of this land and with regard to the resettling of these people. If that is not done, a lot of trouble is bound to arise out of this situation and unfortunately there are people who will take advantage of such a situation.


The official of his department is a busy man who I understand is on loan from the citizenship branch. I do think he should be given some assistance at this stage. Many of these Indians will have to make an immediate expenditure for the building of new homes on other parts of the reserve or wherever they may locate, and it is quite evident that it will be some time before a proper evaluation is made of the property they are losing and a payment made. Will arrangements be made for an immediate advance to take care of the necessary expenditures for maintaining themselves and securing new properties?


John Whitney Pickersgill: If I may be as much out of order as the hon. member is, I should like to answer. I appreciate what he has said about the legal officer of my department, who is a member of the staff of the Department of Justice, as are most of the legal officers in other departments. I quite agree that he does need assistance and I have been trying to impress that view upon the Minister of Justice and I thank the hon. gentleman for his assistance.
As for giving information as to what is going to happen with respect to the St. Lawrence development, we are most anxious to do that and we will take every step we think will be effective to that end to inform both the Caughnawaga and St. Regis Indians. The legal adviser has been to see the band council more than once, as have the officials of the St. Lawrence seaway authority. While it is perhaps not relevant to say this, the St. Regis reserve is pretty well known to the president of the St. Lawrence seaway authority and I think he has every bit as much interest in the welfare of those Indians as he ever had.
The matter of advances will certainly be looked after and these people are going to be provided for right away if we cannot estimate exactly what the ultimate compensation will be.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The item in the main estimates covered payments for needy Indians. Am I right in understanding that relief payment is a matter for the minister's department rather than the Department of National Health and Welfare?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I am sure the minister must have had representations from time to time regarding the inadequacy of the present scale of payments to Indians by way of relief. I have received representations between the time the main estimates were considered and now. I do not want to delay the committee by going into this subject, but it is a matter

which has given concern, not only to members here but I know to officials of the minister's department who are in charge of this work in the field. The amount involved here is not large in relation to the total expenditures, but still $350,000 is not an unsubstantial amount, and I would hope that some provision might be made for a more adequate scale of provision of supplies. I understand that this is done mainly by the provision of supplies rather than by the payment of actual cash to the Indians. I hope the minister will take the whole matter into consideration and establish for the future a more adequate scale of relief payments to Indians.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I shall be very glad to take the hon. gentleman's observations into account and look into the matter further.


Mr. Trainor:: How does the minister reconcile his remarks on this item with the current fiction that the Indian is a full-fledged citizen and as such his welfare is a matter of provincial responsibility?


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is a fiction which is rather new to me.


Owen C. Trainor: The Department of National Health and Welfare subscribes to that.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I can consider only my own responsibilities and I have never heard that from any quarter. Of course we do take the view in my department that those Indians who go off the reserve, who work off the reserve, who live off the reserve, who have their normal domicile somewhere else, should be treated like any other Canadian citizen, and should they require welfare services those should be provided by the provincial and local authorities in the same way as they would be provided for anybody else. Those Indians are taxpayers and wage earners and they contribute to the communities in which they live. But we have never taken that view about the Indian on the reserve and of course it is always open to an Indian who has still the status of an Indian to go back to the reserve to which he belongs if he wants to do so.


Owen C. Trainor: The minister does subscribe to the doctrine that the Indian on the reserve is definitely a ward of the government?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, I do not and there is no legal justification for that view. However, the government does have certain responsibilities for the Indians that have been laid down by parliament, and that is what it is my duty to carry out.


Mr. Campbell:: Can the minister give us the particulars of the rations which are given out to Indians in need of relief?
16, 1955	6265
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am afraid I could not
do that specifically.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The minister advises that the Arrow lake band of Indians is extinct and I understand there was some money in the band fund. What happened to those funds?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would not venture to express an opinion on that, but I shall ask for legal advice and communicate it to the hon. member.


Mr. Blackmore:: Mr. Chairman, I do not know whether this is the item under which I should raise this matter. It is a matter that has troubled me greatly in relation to the Indians. There is a fine reservation and a fine body of Indians in my constituency. The Indians are increasing rapidly, and we desire that they shall increase rapidly because they are very good Canadians.


John Whitney Pickersgill: They are all Canadian babies.


John Horne Blackmore: That is right. When a certain group of Indians has been assigned to a certain reservation they continue to increase naturally and over a period of time it is quite obvious that the reservation tends to become inadequate in size. I wondered whether or not the minister has dreams, visions and plans for adding to the size of any given reservation in accordance with the needs of the population of that reservation. I do not think the matter was seriously discussed by the committee which sat upon this problem of Indians some time ago, but I felt that that matter should be given very serious consideration. There are several reasons-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I know the hon. gentleman and I would almost see eye to eye on this question, but it is not at all within the scope of these supplementary estimates and it is a very big subject. I feel that, if we are ever to end the session, we have to stick to the things that are within our scope. To reassure the hon. gentleman, I can tell him that this matter is engaging most active consideration and I should be very glad indeed to receive any representations from him privately that he would care to make. If I am still minister and if he is still here- as I am sure he will be-I shall be glad to discuss it on my estimates next year, but I do not think it is fair to the committee, when there is no item relating to this matter, to take the time today.


John Horne Blackmore: May I thank the minister most earnestly for that assurance.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Health and Welfare
Indian affairs branch-
Education-
614. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $40,000.
Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, this $40,000 is a very definite amount. Would the minister say on what account it arises? Is it for another building?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, it is another building. We found we could get ahead more rapidly than we had hoped for with plans for schools, and we think we can build one more school.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Where?


John Whitney Pickersgill: In the Qu'Appelle valley. It is very badly needed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
245. Departmental administration, $1,246,846.
Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I wonder if the minister is not now prepared to make some statement on the question of a nation-wide health program following the suggestion of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, or would he prefer that I proceed with my speech first? Well, first of all I wish to congratulate the minister on cutting across party lines and sending the hon. member for Lanark as one of the Canadian delegates to the recent meeting of the world health organization. I think the outstanding speech delivered by the hon. member last night justified the minister's confidence in him.
At this point I should like to offer a suggestion to the minister. I think his information section is falling down with reference to the problems and work of the world health organization. When a member such as the hon. member for Lanark takes on an assignment, the minister's information section should be interested in getting this story told across Canada. I checked with the hon. member for Lanark, and he has indicated he is prepared to speak anywhere at any time on world health. Certainly the Canadian people need information regarding the health problems in the world and what could be done.
I understand the minister deserves some credit for having moved the original motion setting up the world health organization. Again I must congratulate him on his foresight in helping to establish this specialized agency. But, having said that, I must say I am disappointed that after all these years we are spending so little on the work of the world health organization.
We are spending this year $289,958, which works out at a little less than two cents per person in Canada. After giving two cents per person, we have asked for change back,


and we received $10,042 change back. If the Canadian people had the sort of information given to them that was given by the hon. member for Lanark, we would want to raise our contribution to at least a nickel per person per year. When we consider the items that were set out when the world health organization was established and the long distance we have to travel before they are realized, it is obvious that something better has to be done. The minister helped to set up those original objectives. They declare:
In conformity with the charter of the United Nations, that the following principles are basic to the happiness, harmonious relations and security of all peoples.
There are nine important paragraphs, and I am going to refer to only two or three of them:
Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.
The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition.
The health of all peoples is fundamental to the attainment of peace and security and is dependent upon the fullest co-operation of individuals and states.
Unequal development in different countries in the promotion of health and control of disease, especially communicable disease, is a common danger.
When I consider what we have accomplished in Canada during my lifetime, I believe that, if we could use a little more imagination in the whole world, we might be able to accomplish in the next 50 years what we have accomplished in Canada. During my lifetime we have seen our life expectancy increased. I am sorry to have to go to the United States for expectancy figures at the beginning of the century, but our figures are very comparable to those of the United States throughout the years. In 1900, the year when I was born, males had a life expectancy of 47-9 years, as compared with 66-3 now, an increase of 18-4. Although women are supposed to belong to the weaker sex, it probably comes as a surprise to most members that they live several years longer than men. At the beginning of the century women had a life expectancy of 50-7 as compared with 70-8 in 1951.
In the field of infant mortality we again have a record in Canada that should give us a good deal of pride and satisfaction. Canada has not the best record in the world, and has not the worst record, but there has been a very interesting improvement in our position in the last 20 or 30 years. Canada's infant mortality rate in 1951, as recorded by the bureau of statistics, was 38, as compared with 21 in Sweden, 23 in New Zealand, 25

in Australia, and 27 in The Netherlands. Some of the other countries have a much higher rate. The last ones given here are Chile, 148; India, 137; and Mexico, 100.
The breakdowns are given for the provinces. The hon. members for Kamloops and Kootenay West will be interested to know that their province of British Columbia has the best rate of 30. Ontario and Saskatchewan come second with 31 and 31. If, in some 20 years, we have been able to make this sort of improvement in Canada, what could we do in the whole world? Here are the figures for Canada since 1921. There is a remarkable drop from 102 away back in 1921 down to 35 in 1953. I submit that since we are living in a world where it is well known that people in one-half of the world can look forward to living to 65 or 70 and in the other half of the world can expect to be dead by the time they are 35 or 40, we have a fundamental source of trouble. Therefore I suggest the minister should have more money available for his information section so that it can do a worth-while job in the field of world health.
I might mention that I have had a good deal of trouble in getting information from the minister's department regarding what is being done by Canadians in different parts of the world, the sort of information that the hon. member for Lanark gave last night. I asked for a copy of all information on WHO that had gone out from the minister's office in the last twelve months. There is one press release here giving the minister's tribute to nurses on the occasion of the annual world health day, and it also puts in quite a worthwhile plug for his own department, which is all to the good. I also received a booklet telling about a Canadian nurse who left Canada in 1951 for Penang in Malaya. She has been working in the Penang school of nursing ever since. I checked with the department and asked who the nurse was. I was told that they were sorry, but they did not know. She comes from Vancouver, Halifax or Moncton, some place in Canada, and if it is worth while putting out a world health organization publication to tell of the work of a Canadian nurse, surely it is worth while to say who she is and provide some pictures and stories. I am certain that the newspapers in the area in Canada where she used to live would be interested in having that information. There is a worth-while story here about the job that is being done by a Canadian nurse in this school of nursing. My letter was written on the 10th of March, and I am still hoping that some newspaper in
Supply-Health and Welfare Canada will be supplied with the information because they would be very glad to have information about a local girl who has made good.
I should like to devote a good deal of time to the subject dealt with last night by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, national health insurance, but before I come to that I want to make a plea to the minister to use his influence to get more funds from the treasury for his important department. This year he will have $842 million plus $7 million for civil defence. I know that some people in Canada will think that is a good deal of money to make available to one minister, but I suggest the amount is not adequate in view of the problems that have to be met.
I want to mention the expenditures for old age pensions, family allowances, blind persons and disabled persons. Some time ago I referred to a publication of the bureau of statistics showing the distribution of non-farm income in Canada. This publication reveals some very disturbing information. With respect to families of two or more persons, there were 3 per cent who in 1951 had to get by on incomes of less than $500. I ask hon. members to think of having to provide housing, food and medical care on $500 a year. Of course there are a large number of single old age pensioners who are getting $40 a month or $480 a year. I ask the minister: How can you possibly provide decent food, shelter, clothing and medical services on less than $500 a year? Yet 3 per cent of our Canadian families of two or more persons have this sort of budget.
Another 5 per cent have to get by on incomes between $500 and $1,000, and another 7 per cent on incomes between $1,000 and $1,495. Therefore 15 per cent of our families have incomes of under $1,500 a year. In these brackets we have our old age pensioners, our blind pensioners, our disabled persons and a great many to whom family allowances have made a great deal of difference. I know that earlier this session a resolution of the hon. member for Assiniboia was debated which asked that in 1955 we devote the same share of the total national income to family allowances as we did ten years ago when family allowances were first instituted. I submit that is a very reasonable proposition, but unfortunately the Minister of National Health and Welfare could not go along with that suggestion. I want him to reconsider his stand and see to it that disbursements to family allowance recipients are increased so that the same share of the national income will be spent for that purpose as when the allowances were first introduced.
6268	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare
As to blind persons and disabled persons, I think that members in all parts of the house must blush with a good deal of shame when they think of how inadequate our assistance is for this important sector of the Canadian economy comprising people who certainly should be given all the food they can use, all the medical services they require and have those things which we can make available in Canada. I must commend the minister for the studies being carried on by the department in connection with planning for the aged in Canada. Unfortunately we are about 25 years behind the times in facing up to the problem. Twenty-five or more years ago countries like Great Britain, the United States and the Scandinavian countries started in at the point where we now are. It now seems that anyone over 45 is in the category of the ageing at least. I checked the Parliamentary Guide yesterday, and I found that the minister is in that category. He was so young when I first came here in 1940 that I cannot realize he is now over 45.


Mr. Martin:: You are not calling me an old man?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: No, I am not, but I am suggesting the minister is in the category of those 45 or older. A great many Canadians in that category who lose their jobs are finding it increasingly difficult to get positions. The only way anyone can avoid growing old is to die young, and not very many of us are prepared to take that course of action. I am glad the minister has made a start in studying the very real problem of the ageing. I have in my hand a publication called "Everyone Grows Old" put out by the Canadian Welfare Council. It points out that in 1951 7-8 per cent of Canadians were over 65. It estimates that 20 years later the percentage will be 8-8, and that by 1980 10 per cent of the Canadian population will be over 65.
In another publication I received from the minister's department it is pointed out that this really should not be a calamity, that with our modern developments and the great surpluses of foodstuffs in the world we should not consider it is any great embarrassment to have an increasing number of people in this category. But while we have these resources very little study has been done in Canada to find out how many people over 65 have to get by on the $40 a month social security payment and how many get some assistance from their children or other organizations. It might be interesting to recall that there are three provincial governments in Canada which provide supplementary payments to people 65 or older. I refer to my own province of Saskatchewan and the provinces of


Alberta and British Columbia. I must say that the province of Ontario has also accepted some responsibility for the people in this group.
As I understand it, the province of Ontario insists on the municipality matching the payment dollar for dollar, and these payments will be matched by the provincial government up to a maximum of $10 per month. It might be worth reminding the committee that none of the Liberal provincial governments in Canada have so far provided a five-cent piece for supplementary benefits for people 65 or older. I gather this is the result of the conclusion of these provinces that the responsibility for the aged and ageing is a federal responsibility. Since the federal government is now providing comprehensive security benefits for everyone over 70, they conclude that if the individual requires more it should be the responsibility of the federal government to spend more.
As I said, I am glad a start has been made to study the problem. I am sure this study will convince the minister and everyone that there are at least three important decisions that will have to be reached. The first is that people in the group 65 or older must be given some public assistance so that they can find decent housing. I think it is unfortunate that so far the Minister of National Health and Welfare has not come forward with an offer of some assistance to provide decent housing for the people receiving old age pensions. His colleague the Minister of Public Works has made some money available on a loan basis. The hon. member for Vancouver East could speak more competently than I could regarding the very helpful arrangements that have been made with Central Mortgage and Housing, and public-spirited organizations in Burnaby, in connection with providing some housing for old age pensioners. As a result of the public, provincial and private assistance, a limited number of old age pensioners in the Burnaby area-I should say they have not been able to provide housing for nearly all who want it-have been able to get very attractive housing at around $25 per month.
I think it is a great pity that the Minister of National Health and Welfare has not a section in his department now that is encouraging provincial and civic authorities to branch out in the field of public housing.


Mr. Marlin:: If my hon. friend will come over to the department some time, we will show him what we are doing.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I have all the information here.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We are doing that very thing, of course.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minister will correct me if I am wrong, but not a flve-cent piece has his department made available for assisting to build housing for the aged anywhere in Canada.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is not our field, but the department is putting out more money for old age security than any country in the world.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I want the minister, when he rises, to state how soon-


Paul Joseph James Martin: I do not propose to rise.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: -his department is going to face up to the problem of housing for the aged. Again from the department, I have received information as to what has been done in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Great Britain and the United States. I am very sorry that there is no section showing what is being done by the health and welfare-


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have just said it was.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Some work is being done by local organizations on borrowed money from Central Mortgage and Housing. My colleague the hon. member for The Battle-fords is active in a project in the little town of Neilburg. They were able to borrow from Central Mortgage and Housing 92 per cent of the cost of these buildings. The local people are going to have to repay that over a period of 40 or 50 years. The provincial government is going to make a contribution, and the local people are going to make a contribution, but a start is being made at Neilburg.
My case is that the Minister of National Health and Welfare should have funds available so that where provinces are not giving some supplementary assistance to this very large group of our Canadian people, the minister's department will give a start in the field of housing.
The second field where help should be given is medical care. What the hon. member for Peace River said was being done in Alberta for old age pensioners by the provincial government could be repeated about Saskatchewan. I am not familiar with what is being done in British Columbia. But it is a pity you have to wait until a C.C.F. or Social Credit government is elected before the local authorities are prepared to take a step to see that those who are getting no supplementary income get medical and hospital care and other assistance.
The third field is that of income maintenance. I think it is most unfortunate that such a large group of our Canadian people
Supply-Health and Welfare have to balance budgets in this day and age on $40 a month. This is true, especially when one considers how freely we spend for a great many projects. We are going to approve some $50 million for servicing T.V. viewers in the country. We can find $50 million for T.V. but to supplement the $40 a month for people who have no other income we just have not the funds available. I am going to urge that the minister proceed much more rapidly with the establishment of complete information in his department regarding the needs of the ageing in Canada, and what he is prepared to do in the fields of housing, medical care and income maintenance.
Now, I come to the subject which was discussed so fully by the leader of this party last night, but I cannot conclude without making some reference to the need for a nation-wide health insurance program. I think it is a great pity that the minister has not given real leadership in this field. I hold in my hand a pamphlet entitled "Heroes of Health", published by the health league of Canada. There are pictures of Jeanne Mance; Sir Frederick Banting; Edward Jenner; James Young Simpson, for painless surgery; Florence Nightingale; Joseph Lister, for antiseptic surgery; Louis Pasteur; Robert Koch, for bacteriology; Madame Curie and Sir Alexander Fleming. We still have room for a picture of the Minister of National Health and Welfare.


Paul Joseph James Martin: It will be there.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I hope I may live long
enough to see his picture included in a book "Heroes of Health", as being the man in Canada who was prepared to come out boldly and provide the leadership to give people in all walks of life the very best in the field of health.
I might remind him that his deputy minister in charge of welfare had some very constructive ideas some years ago, and I am sure he has not changed his view. In one of the pamphlets issued to the Canadian forces in 1944, Dr. Davidson said:
There are still gaps in our social security program. Chief among these concerns the question of illness. When sickness strikes it strikes with a two-edged sword. Not only does the workman lose his pay during the period he is away from work- worse than that, he has to bear the crushing blow of medical, hospital, and other expenses, running sometimes into hundreds of dollars.
Then, later on he says:
But not all of this represents additional cost. We are meeting now from our own individual resources, as best we can, the heavy medical and hospital expenses that we encounter from time to time. We are carrying now in large part the cost of our own unemployment, eating up our savings when we fall out of work. We are paying now, to
6270	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare
whatever extent we can, through private insurance plans and through savings of one kind or another, for the possibility of retirement or death.
At the end of the war we were prepared to hold out to our young people the prospect of having complete medical and hospital care, and we have delayed long enough. I do not know what it will cost to provide medical care for Canada; but I am sure we have the resources to ensure that our citizens have the very best hospital care, nursing, dental and medical services.
The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar referred to the discussions at Toronto in connection with socialized medicine in the United Kingdom. I noticed a story in the Ottawa Journal where Dr. Clegg was being questioned. It was pointed out to him that Canadian critics of the British health plan considered that British doctors had lost prestige because they could not devote as much time to patients as they did before, and also because they now had too much paper work. Dr. Clegg replied that that was a completely misleading and entirely biased statement by someone who had a deep-rooted prejudice against a national health service.
I might add that I have lived in a rural municipality in Saskatchewan where we have complete hospital and medical care on a prepaid basis. We do not think of it as being free, although of course the services of the doctor are free when you go to his office. If I were told suddenly that I would have to have an operation I would trust my life to those two young doctors who live out there just as readily as I would to any doctor in the city of Ottawa, or anywhere else in Canada I would have a great deal of confidence in them. If they felt that it was an operation beyond their ability, they would say so, and advise me to go to Regina or Saskatoon where I would find more experienced surgeons. When we pay our taxes each year in that province we pay enough so that municipal authorities can pay the medical doctors on a salary basis I think the doctors will agree that 98 per cent of the ratepayers are reasonable; and I think 98 per cent of the ratepayers would agree that the doctors are reasonable. One of them is available, on call, 24 hours in the day; and if he is not there, then there is a doctor in the nearest town who would be available to answer an emergency call.
I submit that because these doctors are on a salary basis they have a happy relationship with their patients. They do not need to worry about the embarrassment they may cause when sending their bills. They do not need to wonder whether their bills will aggravate the illness of the patient or whether the


paying of such bills would mean that the patient would have to go without food or shelter.
The municipal doctors scheme came into being in Saskatchewan chiefly because municipalities were paying out large sums of money for the care of indigent patients. A regular fee was paid for these services. Some persons came to the conclusion that by paying a little more money for the care of indigent persons it would be possible to have a doctor working on a salary basis, and in a position to give complete care.
Certainly in our province there is no prejudice against doctors on a salary basis in the sanatoria or the mental hospitals or on the staffs of universities, or in the municipalities. We have a large number of outstanding Canadian medical doctors who are being paid on a salary basis and who are giving as good service as would be available in most parts of Canada.
My concluding remarks would be that we must ask ourselves this question: Have we the young people in Canada who could be trained? Have we the nurses? Can we build the hospitals? Why is it that the very large group of people in the middle income brackets are not able to have proper medical care? And if they do obtain that degree of care, then many of them are handicapped for the rest of their lives with the debts that pile up. I admit that one group in our community, the indigents, are receiving good medical care. Another group in the highest income brackets are able to obtain the best services money can buy. But the very large number of people in the middle income brackets delay visiting their doctors until it is too late, and it is the undertaker rather than the doctor who is called in.
Some time ago the Minister of National Defence told us that the people of Canada spend $65,000 to train a young chap as pilot in a jet aircraft. It seems to me that the people, who spend money so freely for that purpose, would also be interested in spending public funds tc train young people so that they could complete medical courses which would fit them to care for the sick. There is no reason under the sun why we cannot train and support a sufficient number of Canadians to provide for our medical, dental and nursing needs.
So I hope that before the first item passes the minister will hold out some hope to the committee, and that he will indicate that he is now prepared to go out and popularize in Canada the need for introducing at the next session of parliament a nation-wide health insurance program.


Ernest George Hansell: Mr. Chairman, should the minister feel disposed to reply to the various suggestions and speeches I would ask him to give the house some further information as to what the department might be doing in the field of preventive medicine. We hear a good deal about what the department has done in respect of pensions for incurables, and various legislation covering the sick-and it is to be congratulated upon all those things. But perhaps when the minister replies he might tell us what the department is doing in the field of preventive medicine. I am sure if he did so we might be able to congratulate him upon that too.
I speak on this matter because I believe it offers a useful field of endeavour. I have in mind particularly those who suffer from arthritic and rheumatic troubles. As we know, there are many arthritics in Canada. Many organizations are attempting to tackle the problem, and they are doing all they can,
I am sure. I have no doubt the minister's sympathies are with them and that he would like to help in every way possible.
I think hon. members will agree it is not enough to lock the stable door after the horse has been stolen. It is not enough to help the sick after they become sick. Of course that is a proper thing to do, and also most admirable; but it is much better to tackle the problem at its source with a view to retaining a healthy nation and keeping our people from becoming ill.
The hon. member for Fraser Valley is unable to be with us this afternoon, having been called out on other matters of importance. However, he has been sitting for some time waiting for the minister's estimates. It is unfortunate that they are called when he is not here. Had he been here, however, I am sure he would have spoken along lines I have followed. All hon. members have received many letters urging us to press upon the government the necessity of doing something further in the matter of research and preventive medicine as applied to arthritis. The hon. member for Fraser Valley let me have his file, and it is a fairly thick one. It contains letters from here, there and all over, urging that something be done on behalf of those patients. I pick up one letter which is perhaps characteristic of all of them. This is from the Canadian arthritis and rheumatism society, British Columbia division. It reads:
In view of the fact that there are 600,000 known sufferers from rheumatic diseases in Canada, we feel that there is an urgent need for a federal grant for research in this field.


Paul Joseph James Martin: There are at least 12 different grants for research in this field.
Supply-Health and Welfare Mr. Hansell: I am happy to hear the minister say that. Perhaps he can amplify that a little further, should he reply. The letter continues:
At present grants toward arthritis research in Canada can he obtained only under general public health grants, which are quite inadequate.
The minister can say whether or not that is 100 per cent accurate.


Paul Joseph James Martin: It is not accurate; under the research grant itself.


Ernest George Hansell: I continue:
I am therefore appealing to you to place these facts before the house, and to endeavour to obtain a grant comparable with that provided for research into the control of poliomyelitis. The crippling effects and high incidence of deaths in these two diseases are comparable, therefore I am sure you will agree, that the opportunities for research should also be equal.
Over 8,000 sufferers from rheumatic diseases have been treated by the British Columbia division of the Canadian arthritis and rheumatism society alone. A treatment program is costly; institutional care for chronically crippled patients costlier, and while research may be costly, it may prevent wastage of lives, money and earning power in the future.
This is one letter, but it is characteristic of the many which the hon. member and all hon. members have received. No doubt the minister himself has received many letters, and perhaps he is doing all he can in respect of the matter. There is always an urge to do more, of course.


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend would be interested to know that we have given a grant of $78,000 to the British Columbia society.


Ernest George Hansell: I am glad to hear that. I am not from British Columbia myself, but no matter where we are from we are all interested in the health and welfare of all Canadians.


Paul Joseph James Martin: On one occasion we spent some time in British Columbia.


Ernest George Hansell: Yes; I appreciate the minister's remarks. I am sure we would give the minister credit for everything he does on behalf of anybody.
I should like to touch on another subject in the field of preventive medicine. I am wondering how much is being done in respect of research along the line of nutrition, or shall I say diet. There is a school of thought in Canada, and I am sure it exists in medical circles, too, which holds that diets play a tremendous part in the health of our people and in the cure of certain types of ailments. Mr. Low: The minister is an example.


Ernest George Hansell: Perhaps the minister is an example of clean living. Whether it is a
6272	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare matter of what he eats, I do not know. I know I could give many illustrations. I am not going to take the time of the committee to do that but I have one friend, for instance, who was suffering from what the doctor diagnosed as arthritis, rheumatic trouble of some kind. He just could not move. He was just lying in bed, could not move at all. It was suggested that he might get some relief in a little different climate. He went to a coastal city in British Columbia, but it did not help. He was taken there on a stretcher. He was put in touch with a doctor who specialized in diets. The doctor prescribed a certain type of diet. According to his conversation with me it was largely fresh vegetables, but that is neither here nor there now. Eventually, the gentleman became completely well and was able to return to his work as a cabinetmaker. As far as I know he is still quite healthy. He said to me, "There is no question about it. I took no drugs; I took no medicines; I took some prescribed exercises." He owes his good health to the fact that he had been given a diet by a medical practitioner. He gives credit to that.
I know a gentleman in my own constituency who is a businessman, the owner of a general store in one of our communities. This man also suffered from rheumatic trouble. He wrote me a letter and asked me to pass the information on to the minister. He said he had already written to the minister, giving him as illustration his particular case. He said he used his own common sense in this matter. He said further he believes that what a person eats contributes to his health or to his ill health. He said:
I decided to go on a series of diets.
He tried a number of them and at last he struck one that did the trick. Here is a man who says he spent thousands of dollars in order to effect a cure, and eventually he found a diet that brought him back to perfect health. He continues:
I was amazed. I told other people about it and they got amazing results. Then I began to get letters of inquiries from people all across Canada. In order to save a lot of correspondence I had 500 of these letters printed, and have mailed out hundreds. I have received so many happy letters, that I mailed a copy to the department of health, Ottawa, as I noticed the government was spending a lot of money on arthritic research.
I am pleading with the minister to spend more. The letter goes on:
All I asked was that the department give the diet a thorough test, and if found good, let the thousands of sufferers throughout Canada know about it. But the letter I received from the department was not very encouraging.
Well, of course, I do not know. I suppose it was the regular acknowledgment of a letter received, saying that attention would
[Mr. Hansell.l

be paid to the matter in due course. We all know something about that sort of reply.


Murdo William Martin: In that case I sent the writer a booklet prepared by Dr. Pett, perhaps the outstanding nutritionist on the continent, who is head of the nutrition division, and someone called on that same gentleman as well.


Ernest George Hansell: I do not know whether the minister is a mind reader, but I did not give him the name of the gentleman.


Murdo William Martin: I have a copy of the same letter.


Ernest George Hansell: That is pleasant to know. I shall give the minister the name.


Murdo William Martin: You and I are liked by the same people.


Ernest George Hansell: I shall give the name of this gentleman to the minister so he can check it up. There is another thing this gentleman
said:
I have found out by actual experiment, that it's caused by eating foods the chemicals of which simply don't blend with the chemicals of the human body, and my wife and I have eliminated such chemicalized trash as white bread, white sugar, and hams and bologna. For years now since our recovery, we eat whole wheat bread, brown sugar, fresh meat, cooked and raw vegetables, the same with fruit.
I thought I should mention this matter because it has been brought up before in this house, I believe by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. I submit that our people should be encouraged to eat whole wheat bread. I do not know whether restrictions could be placed upon the milling of flour for white bread, and I am not much in favour of restrictions, but I do believe that there is a great field in the educating of our people along these lines and explaining to them how whole wheat bread is much more nutritious than white bread.
I am told that some time ago an experiment was carried out in the United States in which mice were fed three different types of bread. Enriched white bread was fed to ten mice and they died in five days. Ordinary bread was fed to another ten mice and they died in seven days. Whole wheat bread was fed to another ten mice and they grew healthy and sleek looking, and refused to die. We do know that such experiments are carried on with mice and other animals.
I shall not keep the committee any longer on this, but I do want to say that I appreciate the minister's interjections which indicate that his department is doing something along these lines. I would like him to reply in a nice little speech that I could send out to my inquirers to indicate to them just what

the government is doing along these lines. I have another matter concerning old age pensions, but I notice there is an item dealing with old age security and I shall bring it up then.


Mr. Hees:: Supply-Health and Welfare
(5)	The basis for future control and prevention of dental disease is research and health education.
(6)	In the meantime, an enormous treatment service problem exists and greatly increased output of dental personnel is essential.
(7)	Provision for the proposed new building in Toronto rests as a heavy responsibility on all concerned.
This is a matter of tremendous concern to the dental profession. I have talked with officials of the Canadian Dental Association and with Dean Ellis of the University of Toronto faculty of dentistry, and they have pointed out, as I have tried to explain here, that this is a situation which not only is critical today but is getting worse year by year. They have also pointed out that dental health is just as important as any other branch of health, but this is a problem which does not seem to be realized by most people in the country. They have urged me to bring it before parliament, to make sure the problem is realized. They say that though they have done their best to have the matter given consideration, they do not believe people realize sufficiently the urgency of this matter. That is why I have brought it forward today.
It is obvious that this situation will be righted only if additional training facilities for dentists and dental hygienists are provided in the various dental schools in the country. The Toronto dental school is an important one, as Dean Ellis has pointed out, and I would be interested to hear from the minister what assistance the federal government intends to give to the building of the additional proposed facilities for this school.
I would urge the minister and the federal government to do everything they can to make grants available to the provinces so that dental schools across the country can be assisted to provide additional training facilities, since it is obvious that many additional dentists and dental hygienists, from what I have quoted this afternoon from these authorities, are very badly needed in this country today.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I make no apology for taking a few minutes of the time of the committee to deal with these estimates. This is a most important department of government, having control of the expenditure of about $850 million. It would be most unfitting for members not to take the time required to express their opinions on certain matters that come within the jurisdiction of this department. In addition, I have been sitting here for some days expecting these estimates to come forward, because I have promised certain organizations in my constituency and a good number of individuals
[Mr. Hees.l

that I would bring their views concerning certain matters to the attention of the house and of the minister.
I must say that I listened with great interest last evening to the speech of the hon. member for Lanark and his outline of the activities of the world health organization and his opinion of the good work that organization is doing. At this time I rise first of all to support the eloquent plea of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar for the early establishment of a national health insurance plan, even if it means going forward with the plan without certain of the provinces co-operating with the federal government in the beginning.
I have had quite an opportunity in my rather limited experience to see and be convinced of the need for health insurance. I served for some 18 years as president or director of the district hospital in the district from which I come, the Arrow lakes hospital district. During that time I had an opportunity to recognize more and more the burden of medical and hospital costs on persons in the lower income groups.
I can well remember that during the depression it was my duty as president of the hospital, after a person had left the hospital- we often received payment in goods rather than in cash-to make certain that the board got the odd pig the patient had to offer, rather than the doctor in question. I must say the doctor was rather smarter than I on a number of occasions, and beat me to it. But that indicated to me the necessity for a system of health insurance that would take away this sense of insecurity from the lives of our people. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre and other members have repeatedly reminded the house and the minister that the Liberal party had health insurance in its program of 1919. My father happened to be the president of the district Liberal federation, and he was interested in health insurance.
But I will say that he supported that plank of the C.C.F. He was very pleased with the C.C.F. interest in a national insurance policy and that was one point on which we could agree, although he took rather a dim view of certain of our policies. As a matter of fact he campaigned against me in 1945 and my mother, who was a Conservative, campaigned for me.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Your mother had the better of the argument there.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I can agree with that. I must say, Mr. Chairman, that I have great

difficulty in keeping my eyes on the minister, for obvious reasons. But anyway, Mr. Chairman, to get along with what I have to say-


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is a compliment for my official.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I think we are a backward nation as far as this question of national health insurance is concerned. When we realize the tremendous wealth of this country and the things that have been done in other directions, it is strange to note that we are still talking about health insurance in Canada. In order to illustrate that point I took a few notes from a document I had, which shows that the principle of health insurance has been established in a good many countries in the world for many years, countries far less able to meet the cost than Canada.
I find that in Germany there was a system of partial health insurance in 1883; in Austria, 1888; in Great Britain, 1911; Switzerland, 1911; Estonia, 1912; Roumania, 1912; Norway, 1915; Bulgaria, 1918; Portugal, 1919; Czechoslovakia, 1919; Poland, 1920; Japan, 1922; Latvia, 1922; Yugoslavia, 1922; Greece, 1923; Chile, 1924; Lithuania, 1925; Luxembourg, 1925; France, 1928; The Netherlands, 1929; Northern Ireland, 1930; Denmark, 1933; New Zealand, 1939; Australia since that time, and also various South American countries.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Not Australia; it is a voluntary system.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: But on a much wider scale than anything we have in Canada at the present time.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I do not think my hon. friend would support it.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I do not think I would be quite satisfied with it, but they have gone further with it than we have at this time though not further, I hope, than the minister has in mind. I recognize the fact that most of the European systems were what were commonly called poor man's systems and did not embrace the entire population. But all systems, I think, since the first world war have contained compulsory features, though in some cases both compulsory and voluntary-applying to different sections of the population. I mention this to indicate that the principle of national health insurance has been established in a good number of countries over a wide section of the world for many years, yet we in this great and wealthy country have not been able to take even the first step as far as co-ordination of our national activities is concerned.
Supply-Health and Welfare
I might say that this subject has been of great interest in British Columbia for some 20 years. After a plebiscite in 1936, I believe, the legislature of British Columbia adopted the British Columbia health insurance act which never came into effect owing to the opposition of certain vested interests, involving both insurance schemes and a small percentage of doctors who thought their own personal interests would be affected. In this connection, and I am pleased to be able to do so, I want to pay a tribute to the work done by the man who was provincial secretary of British Columbia at that time and was also responsible for health and welfare. I refer to the late Hon. G. M. Weir.


Paul Joseph James Martin: He was a great man.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: He was. He did a great deal in connection with the necessity for health insurance. As a matter of fact, I know from personal knowledge that he undermined his health in doing this work. He was a forwardlooking Liberal cabinet minister who was exposed at that time to the full opposition of the persons I have mentioned. I know that Dr. Weir died a very disappointed man because of the failure to establish health insurance in British Columbia.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Our deputy minister of welfare was one of his associates.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am very pleased to hear that. He built up a wide appreciation of the need for health insurance, and a wide understanding of the problems involved. I am sure the work he did in that connection will be long remembered by the persons in British Columbia who knew him. It so happens that I was going through my files this morning checking over various things, and I came upon a copy of a speech Dr. Weir made on January 16, 1936. I am going to quote a paragraph or two from that speech, because I think what he said at that time is still true 20 years later. This is what Dr. Weir had to say:
I propose tonight to emphasize the need for health insurance in British Columbia, to discuss the effect of health insurance upon industry and taxation, and to make clear the respective functions of the dominion and provincial governments in the health field.
Then he went on to say:
To understand why we are so concerned over health, illness and their human and economic aspects, it is necessary to describe briefly certain developments of the last few decades. During the past 50 years there have been really marvellous developments in the science of medicine. Inventions and discoveries have revolutionized many phases of medical science. All over the civilized world magnificent hospitals have been built; physicians have been more technically educated; surgeons have been trained; laboratory workers have acquired a technique; and to put it briefly, the
6276	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare science of medicine has been transformed. A few decades ago the doctor carried his equipment in a saddle bag. When called by a patient, he grabbed his trusty bag, whipped up Dobbin and proceeded to the home of his patient fully equipped, in the light of the standards of that day, to diagnose the disease and to provide whatever remedies were required. The development of medical science and specialization has altered all that, but we are still thinking in saddle bag terms when it comes to adapting our methods of paying for medical care.
We still pay in the same way our grandfathers did. But what worked satisfactorily for our grandfathers does not work satisfactorily for us. The medical care provided in 1936 is an entirely different affair from that of 1880 or later. The scientific advances of the last few decades have brought an inevitable increase in the cost of treatment, particularly in cases of complicated disorders. No change has occurred in our methods of meeting these costs-an individual still pays his doctor and hospital in accordance with the fee for service principle, notwithstanding the fact that this method of financing medical care is an unsatisfactory one.
Dr. Weir said that nearly 20 years ago. Then he went on to deal with the need of the people of British Columbia to have health insurance. He said:
It is generally recognized that today in Canada and British Columbia only a small part of our population is receiving the quality and quantity of medical attention that modern knowledge makes possible.
How true that is today, 20 years later.


Mr. Low:: It can also be said that only a small part of our population is receiving the quality and quantity of automobiles that modern knowledge makes possible.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Yes, but I would place health before automobiles. In Dr. Weir's speech he referred to Dr. G. A. B. Hall of Nanaimo, whom I happen to know. He quotes Dr. Hall as saying:
Lots of people will not call in a doctor because of knowing that they cannot pay him, and they do not like to call him on charity. There are many cases I know of where a person has been sick five or six days or a week, and had reached the stage where it was impossible to do without a doctor, whereas if the doctor had been called in sooner the case would have been much easier handled, and in some cases the life of the patient saved.
Then there is reference to another doctor whom I know quite well. Dr. Weir quoted the remarks of other medical men in his speech, and he quoted Dr. H. C. Wrinch of Skeena as having said:
Too frequently I have had to deal with people who, had state health insurance been in effect, would have been spared much suffering-people unable to meet the costs of medical care. Dreading the expense of such attention, many do not seek help from doctor or hospital when they imperatively need it. I have long since reached the conclusion that a state health insurance system would be the solution of the problem of the people's health.
Then Dr. Weir went on to deal with the fact that health insurance would provide for greater efficiency and in the long run save the country money. In that connection he
[Mr. Herridge.1

referred to Dr. Edwin E. Witte, formerly executive director of President Roosevelt's committee on economic security, who wrote in the American Labour Legislation Review for December, 1935, as follows:
The present experience of the European countries strongly supports the thesis that the best possible time to launch an unemployment system is in the early stages of the upswing of the business cycle, when few employed lose their jobs and the labour turnover is at a minimum.
Dr. Weir went on to say that the same argument was valid for health insurance. We in this group believe that health insurance should be established immediately because we are now in the financial position to launch it well before there is any downswing in the economic trend.
I could not help quoting a few paragraphs from Dr. Weir's speech of 1936, because I am one who fully approves the excellent work he did in that connection during the period he was a cabinet minister of the government of British Columbia. I was very interested in reading an article in the New York Times of March 13, 1955, entitled, "A New Experiment in State Medicine". I expect it has been drawn to the minister's attention. It points out that Sweden has established a compulsory health insurance plan that is one of the most comprehensive ever introduced.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Is that by Rusk?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: It is by Waldemar Kaem-pffert. I read the article with interest and kept it because I thought it was a most interesting story. After reading it I was further convinced that if a country of the size and economic resources of Sweden could undertake such an all-inclusive and successful compulsory health insurance scheme, surely it is about time we began to follow the lead of these smaller and less wealthy countries. I should like to quote a paragraph or two from the article, and I can let the minister have it if he would like to see it later.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I know the one. Of course Sweden is a unitary state and they do not have to worry about provincial authority.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I quite admit it is easier to introduce these schemes in a unitary state such as Sweden, Norway or Great Britain. I know there are other difficulties that occur with a federal state. We in this group maintain the government should proceed with legislation and bring in the provinces that want to co-operate in the scheme. This article says:
Since the beginning of this year, everybody in Sweden, including resident foreigners, is guaranteed medical care against illness under a new compulsory health insurance law. It is one of the most comprehensive social medical systems ever introduced anywhere.

I just want to deal with another couple of paragraphs, because I think they are quite interesting when you consider the fact that so many people criticize this sort of legislation as contributing to the welfare state, and the belief that the welfare state is going to undermine the initiative and enterprise of the citizens of the country. I am quite sure everyone will agree that the citizens of Sweden are known as a freedom-loving and enterprising people, equal to any in the world today. This paragraph is rather interesting in that connection:
The Swedes have none of the squeamishness about public medical care that many Americans have.
Of course this is written for the American public.
Even before the new plan went into effect, no Swede, for example, hesitated to go to a public hospital. Indeed, he did so as a taxpayer exercising his right, just as he felt free to call on the fire department to save his house. He did not think of the public hospital as a place of last resort, an institution maintained chiefly for the benefit of the indigent sick. Rather, no matter what his social position or his financial circumstances, he went because he knew that the medical and surgical skill there is so high, the diagnosis and therapeutic services so expert that he could find no better care anywhere.
The article goes on to describe the financing of the scheme and certain details of administration. This appears to be a very sound and successful scheme which is serving an enterprising people well. I think it is a scheme that in many respects could be applied to Canadian conditions and to which we could very well give serious consideration.
Now, Mr. Chairman, that is all I am going to say at this time in connection with a national health insurance scheme. I do want to bring to the minister's attention one or two matters which I was asked to raise particularly. I listened with interest to the member for Macleod, who raised the question of increased grants to universities for research.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Would the hon. member permit me to interrupt just to point out that these specific questions could be dealt with very easily on the various items. We have had a general debate now, and I suggest it makes it easier for me to answer questions if they are asked under the individual items rather than in a general debate.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I shall accept that suggestion and deal with them at greater length than I had intended.
Before concluding I must say that all of us in this group, and I think the majority of Canadians, recognize the excellent work the Department of National Health and Welfare is doing. I know we are very fortunate in having the department served by a very
Supply-Health and Welfare capable and efficient staff which I do not think could be excelled anywhere in the world. Now, Mr. Chairman, we have the department and we have the staff; all that is required is the legislation to provide health insurance for all Canadians. We feel now is the time to legislate for health insurance in Canada. In the face of the present circumstances and all the facts, no excuse for its delay can be accepted by the Canadian people.


George Hugh Castleden: My remarks will not be very lengthy.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


George Hugh Castleden: Of course I can accommodate that group by making them longer if that applause means I should do so.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I wonder if my hon. friend
would want to assist? He could deal with health insurance under the item for health insurance studies.


George Hugh Castleden: I do not want to deal with health insurance. I think it has been well covered.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I felt a little guilty about interrupting the last speaker, and when he was so generous in acceding to my request I thought in fairness to him I should make the same request of my hon. friend if he is going to deal with a specific question with which we could deal quite easily under one of the items.


George Hugh Castleden: It is a general question which would not come under a specific item. My complaint is not so much actually with the department, but perhaps that the fiscal policy of the government has taken away a good many advances that have been made during the past few years. My mind goes back about 15 years, when the average old age pension in this country was $16 per month and in some places even less. I remember the struggle that went on in this house in an effort to get that assistance to our senior citizens increased so it would take care of their many needs and make life more tolerable for them in the years when they were past the time they could earn for themselves. The records will show the number of times the opposition moved amendments to various government motions and upon going into supply, requesting an increase in the old age pension.
I can remember when the pension was increased from $20 to $30 per month. What great praise was heaped upon the government, and what great praise they - gave themselves for the wonderful advances they were making. This protest continued throughout the years until we finally got the pension raised to $40 per month, after a great deal

Supply-Health and Welfare of fighting and education as well as going through elections demanding that the government do something about it.
As a matter of fact, this 15 years of progress has been wiped out completely by the fiscal policy of the Liberal government that has been in power. The $40 per month which a senior citizen gets today buys very little more than the $16 did in the years 1939 to 1940. It is because of that situation that people are demanding an increase in this pension to our senior citizens, so it will give these people a more proper means of security and get rid of some of the worries of living today. The cost of living in Canada has more than doubled since 1940, and our senior citizens are in a difficult situation. Some provinces have increased the special grant-


Paul Joseph James Martin: Could we not deal with this under the old age security item? There is a special item for old age security, and if we take each individual item in a general debate we will never get through. A general debate is permitted and the subject is a legitimate one, but I do suggest we could make more progress without precluding any debate if my hon. friend made his argument on the specific item. He could raise the matter under the old age security item or the old age assistance item. He certainly has the opportunity.


George Hugh Castleden: That would be under item 280, old age security payments?


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is the $40 payment my hon. friend wants increased. He could make his argument there.


George Hugh Castleden: If the minister prefers that we do it that way.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I would be grateful to my hon. friend.


George Hugh Castleden: I find it difficult to refuse him under the circumstances, and the invitation will be accepted.


Harold Edward Winch: I appreciate the attitude taken by the minister when he indicates that he prefers to have the discussion under a particular item. However, there is one phase of health which I do not think would come under any item except this one.


Paul Joseph James Martin: No. It could be discussed under the national health program, the general health grants or research grants. I shall remind the hon. member when we reach the proper item. I know the matter he wishes to discuss.


Harold Edward Winch: I would remind the minister that I asked him where I should discuss the

matter I have in mind, and he said it should be done when the first item was called.


Paul Joseph James Martin: No, I think not. The hon. member suggested that the discussion should take place on the first item, and I suggested that it might better take place under item 265, the national health grants program.


Harold Edward Winch: The minister has not even
heard what I am about to say. How can he say that?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member has discussed with me what he wishes to say, and it is an important subject. I assure him I am anxious that he be given every opportunity to speak. However, under that particular vote various grants are made, one of which is for research. I know what the hon. member has in mind, and it could be undertaken only under the moneys provided for research. That would be the proper place to discuss it, and I shall be anxious to hear him when we reach that point.


Harold Edward Winch: On national health research in Canada?


Murdo William Martin: Yes.


Harold Edward Winch: Do I understand that on the vote for research and administration I can discuss the matter I have in mind?


Murdo William Martin: That is right.


Harold Edward Winch: Will all witnesses please hold up their hands. I shall discuss it then.


Owen C. Trainor: I wish to make a few observations arising out of the remarks of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, who went to some considerable lengths-


Murdo William Martin: I do not wish to interrupt the hon. member, but I suggest that if he is going to discuss health insurance it might better come under the health insurance studies item. In view of the stand I have taken with two other hon. members I believe I should do the same where he is concerned.


Owen C. Trainor: I might point out to the
minister that I did not intend to discuss health insurance in detail, but rather to comment on remarks made by previous speakers.


Murdo William Martin: I suggest it might be done more properly under item 264.


Owen C. Trainor: If the minister prefers to have it that way, I have no objection.


Harold Edward Winch: I am sorry, but I must say that while I do not question the word of the minister, I question the wording of the item. Under the discussion of item 245 the minister draws my attention to item 265 at page 46 of the estimates. Where does he find research there?


Murdo William Martin: Under the health grants program. The health grants program consists of tuberculosis control, general public health and one specific item of research.


Harold Edward Winch: Where is that?


Murdo William Martin: Under No. 265.


Harold Edward Winch: It is not in item 265.


Murdo William Martin: I undertake that the hon.
member will be permitted to discuss the matter he is now raising when we reach item 265.


Harold Edward Winch: I just wished to be certain of my right to speak on it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health services-
257. Administration of the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, $190,710.
Harold Edward Winch: I most certainly wish to say a few words on this item, because I presume under it we can discuss the treatment of dope addicts in Canada. We have now before us the report of the Senate committee which dealt with the traffic in narcotic drugs, and which appeared on Monday, June 20. It will be recalled that Senator Tom Reid was chairman.
About two weeks ago I found myself in a difficult position because it became necessary to divide into two sections what I had to say about the Senate report. That portion of it which dealt with law enforcement I discussed when the estimates of the Minister of Justice were before us, and I said at that time that I regretted being able to discuss only one phase of the matter at a time. I pointed out, however, that I was prepared to wait for the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare to discuss the application of the report to those subjects other than law enforcement, with particular reference to treatment.
As I said when we were discussing the estimates of the Department of Justice, I find the report from the other place most contradictory and difficult to understand. As a matter of fact, within a matter of a few sentences the entire report contradicts itself in law enforcement matters as well as in the matter of treatment.
The Minister of National Health and Welfare knows that I am keenly interested in this subject, and I hope he realizes that I wish to be constructive in what I say. I was most happy when I heard that the other place was appointing a special committee to investigate narcotic problems in Canada and that its report would be available to both houses of parliament. I am as disappointed with the report as I was happy with the
Supply-Health and Welfare appointment. I think the other place was so darned anxious to get a report in that they did not do a decent or a good job.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order. Perhaps the hon. member would not object if I taije it upon myself once again to suggest that from the point of view of the Chair, prevention is better than cure. I would warn the hon. member, and others who may be discussing the Senate report, that they are at liberty to criticize to their hearts' content the conclusions reached in the report. However, I would ask that they offer their criticism so it could not be considered a criticism of the members in the other chamber who prepared the report.
Perhaps it would be proper to say that we should discuss a report from the other place as we would hope to have them discuss one from the House of Commons, and that such discussion should be carried on without any offensive language concerning the members of the committee or of the chamber in which they sit. If this were done no harm could possibly follow.


Harold Edward Winch: All right, Mr. Chairman, I understand your point. I withdraw any remarks that you think are objectionable. I shall just say I am disappointed in that section of the report of the special committee of the other place which deals with the problem of narcotics in Canada. I fail to understand the contradiction in the report, and I want to bring it to the attention of the minister. Because of the seriousness of the situation, because I firmly believe the minister is convinced of the seriousness of the situation, I am sure he would like to see something done. I should like to hear- and I hope we shall hear-the comment of the minister as far as treatment is concerned, his reaction to this report and an explanation, if there is an explanation, of the contradiction.
You will understand why I am confused, Mr. Chairman. I understand that I am perfectly at liberty to quote from the report. Look at this. A doctor right beside me says "go ahead". Just take this.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member is referring to the hon. member for Winnipeg South.


Harold Edward Winch: I shall read the title page:
Proceedings of the special committee on the traffic in narcotic drugs in Canada. No. 15. Monday, June 20, 1955.
I obtained this volume from the distribution office. Turn to page 663. What does it say? Under the section "conclusions and recommendations" we find the following:
The evidence of medical authorities was to the effect that drug addiction is not a disease in itself. It is symptom or manifestation of character weaknesses or personality defects in the individual.

Supply-Health and Welfare
I admit, Mr. Chairman, I am going to repeat the quotation. On page 663 of the report of the Senate committee we find the following:
The evidence of medical authorities was to the effieqt that drug addiction is not a disease in itself.
If I had time I would read more, but I shall not. Let us go down to the last paragraph on the same page and see what we find there:
The treatment of illness is a matter which comes within the responsibility of provincial authorities as, for example, mental illness and tuberculosis. Drug addiction-
Get this. This is only a dozen lines after my previous quotation. I am quoting again from the same page:
Drug addiction is considered by medical and social authorities to be a form of illness, and the treatment of it as such is likewise within the jurisdictional responsibility of the provinces and of the communities therein.
Just look at it, Mr. Chairman. In the middle of page 663 of the Senate report on narcotic drugs they say:
The evidence of medical authorities was to the effect that drug addiction is not a disease in itself.
At the bottom of the page they say:
Drug addiction is considered by medical and social authorities to be a form of illness.
There it is. And that is supposed to be something that you, sir, should take as a responsible report. My friend the doctor on my right says there is a difference between an illness and a disease.


Owen C. Trainor: The Senate think so.


Harold Edward Winch: I thank you, sir. He says the Senate think so but doctors do not. Illness and disease are the same. I understand it. I am not going to take the time of this committee nor the time of the Minister of National Health and Welfare to say what a contradictory, useless report this is.


Mr. Hosking:: You have made a good point.


Harold Edward Winch: I have tried to make a point. I have tried to show how contradictory the report is. I have tried to show how they contradict themselves in their definition of illness according to their own evidence, as when I spoke on the estimates of the Department of Justice I tried to show how they contradicted themselves on law enforcement. From now on I am going to forget the report, as everybody should. I am convinced the Minister of National Health and Welfare is going to forget it too.
The point is, what are we going to do about this problem? It is admitted, and I admit, that there is a big problem in western Canada. It is not going to be solved by passing the

buck between provincial governments and the federal government. It is not going to be solved by passing the buck and the responsibility to the R.C.M.P. and the municipal authorities. It is a problem that must be tackled, irrespective of responsibility, by co-operation between all authorities. I admit that I do not know the answer. I admit that very readily. But I do say we have reached a time, because of the seriousness of the situation, when we should have some definite statement of fact. If the tackling of the problem is being held up federally, then we should know. If it is being held up provincially, then we should know. If there is an endeavour to get together, as I understand there is and I hope there is, provincially and federally, then I believe the people of Canada and this house are entitled to know exactly what is going on.
I personally, from years of study, believe in a certain approach. That is the English system. This approach on half a page of this Senate report wipes out the English system. If the English system is wrong I will accept that. If it is wrong, I should like to know why, sir. That is why I am not making any statement beyond the fact that this is a contradictory report, and to ask the Minister of National Health and Welfare whether he can and will give us his opinion now as to how the drug addiction problem should be tackled in Canada. He has known of the problem for years. He has worked at it for years. He knows that in British Columbia we are up against a terrific problem.
I am not convinced that the R.C.M.P. and the Vancouver narcotic squad are not doing a good job in trying to tackle it. I believe they are; but at the same time it is not only the responsibility of the R.C.M.P., under the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, to stop the importation of drugs, with the ancillary help of squads such as those we have in the city of Vancouver and in other cities. The major problem is this. We have drug addicts in Canada. From the best information I can obtain throughout the world it would appear that there are many who can never be cured. There are authorities throughout the world who say it is better to treat the confirmed addict at cost rather than have him break the law and steal in order to satisfy his craving.
This is one of the greatest problems we have, and it is costing us directly and indirectly millions of dollars. After the years the minister of health and welfare has been in charge of this department it is time he had an answer. If he has not, can he give us some indication as to the answer and what

will be done? Never mind the British North America Act with its jurisdiction federally and provincially; this is a problem which affects everybody in Canada.
Is it not possible for the man who has the greatest responsibility in Canada in connection with health and welfare, namely the federal minister, to give some intimation as to the approach that is going to be made or the steps taken on a federal basis to tackle this problem of drug addiction? First of all, there is the question of curing those who can be cured. Second, there is the question of taking care of those who can never be cured. Third, there is the question of stopping the illegal importation of drugs into Canada.
If you can stop the illegal importation of drugs into Canada there will be no drug addiction problem. If you could wipe out the profit of those who push illegal drugs there would be no drug addiction problem. If you stop the profit on one hand and if you stop the importation on the other you cannot have a problem.
I admit that all this is not the responsibility of the minister of health and welfare, but I do know the minister is interested in this problem and has made a study of it. Personally I think the time has come for the minister of health and welfare to give some direction on the treatment and control in all the provinces. I understand the problem, and I hope that before this vote passes the minister will give us a real outline not only of the problem, because we all know there is one, but of the study being made of it and any recommendation the minister can make irrespective of the British North America Act.
Let us solve this problem whether it is federal or provincial. Because of the importance of this issue, because of the hundreds of millions of dollars it is costing Canada, I hope the minister of health and welfare at this session will give us a real proposal to try to bring this matter under control.


Owen C. Trainor: I must say that I agree with the hon. member for Vancouver East as to the seriousness of this problem of drug addiction. However, I think it is a bit unfair to ask the minister to provide a final solution of the problem, because I do not think anyone in the world has yet succeeded in doing that. I think perhaps it would be legitimate to ask the minister what consideration he is giving to the question of treatment. It has been intimated that this is a provincial problem, and I suppose technically that is so under the terms of the British North America Act. However, apparently other federal states have succeeded in solving this problem, notably 50433-397
Supply-Health and Welfare the United States. I am sure the minister is familiar with the work being done at Lexington.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have been there.


Owen C. Trainor: Would the minister give consideration to establishing something similar in this country? It is recognized in professional circles that drug addiction can be treated only in a special institution where the addicts can be kept under proper control and supervision. Attempts are being made to do this at Lexington.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have listened to what both my hon. friends have said. I know the interest of the hon. member for Vancouver East in this matter, and his very deep concern is somewhat responsible for the great role he has sought to place on my shoulders but it is one which, as the hon. member for Winnipeg South has said, cannot possibly be placed upon the shoulders of any one man or any one department.
Having said that, I do not want in any way to withdraw from my responsibility in connection with this matter. Of course I cannot ignore the constitution, and I know that on serious reflection my hon. friend will not suggest that.


Harold Edward Winch: Yes, I do.


Paul Joseph James Martin: If he does, then I must say that I could not ignore the constitution and I would not be worthy of sitting in the government very long if I did.


Harold Edward Winch: Are we not able to make grants?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think I have been able to deal with the problem regardless of the constitutional position in another way. I do not think we should overstate the seriousness of this problem in this country any more than we should underestimate it. We have about
3,000	drug addicts; they have about 65,000 in the United States. The reported figures in England are that they have about 300; the reported figures from France are that they have about 250. The European figures show less incidence than is the case on the American continent, that is taking North America, Central America and South America as one unit.
I have said repeatedly, and I say again, that having in mind the inadequacy of the British reporting system and other factors I find it difficult to accept the continental standards and those in the United Kingdom. I talked about this matter with the director of this department in the United Kingdom when he was here in Ottawa this year.


Owen C. Trainor: Does the minister mean
standards or statistics?

Supply-Health and Welfare


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am referring to their system of reporting. Every drugstore in Canada is carefully supervised, but that is not the case in the United Kingdom. I mention that merely as an indication of the difference in administration.
Having said that, the fact is that we have
3,000	drug addicts, which creates a serious problem. One human being suffering from this unfortunate disease should capture the sympathy of a department such as the one I have the responsibility of administering. However, we have to look at the realities. The report to which my hon. friend has directed our attention is one that I am studying carefully. The Minister of Justice and I have given consideration since the report was issued to one of the recommendations over which we have direct control constitutionally and physically; that is with regard to those drug addicts who are in penal institutions under the control of the federal government. I would hope we could take some steps there which have been studied, I may say, by the penal authorities for at least two years.
With regard to those addicts not under our control, there are about 1,000 of them in the city of Vancouver. The concentration of drug addicts has not always been in Vancouver. At one time it was in Montreal, but now there are less than 200 addicts there. At one time there was a higher addicted population in Toronto, but now there are not many more than 100. The big centre is Vancouver. Apparently it goes in cycles. Last summer, during my holidays because it was an important thing, I went to Lexington with Dr. Roberts, the chief of our mental health division. They have an institution with some 2,000 drug addicts, most of whom are there by way of court order, but some of whom enter voluntarily. They submit themselves to a process of withdrawal of the drug and suffer no major consequences as a result of receiving treatment while they are there. Some of them even permit themselves to be the subjects of further research by such leading men as Dr. Isbell, who appeared before the committee this winter. Generally speaking I was impressed, notwithstanding many factors that I as a minister would have to consider in this country.
Following that visit I made a proposal to the government of British Columbia. We have a building in British Columbia that we are not fully using at this time. I intimated to the British Columbia government that I would be prepared to recommend to my colleagues-and of course it would be subject to their final approval-that on certain terms we could work out, this building could be used as a treatment centre for those drug 
addicts who came within the control and authority of government. I also said that under the terms of the national health program we would be prepared to give consideration to further assistance in the way of providing equipment such as that at Lexington and so on, if this scheme commended itself to the government of British Columbia.
I did not hear from the government of British Columbia, and I have not heard yet officially in this matter from the minister of health. I have talked the matter over with the attorney general. I must say that I think the attorney general, who has heavy responsibilities, was trying to look at this matter seriously. He personally had some doubts about the wisdom of an institution where the treatment would be under the physical control of authorities. He thought something on the basis of a clinic in the city of Vancouver, in the thickly populated area itself, would be better. These people would stay at home and be under the constant supervision of the necessary psychiatric and other skills. Be that as it may, it was his view. I have merely mentioned this to indicate that we are interested and very much concerned.
I believe it is worth trying out this treatment of drug addicts. I give that positive statement to my hon friend. I cannot say it is the final answer. In Lexington, considering all the people who have gone through that institution, I have been very much interested in the inadequacy of the follow-up system. I talked to one of the most famous physicians in the United States, a man who himself was in that institution when I was there, having gone in voluntarily to rid himself of this unfortunate affliction. I have had a chance of talking to him recently about this. As I have stated, that kind of suggestion does not necessarily provide the cure.
However, I answer my hon. friend in so far as the point of view of treatment is concerned. I am absolutely opposed as Minister of National Health and Welfare-and my conclusion is based on the best technical advice
I can obtain in this country and outside_____
to a system that would give to the drug addict at the expense of the state, in any form or through any agency, drugs which he thinks he needs to meet his particular mood. I do not think you are going to cure drug addicts by giving more drugs. So we in this country, as long as I am in this post, will never give any support to that proposed solution.
I find there is a great deal of misunderstanding. The British policy is not different

from our own in this particular. There is nothing to prevent in Canada-


Harold Edward Winch: The English system is not what you just mentioned.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am simply saying that when some people refer to the English system they say it is one of giving the drug addict unlimited quantities of drugs to satisfy him. That is not what is being done in England. It was attempted in some places, but as long as I am here it is not going to be attempted here. I agree with my hon. friend that it is a serious problem. I cannot give him the final answer, but I believe, from the viewpoint of treatment, we will get somewhere with it.


Mr. Green:: May I ask the minister whether there is anything provided in the estimates for this fiscal year which could be used to further a co-operative plan between the dominion government and the province of British Columbia.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: If so, what amount is available?


Paul Joseph James Martin: As my hon. friend knows, under the national health program the Minister of National Health and Welfare has funds at his disposal under certain terms for the purpose of supplementing the health activities of the province, and it would come under that.


Howard Charles Green: The minister would be prepared to use some of that grant?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No.


Howard Charles Green: If he can get an agreement with the province of British Columbia?


Murdo William Martin: I said I would be prepared to give consideration to the matter. I would want to see the whole plan as proposed by the province. I would be prepared to give it consideration.


Harold Edward Winch: Have you the authority to get the money? Under your vote you have very little money for that purpose.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have the authority, and we have enough money for that purpose.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indians and Eskimos health services-
258. Operation and maintenance, $15,606,781.
George Hugh Castleden: In regard to this item, I should like to have a report on the health services among the Indians and the Eskimos. I think the work being done by the department in connection with tuberculosis is to be commended. It is a tremendous problem, and I think the need has increased because there has been so many years of delay. There 50433-397i
Supply-Health and Welfare are some 136,000 Indians in Canada and in the report of the department last year it was indicated that they were able to take chest plates of some 60,000 Indians and Eskimos.
Could the minister report on the success they are having and give an analysis of the situation as they find it? Could he include in his report what the likelihood is of getting this under control? I should like to have this report. I understand that a few years ago they started the B.C.G. inoculation for treatment of tuberculosis. It would be interesting for the committee to have a report on the progress they are making and the success they are having, and whether they have a complete picture at this time of the problem which is facing them.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think we have made very considerable progress through our hospitalization program. I can say it is noteworthy that during the year 1954 the incidence of tuberculosis, as a result of the progress my hon. friend has mentioned and other advances we are making, has dropped by 40 per cent, from 167 5 to 100 3.


George Hugh Castleden: Did I understand the minister to say -4 per cent or 40 per cent?


Murdo William Martin: It has dropped by 40 per cent.


George Hugh Castleden: Has the chest-plating of Indians and Eskimos been completed?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No, about 75 per cent.


George Hugh Castleden: Will the minister be able to complete that this year?


Murdo William Martin: We shall do our very best.


George Hugh Castleden: The minister can probably say more than that. If he did 60,000 last year and 75 per cent of them are done, he should be able to say whether the work will be completed this year.


Paul Joseph James Martin: It is a very difficult job. We are doing our very best, and I think what has been done is simply miraculous.


George Hugh Castleden: I should like to have something more definite. The minister's general remarks about the miraculous progress are splendid, but surely he can say something more definite. Surely he can say whether the balance of the Indians and Eskimos will be chest-plated by the end of the year.


Murdo William Martin: That would be our objective, certainly.


George Hugh Castleden: What is the likelihood of meeting that objective?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I cannot say any more without being guilty of false assertion, but my hon. friend knows that when we go after something we generally do it.
6284	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare


George Hugh Castleden: That is an excellent statement, but it is something like other statements of the minister on the great progress of health and welfare under the present administration.


Paul Joseph James Martin: If my hon. friend expects me to say we will do it, I cannot say that. I am sure my officers, who are diligent, who work hard, will do everything they can to achieve the objective. Seventy-five per cent represents a tremendous figure, and I do not know of any other area having a native population where the record is as great.


George Hugh Castleden: I am not trying to detract from what has been achieved. The minister agreed he was able to do 60,000 in 1954.


Paul Joseph James Martin: They have to be done over and over again. It is not a question of X-raying someone and forgetting about them. We now have 16 parties out doing this very thing. That is four more than last year.


George Hugh Castleden: That is the kind of information I wanted. It is much more definite than what the minister was giving me before. I understand you also have some 65 health units consisting of medical men and graduate nurses doing contact work with the Indians on reserves.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, that is true. We have several hundred doctors on part time who look after incidents all over the country.


George Hugh Castleden: Can the minister tell me how frequently one of these units will be visiting Indian reserves in Saskatchewan, let us say, for a periodic check-up of the Indians?


Paul Joseph James Martin: At least once a year.


George Hugh Castleden: Have any arrangements been made to contact provincial authorities, where it is found that the condition of health on an Indian reserve has been affecting the schools and the health of the immediate vicinity?


Paul Joseph James Martin: We have very great cooperation with the provinces. For instance, we are using many of the provincial tuberculosis sanatoria to hospitalize some of our Indians instead of having to go ahead and build our own hospitals. We pay them for that service. The same is true in Manitoba, where the sanatorium board of Manitoba is responsible for the whole program. We enjoy excellent relations with the department of health in my hon. friend's province. The same is true all over.


George Hugh Castleden: I know there was a problem some time ago. There was some difficulty in obtaining treatment, and I am glad to learn that the treatment is being improved. So far


as the tuberculosis and health programs among the Indians and Eskimos are concerned, how many beds does the department have at its disposal for their treatment?


Paul Joseph James Martin: About 3,200 beds altogether in our hospital and nursing centres.


George Hugh Castleden: Is that number being
increased?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, there will be some increase this year. That figure includes the sanatoria beds of the provinces as well.


George Hugh Castleden: Can the minister give us any report on the success they are having in the treatment of trachoma among the Indians, a disease that has bothered them for a good many years? Is there a lowering of the incidence of the disease? How many cases are being treated at the present time?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I can say that the disease is pretty well under control. This is largely due, of course, to the use of the antibiotics, aureomycin and penicillin.


George Hugh Castleden: Can the minister give us any figure as to the reduction in the frequency of it, as he did in the case of tuberculosis?


Paul Joseph James Martin: There was only one new case last year, and that is under control.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
260. Grants to hospitals which care for Indians and Eskimos, $54,000.
Owen C. Trainor: Under this item I wish to comment on the practice of the department in compensating the hospitals of the country for the care of Indians. I obtained an assurance from the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration today that the fiction that existed in his department that the Indian was an ordinary citizen and able to look after himself, or if not was a provincial responsibility, was not correct. The minister said he had never heard of this. As a matter of fact, Indians are hospitalized in public general hospitals throughout the various provinces of Canada. The department take the position they will not pay the standard charge for ordinary patients in those institutions, but insist on paying on the scale of a public assistance case. I should like to know from the minister on what ground he justifies this method of payment. It is a question that has caused great concern to the hospitals.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We negotiate a fee, and we pay on the basis of public ward costs.


Owen C. Trainor: But they have to submit their costs before they get payment.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, just as I have to submit mine to treasury board.


Owen C. Trainor: The minister may not know it, but especially in the case of smaller institutions that is a rather difficult thing, because they do not have their costs segregated in that way.


Murdo William Martin: I realize the difficulties. If my hon. friend has a specific case and will mention it to me I shall be very glad to look into it.


Owen C. Trainor: I was wondering why the minister could not pay the ordinary rates charged by the hospitals. Those rates will certainly not be much in excess of costs, if at all.


Murdo William Martin: My budget for this purpose, I am afraid, would be three times what it is today. I think this is a fair arrangement.


Owen C. Trainor: I would definitely say it is not fair to ask these institutions to determine public ward costs, because they are not able to do so without a great deal of expense. There should be some other method of doing it.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Can the minister give us the hospitals in the province of British Columbia that are included in this grant, and the amount paid to each?


Murdo William Martin: There is one at Skidegate inlet, a general hospital. Is that in my hon. friend's constituency? The amount is some $11,000, I think.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am not quite sure whether item 263 is the right one. I can just about read and write and I am not very good at analysing these technical words. I want to raise a question that was raised by the hon. member for Macleod.


Murdo William Martin: Nutrition?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The question of increased research with respect to arthritis and rheumatism.


Murdo William Martin: That would be under the national health grants, research.
264. Health insurance studies and administration of the general health grants, $103,531.


Harold Edward Winch: I want to ask a question, and the minister knows the question in which I am interested. Shall I ask it under 264 or 265?


Murdo William Martin: This is the one.


Harold Edward Winch: As the minister knows, I have a very great interest in a certain matter upon which I spoke earlier this session. I am sorry the minister was not able to be present at that time, but I have been told he was sufficiently interested that he read
16, 1955
Supply-Health and Welfare what I had to say and turned it over to a member of his department for a report. I do not want to take the time of this house now to repeat what I said earlier this session or what I said during last session.
This matter of health is perhaps the most important matter the House of Commons can consider. Whether one is poor or wealthy, if one does not have health then one does not have anything. I am convinced that in Canada, particularly in western Canada, we have the world's most valuable natural health resources. I know that years ago orthodox medicine was opposed to the utilization of natural methods. From my reading during these past few years I would gather that those who are engaged in orthodox medicine have come around to an understanding of the great use that can be made of nature's own methods. I could if required, and if allowed, produce statements from some of the world's greatest scientists and medical men concerning the utilization of natural health methods.
As a matter of fact, sir, you do not even have to go beyond a few hundred yards from this chamber to find that even the members of the house and of the other place know the value of physiotherapy and massage, hydrotherapy and electrotherapy. Right in this House of Commons building we have, I think, one of the finest men I ever met in the realm of natural therapy. I am speaking of a man by the name of Joe Tremblay. Mr. Tremblay has put in over $5,000 worth of equipment, at his own expense, right in this building for physiotherapy, hydrotherapy and electrotherapy. There are a great number of members of this house and the other place who go down there daily, weekly or monthly because of the help he can give them with his own facilities.
I know that is only a small part of natural health. I am convinced that in Canada we could have the health mecca of the entire world, and of course I am referring to British Columbia in particular. However, I would be the first man to oppose any development of these resources on any basis of quackery. I am afraid that might and could be done. It was for that reason I was glad that a few years ago, because of certain pressure, British Columbia put a closure on our hot springs, our cold springs and our mineral spas, so they are all held in the name of the crown.
This is not just an idle dream, a visionary dream, held by myself. Back some 15 years ago, because I was so completely sold on what Canada could do in the way of natural health, I was eventually able to introduce the subject to one of the greatest financial
G286	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare families in the world. I refer to the Sassoon interests. Sir Victor Sassoon sent his personal physician, the Count di Valvisone, to British Columbia to investigate the natural health resources. He spent some three months in British Columbia and then returned to see his principal, Sir Victor Sassoon, who was at that time liquidating his multimillion dollar assets in India and Hong Kong and looking for investments.
As a result of that visit by his personal physician, the Count di Valvisone came back to British Columbia-this was about 1942- with a personal cheque signed by Sir Victor Sassoon for $25,000 and made out to the government of British Columbia to endow a chair at the university of British Columbia for research into the natural health resources of my province and to start training doctors and technicians in the use of natural medicine.
I was there, Mr. Chairman, when the Count di Valvisone stood on the Canadian Pacific dock in Vancouver and presented to the Liberal premier of British Columbia this cheque for $25,000 as a gift just to get started on the study of our natural health resources. I was there when the premier turned it down; he was not interested, Mr. Chairman. This was one of the greatest disappointments of my life. Not only had we someone interested in starting a chair at the university to study our natural health resources, but someone prepared to come in with millions of dollars for its development.
However, this is all ancient history and I only mention it so you will know this is not something new with me. It is not something that is understood only in the Dominion of Canada. I say if I thought anyone were going to come into Canada, and British Columbia in particular, and use our resources on a quack basis, I would be the first man to clamp down and say no. But I am convinced, Mr. Chairman, and I have seen proof year after year, that Canada could become the health mecca of the world. We require research into our cold springs, our hot springs and our spas. We need direction on the best development in the interests of health, and not as a racket.
I spoke on this last year and I spoke on it early this year. At that time I made only one request. I asked whether the Minister of National Health and Welfare was cognizant of the potentialities of our health-giving resources in Canada, and was he sufficiently cognizant to make recommendations for research and development. I do not ask anything more than that. But I hope the minister who, I understand, is interested in


what I have said, and has made some inquiries, will give some indication of his stand at the present time and tell us if something is going to be done in the next year or two, or in the next five years perhaps, in the matter of research and development.


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend may be sure of my deep interest. This matter is now being discussed, as a matter of fact, with the Charles Best institute.


Harold Edward Winch: I cannot hear the minister.


Paul Joseph James Martin: This matter is being discussed with the Charles Best institute in Toronto, and a project is possibly under way. In any event the matter has been referred to the research committee and it is being given further attention.


Harold Edward Winch: To whom has it been referred?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The Charles Best institute in Toronto, one of the great medical centres in the world. It has now for consideration a project involving some of the aspects of what my hon. friend has said. In addition to that I have directed our research committee to consider this matter.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, I understand this is one of the items under which the minister suggested we might continue the debate which was instituted by my leader, the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, on the first item of the minister's estimates.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Right.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I do not intend to enter into any extended discussion. I heard the minister earlier today say that he did not intend to rise to speak; but I am convinced that even at this late stage in the session, although the minister's flesh may be somewhat weary, his spirit is still with the subject of national health.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Very much so.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Personally I make no bones about the views I hold. In my view the discussion of this subject is far more important to the freedom of the Canadian people, in any real sense of the meaning of that word, than the discussion on which the house spent an extended period of time not very long ago.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I agree fully with that.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Therefore I felt I would like to rise in support of the remarks made by my leader at the opening of this debate. While he was speaking last night I recalled that shortly before I came to the House of Commons, immediately after I had been elected, I was asked to participate with

two other people in a forum on this subject. While I do not know for certain the political interests of one of those persons, I think it would be safe to say that generally speaking she was a supporter of the Liberal party. I know, too, that the other person had stood at one time in British Columbia as a provincial candidate for the Conservative party. And I had been elected only recently under the banner of the C.C.F.
In some preliminary discussion we agreed that we would get together one evening to discuss in rough outline how the forum would proceed. I had frankly expected to find that it would develop into a spirited debate, and that possibly I might be in a minority in my support of a national health program. To the surprise of all three of us, I believe, we discovered that we were in basic agreement on the question of a national health insurance plan for Canada. Only one question was raised, and that was the fear expressed by one member of the forum over the idea of developing a completely centralized plan. I think my leader made quite clear in his speech at the opening of this debate that the kind of plan he visualized would not be one which would be completely centralized here in Ottawa.
I happened to have with me at the time a copy of a draft bill which, I assume, was the result of the health insurance study referred to in this item. We went into the draft bill in some detail and, as a result, decided that the best manner to conduct the forum would be by way of a panel discussion of the various aspects outlined in that draft bill.
I have described this incident in some detail only to illustrate my conviction that the vast majority of people in British Columbia are completely convinced as to the value of and necessity for a national health insurance plan, and that it has gone beyond the point where there is any real division among the political parties on this question.
I was pleased earlier in the debate to hear my colleague from Kootenay West refer to the work done by the late Dr. Weir, when he was a minister in the British Columbia government. I share with the hon. member a high opinion of the work done by Dr. Weir.
It has been pointed out several times in this discussion that Canada is a federal state whereas the United Kingdom, to which my leader referred, is a unitary state. So far as I am concerned the fact that this is the nature of our constitutional set-up makes it all the more imperative that we develop a national health insurance plan. To my mind the nature of our constitutional organization is one of the strongest arguments for the plan, rather than against it.
Supply-Health and Welfare
Last night the hon. member for Peace River, when describing the difficulties he had encountered in connection with the birth of his baby in Ontario, proved conclusively the very point I have in mind. Since I have been in Ottawa I found myself in somewhat the same position, when I had occasion to place my young son in hospital for a few days. At least I can say I was better off than the hon. member for Peace River, in that the hospital insurance plan of British Columbia covered my bill even though I was temporarily in Ontario. Nevertheless there was a great deal of, to my mind, unnecessary red tape because of the fact that the bill was to be paid by Victoria to an Ottawa hospital. That red tape could have been eliminated if a national health insurance plan had been in operation, and if there had been proper co-operation in the matter of administrative details between the various governments involved.
There have been a few occasions during the time I have attended sessions of parliament when I have been made conscious of the fact that I live in a different province. There have been times during the course of debates when I have felt almost like an ambassador to the court of Ottawa from some far-distant, foreign land. There have not been too many, I am glad to say, but unfortunately there are occasions when a member from one of the far western provinces does tend to have that feeling. That, to me as a Canadian, is not a good feeling to have. Certainly while I was resident within the confines of British Columbia during the whole year I was a supporter of the national health insurance plan. But I must say that my own experience of having to spend a good part of the year away from my own province has, if anything, convinced me more strongly than ever of the necessity of getting on with the job of establishing this national health insurance plan.
One of the reasons it is important that due consideration be given to this subject at this time is that a dominion-provincial conference is slated for this autumn. Certainly I would join in the hope of my leader that as a result of the discussions that will take place there the Minister of National Health and Welfare will be able to introduce at the next session of parliament a bill which will put this plan into effect. I feel this is one subject in which there is no room whatever for the kind of false provincial pride that sometimes raises itself inside this chamber and in places outside. I think this is a matter which is so paramount to the interests and the wellbeing of the citizens of Canada from Newfoundland to Vancouver island that no petty considerations of constitutional jurisdiction should longer be allowed to stand in the way

Supply-Health and Welfare of bringing it about. It is something which should completely transcend any division on political party lines.
I should like to see in this House of Commons at this session, before this item carries, a clear mandate given from all sides to the Minister of National Health and Welfare to go to that dominion-provincial conference this fall and say, as far as the federal government is concerned the time is now. Let us get on with the job and let none of these smaller considerations stand in the way of the full realization of proper health opportunities for all the citizens of Canada, regardless of whether they live in one province or another, and regardless of whether they have to travel from one province to another.
I happen to live in an area where the majority of the residents have a fairly complete type of health insurance coverage. One aspect of it is provided under the provincial hospital insurance set-up. Another is provided under a medical scheme which is called voluntary, yet as far as I can see now the essential principle that is in operation there is exactly one that could be operated under government auspices. Certainly I have never heard any complaint from any of the local doctors about the operation of that scheme in the particular area in which I live. As a matter of fact, I think largely because of the almost complete coverage of the residents of that particular area under that scheme, we probably have one of the highest per capita rations of doctors of any area in Canada. It is an area in which we have physicians and surgeons of long experience. It is also an area to which younger medical men who are beginning their careers are quite happy to come, either independently or in association with more experienced practitioners.
As I see it, this is not something which any medical man need fear; nor need anyone fear his right of choice of a doctor. I find that inside that little area we have a fairly complete coverage under what could be considered a health insurance plan. There is certainly no regimentation and there is a great deal less fear and anxiety on the part of individual people than was evident before that type of coverage came into being. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I hope the minister will be able to rise in his place before this item passes and give us some indication of the kind of approach he for one will take when this conference meets, and hope he may tell us what will be brought in at the next session of parliament in this connection.


Mr. Mclvor:: Mr. Chairman, just to keep the record straight, this matter was brought


into the house in 1937 not by the C.C.F. but by a member on this side of the house, when he proposed a resolution. That resolution was supported by the former member for Provencher, our family doctor, Dr. Howden. The minister of health at that time was that fine big Scotsman from Vancouver, the late Hon. Ian Mackenzie. As a result of that full-dress debate a committee was formed and specialists were heard from all over the world. A bill was drawn up. We were two years at it. It has not been put into force because there were certain difficulties in the way.
We must co-operate with the provinces. I am sure the difficulty the minister sees is that we have not enough doctors; we have not enough hospitals; we have not enough nurses. I am convinced that just as soon as the Minister of National Health and Welfare thinks it is possible, we shall have a health insurance plan that will be the best in the world.


Mr. Drew:: Mr. Chairman, I propose to refer only to the problem that is presented by the fact that this is a country with a federal constitution. The hon. member who has just spoken expressed confidence in the Minister of National Health and Welfare. That is appropriate from his point of view. However, I have no intention of dealing with this on the basis of any question of confidence, personal or otherwise. It is not within the authority of the Minister of National Health and Welfare alone to solve this problem.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Hear, hear.


George Alexander Drew: I must take issue with the statement that was made a few minutes ago, that no petty considerations of constitutional jurisdiction must be permitted to affect the solution of this problem. Our constitution is not a petty matter. Our constitution is the structure within which the people of this country agreed to live together as one people. It may raise difficulties at times. Unquestionably it does.
There are, of course, differences in the approach to this problem. The very words "health insurance" raise questions. Some people have one idea, others have another, as to what the words "health insurance" mean. I think we can all agree on one basic proposition. I doubt if there is any hon. member of this house who is not in agreement with the proposition that health along with education constitute the two fundamental requirements of society. Perhaps without health it may be difficult to acquire education, and without education health may give very little satisfaction. We all know the old maxim: a healthy mind and a healthy body.

However, a healthy body without a healthy mind means little. We know of course that even with a sickly body a man may perhaps enjoy much of life with that kind of education which will give people self-satisfaction and happiness. We do agree, however, that those are the two great considerations, education and health.
As it happens, under our constitution those are both primarily and in fact exclusively under the jurisdiction of the provincial governments. Nevertheless it has been recognized that there are reasons for seeking a common ground in regard to plans for the improvement of the health facilities of this country, because of the increasing cost and the extent to which many of the things that go into the improvement of the health of our people do fall in one way or another under the control of the federal authorities.
The requirement which must be fulfilled for any satisfactory solution of this problem is that there be agreement between the federal and provincial governments in regard to the way this problem will be tackled. Much has been done and millions of dollars have been spent on inquiries to obtain the essential information which will make it possible to discuss this subject with an accurate knowledge of the statistical information which is essential to reach conclusions. However, the provinces have now made reports based upon these inquiries, and it is essential that steps be taken now to deal with this subject.
When I said there was agreement in regard to the need of providing everything that will improve the health of our people, I think there will also be agreement without any question upon this proposition. In this country of ours, fortunate in the extreme in the opportunities presented to its people, it must be our purpose within the framework of our constitution to make sure in every way we can that the health and certainly the life of no Canadian, regardless of where he lives or what his circumstances may be, shall be imperilled because of lack of opportunity to have proper diagnosis, proper medical treatment and proper surgery if necessary. I feel sure that we will all agree that every Canadian, regardless of his financial position or where he may live, should be afforded the opportunity for that early diagnosis and early treatment, as well as the other things that go to the improvement of health that will give him every opportunity within this society of ours. That should be the purpose, whether there may be differences of opinion as to the method that should be followed.
We have stated most clearly our own position in regard to some of the aspects of this 50433-398
Supply-Health and Welfare problem. We do not believe that the doctors of Canada should be conscripted as the servants of the state under a rigid plan which would destroy much of that personal relationship which has contributed so much to the constant improvement of medical services in this country. We believe that among the many opportunities for the exercise of personal freedom should be the freedom of our people to choose their own doctors, and the freedom of the doctors themselves within our society.
We have stated that we do not believe in state medicine as that term is generally understood. We believe that in this country, with its tremendous distances and enormous area occupied by only 15 million people, a rigid pattern such as may have been adopted in any other country would defeat the very purpose that we are sure all our people have in mind.
When we say that, however, we do not for one moment concede that anything should prevent that proper medical treatment and proper medical care. On the contrary we think the wealth of this country, the resources of this country and the freedom of this country should provide the opportunity for the highest measure of medical and surgical treatment. We feel sure that in a country blessed as this country has been, treatment at the very highest level should be available to our people, no matter what their means may be.
What the actual plan will be in detail can be determined only by consultation with the provincial governments under whose jurisdiction personal health has been placed by our constitution. Having reached the point we have in the inquiries that have been conducted, having obtained the basic information which is essential, we do believe there should be no further delay in seeking a solution of this problem and establishing that basic pattern which will be acceptable to the governments of this country. It would be unfortunate if an attempt were made by this government to establish a rigid pattern without that proper consultation. However, the opportunity to reach an agreed pattern should not be delayed.
It will be recalled that recently at the preliminary conference among the governments of this country the premier of Ontario stated publicly that he believed no further time should be lost in seeking a solution of this problem. Naturally I am not aware of what took place in those closed conferences. It may well be that the premiers of other provinces made some statements at that time. In any event we do know that the head of the government of one of the largest provinces
6290	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare did emphasize the need to tackle this problem with the information now available.
I agree with the statement made only a short time ago that in this country we have unique opportunities to assure the health of our people to the limit that this may be possible in any particular case. With great open spaces, with a healthy, vigorous climate, with natural opportunities for exercise and recreation, there should be no healthier people in the world than the people of Canada.
In dealing with this subject it should never be forgotten that the first place to tackle the avoidance of disease and the need for surgery is in building a healthy body in the early days of our youth. Certainly that is the first place to tackle this problem. But that is something that goes right into the field of education and of the home itself. What we are talking about here is not the building of the healthy body in these early stages so much as the need for some plan that will ensure diagnosis, medical treatment and necessary surgery at the highest level for every Canadian who needs it. Nothing that is done should discourage those voluntary plans which have been taken up so successfully within these past few years. There is at least one community in Canada where over 70 per cent of the people are covered by Blue Cross, a voluntary plan. In a report from the province of Ontario in regard to various voluntary types of protection such as Blue Cross, the medical society plan and personal insurance with the insurance companies, it was estimated that some 65 per cent of the people were covered by those plans.
It may be impossible to reach an exact figure, but these figures are indicative of the extent to which people in this country are voluntarily and by their own effort taking care of their health requirements. I do not think any plan that is agreed upon, any pattern that is adopted within the framework of our constitution, should discourage those personal efforts to provide for the health of our people. I do not believe any rigid over-all pattern can be effective. What must be assured is that those who are unable to care for themselves, those who are unable to provide for these health measures, shall not be denied the opportunity.
As has already been pointed out, the cost of hospitalization and the cost of medical treatment are a source of great concern to many of our people. Undoubtedly that concern is general, and there are many cases where the whole resources of a careful life may be exhausted by unexpected illness. People should be encouraged to protect themselves against that. It should be our desire to 

see that wherever the individual is not fully protected, something is done.
I would point out that there can be no uncertainty about our acceptance of this general principle. That principle was accepted many years ago; in fact I do not believe that there is any community in Canada where a person will not get treatment as long as it is known that he is ill. We have throughout this country provisions for the payment of the bills of indigent patients. This may not be a pleasant thing; it may not be the way men like to recognize the fact that there are many of our people who are unable to pay their hospital bills. It has been recognized, however, by legislation. As a result there is provision for the payment to hospitals throughout Canada of a certain amount in each case for what are described as indigent patients.
We all know that with the increased cost of hospitalization and of the provisions for health generally, these payments are not adequate. In many municipalities a serious problem has arisen as a result of this situation. However, when that legislation was passed the principle was accepted. It should be our hope now that with that acceptance of the principle and with the information available, everything possible will be done without delay to tackle this great problem now facing us.
I feel sure we all agree as to the objective. It is clear that we do not agree on details. There are some of us who believe that in this still young and vigorous country, a country of great space and great opportunity, we must not try to mould our medical treatment into a rigid, cold pattern. We believe that would deny the very spirit that has given our medical practice in this country such renown throughout the whole world. It should be our desire to keep that freedom of choice, both for the patients and for the doctors but at the same time to ensure that in this very fortunate land every Canadian, wherever he lives, whatever his circumstances, will have the opportunity to obtain accurate diagnosis, the best medical treatment and the best surgical treatment that will restore him to health or prevent serious illness if it can be prevented.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Would the Leader of the Opposition permit a question before he resumes his seat? Would he support clause (f) in the amendment moved by his deskmate, the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe, in the speech from the throne debate, calling for greater co-operation with the provinces to develop an effective contributory plan which

will ensure that every Canadian will have adequate hospital and medical services?


George Alexander Drew: I voted for it.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The hon. member was not present.


George Alexander Drew: No, I was not here. I thought that was a reference to an earlier debate. If it was during the debate on the speech from the throne, I was not here, as the hon. member knows, for reasons connected with my own health.


Murdo William Martin: Mr. Chairman, I wonder
whether the committee would accord me a few minutes just to make a brief comment on this important subject, particularly in view of the fact that the Leader of the Opposition has made a statement which I know has interested hon. members greatly.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Would the minister regard it as a discourtesy if we suggested that we have to sit tonight anyway, and we might as well call it six o'clock now?


Murdo William Martin: I would not regard it as a discourtesy.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Then we would prefer to call it six o'clock.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Owen C. Trainor: I wish to make only a few observations on this particular item, Mr. Chairman, largely arising out of some remarks made by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. The hon. gentleman saw fit to quote at some considerable length the remarks of British doctors concerning the British health system during the meeting in Toronto. I suggest it would have been more fitting if he had concentrated on what Canadian doctors said at the same meeting in discussing Canadian health problems, because after all the British doctors are not going to be responsible for the operation of any health program in Canada.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Would the hon. member
permit a question?


Owen C. Trainor: Yes.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Would he not agree that the British doctors are apt to know a great deal more about the actual working of the health plan to which the hon. member was referring in his speech than are the Canadian doctors at the present time?
50433-398J
Supply-Health and Welfare


Owen C. Trainor: No, I do not agree at all. I think Canadian doctors know the situation in Canada and the programs relating to the health of the people of Canada. They are in a much better position to judge what is suitable for Canada than are the British doctors.
The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar made some remarks in his speech calling attention to certain European health plans. The committee might have been left with the impression that these plans supported his contention that his socialistic plan of attack on this matter was rational. The hon. member referred particularly to Switzerland and the minister nodded his head and said, of course, Switzerland was a federal state. One could not blame him for that, but the minister must know quite well that Switzerland is one of the bastions of voluntary health efforts in Europe. Switzerland does not by any means bear out the contention of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. At the same time the hon. member for Kootenay West mentioned the Swedish experiment, and I suggest it is very much an experiment. Sweden is one of the last countries in Europe to give up the voluntary health system. It remains to be seen whether or not the Swedes will be satisfied with what they have bought. It is by no means certain, so Sweden is not a country to instance in support of socialistic health plans.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I wish to present another angle to this question of providing health services for the Canadian public. So far in this debate the committee might have gathered that there was only one way to provide health service in Canada and that was by the socialistic, compulsory plan of health insurance-not health insurance, because it is anything but that. The socialists are advocating the provision of health service to every person in Canada, supposedly without cost to the individual who receives the service. It must be a very gullible or very ignorant person who would buy that sort of statement, because it will have to be paid for.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: You buy your education
that way.


Owen C. Trainor: I will tell you how you buy it; listen for a moment. You will buy it in one way or another. If you are an income taxpayer, you buy it by increased income taxes. If you are not an income taxpayer you will buy it through an increased cost of living, because there will be an attempt made to load the cost on the corporations and the corporations will certainly pass on that cost. The ordinary individual, therefore, will pay for it in his increased cost of living. Don't think you will get anything for nothing.

Supply-Health and Welfare


Thomas Speakman Barnett: No one ever suggested that, certainly not the member for Rosetown-Biggar.


Owen C. Trainor: I have heard suggestions. It was held out to Canadians as a sort of Santa Claus proposition.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Never by our party.


Owen C. Trainor: Definitely it has been by your party. The people of Canada will pay for it themselves. I want that definitely understood.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Oh, certainly.


Owen C. Trainor: I suggest there is more than one way of doing it. There is an efficient system of voluntary health insurance in this country. I have been personally associated with the Blue Cross plan since its inception. I was associated with the founders of the Blue Cross plan in Manitoba, which was established in 1938. I instance that to point out the predominant role Manitoba always takes in forward-looking measures of any kind. I would definitely make the assertion that voluntary health insurance, through Blue Cross and medical plans, can provide anything that can be provided under the socialistic medical plans, at a much lower rate but just as comprehensively provided they get assistance from the government.
This is necessary because you cannot provide assistance to people unless they can pay the premium. The premium may be very small; nevertheless if an individual has not sufficient income to enable him to pay even a small premium he cannot be protected. There, I suggest, is where the government may come in legitimately. I think they have a moral obligation to come in because the state has a moral obligation, I believe, to look after its indigents.
Now, so far as hospitalization coverage is concerned, that is one thing I pretend to know something about. I know that even the show windows of the C.C.F. in Saskatchewan cannot produce any better hospital coverage than we can in Manitoba, and it does not cost the government a nickel to provide that service. It is just as good as anything the C.C.F. can provide in Saskatchewan. We have done that on our own, without any help from anybody, and we are prepared to continue to do it.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: But your mortality rates are not as good as ours.


Owen C. Trainor: I dispute that. I think, as a matter of fact, our medical service is better than yours. I know definitely that we can provide our coverage at just as low a price as you can in Saskatchewan, about which you are talking all the time. It seems to be


the show window. We can match it and beat it in Manitoba, so far as that goes, any time.
My conclusion, Mr. Chairman, is that voluntary insurance with assistance from the government can do the job. I will admit that voluntary insurance itself cannot cover all the people. It has to have assistance; there has to be a partnership between government and the voluntary plans. However, with that partnership and with reasonable effort, a reasonable desire on the part of the government to co-operate, voluntary insurance can cover all the needs of the people effectively, efficiently and at a price that they can afford to pay. All this is in contrast to the socialist plan which would stultify the rights of individuals, endanger the economy of the nation and beggar the citizens, taxpayer and nontaxpayer alike.
Now, Mr. Chairman, the second part of this particular item on which I should like to say a word covers the matter of health grants. I suggest to the minister that there is one very important aspect of the situation in Canada at the present time, and that is the supply of nurses. I might say for the information of the committee that, by and large, nurses are trained by private hospitals and at the expense of those hospitals. What happens to these nurses when they are trained? What do we find? We find, for example, that the public service, including the minister's department, uses the services of the nurses after they have been trained. Yet the public service has not contributed one cent to their training. These nurses are not available to the general public or to the hospitals in which they trained. For example, Trans-Canada Air Lines takes a certain number of them. I am not suggesting that there is anything wrong with that, but it must be kept in mind that the nurses are trained at the expense of the hospitals. Therefore I suggest that those in the public service who make use of the services of these nurses should accept the obligation of contributing toward the expense of their training.
The hospitals of Canada are in difficult financial circumstances, and we cannot expect them to absorb the cost of training nurses if the graduates of the hospitals are raided and placed in a position where they do not serve the general public. We have to depend upon the hospitals for the training of our nurses. Therefore I suggest we have in this instance an excellent case for the subsidization of training schools for nurses. If we can subsidize other educational institutions, why not hospitals?
I warn the minister that this is one of the rocks upon which any health plan could founder. We must have nurses; they are

absolutely essential. Yet the hospitals which do the training are finding their position so difficult that they may have to almost cease their efforts. They are doing the best they can, but unless they receive encouragement and support their situation is hopeless.
I would strongly urge the minister to consider this important question, because I can assure him it is one of the main difficulties in the health field today.


Murdo William Martin: Mr. Chairman, the Leader of the Opposition, the hon. member for Rose-town-Biggar and the leader of the Social Credit party have spoken on the general subject matter covered by this item. The leader of the C.C.F. party spoke in the general debate, as well as the leader of the Social Credit party. And just before six o'clock the Leader of the Opposition made a statement about which I feel it is my duty to make some comment.
The problem, simply stated-that is to say, the problem envisaged by this particular subject matter-is to find some equitable method by which some proper means can be found to purchase medical and hospital care in a way such as to avoid the hazards which most reasonable people foresee. As the government views the problem, it does not involve a question of professional regimentation. It is not a matter of providing the state with a monopoly of power. But any adequate solution to this complex social and economic problem must take realistic account of financial and constitutional factors. It must take into account the need for maintaining professional freedom and respecting the essential traditions of medicine, as well as the assurance of adequate supporting health facilities and services and, above all, of course, the needs of the people to be served.
What we seek, and what I believe is sought by most people in Canada, regardless of political affiliation, is not socialized medicine but perhaps something that could be described as socially sound medicine. That is, it involves satisfactory medical and hospital care for the members of our society.
That is the framework of the problem which, as the Leader of the Opposition said, under our constitution is primarily the responsibility of the provincial governments. The leader of the C.C.F. party, the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, by way of appreciation referred to the contribution made by the national health grants program, as indeed did the premier of Saskatchewan six or seven weeks ago when my parliamentary assistant spoke from the same platform with him on the occasion of the opening of the
Supply-Health and Welfare University hospital at Saskatoon. And recently at the dominion-provincial conference the various provincial premiers indicated how important these grants have been to each of them in supplementing and rounding out their already existing excellent health services.
But what should not be forgotten is that this whole program, costing now over $165 million since the date of inauguration, was referred to in May of 1948 by the prime minister of Canada, the Right Hon. William Lyon Mackenzie King, as a prerequisite to a system of national contributory health insurance, administered by the provinces and jointly financed under satisfactory terms based upon agreement with the ten provincial governments.
Today I thought the Leader of the Opposition stated the constitutional position correctly. He said it would be a mistake to overlook the position of the provinces and their primacy under the law in this matter. And I can say now, after nine years of experience in this portfolio involving constant relations with the provincial governments, that it would be absolutely impossible ever to arrive at a responsible system of national health insurance unless we have regard for and bear in mind what was noted in this particular by the Leader of the Opposition, namely the necessity for a measure of cooperation with the provinces. I believe today we have that co-operation to a degree such as we have never had before. The Salk vaccine program is a good example of the kind of teamwork I am talking about.
The Leader of the Opposition today did not make it easy, for me at any rate, to understand clearly and in precise terms what particular scheme he had in mind.


An hon. Member:: There were others, too.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yet I can understand that he was speaking in a general way. I do feel, however, that I must say this, that other members who spoke generally were not precise in their exposition. And I can appreciate that too.
The fact is that the Leader of the Opposition said it was desirable not to interfere with the character and existence of the present voluntary schemes. I do not believe it is possible to have a national contributory health insurance scheme unless there is some integration between that scheme and the various voluntary plans. Otherwise we would be imposing on the taxpayer a double obligation; or, if not that, we would be imposing on the taxpayer the obligation of paying a premium greater than is necessary in the circumstances.

Supply-Health and Welfare The main point made by the Leader of the Opposition was that the time had come when, in view of all the studies that had been made -and I looked up his exact words during the dinner recess-there should be no delay in getting some understanding between the provinces and the federal government in respect of a scheme-a scheme, incidentally, which the hon. member did not detail. I agree and the government agrees that there should not be in these and other matters unnecessary delay.
He mentioned the fact that the provinces had all made surveys of their existing health facilities. He did not mention the fact that it was the federal government that paid entirely for these surveys. The 10 provincial governments were put in funds by the federal government in 1948 for the purpose of making a complete assessment of their health facilities, their personnel needs, the cost of any kind of scheme, medical or hospital insurance which they might care to see implemented. The last of these surveys reached us some time ago. In the month of April we received the last survey, from the province of Newfoundland.
Now, what did all these surveys indicate in so far as government policy and the wish of the provinces in this matter are concerned? It is idle to talk about health insurance unless the provinces are in agreement. Unless they are in agreement it is not possible to have a scheme, and anyone who ignores that fact I do not think is being fair to the Canadian people. I am not suggesting that the Leader of the Opposition did not note that fact. He did.
These surveys were all reported to us. As I said, the last one came a few months ago. Only one province, Saskatchewan, urged the government, in the light of the survey of its province, to enact a national health insurance scheme to be jointly contributed to financially by the federal and provincial governments. It is true that the survey for Alberta recommended health insurance on a national scale, contributed to by the provincial and federal governments and administered by the provincial governments. But the province of Alberta entered a caveat and said that this particular recommendation did not carry the sanction of the government of Alberta.
The province of British Columbia, in its survey, said it was in favour of a hospital insurance scheme. No province other than these three gave any support to a national scheme-


Owen C. Trainor: Will the minister state what Manitoba said in the survey?


Murdo William Martin: The province of Manitoba did not commit itself. The only province that committed itself was the one I have mentioned.
This is the background. I do not say that will be their continuing attitude, but that is the background of provincial attitudes. Since that time I have had 14 meetings with all the provincial departments of health, and nothing has taken place at these meetings as far as they are concerned which would reverse the positions I have already described. Therefore, it is not right to suggest that there has been any delay so far as the federal government is concerned.
I am not criticizing the provincial governments. I believe that in the matter of intergovernmental relationships it is important to respect the policies and decisions of other governments. That is what I am seeking to do tonight, but I am stating the facts. In the face of that, to go on suggesting that the federal administration is at fault, or is needlessly delaying, is not to give a true picture of the situation, and is not giving expression to the kind of view that is likely to further the cause which basically all the political parties in this house support in their platforms.
Shortly after the dominion-provincial conference in April of this year, the Minister of Finance arranged for his deputy minister, the two deputy ministers in my own department and other officials in the federal government service and their opposite numbers in the provinces to meet. They met, I think, almost within two weeks of the last meeting with the provinces for the purpose of preparing the necessary material for the conference that will take place beginning next October 3. Material has been and is being prepared for that conference in respect of all of the items enumerated for discussion, or that we anticipate might possibly be discussed at that conference.
Among the enumerated items on the agenda is the matter of health and welfare services. Therefore so far as we are concerned there is no delay whatsoever in trying to meet this problem, in the light of our over-all obligations, as responsibly as we can.
I want to make another observation. Several times during the course of the debate the hon. member for Saskatoon, the hon. member for Kootenay West today, and I think the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, all acknowledged interjections I made about the fact that Canada was a federal state. They recited the instances of health insurance programs in many countries. All of these countries, but one, were unitary states. That is not our position in Canada; we are a federal

state. The federal government has to take into account many factors. Among them are the particular concepts of the role of government, in this and in other matters, that exist in various provinces, and it would not further the cause of health insurance to ignore these variations. I have stated twice during this session the policy of the federal government in this matter, and it must be construed in the light of what I have said and in the light of what the Leader of the Opposition himself properly noted as considerations that have to be taken into account.
Before coming to that, may I make another observation. At the last dominion-provincial conference-and I am not now talking about the private meeting, because that was a private meeting; but nothing took place there inconsistent with what I am now going to say-there was no proposal put forward that could be regarded in any way as inconsistent with what I have said. There was a proposal put forward by the premier of Ontario that this matter should be given study at the dominion-provincial conference. I can say that since that time I have offered the personnel of our department to assist that or any other province in the formulation of its material in order to give those provinces our understanding and our assessment of all the factors, including the financial factors, involved in this program.
In the light of all this, it should be noted what the policy of the government is. It was clearly and unequivocally stated by the present Prime Minister of this country when we went to the people at the last federal election. It was stated by me in this house twice during the course of the present session, and last June in the session preceding this one. I give it to the house again as the policy of this government:
We are committed to support a policy of contributory health insurance to be administered by the provinces. But under our federal system, to get health insurance started the people and the governments of the various provinces have to take the initiative in working out plans adapted to local conditions.
We are ready to assist in a sensible and practical nation-wide scheme, but that depends on satisfactory agreements with the provincial governments.
The Prime Minister went on to state:
I am more convinced than ever that this is a field which should, as far as practicable, be left to provincial administration. Conditions differ vastly from one province to another, and services which are suitable for one region are quite unsuitable to another. We now have had a great deal of experience with health schemes of all kinds in this country, including full-fledged hospital insurance in two of our provinces.
But I do not think it would be fair to the taxpayers of Canada in all the provinces to make federal contributions to provincial schemes in only one or two provinces.
Supply-Health and Welfare
Federal contributions should be regarded as a supplement and an evener-out, when most of the provinces are prepared to undertake satisfactory
schemes.
And it is the government's policy to go on improving federal health grants which have done so much to place all the provinces in a better position to discharge their primary responsibility in this important field.
It seems to me that is a clear and unequivocal statement. Some hon. members may not agree with it all, but I think most hon. members and most people in this country will. It is based upon the fact that since 1948, with the approval of all members in this house and now with the active co-operation of every provincial department of health, regardless of political persuasion, we are building up a standard of health services and health care of which no Canadian need be ashamed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General health grants-
265.	To authorize and provide for general health grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates and under terms and conditions approved by the governor in council including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $48,296,137, $31,750,000.
Mr.   Herrid@: I have in my hand a letter from the arthritis and rheumatism society in Trail, signed by ten well known and responsible citizens, including several doctors. In this letter they urge the great need for increased research into the leading causes of disability from rheumatic diseases. The hon. member for Macleod spoke about this, and I know at that time the minister gave a reply. I raise this question because of the great interest of these people.
I want to say at this time that voluntary organizations of this type, particularly in the smaller communities, are making a most necessary and helpful contribution to national health and welfare. I do urge the minister to give serious consideration to the representations of these very earnest people.
Then in addition there is another matter to which I should like to refer. We have developed in the Kootenays an excellent organization known as the Kootenay society for handicapped children, which is doing a great deal to assist handicapped children in that district. It has a lot of local support with an excellent committee in charge. They are now proposing to extend their activities by putting up a building and so on. I am not quite sure how the activities of a group like this would tie up with plans of the Department of National Health and Welfare,
6296	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare and I should like the minister to tell me what the government does to assist this type of organization.
Before concluding I should like to bring to the minister's attention a rather unusual situation. We have these organizations which are doing excellent work and there is a man in Trail, a smelter worker named Duncan MacDonald, who has taken a very great interest in this type of work. He is a single man who has devoted all his spare time to assisting handicapped people. We have had a number of cases in Kootenay West of people who were considered incurable, and at his own expense this young man on his four days off-he works 12 days at Consolidated Mining and then has four off-will take these people across the line to an institution in the state of Washington.
A number of parents of children have come to see me. This young man has taken various children across to this institution over a period of years. I myself have seen the tremendous improvement that has occurred. The father of one child came to see me; and before receiving treatment this child was a sad case indeed. Within a period of six or eight months there has been a great improvement. I know of another young man who was given up as completely incurable, but who is now able to walk around on crutches and according to a letter I received two or three weeks ago is now seeking employment.
This work is being done by a devoted man whose principal interest is to do what he can for these handicapped persons. He has written me a number of letters, and I am wondering what could be done to assist this type of work. He has demonstrated what can be done. I know of several cases of children and adults who have been given up by the medical profession as completely incurable, but he takes them to this institution across the line on his days off, stays there a day or two with them, and then comes back. Possibly the next time he will take someone else. I have seen the results of this excellent work and I think it is most commendable, and I feel I am justified in bringing it to the attention of the committee and the minister.
I should like to know if the department has inquired into this institution in the state of Washington and what it is doing in this respect. I have seen the results with my own eyes, and I know they are worth while.


Howard Charles Green: I should like to say a word with regard to arthritis and the rheumatic diseases. As the minister knows, we have in British Columbia a very active branch of the Canadian arthritis society, whose driving


force I think is Miss Mary Pack, who has done outstanding work in this connection. Apparently the only provision that can be made under this vote for work in connection with arthritis and the rheumatic diseases is under the general public health grant. That means, of course, that any proposal must first be approved by the province and, second, it must be related directly to general public health services. Other grants, such as the tuberculosis control grant, the mental health grant, the venereal diseases control grant and the cancer control grant are available for specific projects which can be of a continuing nature.
Apparently these people have been told that there are to be no new research projects this year having to do with arthritis and the rheumatic diseases. I am wondering why there could not be a specific grant in connection with these particular diseases. They affect several hundred thousand Canadian citizens, a larger number than most other diseases. I am told that in some instances research work is to be stopped, though that may not be an accurate summing up of the situation. I wish the minister would tell the committee whether it would be possible to have a specific grant for research into these particular diseases.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I shall reply briefly to the hon. member for Kootenay West. With regard to the arthritis and rheumatism society, a grant of $78,000 is made to that particular group for work in British Columbia alone. The amount for research into arthritis by various universities throughout the country comes to an additional half a million dollars.
In regard to the specific point mentioned by my hon friend, money for this particular purpose can come from the general public health grant; it can come from the crippled children grant; it can come from the public health research grant. Except for the total of the appropriations, there is no limit theoretically to what can be done. The amount of research is determined by the recommendation made to me by a research committee composed of five of the most eminent men in Canada, who are not connected with the government. The fact that there is no specific amount for arthritis does not mean anything, because we have an interchangeable arrangement under the various grants. In other words you would have to list all the diseases, and they run into many hundreds. It is a general public health grant. It does not exclude others.
In regard to British Columbia, for the western society for physical rehabilitation and related projects a total of $178,000 has been provided in the last four years. This society is one of the great organizations in this field.

I am sure there is nothing in the United States that would be any better. If the particular cases my hon. friend had in mind were referred to this society I am sure he would find amazing results, as I myself have seen.


Edmund Davie Fulton: May I ask the minister whether there is anything here specifically devoted to arthritis and rheumatic diseases, for research under the control of the dominion government in that field. As I understand it, of the money which is made available to the provinces under the general grants, a good deal may be devoted to research along those lines, but what I want to know is whether anything allocated by the dominion government is specifically for the purpose of research in that field.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Very much. The research in cortisone alone done at McGill and Western was directed along that line.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Was that money allocated from here for that purpose?


Paul Joseph James Martin: From here for that specific purpose.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What is the current situation? What amount of research is being carried on under the same sort of idea?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Half that amount is being spent at the present time in research projects at three different universities.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Could the minister, for our information, tell us which ones?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Toronto, Western and McGill.


Owen C. Trainor: I should like to call the minister's attention to what I consider to be a weakness in these health grants. As the minister is aware, each individual grant has to be approved by the provincial department of health. I have found that a provincial department of health is unlikely to approve my specific application from a private organ-nation-a hospital, let us say-for assistance n training or in technical health matters unless the department itself has no particular way of utilizing that grant. As a consequence, generally speaking the grant is rather monopolized by the provincial department of health and the private institutions have very little chance at these grants.
There is another point to which I might call the attention of the minister in connection with the success of his rehabilitation program. As he may be aware, there is a very definite shortage of practitioners of physical medicine in this country. I wonder if it is not possible for the minister, by way of scholarships or something of that nature, to encourage postgraduate education in this field, because there
Supply-Health and Welfare
is going to be a great demand for specialists of this type in the future.


Murdo William Martin: They can qualify for grants.


Howard Charles Green: The minister did not deal with the question about there being no new research projects undertaken with regard to arthritis and the rheumatic diseases. I have heard from the British Columbia branch that they have been told that under this public health grant there are to be no new projects undertaken this year. Is that the case?


Murdo William Martin: No, that is not the case.


Howard Charles Green: What are the new projects?


Murdo William Martin: I just mentioned to the hon. member for Kamloops that there are three different projects at Western, Toronto and McGill at the present time.


Howard Charles Green: Do they have to do with the production of cortisone?


Murdo William Martin: One of them has to do with ACTH and the other with rheumatoid arthritis.


Howard Charles Green: What is the exact nature of the projects being started this year?


Murdo William Martin: There are a few hundred different forms of rheumatism, and it would take greater skill than mine and many hours to explain. The general set-up is this. We have a board of five men. I have never said who they were, but they are prominent men in the field of research. When this program began I suggested that I would like all projects of a research character to go before them so they would have an opportunity of making an assessment of the desirability, of the need and of the priority of the project. In practically every instance I have followed that recommendation. I think it is a sound course to follow. But there is no such cessation as my hon. friend suggests.


Howard Charles Green: Would there not be more assurance of continuity in research work into the rheumatic diseases if there were a specific grant made for that purpose?


Murdo William Martin: I do not think so.


Owen C. Trainor: Would the minister please explain what degree of collaboration there is between the board of consultants he has just mentioned, the national research council and the defence research organizations?


Murdo William Martin: All the members to whom I have referred are also on the medical advisory board of the national research counciL


George Hugh Castleden: I notice these grants are made up in two branches to the various

Supply-Health and Welfare provinces; one on the basis of hospital construction grants and the other in other health grants. I notice that the province of Saskatchewan is third highest in the dominion with regard to hospital construction grants. Is that still on the basis of $2,000?


Paul Joseph James Martin: One thousand dollars and $1,500.


George Hugh Castleden: What is the $1,500?


Paul Joseph James Martin: For chronic cases.


George Hugh Castleden: What is the basis of the grants given to the provinces under "other health grants"? Does that take in special work under mental health programs?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Grants for tuberculosis, cancer, professional training, hospital construction, crippled children, diagnostic services and so on.


George Hugh Castleden: At one time it did include the grants made to the provinces on the basis of their physical fitness program?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No.


George Hugh Castleden: Did the federal government ever assist in any way in that regard?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No.


George Hugh Castleden: I was under the impression that the federal government did.


Paul Joseph James Martin: No, it was never part of this. That was welfare; this is health.


George Hugh Castleden: Have there been any programs such as you have under "other health grants" that have been discontinued with regard to the province of Saskatchewan?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No.


George Hugh Castleden: They are in full force?


Paul Joseph James Martin: They profit greatly from these grants.


Owen C. Trainor: I should like to discuss briefly the question of the hospital construction grants. The minister is probably aware that these grants do not bear the same relation to the cost of construction today as they did when they were instituted, because hospital construction is considerably more expensive than it was then. I wonder if the minister or the government would give consideration to bringing these grants up to where they may bear the same relationship to the total cost of construction as when they were instituted.


Murdo William Martin: These matters are under study.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Grants to health organizations-
266.	Canadian mental health association, $10,000.
Edmund Davie Fulton: Within the very recent past the minister made a statement in connection with mental health which was of course gratifying to everyone interested in that particular subject and in research into that subject. I am not one of those who are usually amongst the foremost in asking for greater expenditures, but I notice that here-


Mr. Harris:: I have been listening tonight.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I have not said anything at all on this subject as yet. I am just leading up to something. The grant is the same as it was last year. I want to ask the minister if he can tell us what amount out of the general health grant is now being devoted to research on this subject.


Murdo William Martin: Which subject?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mental health.


Murdo William Martin: The mental health grant is a separate grant. It is the largest of all, $7J million.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Pardon?


Murdo William Martin: Seven and a quarter million dollars.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Where is that found?


Murdo William Martin: Item 265.


Edmund Davie Fulton: It is part of item 265?


Murdo William Martin: Yes.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What I am asking is what part of that is allocated specifically to research in the field of mental health?


Murdo William Martin: About half a million dollars is devoted to research in mental health. For instance, the Allan Memorial Institute in Montreal, the great mental research centre, will receive from us about $100,000 this year.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Where do we find the breakdown?


Murdo William Martin: Pages 371 and 372.


Edmund Davie Fulton: In the middle of page 371 I find the following:
Mental health grant to assist in an extended program for the prevention and treatment of mental illness, including rehabilitation and free treatment.
The minister tells me that represents-


Murdo William Martin: About half a million dollars in direct research.


Edmund Davie Fulton: That is allocated between what institutions?


Murdo William Martin: The main one at the moment is Allan Memorial Institute in Montreal, which is the big research centre, the mental

health unit in Toronto, the one at Ottawa University here and the one in Saskatchewan. Those are the main ones.


Edmund Davie Fulton: How does that amount compare with what was spent in previous years?


Paul Joseph James Martin: It is about $100,000 more than the previous year.


Edmund Davie Fulton: And the total amount for mental health, as the minister told me earlier, is about $7J million.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes. It is the third largest grant.


Edmund Davie Fulton: How is that divided?


Paul Joseph James Martin: It is divided among the provinces on a per capita basis, and it is nonmatching.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
267.	Health league of Canada, $10,000.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I have in my hand-


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have that matter under consideration.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Does the minister know what matter it is?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The health league. I have that matter under consideration.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I do not think that is quite the aspect I want to mention. Our group are very pleased to support the vote for $10,000, and I am going to make a suggestion. I think the minister's department could possibly substantially assist the health league and at the same time save money by adopting this suggestion. I have in my hand a copy of an excellent periodical published at various times by the health league known as "Health For You and Your Family". It is very readable material. At the same time I have an official publication published by the Department of National Health and Welfare entitled "Canada's Health and Welfare." I should like to ask the minister this question. Would it be possible to assist the health league and at the same time save the department money by the department taking four pages in the health league magazine instead of putting out a separate publication?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I would not agree with that, and I am sure the hon. member for Kinder-sley would not agree. We write a lot of the articles in both.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Could the minister say why he would not agree?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The departmental magazine is perhaps the most important general document *of its kind. It goes to all doctors and health
Supply-Health and Welfare workers and has a much bigger circulation. The two have different purposes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
268.	Canadian public health association, $5,000.
Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I cannot find an item under which to raise this matter but the Minister of Finance gave me the idea of bringing it up now because he said he was listening. I refer to certain drugs, notably insulin and drugs of that prescription, that are a constant expense to certain people. The point I am concerned about is the deductibility from income for tax purposes of the cost of these particular drugs. My view of the minister is obstructed charmingly and I cannot see him, but if I can get his eye I should like to ask the minister what are the particular drugs that his department recommends to the Minister of Finance as being deductible for income tax purposes?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am sorry but I have not the full list. There is quite a list. The Minister of Finance and I are in constant consultation. We get along on that matter as well as we do on other things, which means that we get along very well.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: It is certainly not confined to insulin?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No; cortisone, Salk vaccine, ACTH, injectable liver extract or vitamin B-12, as well as insulin.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: My reason for asking is that I have a particular case in my constituency involving a young lady who tells me that her monthly expense for a completely indispensable drug is some $32. She is a person in a position that does not pay very much money. I took up the matter at one time with the Minister of Finance. Of course he will have forgotten it, but I wrote him about it. However, I did not have any success in that particular case. Perhaps the Minister of National Health and Welfare might recommend to his colleague that one or two other drugs should be added to the list.


Owen C. Trainor: On what basis is the list compiled?


Murdo William Martin: Essentiality, the cost involved and the question whether or not institutions like Connaught are engaged in the production.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Family allowances and old age security-
280. Administration, $2,743,441.
Ernest George Hansell: Mr. Chairman, I think we have made some progress in the last minute. We come now to item 280 covering the administration of family allowance and old age
6300	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare security payments, which are statutory. I wish to raise one point with which I think the minister is rather familiar by reason of the fact that I have taken it up with him on two previous occasions. I have reference to the possibility, and I hope it is a probability, of being able to pay the old age security pension to those old age pensioners who find they cannot reside further in Canada for one reason or another, reasons which I think are quite legitimate and should be given some consideration.
In the first place I had the matter brought to my attention a year or two ago, and I wrote the minister about it. He answered very courteously and explained that an old age pensioner could be out of the country for three months each year without losing any pension. Of course if he were out of the country the last three months of one year and the first three months of the next year, then he could be away for a period of six months without losing his pension. Well, that is all right, but that did not cover the case I had in mind.
At the commencement of the present session I put a question on the order paper asking if the government expected to make any changes along this line. The reply I received was simply a quotation of the present law governing the case, which was not what I wanted. I knew what the regulations were, but I wanted to know if there was any hope of these regulations being changed. I shall give two examples of cases which I think are quite deserving.
The first one that was brought to my attention was that of an aged gentleman who had lived in Canada nearly all his life, who had homesteaded in Alberta and had had some difficult times. Perhaps his land was poor, I do not know all the reasons. Eventually, during the depression he borrowed money on his land, found he could not pay it back and so lost his farm. He went through hard times and was not successful in keeping his farm, through no fault of his own but because of external circumstances. As time went on he managed to get a little work here and a little work there. Sometimes he lived with his children. The time came when he applied for and obtained the old age pension.
This gentleman was not in the best of health and went down to the United States. He was a widower by this time, and he remarried a woman in the United States who owned her own home. I do not believe she had any income to speak of, but she was a United States citizen. He resided not more than about a hundred miles across the border, but he lost his pension. He could not continue to live there with his wife and receive


his pension. It meant that his wife either had to sell her home and come to Canada or he would lose his pension. I suppose she did not want to do that by reason of the fact she had lived in this home all her life; she had her friends and social connections there.
Now, of course, he did not have to marry. He could have stayed here and kept his pension, but that is not reasonable. He wanted the companionship of a nice lady in his declining years and she wanted the companionship of a husband. There was no reason why they should not marry. By reason of the fact he has to live in the United States, or feels he has to, he has lost his pension. I ask, is that reasonable? It would not cost any more to pay his pension if he lived here or on the other side of the border, but because he lives on the other side of the border he cannot receive his pension.
The other case is that of a gentleman who also pioneered this country. He came from England in the early days and ran a little general store in a very small community. He was the postmaster in that particular place and had the post office wicket in his store just as you find it in these rural places. Eventually he retired, his money ran out and he went on the old age pension. He took ill and the doctor said that perhaps if he tried some other climate he might get better. He visited some of his relatives in England and found he was quite a lot better there. Of course if he stayed there more than three months, he lost his pension. He came back here, and the moment he came back he took ill again. He finds that about the only place he can live, and in addition where he wants to live with his relatives, is in England but he loses his pension. Now, it is not going to cost any more to send the pension to him in England than if he gets the pension here.
There is another matter in this connection I should like to bring to the minister's attention. I am not going to accuse anybody of going around a corner in order to receive his pension and live away from Canada. I could not prove it even if I wanted to do so, but there is a rather strong rumour that it is done. I said to one young gentleman to whom I was talking about the matter, "Well, I am not going to advocate that a man live on the other side of the border or in England, and have his cheque sent to someone with a power of attorney to bank it for him, because that would not be complying with the regulations." The young fellow said it is being done. I said, "Well, I cannot help it but I am not advocating that it be done. Eventually some inspector will come around and you will have to lie about it or they will catch up with you".


Murdo William Martin: They cannot give a power of attorney. We have had several cases like that, and we have caught up with them.


Ernest George Hansell: The phrase "power of attorney" was my own, but the cheque was deposited to his account; at least that is the story. I told this young man, "Sooner or later they will catch up with you and there will be trouble, so you had better not try that". I simply mention it to indicate that there is a possibility of old age pensioners wanting to get around the regulations, and it is not right.
I come to my point, which is a very simple one. If people find there are some extenuating circumstances of that kind which force them to live in some other country, why is the pension not paid to them just the same? We do not lose anything. The only thing is that the money is not spent here, but what is a few dollars? I do not think the government could take the attitude that if they changed the regulations and paid the pension to eligible pensioners who may be living in some other country, there would be an exodus of old age pensioners from this country. Most of our old age pensioners have their homes and families here. They have lived here at least 20 years or more. It is only in the odd case that one wants to go somewhere else.
The minister is well aware of the fact that at least some other countries, such as the United Kingdom, pay eligible pensioners their pension even though they come to live in Canada. The minister may argue that their system is a little different, that it is a sort of contributory system. I say this. A person eligible to receive an industrial pension could go somewhere else to live and receive it.
The hon. member for Acadia whispers to me that the old age security pension is a contributory pension here. It may not be deducted from salary but-I suppose it is deducted, not as a pension contribution but by way of a contribution through taxes. There is the 2 per cent special income tax and the 2 per cent sales tax, which make it a contributory scheme. After all, in the long run the old age pensioner is only receiving what he has paid for, plus perhaps an additional contribution by the federal government depending upon the actuarial soundness of the scheme. But it may be regarded as a contributory scheme. I believe we have a case here, and that we have made a justifiable plea on behalf of those who find they cannot live here but must go to some other country. If they have been in receipt of the old age security pension, then they should continue to receive it.
Supply-Health and Welfare
I do not know what more I can say, except to continue urging this point. I cannot see any justifiable argument against it, but if the minister has one we will be glad to listen to it and, if it is reasonable, to accept it.
I have thought my way around this thing; I have thought my way up and down and through it, and for the life of me I cannot see why this cannot be done. Surely it would not cost as much as some people think. Surely there will not be so much money going out of the country in respect of just a few pensioners; and some of these persons might be living with relatives. There may be the pensioner who goes to live with his son so that he may be a little better off, but if it is outside Canada he cannot do it. I wish the minister would give this matter favourable consideration, because I see no reason why my suggestion could not be accepted.
This is a tiny thing so far as the financial obligation is concerned. If the minister has any figures to show how much the department is saving by insisting upon the pensioners remaining here, I would like to see those figures. But I do suggest it cannot be very much, and that it would be only a drop in the bucket when compared with the $367 million we are paying out. I am going to keep on dinging on this thing until we get something out of it.


Mr. Quelch:: I should like to say a few words in support of what has been said by the hon. member for Macleod. I am not thinking of those persons who want to go to a foreign country with the intention of remaining there. And just in passing, I do not know whether the minister is making those signs in connection with my speech, with a view to putting the skids under me.


Paul Joseph James Martin: No, I was just sending a love message to the Deputy Speaker.


Victor Quelch: I was pointing out that I am not referring to persons wishing to leave this country permanently. I have in mind persons who suffer from, let us say, arthritis or rheumatism or asthma and who get tremendous relief by going south for a few months in the winter. If they lived in this part of the country they would go to Florida, or if they were in the west they would go to California. They can drive down there in their cars and, once they have arrived, it does not cost any more to live than it does in Canada. As a matter of fact it costs less, I believe, to live in Florida or California than it does in Ontario, once a person has arrived in either of those places. Perhaps,
6302	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare to have accommodation at a reasonable price, one would take a trailer, or upon arrival rent a cheap apartment.
This gives tremendous relief to these sufferers. I have seen people in Florida suffering so badly from rheumatism that they had to be carried down to the sea, but within six months they have been able to walk. They are carried out into the sea and move about in the waves. This helps them to manipulate their legs and, after a month or two, they are in much better health.
And it is not only those who suffer from rheumatism or arthritis. Some of the older people who are getting a little stiff in their joints-in fact, I feel like that myself after being down here in this climate and sitting in these seats for so long-would like to go down there and have the benefit of the sea.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We shall end up with you if you do not hurry along.


Victor Quelch: We shall all be there, if we sit here long enough. Why penalize these people by not allowing them to have their pensions? The hon. member for Macleod has pointed out that they are contributing to pensions.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have listened to these two full, thorough and very interesting speeches, and I shall give them very careful study.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I should like to ask the minister two definite questions which I expect him to answer, despite the fact that apparently he is in a hurry.


Paul Joseph James Martin: No.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: It is true that a change of environment is often useful in the treatment of rheumatism and asthma. I cannot see any reason why some old chap who is troubled with asthma in certain climatic conditions, and whose condition would be modified or cured under other conditions, should be refused permission to go outside the country.
There is another thing, and this argument has become more convincing because in the old days, when pensions were enjoyed only by those having very small incomes, it was almost certain that those people could not go to other places. But since payments are now made, irrespective of a person's financial position, and the pension is paid as of right, more people would like to travel or would be able to travel.
I would ask the minister this question. Is any special consideration now given to anyone on the basis of invalidism to allow him to leave the country and still draw his pension? If so, about how many have that privilege?


The second question is this. I would ask the minister for a restatement of the economic considerations which induce the Canadian government to say it is impossible to pay pensions to people outside the country. These may be people who have resided here for 70 years. They have borne burdens in this country and should be given consideration. These are two clear questions to which I would ask for answers.


An hon. Member:: Carried.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: No, it is not carried. Is the minister going to answer?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The answer to the first question is no. The answer to the second question is that first of all there is the difficulty of administration. We anticipate it would cost at least $10 million on the basis of applications we have already had. I know there are individual cases; indeed there is one right in this House of Commons, though not at this moment. We all know that case. But we have to take into consideration the general obligations of administration. And there is the further fact that in my judgment, and I am sure in the judgment of most people, it would not look good-


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: "Well".


Paul Joseph James Martin: -to give special consideration to people who are going to live in Florida. I do not say that because I have any objection to going to Florida, because I have been there myself. But I am just saying that it does not look good. Then, as the hon. member for Macleod said, this is a scheme based in part upon a contributory principle. That principle of contribution continues while the recipient is in benefit. The old age security pensioner, while he is receiving his pension, is actually continuing to pay toward it through the sales tax.


Victor Quelch: We hope you will abolish that sales tax.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is another matter. So those are the reasons for the policy I have mentioned.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: The minister's last argument is perhaps a valid one, that the pensioner would be contributing toward his own pension. But I am not so sure about the vague -and we shall not discuss it from the standpoint of grammar-statement of the minister, when he said it would not look good. I am not interested in things simply because they do not look good-or well. The minister says something would not look good, but I would like to have a better reason than that.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That was only an incidental reason.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: That was why I put the word
"economic" in my question.


Murdo William Martin: That is a better way of putting it.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I think the minister has partially answered the question on that basis.


Ernest George Hansell: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to pursue the matter further. I do not go for this looks business at all. I can quite understand that if a flock of millionaires over 70 who were receiving old age pensions were going down to Florida it would not look good. I do not know that it would be right. But surely some regulations could be brought into existence to differentiate between those who have some sort of extenuating circumstances. Health is one. The gentleman whom I said got married down there is another. Perhaps it could be on a means test basis. I do not care how it is done, but there should be some way to differentiate between those who must go, or feel reasonably justified in going, and those who are just going down there to have a rip-roaring good time. I admit there can be a difference between the two, but surely there can be some method of granting the pension to those who feel that they must live away from Canada or who have some particular extenuating circumstances.
I again urge the minister to give consideration to it. On the looks basis it is not good if you have a lot of people going down there who do not need to go; but the cases I have mentioned are typical. Surely the populace themselves would say why, certainly he should be paid the pension. The thing that looks good is to pay it.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minister is making signs indicating that he has no idea what I am going to say. I want the minister to get more help from his colleagues in the cabinet, particularly for family allowances and old age security. These two schemes are economically sound and politically popular. In Canada we have very large surpluses of a great variety of commodities. On the one hand credit buying is snowballing so we have a situation that is getting out of control. The minister must have more funds available so that family allowances and old age security benefits can be increased in order that this very large sector of the Canadian economy may have increased purchasing power.
I do not want the item to go through without putting in my plug so that when the treasury board are making plans for next year's budget the minister will be able to claim that at least as much money as the Minister of National Defence has to spend
Supply-Health and Welfare should be made available to the Minister of National Health and Welfare.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Old age assistance, blind persons and disabled
persons allowances-
281. Administration. $115,630.
Mr. Bryce:: Mr. Chairman, 25 minutes past 9 on a Saturday night is not an ideal time to ask for concessions from the minister or to bring grievances to him, I am quite sure. I shall be very brief. I want to talk to the minister about the disabled persons' allowance. I do not think the act is working out the way it was meant to, because only certain people are getting it. I have taken the matter up with the minister; I have taken it up with the Winnipeg people. It seems there are still a lot of disabled people who do not come within the terms of the act. I put a question on the order paper some time ago in which I asked how many applications had been received from Manitoba up to May 31. The reply was 2,130.


Murdo William Martin: It is over 2,200 now.


William Scottie Bryce: Well we shall just stick to the May 31 date. I have those figures in my mind at the present time. Up to that time 371 people had been granted the pension. Thirty-three people had been granted a partial pension, and 670 were refused. That leaves a backlog of 1,056 who have had no consideration yet. Perhaps the minister will tell us why all these people have not been before the panel? Perhaps he needs two panels instead of one.
This is the trouble. There may be one man on one side of the road who has a son or daughter disabled and he does not get the pension for that boy or girl. On the other side of the road there is a person who gets it. The man on the one side of the road keeps his disabled son and also contributes to the allowance received by the other one on the other side of the road who is getting the pension. These things will have to be straightened out.
A couple of weeks ago I had occasion to take up the case of a man who could neither read nor write. He does not know his own name. He never went to school. He lives with a brother who is looking after him. They applied for a pension but were turned down. The reason they were turned down was that this man could bring home the cows from the pasture, carry in wood and follow simple orders. As I said before, he cannot read or write. He has to have his name on a label on his clothes to save the police a lot of trouble picking him up. If he does bring the cows home he has enough sense to open the gate and follow them. It is not a matter of his bringing the cows home.
6304	-	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


William Scottie Bryce: Hon. members may laugh but it is an awfully serious business to have this happen to someone in one's family. If this government has been good enough to enact a pension for these people I want to see the thing evenly divided so the people who are entitled to it will get it.
I can understand that somebody who has some sense, who can do a little work, can go to the village for groceries and that sort of thing, would be of some use. But here is a man who has been of no earthly use since the day he was bom. Somebody has to look after him. His mother and father are gone. The brother is looking after him. This is a man who should come under the act.
I do not want to get in wrong with hon. members by taking too long, but I appeal to the minister. When we come back in January, bring this legislation before parliament. This legislation has never been debated in the house. Up to the present time the regulations have all been made by the department. Let us have this legislation before us and give it a good keel-hauling.


Murdo William Martin: The regulations are made by the provinces and the federal government together.


William Scottie Bryce: The provinces are no more free from guilt than the minister. If you both have had to do with the making of the law, well, the two of you can improve on it. I think the panel in Manitoba is much too strict. I think they are like the lawyers in this house. They will hold out for a comma or a semi-colon.


An hon. Member:: Steady.


William Scottie Bryce: Now we are getting the doctors in the same class. If they say something they stick together by hook or by crook. You have to use a lot of common sense when you are administering legislation of this kind. I hope the minister will do something for the people of the dominion as far as that is concerned. It is the people who have to raise them, look after them and clothe them who need the consideration.


Murdo William Martin: I thank my hon. friend for his suggestion.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words about the position of blind persons in Canada. I know it will probably be small consolation to the minister if I remind him that it was not too long ago that we had Bill No. 350 before the house, which was an act to amend the Blind Persons Act. That bill went through the


house with a minimum of discussion. I am quite sure from what information has come to me that the passage of that bill undoubtedly was welcomed by the people of Canada who are unfortunate enough to be sightless.
The particular matter which I want to raise revolves around a principle which has been termed a guiding allowance without a means test to people who are blind. I do not profess to be any great authority on the problems of blind persons, but as far as I have been able to understand that suggestion it makes a lot of sense to me. As far as I can see it is based upon the premise that regardless of what other circumstances may be involved, economic, educational or otherwise, the person unfortunate enough to be without sight has to make an uphill fight.
It has been suggested to me that one of the most difficult problems facing a person who is blind or who becomes blind, in the matter of rehabilitating himself and making an attempt to become self-supporting, is the fact that under the present legislation we have in Canada he feels that in branching out and making that effort, and not being sure he is going to be able to maintain it, he may thereby lose his allowance.
I was interested in having drawn to my attention the fact that there are some countries in the world which have accepted the principle about which I am speaking, Sweden and Denmark being two of them. An article which I have before me written by someone familiar with the conditions there points out, among other things, that in those two countries a sharp line is drawn between economic support to secure the maintenance of needy people and economic compensation granted to lessen the special expenses imposed by blindness.
That simply points up the matter I have mentioned, that people who are blind have a starting point in life behind those of us who are blessed with normal sight; and it also verifies that in those countries they subscribe to the suggestion that this is one means of giving to blind people the necessary assurance and encouragement to make an effort to become self-supporting. I am raising this point now without attempting to elaborate on it at any great length, because I feel that it should be receiving consideration when we come to make the next forward legislative step in connection with the blind people of Canada.


Mr. Nowlan:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to concur in what the hon. member for Selkirk said a moment ago with respect to the regulations concerning the granting of disability pensions. I realize that this is a new

undertaking upon which we have embarked this year. We must have the co-operation of the provincial governments, and a set of regulations was drafted after consultation with those governments.
Like the hon. member for Selkirk I have encountered a number of these cases, and it is my opinion that either the regulations are too strict or their administration is too strict. I had a letter this morning from the parents of a boy I know very well. This boy is not able to go out alone and bring in the cows because he would probably get lost, but he can dress himself. Because he can dress himself it has been ruled that he is not permanently and totally disabled, and the parents are not receiving anything. I shall not elaborate on it at all, as I know the minister has a problem to deal with.
However, I hope that come next year, after a year's experience in the administration of these regulations, the minister will be able to call another conference and relax either the regulations or their administration so as to avoid many hardships of this kind.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Civil defence-
283. To provide for the civil defence program. $7,001,034.
John Borden Hamilton: Before I make any remarks I should like to ask the minister if he is going to make a statement on this important matter. The minister shakes his head, and as a rule that means no.
It is difficult to evaluate civil defence. The verdict as to its final effect is a matter for history. Perhaps 50 years hence we shall know whether it was the most unnecessary or the most necessary expenditure that could have been made. But this can be said, that those of us who stand here today and consider civil defence in Canada find it essentially in an unsatisfactory condition.
In making that remark I want to make a distinction respecting the civil defence organization as such. This organization contains a great many devoted people who put a great deal of voluntary effort into this operation. In general we can perhaps say that the civil defence organization as such has achieved a great deal.
But after all civil defence is not essentially an organization of a few thousand people; it is a matter of public preparedness for attack. It is in that field primarily that I feel our civil defence is unsatisfactory, because it is in that field that we find almost complete apathy on the part of the general public. In order to find out why that apathy exists and
Supply-Health and Welfare what corrective measures might be taken to deal with it, I think we might for a moment look at civil defence.
In world war II civil defence was essentially a matter of rescue, fire fighting, first aid and that type of thing. For the first few years afterward after the end of world war II we thought of civil defence in terms of atomic weapons, and our thinking was essentially along the same lines as in world war II; that is rescue, fire prevention, first aid with the addition of provision for individual protection, the fact that one must go underground where you were at the time of the warning signal.
When the world learned of the H-bomb and its effects there was a complete line of demarcation between the old and the new concepts of civil defence. The considerations I have already mentioned had to be laid to one side, and civil defence had to focus on mass evacuation of cities. There was no other solution. There was no other civil defence measure, with the advent of the H-bomb, which ranked in importance with this matter of the evacuation of the cities. Canada, and particularly the Department of National Health and Welfare, did not grasp that important concept in time. Whilst in recent weeks and months they have begun to think and work along those lines, they have been pitifully and unreasonably far behind- I am trying not to use too strong words; perhaps the strongest that would be appropriate would be that they have been painfully far behind-the United States.
I want to demonstrate the situation as briefly as I can by taking excerpts from three speeches delivered before the congress of the Canadian federation of mayors and municipalities in Windsor on the 30th of August, 1954. The interesting thing about these speeches is that one was delivered by the Minister of National Health and Welfare, who heads our civil defence program; the second was delivered by his deputy, General Worthington, who is in charge of the program; and the third was delivered by Mr. Val Peterson, who is the federal civil defence administrator of the United States.
Let us take Mr. Peterson first, because he gives the United States position. In his speech he says:
In June a year ago-
That was in June of 1953.
-I began urging publicly that states and cities start planning for evacuation and public tests of evacuation.
In the face of the increased destructive capacity of hydrogen bombs, planned evacuation of cities- as a new dimension in civil defence-now becomes an urgent necessity. We recognize that evacuation of people from large cities poses staggering prob-

Supply-Health and Welfare lems requiring careful analysis and intensive leadership by civil authorities in each of the target areas.
The fact that evacuation is difficult or inconvenient, however, does not detract from the equally evident fact that we must have planned evacuation or millions of North Americans will die unnecessarily in the event of attack.
On that same platform that same day appeared the Minister of National Health and Welfare. The closest approximation to even a suggestion that mass evacuation of cities was a primary consideration in civil defence in Canada I find in his speech when he says:
Consideration will have to be given to the strategic and tactical deployment of civil defence forces. This means that, when the early warning is given, the civil defence workers might be pulled out to the periphery of the city so that they would be ready to move back in to carry out their essential rescue work once the bomb had been dropped.
In other words even at that point, one year after the United States had commenced talking and planning and working for mass evacuation, the department here in Canada had not faced up to this situation or taken any concrete steps to meet it. In fact they were not even thinking, according to the minister's speech, in terms of mass evacuation of cities. We find General Worthington saying essentially the same thing on the same platform on the same day. General Worthington said:
The advent of the so-called hydrogen bomb has made it necessary to make a new assessment. Virtually the whole of Canada has now become a target area, with a number of critical or potential aiming points, but every town, village and hamlet will have a part to play and it is of vital importance that there be an organization set up in all these places. This also means that there must be plans for the dispersal of population-either tactically or strategically, or both. Right now plans are being made to enable tactical dispersal in the event of a yellow warning.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Would the hon. member permit me to point out that a month after that we had our first evacuation in St. John's, Newfoundland. Eight days after the particular speech to which my hon. friend referred,
I did make a statement on evacuation.


William McLean Hamilton: That is the point, however, which I am trying to make. We have the United States director of civil defence speaking on this platform with these other two gentlemen and referring to his plan and his public statements made in June, 1953, one year and two months before this meeting. I suggest, and I do not think I am being unkind, that the Canadian government and the Canadian civil defence organization have not yet faced up fully to the concept of mass evacuation.
I feel that this bolsters and proves my point that here in Canada we have been very far behind what is necessary in the business of proper civil defence in terms of the H-bomb.


Even today-and here I come to the reason for what I feel is public apathy-the civil defence organization under the direction of the minister does not seem to be placing proper emphasis or making sufficient progress in this field of planned evacuation. After all, it is the public we want to influence. As I pointed out earlier, it does not matter what a fine civil defence organization we have, what beautiful plans we have or how well trained our civil defence workers are, if the public-the millions of people who live in cities in Canada-are not civil defence conscious and are not prepared to move, and move in the right direction at the right time. Saturday Night of April 16 said this, commenting on this question of plans and their relationship to public apathy:
Faced with the situation in which government spokesmen say something must be done and the public declines to do it, it is not invariably true that the public is right, but it is much more likely to be true that the government spokesmen have failed to find the right approach to the public mind. The average man is not really convinced that there can be nothing in civil defence, that he is doomed to sit and await events with folded hands. What he is looking for are plans that make sense to him. Public apathy can only mean that the present answers that have been given to all the questions from the public leave it very sceptical of the quality of the minds that provide them. The answers seem to make sense only to those who put them out, and even this, sometimes, seems to be a charitable assumption.
There are similar observations in the rest of that article. The department, feeling rather aggrieved by the article, I should imagine, prepare what they feel is a reply, and it is extremely well written by their senior information officer, Mr. Harvey Adams. Whilst I cannot agree in toto with Mr. Adams' observations in the article, I have a great deal of respect for him as an information officer and for the job he is doing. I am not going to read from that article except one paragraph. It appears in the June 11 issue of Saturday Night. The paragraph to which I refer concerns evacuation and reads as follows:
Civil defence planning in Canada is based on one hard inescapable fact of the hydrogen age: the only way to survive is not to be there when it happens. In an H-bomb attack, therefore, a city has two alternatives

evacuate or die.
I am not going to comment on the department's position as set forth in this article because I might perhaps be biased. Instead I am going to read a comment on it from the editorial pages of the Montreal Star. Here is a newspaper which is essentially sympathetic to the government, a newspaper which, like all Montreal newspapers has, I think, done its utmost to support civil defence in Montreal.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Hear, hear.


John Borden Hamilton: There are certain sentences which are not pertinent, but here is what the editorial has to say about the matter:
On the page opposite this there appears an article written for Saturday Night by Harvey W. Adams, director of information services for the Department of National Health and Welfare. It is an authorized article. General Worthington, the co-ordinator of civil defence, says "it is one of the latest and most complete summaries of civil defence thinking in Canada". In these circumstances everyone will wish to read it carefully and critically to see how far we have come along the road to survival.
The reader will quite early in the piece come upon this statement-
Then it gives the quotation regarding the hydrogen bomb and evacuation of cities which I quoted earlier. Then the editorial continues:
This is a hard saying. If it is true the individual must at this point ask himself, "What do I do? How do I evacuate the city? Where do I go? What do I do when I get there?"
Do any real plans exist? A little further on in the article the writer anticipates just this objection. It is absolutely untrue, he writes, to say that civil defence has no definite plan for an H-bomb disaster. "At the federal level, civil defence has worked out a basic plan to save life under H-bomb attack."
At the federal level-the grass roots plan is to be an adaptation of the federal level plan "to the local circumstances of each individual city, but in a number of cities this individual planning is either beginning or well under way."
This offers no comfort to the man in Montreal who asks what he is supposed to do to save himself and his family. It is true that Montreal as a city is not co-operating wholeheartedly with the civil defence people. But even if it were, would the individual now know what is expected of him? Toward the end of his article Mr. Adams says that the first thing every citizen can do in civil defence is to learn everything he can to protect himself and his family in case disaster should strike. But where, and how?
It does not do to be defeatist about civil defence, but it is difficult not to be in the face of a complete absence of effort to tell the individual what he should do. By the time planning on the federal level has sifted down to the individuals in the cities, either the emergency will have passed or the bombs will have fallen. If the threat is serious and plans to meet it equally serious, something more than voluntary local co-operation is required.
That is essentially the case against the civil defence organization of the federal government as such at present. What must be done is obvious-mass evacuation of cities. The fact that the public must be made aware of this is equally obvious; but because of the absence of any concrete plan or any particular specific information for the citizens of our major cities the public are apathetic, and they will continue to be apathetic until such time as the civil defence organization of the government comes forward with specific plans that can be laid in the hands of the public so that an individual living on a specific street at a specific number will know what he has to do.
Supply-Health and Welfare


Paul Joseph James Martin: I know my hon. friend is interested in the subject, but may I point out to him that we can now place plans for evacuation in the hands of any major community. The city of Calgary has those plans in fact now, and on the 22nd of September it will carry out the largest evacuation of a city of that size on the continent. Here are the documents. The plans exist. The city of Calgary has them, and they are available to any other city. I point that out because I expect that the city authorities will read what my hon. friend is saying and saying so well, and I want that to be understood.


William McLean Hamilton: Thank you very much. Perhaps the minister would have been wiser to have made a statement when I invited him to do so at the beginning. He had the opportunity. Let me say-and this is another essential criticism-that I am not talking about some very highly theoretical plan for the evacuation of a city which the department may have. I am concerned with the man who is living at 2044 Bay street, Toronto, if there is such a number, and what he has to do to get himself out of Toronto when he is told to do so in advance of the dropping of the H-bomb. We now know that if he is there when the H-bomb drops he is not very likely to remain alive. Even if I do come from Montreal I would not wish that on anybody from Toronto. That is a concession to my hon. friend from Broadview.
The minister talks about detailed plans. Let me tell him what I think of some of his detailed plans. I do not think they are too good. In a series of articles in the Montreal Gazette some time ago-very good articles, by the way-


Murdo William Martin: Very helpful.


John Borden Hamilton: -ten
major routes were listed for evacuation purposes from the city of Montreal. Someone must have picked these routes out of the air. Traffic probably will be going hell bent for leather along every one of these evacuation routes, using every available lane, and as two of the major routes they give us Decarie boulevard and Cote de Liesse road. The interesting thing is that Decarie boulevard and Cote de Liesse road are intersecting roads, so that when one is in use the other one cannot possibly be in use. Then they give us as another evacuation route from the city Metropolitan boulevard. Anyone who knows the city of Montreal knows that Cote de Liesse road runs right into Metropolitan boulevard.
Therefore we have three so-called evacuation routes from the city of Montreal, two
6308	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare
of which intersect and one of which also runs into another evacuation route, thus reducing their efficiency as such to almost nil. That is not a very sound indication that the evacuation plans for major cities are anything on which we can place very much dependence.
Turning to the Montreal situation for a moment, I have no great sympathy, and I want to say this publicly in the house, for the attitude of the Montreal city council and its executive committee so far as civil defence is concerned. I am not satisfied that this government has done everything it might, but I regret extremely that the executive committee withdrew from civil defence as abruptly and completely as it did. On the other hand, I feel that the government should not be withdrawing civil defence supplies from Montreal at the present time. According to my information there is some $500,000 worth of material and supplies including five pumpers, two rescue trucks and some $400,000 in medical supplies, all of which are being taken out of the city by the civil defence people, according to information communicated to me some days ago in the house by the minister in answer to a question. I feel that the material should be left there, and that every effort should be made to come to some working agreement with the city.
But, Mr. Chairman-and I think this is my final point on civil defence-a working agreement with the municipalities in so far as civil defence is concerned has to take cognizance of the fact that the municipalities, by and large, cannot afford to put money into this proposition, despite the fact that it is vitally important. I am not going to go into the details of the financial position of the municipalities. The minister knows, and the house knows, that every municipality in Canada has its funds strained to the uttermost. It seems to me that the government, having gone far along the road in the provision of services and supplies, would be well advised to take that final step.
Let us consider Montreal. Their civil defence has ground to a stop because of the need for $60,000 which previously had been supplied by the city council. As I have said,
I have no sympathy for the elimination of that vote by the city council, but I would point out that the lives of approximately two million people are being put in jeopardy today and will remain in jeopardy purely because of an altercation over the services of a very few men and the provision of $60,000 in cash to retain the services of those men.
I must say in all fairness that the minister has made every effort to come to an agreement with the municipal authorities in Montreal. I do not lay the entire blame at


his door, nor do I lay the entire blame at their door. Certainly as a resident of that city, and one who realizes so keenly that when the day comes there will be no time for debate in this house, there will be no time for consideration as to how it should be done, I ask that something be done. There will be only about three hours which will spell the difference between life and death for millions of people across Canada, depending upon where the blow should fall.
I think it is high time, first, that the department came out with plans which were understandable, concrete and realizable for the use of the citizens of this country; second, that they realize the position of the municipalities-and I speak not only for Montreal but for many others-and their inability to provide funds for this work. The department should push the project forward and make whatever adjustments are necessary to make civil defence really effective in Canada instead of only a skeleton, a very sound skeleton to many devoted people but a skeleton at the moment without any flesh.


Mr. Churchill:: Ten o'clock, Mr. Chairman; it has been a long day and a long week.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre would not care to go on for a while?


Gordon Minto Churchill: No. I am very anxious to hear the minister on this subject. I know he is worn out after a long day in the house discussing health, and after such a long day we must look after our own health. This has been a 45-hour week, and we started morning sessions on June 9th. After all, I think we should quit.


Paul Joseph James Martin: If my hon. friend would like me to say something-


Gordon Minto Churchill: No, I do not want to hear the minister tonight. In fact I have some things to say on civil defence myself.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I had hoped the Leader of the Opposition, who has been most genial all day, would perhaps persuade the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre to accept my reasonable suggestion.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Ten o'clock, Mr. Chairman.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported, read the second time and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, on Monday we shall take veterans affairs, public works, mines and technical surveys and labour.


Howard Charles Green: Is the minister not going on with these estimates?


Walter Edward Harris: No.


[Stage Direction]
It being eight minutes after ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
tThe following Items were passed In committee of supply]:

[Stage Direction]
A-Public archives-
343.	General administration and technical services,
[Stage Direction]
B-National library-
344.	General administration, $119,097.
345.	Payment to the national library purchase account for the purpose of acquiring books, in conformity with section 12 of the National Library Act, $40,000.
A-Public archives-
701.	General administration and technical services -further amount required, $9,000.
B-National library-
702.	General administration-further amount required, $11,290.

[Stage Direction]
242.	Administration, production and distribution of films and other visual materials, $3,193,730.
243.	Acquisition of equipment, $150,700.
244.	To provide for the dismantling, conversion and installation of existing equipment, acquisition of new equipment, removal expenses and other costs related to the transfer of the national film board to new building, $665,290.

[Stage Direction]
Citizenship-
642.	Citizenship registration branch - further amount required, $167,435.
Indian affairs branch-
Welfare of Indians-
643.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $350,000.
Education-
644.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $40,000.
B-National Gallery of Canada-
645.	Administration, operation and maintenance, including industrial design division-further amount required, $11,230.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
245.	Departmental administration, $1,246,846. National health branch-
Health services-
246.	National health branch-administration, $170,050.
247.	Administration of the quarantine and leprosy acts, $403,726.
248.	Immigration medical services, $1,151,340.
Supply
249.	Sick mariners treatment services, $1,003,926.
Laboratory of hygiene-
250.	Operation and maintenance, $558,214.
251.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $45,000.
252.	Public health engineering, $216,005.
253.	Occupational health, $298,391.
254.	Civil service health, $312,283.
255.	Epidemiology, $66,928.
256.	Administration of the Food and Drugs and the Proprietary or Patent Medicine Acts, $1,277,082.
257.	Administration of the Opium and Narcotic Drugs Act, $190,710.
Indians and Eskimos health services-
258.	Operation and maintenance, $15,606,781.
259. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $1,406,950.
260.	Grants to hospitals which care for Indians and Eskimos, $54,000.
Northern health services-
261.	Operation and maintenance, $65,230.
262. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $750,000.
263.	Special technical services, $621,859.
264.	Health insurance studies and administration of the general health grants, $103,531.
General health grants-
265.	To authorize and provide for general health grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates and under terms and conditions approved by the governor in council including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $48,296,137, $31,750,000.
Grants to health organizations-
266.	Canadian mental health association, $10,000.
267.	Health League of Canada, $10,000.
268.	Canadian public health association, $5,000.
269.	Canadian national institute for the blind $45,000.
270.	L'Association Canadienne Frangaise des Aveugles, $6,000.
271.	L'lnstitut Nazareth de Montreal, $4,050.
272.	Montreal association for the blind, $4,050.
273.	Canadian tuberculosis association, $20,250.
274.	Victorian order of nurses. $13,100.
275.	St. John ambulance association, $10,000.
276.	Canadian red cross, $10,000.
277.	Canadian paraplegic association, $15,000.
278.	Grant to the Canadian medical association to assist in defraying the expense of a joint meeting of the Canadian medical association and the British medical association to be held in Toronto in 1955 $25,000.
Welfare branch-
279.	Welfare branch administration, $54,610.
Family allowances and old age security______
280.	Administration, $2,743,441.
Old age assistance, blind persons and disabled persons allowances-
281.	Administration, $115,630.
282.	Grant to Canadian welfare council, $28,000.
[Stage Direction]
Supply
National health branch-
Health services-
Laboratory of hygiene-
684.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $153,594.
685.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $30,000.
686.	Occupational health-further amount required, $35,000.
687.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $91,295.
General health grants-
688.	To authorize and provide for general health
grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further
amount required including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make additional commitments for the current year not to exceed $4,982,156, $2,000,000.
Welfare branch-
689.	To provide: (a) in respect of the fiscal year
1954-	55 a reduction of $45,837,905.05 in the amount owing by the old age security fund pursuant to section 11 of the Old Age Security Act, representing the amount of temporary loans made by the minister of finance to the fund during the fiscal year 1953-54; and (b) in respect of the fiscal year
1955-	56 a reduction in the amount owing by the old age security fund pursuant to section 11 of the Old Age Security Act, representing the amount of temporary loans made by the Minister of Finance to the fund during the fiscal year 1954-55 estimated at, $63,300,000.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, July 18, 1955