1956-07-02

[Stage Direction]
89th anniversary of confederation
Right Hon. C. D. Howe {Acting Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, today Canadians are celebrating the 89th anniversary of the birthday of Canadian confederation. I should like to suggest that we follow precedents established in recent years when the house happened to be in session on this day and stand and sing together "O Canada" and "God Save the Queen".
Whereupon the members of the house rose and sang
O Canada and
God Save the Queen HOUSE OF COMMONS

Mr. Speaker:: I should like to make a statement to the house. On Friday last the Leader of the Opposition rose on a question of privilege in connection with the publication in a newspaper of two paragraphs extracted from a private letter that I wrote to a free lance writer who occasionally contributes an article to the Montreal newspaper La Patrie. Notwithstanding the fact, a well-known fact, easy to verify by those who do not know that Mr. Cinq-Mars, the author of the article in question, is only a free lance writer, the Ottawa Journal in an editorial which appeared in Saturday's edition said I wrote to the "editor" of the newspaper La Patrie.
On Friday last the Leader of the Opposition contended that if the expression "my accusers falsified the facts for their own political ends" was used in the house it would be the duty of the Speaker to call for a retraction immediately. In its Saturday editorial the Ottawa Journal supported the contention of the Leader of the Opposition in this regard. My view, well-supported, I think, that the expression would be unparliamentary only if it read "my accusers deliberately falsified the facts", was completely disregarded. I had referred
to a recent case at page 5382 of Hansard of June 26, 1956. The hon. member for Kootenay East said this:
The leader of the C.C.F. party, answering an interjection by myself, at the time he was attempting to distort the facts as he has in the past, saying that we were responsible for the breaking of the rules-
The hon. member for The Battlefords (Mr. Campbell) rose on a point of order and asked that the expression be withdrawn. I ruled that the hon. member should indicate that:
. . . he had no intention whatever of accusing the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar of deliberately distorting the facts in this house.
On June 4 last while the hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch) was speaking, the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) rose on a question of privilege and said, as reported at page 4651 of Hansard:
The hon. member for Acadia, Mr. Speaker, has just made two remarks which are a grave offence against privilege and a falsification of the fact.
And he was not asked to withdraw.
On May 30, 1956, the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. Bryce) as reported at page 4462 of Hansard said the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Mr. Pickersgill) had deliberately deceived him. I asked the hon. member for Selkirk:
* . . because he knows it is against the rules to say that an hon. member of this house has deliberately deceived another hon. member, to take the corrective steps.
On February 16, 1956, as reported at page 1268 of Hansard, while the hon. member for Regina City (Mr. Ellis) was speaking the hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Tucker) rose on a question of privilege and said:
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. I suppose nobody should pay any attention to the ravings of the hon. gentleman opposite, but after all, when he deliberately misrepresents what I said,
I suggest that I should draw that fact to the attention of the house.
I ruled that the hon. member for Rosthern:
. . . should not indicate that the hon. member for Regina City is deliberately misrepresenting what he said.
And Mr. Speaker Macdonald made rulings also to the same effect. Some of his rulings appear in Hansard, volume I, 1952-53, at pages 271, 759 and 760. Therefore I maintain that the expression I used, namely "my accusers falsified the facts", is not an unparliamentary expression. It contains no charge of dishonesty or of insincerity. During the
5554	HOUSE OF
Mr. Speaker-Tendered Resignation debate on the unanimous report of the committee on procedure adopted at the last session, several hon. members expressed the view that as long as there were no accusations of insincerity or dishonesty, strong language should go unchecked. During this session I have taken into account the remarks that were then made.
At page 5990 of Hansard, volume VI, 1955, the hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker) had this to say on the subject:
We do not want to turn parliament into an afternoon society meeting. If we have strong opinions we want to express them. We do not want to engage in personalities as such, but if we allow our rules or Speakers' decisions to place members of parliament in the position where if they use a strong expression they have to withdraw it parliament will become nothing but a mere debating society.
After all, strong men have strong opinions. I think our trend in the last 15 or 20 years has been to reduce the standard of debate in parliament Jsy the insistence on the letter of decorum. We do not carry our ill feelings outside of the House of Commons, and the things that we say, as long as they do not impute personal wrongdoing or lack of integrity, should be permitted in the House of Commons.
Notwithstanding what has happened during the pipe-line debate and the motion of censure that followed, no hon. member had ever suggested that I should resign. I may say, however, that I intended to resign more than once during that period for the purpose of regaining my full freedom of speech both in and outside this house. I had received communications and I had an exchange of views with some of the 35 members who had voted in favour of the motion of censure on Friday, June 8 last. It appeared to me that time might bring about a situation by virtue of which it might be possible for me to carry on at least until the prorogation of this session. When paragraphs of a private letter of mine were published in a newspaper I knew I had to take immediately the course I had in mind to follow.
In public life all men have had the experience of being quoted when they spoke off the record, or of being misquoted. I realize, however, that if the accident happens to one who is occupying my position, the house to which I am responsible-and I am responsible to the house alone-may ask for an account of the incident. That was done last Friday. It appeared to me that the hon. members of the opposition exaggerated the importance of the incident and since they were accusing me of improper conduct and of having used unparliamentary language I felt that the traditional parliamentary recourse in such cases should be taken, a recourse which I think is a protection for the house and for
IMr. Speaker.]

the Chair, namely that a motion dealing with the accusations should be placed on the order paper, debated and decided. It was said in the press that my language at that point was confusing. Here is what I said, as reported at page 5514 of Hansard of June 29, 1956:
I want to tell hon. members that ever since I was appointed on November 12, 1953 my resignation has always been at the disposal of the house. If one wishes to move a motion, after 48 hours' notice, stating the reasons why and concluding that the Speaker be removed I will resign immediately.
Later, in my office, I inserted the references to the citations of Beauchesne's third edition, citations 127, 225 and 46. For the insertion of these references it has been said by the parliamentary correspondent of the Montreal Gazette, in an article appearing on the editorial page for Monday, July 2, 1956:
He is open to attack for tampering with Hansard.
All Speakers have inserted the references to the authorities interspersed with their remarks, whether in Hansard or in the Journals because, indeed, it is their duty to do so. Standing order 12 states:
In explaining a point of order or practice, he shall state the standing order or authority applicable to the case.
When I said "If one wishes to move a motion" some understood that as soon as the notice of motion appeared on the order paper I would resign. Once a motion is moved it is in the possession of the house and must be disposed of. Citation 322 of Beauchesne's third edition says:
Every matter is determined in the House of Commons upon a question put by the Speaker on a proposition submitted by a member and resolved either in the affirmative or negative as the case may be. A motion is a proposal made by one member, in accordance with certain well established rules, that the house do something or order something to be done, or express an opinion with regard to some matter or thing. The proposal is not a motion until it has been actually moved.
Now, I thought that I was entitled to have the house judge my actions. I have been in public life since 1945. My strongest critics have said that until the pipe-line debate I had acquired a good reputation as Speaker of this house. I have a family, friends and a constituency. For their sakes, as well as for my political future, I thought that I was entitled to get the judgment of the house on the incident referred to last Friday. Otherwise, notwithstanding the fact that I had admittedly a good record until the pipe-line debate and that the motion of censure arising out of the pipe-line debate was defeated by the house by a vote of 109 against 35, would it not appear, if I were to resign now without a judgment of the house, that because a newspaperman published extracts of a

private letter of mine, I have done worse than anything I might have been accused of before?
Now, last Friday the Leader of the Opposition, speaking about the above-mentioned paragraphs that were published, concluded by asking the Acting Prime Minister to dissolve the house. I do not wish my actions to be part of the many considerations which must be weighed before such a grave decision is taken. Furthermore, I am anxious to regain my full freedom of speech. I realize that the Prime Minister is away. Were I to resign today the house would have to adjourn immediately. The Senate being adjourned for three weeks, it would have to be called back in session and the presence of His Excellency the Governor General or his deputy would be required for the approval of the new Speaker.
I place now my resignation before the house to take effect at the pleasure of the house. I would wish that it be accepted as soon as possible.
This is my farewell speech. I shall always remember with pleasure my term of office as Speaker. I have enjoyed every moment of it, even the most difficult parts, because I know that deep down in their hearts members understood certainly much more perhaps than they were indicating.
In private I had conversations and exchanges of views and I know that, notwithstanding what has happened, I retain in this house the friendship of many more members than one would like perhaps to believe. I must have enjoyed every moment of it. I have never been avoidably absent since I became Speaker. I have been in this house every sitting day since November 12, 1953.
Now, I have no animosity whatever against anyone. Throughout my term of office, I assure you, I have never acted, nor have I ever been motivated, by any other interests but the best interests of the house itself. Never was I motivated by any partisan feelings; and my conscience is perfectly clear. Had it not been as clear as it is, I do not think I could have gone through all the difficulties that came my way in the past month.
Now, I thank you very much for the privilege and the honour that you have given me of serving you as Speaker of the house and I want to assure you that as long as I live I shall never forget this honour that you have given me and this kind gesture on your part. Unintentionally I might have done something wrong or I might have done something offensive to hon. members. I want to ask them-and I do say this is the last favour, if I may be deserving of a last favour-that, if I have done something offensive or anything wrong to any hon. member, an act of oblivion
Trade-British Caribbean Area will be passed. Gentlemen, thank you very much.


Righi Hon. C. D. Howe (Acting Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure we are all moved by your remarks. I appreciate your forbearance in not pressing the matter you have raised in the absence of the Prime Minister. As we all know, the Prime Minister is in London attending to Her Majesty's business, and I think it is a courtesy observed by all commonwealth parliaments not to raise difficulties affecting the office of the Prime Minister in his absence.
I sincerely hope that hon. members will be prepared to consider your statement and not raise the matter of the office of Speaker until the Prime Minister is in his seat, which I hope will be next Monday. I telephoned him this morning, and I find he hopes to be able to leave London next Friday evening at the conclusion of the final session of the imperial conference. When he arrives here on Monday he, as leader of the House of Commons, will deal with the matter that the Speaker has raised at this time.


Mr. J. H. Ferguson (Simcoe North):: I believe that the Liberal government has crucified one of the finest men that was ever here. One of the finest young men who ever walked into the House of Commons has been put on the cross and crucified by this government.


Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: You will pay for that.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: I will not pay for it; you
cannot make me pay for it.



BRITISH CARIBBEAN AREA


Clarence Decatur Howe: I take pleasure in announcing a trade development in the British Caribbean which will further assist Canadian exports to that area. We have now been informed that the British Caribbean countries will place apples, leaf tobacco, chemical fertilizers and calcium carbide under world open general licence effective today, July 2, 1956. This means that these products will henceforth be permitted import from Canada without restrictions. These products are of importance to many Canadian exporters. With this further liberalization, a large proportion of our exports to the area are now completely free of restriction.
Hon. members will appreciate that we have over the years maintained close and continuing consultations with British Caribbean countries and the United Kingdom with the object of developing our trade with that area to the greatest possible extent. In these circumstances this additional measure of trade

Inquiries of the Ministry liberalization is especially welcome and will serve to strengthen further the close and traditional commercial ties which exist between those countries and Canada. In 1955 Canadian exports to the area amounted to $42 million. These exports are increasing this year. With the new federation which is emerging in the British Caribbean we look forward to a further expansion of mutually advantageous trade.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 87-Mr. Knight:
For a copy of all correspondence during 1956 between the Prime Minister or the government and the Canadian school trustees association, relating to a request for an interview with the cabinet by a delegation from the association to discuss school finance in Canada.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 88-Mr. Robinson (Bruce):
For a copy of all letters, telegrams and other documents, dated from January 1, 1954 to date, in the possession of the Department of Transport, with respect to the appointment of lighthouse keepers at (a) Port Stanley; (b) Port Dalhousie; (c) Niagara-on-the-Lake.
Mr. Marler:: Mr. Speaker, I have no objection to the adoption of the motion subject to the usual reservation with regard to privileged correspondence.


Mr. Robinson (Bruce):: Do I understand "privileged correspondence" to refer to correspondence between members of the department?


George Carlyle Marler: Yes, correspondence between officials or members of the department would be regarded as privileged.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion subject to the remarks made by the minister?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. S. Barnett (Comox-Alberni):: I should like to direct a question to the Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs. Perhaps he may wish to take the question as notice. By what authority is the United States air force forbidding Canadian civilians employed by them at Newfoundland bases to participate in Canadian political activities, as reported in the Sunday Herald, St. John's,

Newfoundland, under date of July 1, 1956? Is this not an improper interference with the rights of Canadian citizens by a foreign power?


Hon. W. E. Harris (Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs):: I shall take the question as notice.


FREIGHT RATES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. R. Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, on Friday last I asked the Minister of Transport if the government would consider rescinding the order of the board of transport commissioners allowing a 7 per cent increase in freight rates. I wonder whether he has a reply at this time.


George Carlyle Marler: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say that since last Friday I have had the opportunity of reading the order to which the hon. gentleman has just referred, and I should like merely to read one paragraph from it, although there are quite a number in the order. This, as hon. members will recall, is the order of the board of transport commissioners which was rendered on Monday, June 18, 1956, and it reads in part as follows:
And whereas the board has also concluded-on the basic principles of its uniform accounting and cost finding regulations applicable to the two major railways of Canada from January 1, 1956-that, inter alia, after making due allowance for the factors of potential increases in traffic volume and potential savings in operating expenses, the prospective net rail earnings of these applicant companies during the period from July 1, 1956, to the date of determination of the application herein following the adjourned hearing in September next, will be pro rata in principle, well within the limits which the board has heretofore found allowable in its judgments in general revenue cases in recent years, and that the interim increases hereby authorized which the board considers to be an irreducible minimum, will not enable the railways to recoup the said wage increases to non-operating employees incurred retroactively for the period prior to July 1 next, or any portion for any period of any operating wage increases now pending final settlement between the railways and their operating employees.
Mr. Speaker, it is not necessary to go into all of the relevant considerations which are set forth in the order but I may say that I have not the intention of recommending to the governor in council that, pursuant to section 53 of the Railway Act, that order to which I have just referred should be varied or rescinded.


Hazen Robert Argue: I wonder whether I might ask a supplementary question. Has the minister ' considered the request of the

Canadian Federation of Agriculture that agricultural products be exempt from any interim increase?


George Carlyle Marler: No, I have not considered that request. I think the hon. gentleman should realize that those who are not satisfied with the order have a right of appeal under the Railway Act and that, at the hearing to take place in September, there will be an opportunity for all those interested to present their viewpoints with regard to the rate increases which appear to be contemplated.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance and ask him whether he has any observation to make on a statement by Harry J. Long of Toronto, president of the National House Builders Association, to the effect that unless the government eases its tight money policy with respect to N.H.A. mortgages the end result will be unemployment in the building industry, higher house prices and damage to the economy. Has the minister given final consideration to this question, and does the government intend to see that interest is reduced to the end that the potentialities that are set forth by Mr. Long will not be achieved in this country?


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, last week I indicated that I would make a statement on this matter either on the orders of the day some day or on my estimates. I am in the course of preparing that statement. I would suit the convenience of hon. members but I think it is rather long for the orders of the day. However, I shall be glad to say something about this matter shortly. In the meantime, I may say that I have not seen the particular statement to which my hon. friend refers.



CANADA SHIPPING ACT


George Carlyle Marler: the second reading of Bill No. 349, to amend the Canada Shipping Act.


Mr. L. Langlois (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, this bill is largely of a technical character. Some clauses are the correction of errors which crept into the framing of the Canada Shipping Act of 1934. Other clauses bring
Canada Shipping Act
certain older provisions, which were carried' over from the Merchant Shipping Act of' 1894, into line with modern marine practice. Ocean-going vessels of modern construction, will benefit from the proposed amendment to the tonnage regulations, while operators: of small coasting vessels in our domestic trade will find it easier to comply with requirements as to certificates of those incharge of the navigation and of engines. The crews of certain commercial vessels, which at present have very little protection in the matter of safety precautions, will be accorded greater protection. The vast and ever-growing pleasure-boating public will have some protection against the foolhardly and irresponsible-minority.
Finally, our thousands of miles of coastline, including the shores of the great lakes,, will be protected against pollution by indiscriminate disposal of waste oil from ships.,
I do not intend to go into the details of the bill, but I deem it necessary at this stage to. make a brief explanation of its main features.
First, then, concerning those clauses having-to do with registry of ships. As hon. members are well aware, registration of ships is an important feature in maritime practice. The whole of part I of the Canada Shipping Act, comprising some 113 sections, is devoted to it. A ship's certificate of registry is her identity certificate, her passport in her jour-neyings to and fro in the commerce of the-world. The particulars set out in the certificate are accepted without question by government officials of foreign countries; the tonnage as shown is accepted wherever the ship may go as the basis for port charges, and the other-sundry charges which a ship must meet when she enters port. Registry is not only evidence of a ship's right to fly her national flag, but also establishes ownership title and gives the shipowner the right to invoke certain pro-, visions regarding limitation of liability.
The procedures of registration are nob. onerous, when they involve property amounting to hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions, of dollars in one vessel, but we feel they are hardly necessary in the case of very small vessels which never leave our own shores.
At present only vessels of less than 10 tons net tonnage are exempt from registry. The purpose of clause 2 of the bill is to increase this figure to 15 tons of net tonnage. On the other hand, the proposed amendment does not deprive a person of the privilege of registering a smaller vessel if he wishes to take this, trouble, in order to obtain any of the benefits, that flow from registration.

Canada Shipping Act
Clause 3 of the bill, proposing a new section of the act, may look somewhat formidable, but its purpose can be simply explained. Tonnage measurement is a vital part of registry procedure. Since most port charges are made on the net tonnage of the ship, the efforts of naval architects have always been directed to the design of ships with low net tonnage and high carrying capacity. As now provided in section 94 and in the seventh schedule, the net tonnage is arrived at by first measuring all the enclosed spaces in the ship to get the gross tonnage, then making certain deductions. One of the deductions is for the space required for the propelling power, and section 95 of the act lays down the rule governing the allowance that may be made on this account.
The United Kingdom government have already amended the British merchant shipping acts to bring this feature into line with modern construction, so that ship owners might reap a proportionate benefit in reduction of net tonnage, when modern machinery allows them to devote less space to the propelling power. They consulted us before doing so, and we undertook to take similar action in Canada at an appropriate time. If we do not, ships registered in Canada are at a disadvantage regarding tonnage, as compared with ships registered in the United Kingdom and elsewhere.
Clause 6 is designed to be of assistance to the fishing industry. In recent years it has been difficult to get fully certificated engineering personnel for fishing vessels and we have had to meet the situation by granting temporary permits in many cases.
There are quite a number of men available, who have reasonably good understanding of the duties required for certain types of engine room work, but apparently there is a shortage of men available who can pass the examination as fourth class engineers. Moreover, it does not appear necessary that the same requirements in this respect should apply to fishing vessels as to passenger or cargo vessels. Accordingly, this amendment, while maintaining the qualifications required for the chief engineer on fishing vessels, will provide for some relaxation in regard to the qualifications of additional engineering personnel, by creating a new category of watchkeeping engineer on a motor-driven fishing vessel for which modified standards will be established. Clause 8 is consequential upon clause 6 of the bill.
The department's sympathy with the difficulties experienced by the good mariners in our small domestic traders is evident in the amendments suggested in clauses 7 and 9 of the bill. Section 116 of the act sets out the grades and classes of certificates as master of

a steamship of under 150 tons in the home trade, inland waters and minor waters of Canada. Such a certificate may be obtained without prior service as mate, and does not call for the same standard of navigational and other technical knowledge as in the case of large vessels. When the existing provision was made, the vessels for which it was intended were all well under 150 tons gross. But of late years it has been found that the vessels, which are often constructed by the owner-masters themselves, without benefit of naval architectural assistance, have exceeded this critical tonnage quite considerably. We are of the opinion that this class of certificate should now be made available for vessels of up to 350 tons gross, and that holders of existing certificates should be granted the wider privilege. This will be accomplished by clause 7 of the bill.
Section 119 provides for certificates of service, which may be obtained by those seamen who may have lived their lives in small vessels on our coasts and in the St. Lawrence and who have demonstrated in a practical way their ability to command their own vessels, but who are handicapped by the lack of basic education. When the existing provision was made a time limit was included, and it was thought that the time provided would suffice to allow all interested seamen to become properly certificated. In this regard it appears that sufficient allowance was not made for the natural reluctance of the practical seaman, particularly when he is no longer young, to subject himself to any kind of examination, even the simple oral one which is all that is required in this instance. The amendment proposed in clause 9 of the bill gives the provision a continuing effect and widens its scope. It is hoped that in time, by a process of persuasion and education, all our domestic shipmasters will eventually become properly certificated under the act.
Clause 11 of the bill provides yet another concession to the small commercial vessel operator in a proposed amendment to section 128 of the act. This widens the scope of the temporary engineer's certificate which may be issued on the basis of practical training without the added requirement of technical training.
Clauses 12 to 17 of the bill have to do with licensed pilots. The first, which will permit temporary licences to be issued for a season of navigation or any other desirable period, is obvious, but hon. members may wish an explanation of the proposed amendments to sections 354, 356 and 357 of the act.
The previous wording was reasonable enough in the old days when a ship had no

communications with the shore and pilots remained on station outside a port waiting for the arrival of ships. Nowadays it is the practice for an incoming ship to radio in her expected time of arrival, and then a pilot goes out to meet her. The proposed wording is in line with modern practice.
A proposed amendment to subsection 3 of section 354 makes it an offence to act as a pilot without a licence or to employ an unlicensed pilot, in an established pilotage district. The change in the heading preceding section 354 will give this protection to pilots in all districts, whether or not the payment of pilotage dues is compulsory.
Such sanctions against the use of unlicensed pilots have long been a feature of pilotage laws in the United Kingdom, and are considered reasonable. Hon. members will understand that the proposed provisions do not affect the right of the master of a ship to do without a pilot. However, if he employs a pilot-that is, any person other than a member of his own crew-that person must hold a licence issued by the pilotage authority of the district.
Clauses 18 to 24 of the bill deal with safety measures which fall within the purview of steamship inspection. The amendments to sections 477 to 479 accord to the crews of non-self-propelled vessels and of vessels such as dredges, a certain measure of protection which they have not hitherto enjoyed, when they go more than 15 miles from land.
The amendment to subsection 3 of section 494 places sealing vessels in the same general category as fishing vessels and whaling vessels for the purposes of part VII of the act. This is important for the province of Newfoundland.
Clause 25 of the bill proposes a new part VIIA, entitled "Oil Pollution". In 1954 Canada was represented at an international conference on pollution of the sea by oil. The convention which resulted, and which is set out in clause 29 of the bill as a proposed fourteenth schedule to the act, is the first concrete attempt by the leading shipping nations of the world to stop dumping of waste oil from ships on the high seas. Certain zones of the oceans are set out where the dumping of waste oil will be prohibited. A fifty mile prohibited zone along the North American coast line will protect Canada in this regard. Provision is also made for the setting up of reception facilities at large ports where waste oil may be disposed of without contravening regulations. Hon. members will no doubt be aware of the very great concern which has been occasioned, particularly in the United
2,	1956	5559
Canada Shipping Act
Kingdom and western Europe, by the destruction of sea birds and the spoiling of the beaches by oil dumped from ships, perhaps far out at sea.
The problem has not yet reached serious proportions in this country, but prevention will be easier than cure. Accordingly, the government intends to ratify the convention. The new section 4 95A is proposed so that the necessary regulations may be made to implement the convention, and also to apply similar protective measures for the waters of the great lakes which are not covered by the convention. Officials of the department have been studying the problem as it exists on the great lakes and have discussed with our American friends the possibility of their taking parallel action at the appropriate time.
The convention as presently drafted and our proposed legislation do not provide a final and complete answer to this problem. In fact, we would have preferred to see an international agreement forbidding any pollution of the sea by oil from ships. This was the first major attempt to deal with this problem on an internationally agreed basis that has shown any measure of success. As may have been expected, at the international conference widely varying points of view were presented, with the result that the final convention represents to some extent a compromise between these varying points of view. It does, however, go some distance toward meeting the objective of complete prevention which we hope can be achieved in due course.
Clause 27 also merits a full explanation. This would amend that section of the act which applies to the operation of small boats and, in particular, pleasure boats. Since the end of the war there has been a huge increase in the amount of pleasure boating in Canada; a great deal of this has taken place in the field of power boats and has, of course, been greatly accelerated by the development of the outboard motor. There are, for example, over 36,000 power boats registered in Canada on the great lakes with engines of 10 horsepower or more and we believe an even greater number of lower power.
The department has been in receipt of many representations asking it to take further action to deal with this growing problem from the point of view of public safety. It is admitted that many power boat operators are reasonable persons who are familiar with marine traffic rules, but it is also quite apparent that a great many others may be irresponsible or foolhardy or at least completely lacking in knowledge or observance of the elementary rules of marine safety and marine traffic.

Canada Shipping Act
We have attempted to deal with this problem in several ways. The minor waters navigation regulations forbid excessive speed or dangerous operation of motor boats, but they are not sufficiently comprehensive in that there are large concentrations of these boats outside the minor waters. The requirement that boats equipped with engines of 10 h.p. or more be licensed has also been a useful step but it is not enough in itself, dealing as it does with the boat and not with the operator. It is clear from our experience, from our consultation with the R.C.M.P., who are charged with enforcement of these matters, and from the representations we have received that something more must be done.
We have made extensive distribution of literature and a special pamphlet entitled "Safety at Sea", but regardless of this the problem continues to grow. We have reached the conclusion that two further steps should now be taken. The first of these is to amend this section so that it relates not only to the minor waters but to all waters of Canada. The second is to make direct use of the well proven experience in the field of motor vehicles and develop a system of licensing for operators of power boats.
The objective will be to ensure that the department has a direct contact with the boat operator and that he has in his hands some information regarding the rules of marine safety and marine traffic and some knowledge of these rules as well. The regulations for this purpose are in the formative stage at the present time and it is intended to take a gradual approach to this problem in consultation with the R.C.M.P., with various private organizations interested in boat operations and possibly local or provincial authorities.
It is not intended to create hardship for the individual who is willing to familiarize himself with the rules of marine safety and marine traffic, nor to impose any financial penalty on him in obtaining a licence, but it is intended to establish some method by which we can encourage his knowledge of this field and ensure that he does not disregard the elementary precautions which should be observed by the operators of small pleasure boats, not just in their own interest but in the interest of those around them.
This concludes the statement which I intended to make at this stage. Before resuming my seat I wish to state to the house that it is intended after second reading to move that this bill be referred to the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.


Mr. Thomas M. Bell (Saint John-Albert):: Mr. Speaker, we appreciate the comprehensive remarks of the parliamentary assistant with regard to this piece of legislation, this bill to amend the Canada Shipping Act. I suppose that those of us who have a connection with the sea are more interested but I think we all appreciate that this act must be brought up to date from year to year as the shipping nations of the world modernize their fleets and plans. We understand also that in the efforts of officials and others who are connected with such plans there is a natural tendency to grab more power in order to carry out efficiently the operations of their departments. Having said that, I think we should remember that we must be constantly on guard to preserve the rights of small operators and others who must be protected from the natural plans of the bureaucrats.
This legislation comes to us from the other place where it was dealt with most extensively. We have the value of their report of their considerations in their standing committee on transport and communications. I think this is one job that has been done by the other place which indicates that there is still some worth in their operations. They considered the bill extensively, went into the details and made quite a few worth while changes.
In going through the reports I note some of those who took an active part in the consideration of this legislation. In connection with that part having to do with fishermen and the administration of shipping, an active part was taken by two hon. members of that place from the maritimes who have extensive family backgrounds connected with the sea. Then with regard to the constitutional aspects of the bill there were two constitutional lawyers of note-there may have been more -who added considerably to the discussion on this legislation.
I think it must be realized that in the consideration of this legislation those members, of the other place included more experts than we might have available here. They took their time with the legislation and except for one small matter of controversy to which I shall refer later I think they brought forth a fairly good piece of legislation.
I think it can be said that this bill divides itself into two general parts. As the parliamentary assistant pointed out, there are the routine clauses which modernize and bring: up to date in various ways the shipping act itself. This is made necessary by changing conditions in the world and the plans of other nations. It is made necessary also because of the growth of traffic on the great lakes necessitating new certifications for

mates, engineers and pilots. It is made necessary by the more extensive use of pleasure craft. All these matters have been dealt with in fairly good fashion.
I do not have anything more on that aspect of it except to say that I hope that when we get into committee we will have some expert advice and also some specific treatment of these changes which are necessary and important but which have to be appreciated from the standpoint of the small operators, the fishermen and those who might be put out of business or affected in their daily lives.
The second part of this bill has interested me the most and I think it was the cause of some controversy in the other place. It ratifies the convention on oil pollution, that is the Canadian action which was taken at the convention two years ago. This raises a most interesting constitutional problem and I do not think we should pass over it too quickly. Unfortunately I do not have the background to discuss the intricate legal points involved, but in my reading of the activities in the other place and by some quick research I am of the opinion that this is being handled in a unique way.
It is not the first time that this method has been used, but I understand that of the two general types it is the less common. In most cases, if I have my words correct, the treaties or conventions that have been signed on behalf of Canada are brought back to parliament and, through active legislation and statute, are put into force by law. But this method-and it is the one that caused comment-is to incorporate into one of our acts or statutes the exact treaty, convention and other points that are necessary for its enforcement here. I am not saying for one minute that this is wrong, because I do not know. I realize there have been parliamentary legal experts on it who have given it considerable thought, but we remember the legislation in the 1930's that dealt extensively with this problem and we remember that it was necessary to go to the privy council in 1937 to receive a final opinion on the treaty-making powers and the necessary legislative and executive action thereto.
I mention this because I hope that we shall consider it extensively in committee. It is interesting. Probably the lawyers are the ones who are more prone to indicate a knowledge of this, but we have to be careful to make certain that this is being done in the best way possible.
That is all I have to say on second reading. As I say, I appreciate the fact that our shipping act is being modernized to some extent. We have in Canada little enough
Canada Shipping Act
interest in the sea, in shipping and in our future plans, and if this action today helps in any small way to further the cause it is agreeable to me, and I am pleased to see it.
The second point that I mentioned, regarding the constitutional aspect of it, is important, and we should not forget it. It is probably the only point that has a principle involved in it; so I suppose that it is the one aspect of the bill which we should be discussing extensively here now on second reading; but I shall be interested in following it when it reaches the committee stage, and we shall watch for all these small points that may have been overlooked. We hope that by this legislation we shall have modernized and increased our shipping laws and in that way we shall be able to take our place in the competitive world in much better fashion.


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: My
remarks will be quite brief, but I must say that we are very much interested in this bill, which without doubt does something to improve the shipping act in the light of modern conditions and circumstances.
I noted that the members of the other place gave a great deal of consideration to the suggested amendments, and without any question there are a good number of the members over there who have experience of the sea and have some knowledge of the technical and administrative problems with which this bill deals.
I myself read the bill. I listened carefully to the excellent explanation of the purpose of the bill given by the parliamentary assistant and I was particularly pleased that when he concluded he said that it was the intention to send the bill to the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines. I am sure that will provide an opportunity to get a great deal of information on certain aspects of the bill that some of us inland people would not have unless the bill went to the committee.
I might say, though, that I am interested in the bill because I know the problems of small tug-boat operators, persons operating small vessels of 15 tons and under, and as a long-time member of a yacht club I am fully aware of the new conditions arising with respect to small pleasure craft because of the great increase in their numbers in recent years.
I was very much interested in the suggested amendments and the explanation given by the parliamentary assistant with respect to certificates for mates and certain classes of engineers who will be on these boats of small tonnage. I thought that at the present time it seemed most sensible, from my own personal experience on the lakes on which I reside.

Canada Shipping Act
I was also particularly interested in the proposals in connection with small craft operated by outboard motors of ten or more horsepower. I remember when the act was amended some years ago to require that the craft be licensed or registered. I know some of the difficulties that the R.C.M.P. have found in administering the act because of the great increase in the number of these vessels and because of the numbers of people who will use these boats without any knowledge of the rules of the road, as far as the water is concerned, and without any knowledge of the safety precautions required. I think that is one aspect that has to be emphasized very strongly, and more strongly all the time, across this country.
I am very glad to notice that the bill provides for the extension of this section of the act from minor waters to all waters.
I remember the time when the amendment was before the house. I could not see how it could be effective, because minor waters are only a certain group of waters, and I should say the majority of these small craft are to be found on other types of waters. I judge that that amendment has been proposed as a result of experience. I think that the proposal to license gradually the operators of these small craft is sound and is a good one.
I am very pleased that the parliamentary assistant indicated it is not the intention of the department to rush into this suddenly. I find that people co-operate usually very well if they have an opportunity to understand what the department is attempting to do. I noted that he mentioned it was the intention of the department to implement this phase of the legislation gradually. I would suggest that the department would be well advised to get the list of all the yacht and launch clubs throughout the country and keep them informed of the changes in the legislation and ask for their suggestions and their experience. I think that would assist the department by getting the co-operation of even the smaller yacht and launch clubs all across Canada which exist on the seaboard and on our inland lakes and minor waters. It will make for an easier administration of the act and make for a better understanding of the department's intentions and, I am sure, will improve the relationship of the department's officials with the organizations concerned. I am not suggesting it is not good now but, in the administration of this type of legislation, through that co-operation, I think you will find that the general public interested in this type of craft will be quite willing to extend their co-operation because they know it is in the long run for the public good and for their own good.
[Mr. Herridge.l
That is all I have to say at this time. When we meet in committee, there are a number of questions I should like to ask. Like the member who preceded me, I am not competent to talk about the section on oil pollution-it is a constitutional and technical section-but we know that when we get into committee we shall have the opportunity to get the minister or his assistant and his officials to explain in detail all that this implies. We possibly will have an opportunity to give them our views as the result of our experience, and when the bill returns to the house it will receive the consideration that is justified and necessary so that when it does pass all the little kinks will have been ironed out.


Mr.  C. E. Johnsion@Bow River: Mr. Speaker, I just want to say a word about this measure. I think that Bill No. 349, an act to amend the Canada Shipping Act, will be of interest to all members of the house. The statement just made by the parliamentary assistant was a worth-while one, but it was indeed difficult to follow all the points that the parliamentary assistant brought out. However, he indicated in his remarks that the bill was going to be sent to a committee and that will give us time to go into his remarks more thoroughly. I am glad that the parliamentary assistant has indicated that the bill is going to a committee because there are some of us-I know this applies to mySelf-who are not too familiar with the conduct of ships at sea and those practices which are necessary in the best interests of the sailors themselves and the shipping industry as a whole.
I am sure that when the bill goes before the committee we will be able to have the advice of those people who are conversant with these matters, and the minister will be able to explain the different parts of the bill to us. The bill is a rather extensive one. There are 29 sections amending different parts of the act, and their consideration will require expert advice from the officials who appear before the committee. There is one part dealing with the international convention for the prevention of pollution of the sea by oil. That too is something about which we will have to get advice from the experts, those people who are immediately concerned with this type of pollution and the advantage that its prevention will mean to the shipping industry as a whole. Then there are also the appendices to deal with.
It is useless for me to carry the debate any further at this time because, as I say, I am not too conversant with the details of operations of this type. When the bill is before the committee we will be able to get the opinions of those who are more intimately acquainted with these matters. As

far as I am concerned, I will leave the matter until the bill is before committee.


Mr. H. M. Batten (Humber-St. George's):: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to take much of the time of the house at this stage in discussing Bill No. 349. I do feel, however, that as far as those of us who live in the maritimes are concerned this bill is really important. With those parts of the bill that refer to the operation of larger boats I think most of us will agree wholeheartedly, but as far as the province of Newfoundland is concerned, where for many years small boat operators, particularly small motorboats, have been operating around the coast and bays of Newfoundland, the bill will need some clarification. I agree with the parliamentary assistant in the decision to refer the bill to the appropriate committee.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Speaker, like those who have preceded me I do not intend to take a great deal of time on the second reading of the bill. First I should like to say that I am pleased that the bill is to go to the standing committee where it can be discussed in detail. I appreciated the explanation given by the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Transport, and I might also say that I found some reading I did of the proceedings in the other place to be of considerable interest. I agree with some of the remarks made by my colleague, the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge), with respect to the approach that should be taken in the development of regulations covering the operation of smaller vessels of various kinds, both fishing and pleasure craft. However, I should like to add one or two things to what he said in that connection.
As I understand it, the purpose of some of the proposed changes is to assist people to increase their own safety by acquiring some additional knowledge of the rules of the sea and so on. While I think that is a good thing, I hope that the Department of Transport does not feel that through taking steps of this kind they are going to be able to forget about the provision of the improved marine rescue facilities that are required in various parts of Canada at the present time. I believe that the development of safety consciousness and of appropriate regulations to ensure that people will take better care of themselves should go hand in hand with the development of more adequate rescue services than we have had heretofore.
Apart from that, one of my main interests in the bill has to do with the addition of the new part VILA which concerns the matter of oil pollution. The Minister of Transport (Mr. Marler) may recall that quite recently
Canada Shipping Act
I drew his attention to a problem existing in my own constituency with regard to oil pollution caused by ocean-going cargo vessels. Therefore I think that if the legislation before us now will meet the problem that has been created it is something which we should welcome and which, as far as I am concerned, I intend to support in principle at least.
I hope that some of the finer constitutional points that may be involved in our discussion in the committee will not cause us to overlook the essential value of protecting the people who live on our seacoasts from the dangers and the damage that can come from oil pollution. I think that the coast of British Columbia is perhaps an area where this type of legislation will be of particular value because in that province we have quite a large number of one-industry ports, some of which are in rather isolated parts of the coast but nevertheless quite a substantial tonnage of ocean-going freight moves through them during the course of each year.
In these places there are no local harbour authorities, no local bodies, with the power to make regulations and exercise control. I know that in my own constituency we have one board of harbour commissioners, that at Port Alberni. It has authority over the harbour there, but apart from that there are a number of other ports of call out of which quite substantial tonnages of ocean-going freight are shipped every year. Ocean-going vessels come to those ports directly from the sea and at times nuisances have been created which have been of considerable inconvenience to the residents of the area concerned.
So far as I am concerned, I feel that the implementation of the treaty respecting oil pollution on the seas is a forward step. I notice that the committee of the other place made one or two fairly important changes in the bill. One of them in particular had to do with the original proposal for the licensing of mates of fishing vessels, and because considerable objection apparently was raised to the proposal in the original bill a change was made.
I was rather interested to notice that all the opposition which came from the fishing industry to date appeared to have come from the maritime area rather than from the coast of British Columbia. That is not to say, however, that the development of a program with respect to improved seamanship and the requirement of an adequate knowledge of navigation and so on is not. something which could not be brought forward in British Columbia. I do not know

Indian Act
*whether or not we may have progressed iurther in that direction on our coast. Nevertheless, when we get into committee 3 think we might perhaps have some little :review as to the pros and cons of that situation on which Their Honours in the other place acted to change the bill as it was originally drafted. I think that is all I have do say, Mr. Speaker, except that I shall be looking forward to the study that will take .place in the committee.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it the pleasure *of the house to adopt the motion?
Motion agreed to and bill read the second time.


George Carlyle Marler: that the bill be referred to the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?
Motion agreed to and bill referred to the standing committee on railways, canals and *telegraph lines.



INDIAN ACT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, June 19, [DOT]consideration in committee of the following resolution-Mr. Pickersgill-Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Indian Act to provide for a number of [DOT]changes in connection with the administration of the act; and to provide further that the Minister -of Finance may from time to time advance to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration out of the consolidated revenue fund such sums of money [DOT]as the minister may require for loans to Indians under section 69 of the act;
The total amount of outstanding advances under the said section not to exceed at any one time one million dollars in lieu of three hundred and fifty thousand dollars as at present.
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, the resolution that is before the committee is one whereby it is deemed expedient to introduce ;a measure to amend the Indian Act to provide for a number of changes in connection with the administration of the act and also to prowide for a revolving fund as therein set out. I should like for a short time to deal with the Indian Act and to make certain suggestions as to its amendment which the experience of administration has, in my opinion, made necessary. In the administration of the act I believe that the first consideration should be that the rights of Indians under treaties should be maintained and guaranteed to all Indians and for all time. Indeed, when treaties were entered into, particularly so Tar as those treaties are concerned that affect
the Indians of the western plains, an agreement was made at that time by Lieutenant Governor Morris, while in the course of negotiating one or more of these treaties, in these words:
The ear of the Queen's government will always be open to hear the complaints of her Indian people, and she will deal with her servants that do not do their duty in a proper manner.
Also the general principles connected with the administration were set out by Lieutenant Governor Morris when he negotiated with the Indians at Fort Carlton. I think that was in 1876: I quote from the general principles then enunciated:
I see the Queen's councillors taking the Indians by the hand saying we are brothers, we will lift you up, we will teach you, if you will learn, the cunning of the white man. All along that road I see Indians gathering, I see gardens growing and houses building; I see them receiving money from the Queen's commissioners to purchase clothing for their children; at the same time I see them enjoying their hunting and fishing as before, I see them retaining their own mode of living with the Queen's gift, in addition.
Those were the general principles upon which these treaties were signed. Personally I knew one of the signors, one of the chiefs- namely the chief of the Mistawasis Indians- who was a boy at the time that treaty was made at Fort Carlton. I remember with what forcefulness and eloquence he pressed for that justice which was promised and relied upon the assurance that in the administration of the Indian Act the promises of 1876 would be carried out in their entirety. For the benefit of the minister I say this. I believe that in the last year or so changes have been made which have been beneficial. I refer to changes to provide for certain types of technical training, to allow for Indians to adopt mining and prospecting. I believe that the changes in this regard have been most beneficial and that the ambit of the changes already made should be materially increased and expanded in so far as vocational training is concerned. I believe that progressive programs of technical training, within the limitations of the native ability of the Indian, deserve as far as possible to be expanded and extended.
In general with regard to administration I should like to say this. I feel that, to too great an extent, there has been a desire on the part of the administration to expand the powers of the minister. When this bill is introduced, I hope there will be no changes to increase his power at the expense of the governor in council. I have seen a draft of the sections of the bill which were submitted to the Indian representatives who met some months ago. If some of those sections are to be adopted, I say that indeed the power of the minister will be extended and that

556S
the centralization of authority in the minister will result in detrimental effects in so far as the administration of Indian affairs is concerned. Instead of centralizing power in the minister I believe that there should be more and more an expansion of the rights of Indians to their own self-government. One of the things that might be achieved in that connection is to give more Indians an opportunity to be installed in administrative positions not only in the field in the reserves but in the administration of the department here in Ottawa. While saying that, I also say that if changes are ever made whereby the minister receives further powers, I feel that provision should be made in the act to allow for appeals to the courts against administrative orders which affect the individual rights of Indians themselves. In other words, where the minister acts in a manner, administratively speaking, that has the result of determining the rights of an individual, or of a band, his decision in that regard should be subject to an appeal to the courts to the end that no one in this day and age have the right to determine the rights and privileges of peoples of other races without those persons having an appeal to the courts. All over the world coloured races are demanding that they shall no longer be subservient to the white races. In our country, the major subject of complaint on the part of Indians is that they are placed in an inferior position. There are 150,000 of them in this country, and 2,500 of them served during the past war, most of them voluntarily. Education is coming to them in larger measure though not in a sufficient way having regard to the potentialities of those people. Certainly, they have the right to demand that they shall not be subject to the ipse dixit of the minister, and their rights determined without having the right to appeal to the courts.
I mention that because Indians object very strongly to being placed in a position of being not second-class citizens but second-class people, to whom the courts of law in large measure against arbitrary and unjust actions on the part of the administrators are not open. In that connection, I should like some provision made whereby Indians would have an assured right of appeal against any orders or convictions made against them by the summary courts of criminal jurisdiction in our country. I think of an example that arose the other day. An Indian becomes intoxicated and pleads guilty to the charge. There is no reason whatever why, under those circumstances, a person should receive a jail sentence for a first offence. He is sentenced to two months in jail. He is a married man living on the reserve. He is sent away to
Indian Act
serve his term at a time when he is just about to commence upon his farming operations. I believe when sentences of imprisonment for petty offences such as that are pronounced against Indians the department should see to it that there is an appeal in order to assure a reasonable equality of sentences and thereby deny any perversion of justice.
In that connection, I point out another subject of complaint. When a treaty Indian commits an offence he is subject to a summary conviction trial before a justice of the peace appointed by the department of Indian affairs. However honourable such persons may be, none the less they have not that freedom from external influence which our courts should have and to which every Canadian, whether white or Indian, should be entitled. In other words, I believe that the section of the act that today makes possible the appointment of justices of the peace by the department of Indian affairs, or by the governor in council, should be removed, and Indians should be tried in the ordinary courts before magistrates who have the necessary ability and also the experience to assure that inequality and inequity in the present system would be reasonably removed. After all, when an Indian serves a term in jail the effect on his health is detrimental; it stays with him sometimes for years. A jail sentence of two months should not be imposed upon Indians for the simple offence of being, intoxicated.
I believe, too, that in so far as these minor offences are concerned, such as are provided for in the Indian Act, a fine should be sufficient. Provision might well be made in the Indian Act so that instead of there being a default, except in a limited number of cases, the Indian would be able to make payment of his fine in instalments to the end that imprisonment and its stigma would not be impressed upon him.
Now, sir, having said that, I feel that the-resolution in question, which constitutes apparently in part a series of amendments based on the experience of the last few years, is premature, and that before the Indians in Canada can properly receive that consideration to which they should be entitled the law should be brought up to date and the Indian Act made an instrument of justice for the Indians of our country rather than in some-cases, as it is, an agency of tyranny in its present form. I believe the first thing that should be done is to appoint a royal commission which would meet in all parts of Canada at appointed times and places so that the-Indian's point of view might be placed before the Canadian people as a whole rather than through the narrow conduit pipe of the

Indian Act
administrative services within the department itself. There are tremendous problems at stake in the administration of the Indian. These problems will never be met by a piecemeal haphazard amendment of the act from time to time. They can only be met by viewing the problem in the national sense through the medium of a royal commission of men and women who have some knowledge of Indian affairs so that recommendations may be made for the amendment of the act which will remove many of the inequalities and injustices of the present.
We have royal commissions appointed on everything else. Why not a royal commission on Indian affairs? If a royal commission were appointed, Indians would feel free to appear through representatives from each of their bands to place before that commission their demands, their requirements and their suggestions for the improvement of the act. A number of commissions have sat within the last three years on the question of band membership. Those commissions were one-man commissions. They sat in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and in Ontario in one or two cases. They consisted of a commissioner whose authority it was to hear evidence regarding the challenged rights of certain persons on the reserves to be considered as Indians. I am not going into the particulars of the number of sittings that took place but there were 17 of these commissions and they sat in 1954.
Under the provisions of the Indian Act as It now stands, these commissions did not examine the questions with which they were charged and had the responsibility to undertake by anything approaching the laws of evidence. They proceeded on the basis of the sheerest hearsay in many cases. Their purpose was to ascertain whether or not certain individuals on the reserves whose status was challenged were or were not Indians. I took no part personally in any one of these but I was present when two of the commissioners sat, and what passed as evidence was a denial of every principle that should be in effect if the rights of individuals are to be protected. It is true there was a right to appeal for a review by the minister and also by a district or county court judge, as the *case might be, but here was the kind of evidence I heard.


Mr. Pickersgill:: The appeal is not to the minister but to the registrar.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister is right; I am speaking without the act before me. This is an example of the kind of evidence that was given: Someone would turn up who was called to give evidence concerning party A who was challenged as not being an Indian.

He might say, "My grandmother told me when I was a boy that A's grandfather was a white man". Well, Mr. Chairman, that type of hearsay evidence could not but arouse feelings of intense antagonism among the Indian tribes on reservations where the commissions sat. The commissions had the power by way of evidence to determine whether A, B or C as the case might be was indeed an Indian within the meaning of the act. I know of nothing that has taken place on Indian reservations or among Indians within the last 25 or 30 years that aroused such intense feelings of antagonism and animosity as between band presidents.
The minister might say, "Well, the Indians asked for this." It is indeed one of the few things the Indians asked for that they ever got, but it is one of those things that naturally provide a short-cut in the determination as to whether or not a person is indeed an Indian; but in the manner in which it was administered under the law passed by this house it had the effect of creating feelings of antipathy, arousing false motives on the part of those who would benefit by having reduced the number of people on a reserve entitled to be called Indians. There were jealousies, ancient antipathies and fears. There were all the motives that cause men to act differently than normal men and women. All these things brought about a state of disagreement and ill-feeling that should never have been permitted to take place.
Even at this late date I am asking the minister whether it would not be in the interests of amity and good spirit on these reservations if whatever was done by these commissions should be entirely obliterated. Whatever the findings were-whether or not the findings were correct as regards certain individuals being entitled to be considered as members of the band-the manner in which the commissioners sat and the sittings of the commissions themselves brought about a situation that was a negation of the kind of tranquility that should be established and fostered on reserves, and brought about a feeling of hostility that will only be obliterated in possibly one or more generations. I say that because I believe even now the minister should realize the situation has arisen everywhere in this country and should endeavour as far as possible to remove the adverse effects which the commission system brought into being. After all, there are three, four or five hon. members of this house-my friend the hon. member for Qu'Appelle is one and I am another- who have been honoured by appointment as chiefs of Indian tribes. The Indians come to us and ask us to present their views before parliament. They have no direct representation. As a matter of fact, I have often thought

that the only way in which our 150,000 Indian people in Canada who have no representation in parliament could receive representation would be through the appointment to the Senate of one or more of their outstanding leaders to the end that their problems will receive that consideration which only direct representation in parliament, either in the Senate or in the House of Commons, will permit.
I therefore sum up the views I have endeavoured to place before the committee. In the first place, a royal commission should be appointed. Second, the powers of the minister which permit of the arbitrary exercise of rights determining individual privileges and rights on reservations should be subject to an appeal to the courts. If the orders that are made by the minister determining the rights of individuals are worth while and have a sound basis, there should be no fear of having the courts review them when and if any Indian feels he is aggrieved thereby.
Third, the provisions concerning the appointment of a justice of the peace to try infractions under the Indian Act should be removed from the statutes and those Indians should be permitted trial before regular magistrates in the several provinces in this country. Surely we do not have to have a system that denies one group of people in this country, the Indian population, the right to be tried for summary conviction before the same courts that try all the other people in Canada. The Indians should not be restricted to trial before justices of the peace who indirectly owe their *appointments to the Indian department. We should have reached the stage in our development where no judicial officer should directly or indirectly find himself in the position where he has to act both as judge and as interested party.
Fourth, I suggest that the provisions for commissions to investigate the rights of Indians to be on reserves and be considered as Indians should be entirely obliterated and the band list as determined by the Indian reservation residents themselves should be accepted as the basis for future determination as to qualifications for Indians after this date.
These are but three or four suggestions which I have to offer. I couple them with the need for a pronounced expansion in the vocational training of Indians. They have done amazingly well under the plans brought into being by the minister in connection with prospecting for minerals. They have caught on to this and many of them are receiving large wages, far beyond what they could have ever hoped for in other activities. They have a natural aptitude for the outdoors and
Indian Act
a natural ability to do those things in the outdoors which a prospector must do.
Then what about provisions to raise the standards of Indians on the reservations? I suggest that there should be provision in the act for a trained welfare worker on every reserve to the end that residents on the reserve would receive the benefit of instructions which only a person such as that could give, thereby bringing about improved economic conditions.
From that item arises one other, the amounts furnished today to indigent Indians for upkeep, food and relief assistance. According to the information I have this allowance is at the starvation level of some $7.75 per month. This is something which should be altered. Today Indians are removed from the time when they could provide their livelihood by hunting and fishing. The white man has made that almost impossible and for that reason indigent Indians and those unable to take care of themselves should be assured of at least a reasonable living, something that is not possible under the allowances paid today.
The objective of the Indian department should be a wider expansion of local selfgovernment on the reserves. Give to the chiefs and their councillors allowances in keeping with their responsibilities. I have not the latest figures, but I know of no change in that regard, and I understand that the chief today receives $25 a year while the councillors receive $15 a year each.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is right.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister indicates that those are the rates still being paid. Those rates go back to 1870 or 1875 and they are ridiculous in the light of conditions today. There can be no justification for not extending them. Indians I have met contend that the chiefs are entitled to at least $12.50 per month and councillors $8 per month. They ought to be repaid in some small degree for the energy they display and the ability they exercise in solving the day-to-day problems of the reserve. After all, our purpose is to give them the opportunity to rise to a position of honourable, effective and dignified citizenship. By that I do not mean that we should grant to them all citizenship because there is disagreement among them. They fear that if they become citizens of Canada-


John Whitney Pickersgill: They are citizens of Canada.


John George Diefenbaker: They fear that if they vote as citizens of Canada-


The Deputy Chairman:: I am sorry to have to interrupt the hon. gentleman but he has exceeded his time limit.

Indian Act


Mr. Bryson:: Mr. Chairman, as one of those in this country who point with such pride to our economic prosperity, it is with a feeling of some embarrassment that I find it necessary to rise and make a plea for Canada's most impoverished citizens. At the outset I should like to say that I support the proposed legislation with one or two reservations which I shall make known later. When we are enjoying such prosperity in this country I feel it is rather embarrassing that we have to admit that we have approximately 150,000 people who have been and still are being relegated to a role of unimportance within the economy of the country. It is embarrassing to admit that living conditions such as we find on Indian reserves across this country do exist. We have to admit also that we are still unprepared to accept these people as anything but second-class citizens.
I had hoped for the last three years that there would be a new approach to the whole Indian problem. I had hopes that the present minister would go to great lengths to revise and improve the existing Indian Act. Certainly he knows the problem because he has admitted it on many occasions. A prime example of that admission will be found in the Indian News of January of this year. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is pointing out the problem that exists, and he goes on to say:
-there are only two ways in which we can carry on in this country in the future. One way is by the Indians living off in a corner by themselves and having as little to do with the rest of us as possible, and the other is by our getting together and working together and living together as brothers, and as equals, to make this a better country for all of us.
That is a most worthy admission on the part of the minister. When the minister was speaking to the delegation of Indian representatives here in Ottawa he said that something should be done about the conditions which exist. He went on to discuss the purpose of the conference at which changes in the Indian Act were to be considered, and he continued:
Now nothing we are going to suggest, nothing I am going to put before you, is different from the principles of the old act.
I think that was most unfortunate.


John Whitney Pickersgill: By the old act of course I meant the act of 1951.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: That may be; nevertheless I think events have proved that nothing fundamentally different was arrived at at that conference.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, yes, it was.
[The Deputy Chairman.]


Hugh Alexander Bryson: As I said at the beginning, if we are not to have a new act or a new approach to the old act, then we are left with no choice but to support the legislation before us with one or two reservations. It was unfortunate the other day that the minister was reluctant to discuss the administrative changes referred to in the first part of the resolution.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, I am not in the slightest degree reluctant to discuss the administrative changes. I should like awfully much to get this resolution passed so that all hon. members can see what is proposed and so that we can discuss it intelligently.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: That is the very point I am trying to make. While I am in favour of the proposal covered by this resolution, I think its success or failure hinges entirely upon the administrative changes which we presume the minister is going to propose. To suggest that the increase that is mentioned is going in any way to benefit the Indians without any change in the administration is, I feel, a complete delusion. I hope that when the bill is at the proper stage we shall have some indication of what that change in administration is going to be.
I was rather amazed when I tried to find out on what basic information this house is asked to subscribe something in the neighbourhood of one million dollars to increase loans to Indians under the act. Why are we being asked to do that? Apparently we are unable to find out very much authentic information through the questions that have been asked in this house, so we must try to make up our own minds as to the necessity for this increase. Certainly if we believe some of the stories we read in the press and hear over the radio as to what conditions are regarding our Indians generally, we have no alternative but to believe that conditions are not what they should be. I should like to read one or two excerpts from some of the press clippings from local newspapers that have appeared over the past month or two. According to one, Mr. Gordon Robertson, commissioner of the territories, said on Friday, May 4, before the royal commission on broadcasting:
The fur trade was the most depressed industry in Canada and the average annual income of the natives was less than $800.
The other day the hon. member for Mackenzie River mentioned the figure of $400. Again, an item appeared in my own constituency paper of January, as follows:
Needy Indian families on the Fishing lake reserve, southeast of here, are more warmly dressed as the result of an appeal for clothing and

deer skins made by Corporal Gordon Crawford of the local R.C.M.P. detachment.
He requested that local people bring old *clothing and deer skins to a central depot ior distribution. Again, we have a report of April 11, as follows:
Federal officials have begun an investigation of living conditions of 400 Indians at the Roseau river reservation about 60 miles south of Winnipeg.
An Indian affairs branch official said that the investigation followed recent Winnipeg reports that the Indians are living in three houses and 17 log cabins there.
It goes on to point out the very serious conditions that exist. Then possibly one of the most shocking items appeared in the Star-Phoenix a month or so ago, when an Indian was arraigned in court on a very serious charge. The judge in that case, Mr. Justice G. E. Taylor, took a grave view of the conditions under which Indians of the Saulteaux reserve, north of Cochin, are living. He said:
It is shocking indeed to find that such conditions can continue to exist anywhere in Canada.
J. N. Conroy, Q.C., then described the conditions that exist:
Mr. Conroy described their reserve as an area of "hills, sand and stones, not capable of cultivation". Its people, he said, "can neither read or write. They have no schools. They know nothing of religion, or the customs or morals of civilization.
"They are a race apart-" . . .
Whilst I have said I am in favour of this increase, I should like something more than newspaper reports as a justification for parliament passing this request that the minister has placed before it. So, because of that interest and because of my curiosity, I asked for certain returns, and from those returns I hoped to get a clear picture of the need for this increase. About a month ago I asked what the cash income was, thinking that possibly if I could get some answer as to the cash income of Indians across this country, it would give some indication of the economic condition in which they find themselves. I asked for the cash income each year since 1951 from the sale of grain, livestock and other products. The answer I got from the department was:
There are no official records kept of the total income of Indians. Statistics are, however, maintained for reserves on which the "permission to sell" section of the act is invoked with respect to farm produce. These figures would not necessarily be an accurate reflection of the total income of the Indians concerned.
I thought that was rather strange, because we are able to find out the income of every other group in this country.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Would the hon. member mind if I interrupted him? I had meant- and I apologize to him-to say a word to him about the answer filed to that question.
Indian Act
I did not wish him to think there was any desire not to give information. After considering as much information as we had available in my department, I felt it would be entirely misleading to give it.
There was another objection too. With these Indians who are given permission to sell certain things-permission is still required under the act, and I rather regret to say it is-their number is so small that if you gave it for individual reservations you would be almost disclosing the affairs of individual Indians in a way that I do not think we would do for other people in the community. But I think if the hon. gentleman wanted to get some kind of estimate such as the bureau of statistics makes, it might be possible to get something of that sort that would be sufficiently generalized so as not to disclose people's private affairs and so as to give a fairly reasonable picture, but my department does not have statistics of that sort.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: I think it would be to the advantage of those of us in this house who are interested if we could get a compilation of the income of these people, when we are asked to subscribe considerable amounts of money for their welfare. Then I investigated a little further, and I understood from reading section 69 of the act that in many cases this money was primarily going to be used for furthering farming and agricultural activities of the different reserves.


John Whitney Pickersgill: For loans.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: So I undertook to ask a few questions relevant to that, because I am very much concerned about this question of supervision. I am not an expert on Indians, although I have lived near them all my life, but I know they must have supervision. After all, you do not send out even skilled workers without supervision of some kind, somebody to see that the plan is carried out. It is unfortunate, in my estimation, that the department expects these people, who are still in many cases very primitive, to go out and attempt to do the kind of job that is going to make their operation an economic possibility. So I asked a question relevant to supervision. I asked:
How many persons are presently employed as farm instructors by the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, Indian affairs branch?
These farm instructors are the people who are going to make or break the scheme the minister envisages in this section. The answer was:
The Indian affairs branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration does not employ farm instructors as such. In areas where the chief occupation of the Indian population is agriculture.

Indian Act
farming instruction is given by Indian agency assistants who also perform administrative and other functions.
Then I asked how many part-time instructors there were. There was no answer to that. Then I asked:
On what reservations are these instructors presently engaged?
There was no answer to that. Nor was there any answer to the question:
What salary do these farm instructors receive?
It was very evasive from start to finish. I took the little bulletin that is put out by the department regarding the census of Indians, and I found a very amazing revelation. There are 100 Indian agency assistants looking after 151,558 Indians. That is one Indian agency instructor for every 1,500 Indians. There are 608 bands, 87 superintendents, and so on, or one superintendent for every seven bands.
The point I am trying to make is that I feel that if this money is going to be used to the best advantage when there is very close the best advantage when there is very close administration on the reserves. Two years ago I drew the attention of the minister to a particular situation, and I want to mention it now because it has a very great bearing on this matter. I find from a return that the reservation I have in mind was in receipt of some $3,900 by way of a loan out of the original amount of $350,000.
I should like to ask this question. What benefit did these Indians actually get from that loan? I have been unable to get any information at all in that regard. However, I should like to read an excerpt from a letter written to me two months ago, and the part I wish to read has to do with conditions existing on this reserve in spite of the loan they received. A man who lives near the reserve wrote me and this is what he had to say:
I think this has been the worst time we have had with the Indians coming to the house to get warm on their way to the reserve. I keep a diary and on looking it over I find this. On the last four days we have had no less than 30 Indians . . .
These Indians came in there to try to get warm around the stove. Then he went on to say that he saw the Indian agent and the Indian agent shrugged his shoulders and said, "Throw them out." That is the kind of situation that exists on that reserve. Therefore I ask this further question relative to that condition. On that reserve there are 183 Indians and they have 348 acres of cultivated land. There you have 183 Indians trying to eke out an existence on 348 acres of land, without any supervision whatsoever.

The minister challenged my statement two years ago when I said there was no supervision on that reserve. I received a return from him pointing out that the Indian agent, had visited the reserve three times during the-summer. The fact of the matter is, as appears from the return that I received, that the-Indian agent visited the reserve in April before seeding. Then he came back early in August before harvest and came back again in November. He always came when there was actually no need for him to come. He came there before the crop had been sowed. He came back before it was harvested, and he came back after it was harvested.
Here is a situation where we have people trying to exist on less than two acres of cultivated land each, and it is not good enough. We go to great lengths to provide money for the Colombo plan for economic aid.
I feel that we in this country need a Colombo plan for our own Indians. If we are going to talk about economic aid in other parts of the world, I think we should investigate the proposition of establishing a Colombo plan with respect to our own Indians here at home.
I referred to our Indians as being second class citizens. In my area of the country a great many farmers who have land to be cleared and broken go to an operator and say they will give him the first crop clear if he will clear the trees off the land, break it and sow it at his own expense, and there are many takers. In some cases, if it costs $40 or $50 an acre to clear it, they will take the first crop and half of the second crop. But what happens on the Indian reserve when there is land to be broken? The officials of the department solicit farmers from the surrounding areas to come and bid on clearing and breaking the land, and you give them three-quarters of the crop for five years for doing it. I do not think that is giving the Indian very much of a break.
Then I should like to refer to something that I understand by the grapevine is going to take place, and I hope this is not true. I referred to this reserve where there are 183 Indians trying to operate 348 cultivated acres. They also have 1,500 acres of leased land. I know the land very well. It is on the shore of a lake and is mostly rock and trees.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. member means land leased to non-Indians?


Hugh Alexander Bryson: It is part of the reserve.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Land leased for the Indians.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Yes, it is part of the reserve. I understand by the grapevine that the department is going to take 100 head of heifers, breeding stock, to the reserve this spring.

I hope that is not true, because these people have no haying machinery whatsoever. They have no facilities to look after such a herd of cattle, and they will end up without any cattle or anything else. All they will have will be the companionship of some of the cows next winter. I hope the minister will advise me as to the truth of that story.
In this very informative little magazine I also read something about housing conditions on reserves. I was rather amused at the story, because the first thing I read was that hammers and saws on almost every reserve in Canada were singing a song of better housing. It sounds very interesting when you read it, but when you investigate the proposition what do you find? I am just going to take two provinces, Saskatchewan and Alberta. I find that in Saskatchewan we have 67 Indian reservations and last year there were 62 new homes built, or something less than one home per reservation. There are 18,750 Indians on the 67 reserves, so that means one new house for each 300 Indians. In Alberta there are 47 reserves and there were 130 houses built or 2-7 houses per reserve, with about 300 Indians on each reserve.
I come back to the first point I made about supervision. We need, not only more but better Indian agents. I am sure the minister is a good enough administrator to realize that changes are necessary in that regard if we are going to have better conditions among our Indians. It is going to cost more money, and I think the people of Canada will be prepared to grant more money for this worthy cause. In my opinion we in this country stand condemned of the greatest crime in our history so far as our treatment of our Indians is concerned. I think it is time that our Indian policy was established on the principle that the Canadian Indian is a respectable individual. That is the only policy the government has not tried up to this time, and that is why we have failed so completely and miserably to even come close to finding a solution to the problem.
We are placing a great deal of emphasis on education, but I should like to say that only when we make a concerted attack at the root of the problem are we going to make any progress in education. First of all we must establish a decent economic existence for these impoverished people before we talk about interesting them in education. However, adequate educational facilities must be provided in conjunction with such a program.
I said something about the minister being a good administrator, and I hope he will prove to be a good administrator in future so far as Indian affairs are concerned. Certainly
Indian Act
if we take as our yardstick the progress in Indian welfare that has been made to date I doubt whether among the 19 members of the cabinet a worse administrator could have been found. I hope the minister will de something to better conditions as we find them. I should like to ask the minister this question. We are stuck with this Indian problem, and nobody knows it better than he does. The Indian, by the minister's own admission, is not a dying race by any stretch of the imagination; he is increasing.
We must face this problem. I should like to see the minister take one of these reserves in western Canada and set it up as an experimental station in order to see what can be done to give these people a decent economic existence. I think he is going to be obliged to abandon many of these reserves. The Indians themselves asked for land which was not suitable for agriculture. They asked for land that was situated near lakes where they could fish, but there is no longer fish in the lakes. I should therefore like to see the minister take one of these reserves that has possibilities, set it up under proper supervision as an experimental station, and see what can be done. Certainly it is going to cost money, but I think it will be worth it. Otherwise, we shall be obliged to abandon completely the reserves we have because these people are increasing in numbers and are becoming more impoverished as time goes on.
I should like to see the administration divided between the province, as much as possible, and the central government. When you are dealing with people scattered through the ten provinces, local conditions and provincial conditions are different. I think it would be to the advantage of all concerned if the administration of this problem were shared between the province, as much as possible, and the federal authority. I feel that the Indian problem will not solve itself. We made the problem, and we must accept, the major responsibility for solving it.


Mr. Blackmore:: Mr. Chairman, in all I say today I want the minister and every other member in the chamber to realize that I fully appreciate the fact that in dealing with the Indian problem you are dealing with a major problem. It is a matter about which it is extremely easy to find fault but. exceedingly difficult to prescribe a remedy and produce results. I have spent my life within two miles of the Blood Indian reservation. The Blood Indian reservation is one of the finest reservations in Canada, and the Blood Indians are one of the finest tribes;

Indian Act
in Canada, if not the finest. I say that without reservation, and not because they happen to be in my constituency.
I have greatly appreciated what has been said by the hon. member for Prince Albert and the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort. Everything those hon. members said was true, valuable and pertinent; and everything those two said must be met head on, with no sidestepping whatsoever, because they are picturing facts just as they are. The speech given the other night by the hon. member for Mackenzie River was again an exceedingly valuable one that must be met head on.
Ever since we started dealing with Indians, or rather ever since our forefathers did so, I think there has been a failure to realize a most important fact, namely that the Indian population of the Dominion of Canada is potentially a magnificent asset or a dreadful liability. Whether it is going to become a magnificent asset or a formidable responsibility rests upon us who are charged with the responsibility of administering the act under which the Indians are supposed to try to live. There is no doubt that our Indian population-and I say this as a result of my observations of the Indians-as far as I have met them-consists of splendid men and splendid women in potentiality. If they are given a chance such as that which we demand for our own children and our fellows, they will measure up in a highly commendable way.
Up to the present time, as I have seen ourselves in action in respect of Indians-and while I was sitting in the committee on the Indian Act I kept thinking of this over and over again-the first thing we always think about when we think about Indians is how to save money. We try to put the dollar sign on every single thing we think and say about Indians when as a matter of fact the first -thing we ought to be thinking about is Indians, how to make them the great people the Creator intended they should be, and the magnificent people they were before the white man came to this country. Let the dollar sign take care of itself. We have been altogether too niggardly in the past. We should be treating our Indian population as .a sort of big business in Canada.
It is easy for us to hear men like the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort, whom I Honour because of his contribution this afternoon and the careful study he has devoted to this problem-it is easy to hear him speak about the Indians consisting of 150,000 or more, but it is extremely difficult for us to realize what 150,000 people would look like if you- had them all close together
[Mr. Blackmore.I
where you could get a good look at them; how much it would take to feed, clothe, shelter and educate them; and how many resources and what kind of resources they would require to have access to if they were to supply these things themselves. I refer to the feeding, clothing, sheltering and educating.
With us it is largely a matter of money, as I have already indicated. I know that we are faced with serious financial difficulties in this nation, but we are not faced with any difficulties in connection with producing food, clothing, shelter, the means of educating or of giving hospitalization. We are not faced with that problem at all. Let us not forget that fact for one minute. If we are worried about money, it is likely to be our own fault. The Indians cannot do a thing about that money question. They are helpless. Today they can do very little about producing, because in that respect they are likewise largely helpless.
Having said these things, I want the minister not to feel that I am finding fault with the way in which he is administering the Indian department. I believe the minister has approached this problem with just as great sincerity, resourcefulness and initiative as did the present Minister of Finance; and I doubt that the country ever had a finer minister in charge of Indian problems than the present Minister of Finance.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I agree with that statement.


John Horne Blackmore: We must face these things. It is just little Canadianism for me, because I happen to be in the opposition, to fail to appreciate the efforts which are being put forth by the people who are in the government. I must put myself in a position such as that in which I would be if I occupied their position. I may say that I am really very glad that I do not occupy the position in which the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration happens to find himself with regard to nearly anything he has to deal with in his department.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have at least one friend.


John Horne Blackmore: You have at least someone who appreciates the problems you face and who is ready to give you credit for the things you do when you are trying to do what is right.


Mr. Benidickson:: I would join with the hon. member for Lethbridge.


Mr. Hansell:: Another friend.


John Horne Blackmore: There are several principles which I think must be laid down. I found when I was on the Indian Act committee

there were a good many who did not agree with me; but after the thinking I have done, which may not be of the very highest type, and after the experience I have had with Indians-and I have been on plenty of reservations-I have come to the conclusion that the things I am going to lay down are principles which are essential in dealing with the Indian problem.
I would say the first thing, Mr. Speaker-[DOT] and I believe the minister agrees with all these things; I hope he will not think there is any criticism implied-we must do is to keep the reservation inviolate. Every reservation in this Dominion of Canada must be kept at least as good as it is now, and retained that way for generations yet to come. It must be improved if possible and wherever possible, but it must not be allowed to deteriorate.
The hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort spoke of the increase in the population. It is true the Indians are increasing in numbers; we want them to do so. We are providing them with family allowances and old age pensions to encourage them to do so. We should be providing them with greater family allowances and old age pensions to encourage them to do so, because as far as I know Indians will be loyal and true to this nation, which is a great deal more than you can say about a whole lot of the questionable characters we have been dragging into this country in droves in the last 15 or 20 years, people who would rather cut our throats than say hello to us, only they do it in a sneaking underhand way, behind the curtain or in the dark. Therefore I say we want the Indian population to increase. They are great people.
Now, then, if the Indian population increases-and it is increasing on the reservation in my constituency, the Blood Indian reservation-why have we not added to the acreage in that reservation in conformity with the increase in the population? Why did we make the reservation in the beginning the size it was then? Had the size of the reservation any relation whatsoever to the number of Indians which it was contemplated would be expected to maintain themselves on the reservation? If not, then certainly it was an oversight. Should we not in a very broad way fit the size of a reservation to the population of the Indians who are required to live on that reservation? Wherever it is found that the size of a reservation is not in conformity with the number of Indians who have to keep themselves on that reservation we had better look into the matter with the determination to make the reservation larger or more productive. I say that is the first great principle.
We should increase the productivity of the reservation by such things as wood lots, fish 67509-354
Indian Act
ponds, pasture lands and game. A lot of people I have talked to gasped when I talked about a thing like that. Well, how in the name of common sense do you suppose an Indian gets his wood with which to keep himself warm? Seventy-five years ago there was wood all over the place and in every water course, where he could help himself and get all the wood he wanted; there were ponies running all over the range that he could use. Well, today he cannot find any place where he can go and get a bit of firewood for his home without being warned off by a white holder of the property.
Why have we not looked into the matter of planting wood lots and maintaining them where an Indian on the reservation has not a wood lot and where wood is at a premium? How do you think Indians can afford to buy coal the way we can? Where are they going to get the money to pay for the coal? For instance, in my own riding time and again I have seen the Indians struggling along. When I think of how much it costs my family for coal to keep ourselves warm and what we have to spend on food and clothing and every other thing that we need to live, I often say to my wife I do not see how on earth the Indians live at all.
I do not wish to elaborate or take too much time on the matters I have mentioned, but they are matters that ought to be taken care of. The Indians used to be able to go fishing all over the place 75 years ago. When they signed the treaties in the west in 1877 they could fish anywhere; they could take prairie chicken and other game birds anywhere, and, as I have said, they could get firewood anywhere. They could pick fruit in abundance, on every hillside, and a little while before that there were buffalo in abundance, and deer. There was a wide variety of game, and there were rabbits on pretty nearly every reservation. You can go across the average reservation today almost without seeing a sign of any of these things. What are the Indians living on?
I would like to elaborate on the remarks of the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort. It would be a very fine thing for the minister if he could possibly select a reservation somewhere, if he feels they are satisfactory, and then take the number of white men that would correspond to the number of Indians that he would expect could make a living there, put the white men there and see if they could live where Indians are trying to live, with no more access to productive capacity than the Indians have.
In the reservation in my constituency there is plenty of room for wood lots and plenty of room for fish ponds. Until the St. Mary

Indian Act
dam was built I do not believe we ever thought of increasing the number of fish in the streams in which the Indians used to fish. We took no steps so far as I know. I hope the minister is doing that, and I am sure he will do it after I get through talking. We took no steps to increase their pasture facilities. Wherever I go the white men around are just simply straining to get in on the Indian reservations and rent their lands for pasture. It is good that they do, because in many instances the Indians have not the cattle to pasture on the land. But the main thing is that they never take any thought of improving the pasturing on their lands. Something should be done to renew the pasture.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the hon. gentleman would not mind my interrupting for just a second? I know he will be glad to hear that I anticipated what he was going to say, and we did make an arrangement with the provincial government to get quite a bit more land added to the Stony-Sarcee reserve west of Calgary for precisely those purposes.


John Horne Blackmore: I want the minister to get up and tell us every one of the things he is doing, because that would help us to appreciate them. I hope he goes not only on the Stony reserve but I hope he considers every reserve. The only reserve I know of in which there appears to be sufficient pasture is the reserve of the Indians near Gleichen, Alberta. I have been over a good many of the reservations, too.
Again, in the Waterton national park, during the last few years, we have had a preserve in which we have buffalo. It is just surprising how happily these buffalo live and how they thrive and grow and reproduce. The thought has come to me many times, why could we not establish-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Horne Blackmore: I may have used the wrong word.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, no.


John Horne Blackmore: If I did, I beg your pardon. After all, the important thing is that these buffalo are growing in numbers. Why should we not have buffalo paddocks in a great number of places where the Indians could go and shoot buffalo as their fathers did? Why have we not taken care of a matter of that kind?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I shall have to leave that to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources.


John Horne Blackmore: But remember, it will take quite a bit of money and it will take someone to look after the buffalo. In the hills a part of which form part of the Waterton park where the buffalo are now roaming there would be ample space for thousands of buffalo. I do not know why it could not be put to such good use, considering the fact that we do not know what to do with our surplus wheat when we produce it, and a great many other things we produce in abundance. I do not know why we could not put some of these lands into valuable use for the sake of our Indians.
As I said a moment ago there is a great deal of land which we are taking over and finding unsuitable for farming. I do not see one valid reason why we should not build pastures, as the Minister of Agriculture has done under the P.F.R.A., in which we could allow the Indians to participate. I just throw that out as a suggestion. If we are afraid to give them the land outright we might lease it to them over a considerable length of time. We are now overproducing all across the country, and I do not see why we should not let the Indians benefit by some of the land we are using.
There is another very important matter. I do not wish to do any harm to any hon. member who served with me on the committee examining the Indian Act, but during our sittings there seemed to be a feeling that what we wanted to do was to get the Indians off the reserves, wash our hands of them and dust our trousers and say, "That's that''. As I said when I first spoke, we must treat these reservations, shall I say, as sanctuaries to which the Indians can return.
If we were to take the Indian boys and girls and give them the finest education and training that we might give to white youth and they were to go into ordinary society, they would be under a tremendous disadvantage in the average community purely because of personal characteristics. Can you imagine how popular an Indian doctor would be? Can you imagine what success an Indian dentist or an Indian school teacher or lawyer would have? I know there are some who succeed but when you think of how many white people fail, with all their advantages, you would not be surprised to find that a great many of these people would fail, not because they were incompetent in their profession but simply because the white people would not want to go to an Indian.


An hon. Member:: Oh, no.


John Horne Blackmore: Well, I have had a certain amount of experience in these matters, and I am certainly not hurting the Indian; I am

boosting him up and my hon. friend should be glad of that. He puts himself up as a great defender of Indians and an advocate of their welfare, but I want this to be understood. As far as I can see, if you trained the average Indian to the very highest degree he would still be under a serious disadvantage in open competition with white people among whom he hoped to dwell. In an age when unemployment is so common and jobs are so hard to get we must not imagine that just because we train these Indian boys and girls they are going to be successful. Many an Indian who had fine personal qualifications himself might have a child who would not have those qualifications. This happens among white people with great frequency. If the father of that child should have left the reserve and established himself independently, his children who did not inherit the qualifications they would need in order to live off a reserve would have to be able to go back in time of need. I think this is a matter that must not be disregarded.
For the reason I have just given I think we have to safeguard the band membership of Indians. I do not think we can afford to leave it entirely to the bands of Indians to determine whether Indians are going to be on reserves. If people have Indian blood in their veins, even if it is only one-twelfth or one-sixteenth, they may be parents of children who will have all the characteristics of full-blooded Indians. These children will likely have to go back to a reservation and claim the right of the reservation to which they should belong. I think provision must be made for this sort of case looking to the future, if we are to approach this problem in a realistic way with a long range view.
Certain things have been said by various men and certain things have been said by the minister which have caused the Indians much concern. The Indians fear he wants to get them off the reservations. For instance, the minister has used the expression "integrating the Indian with the white population". Throughout his life the Indian has been taught to suspect everything the double-tongued white man said; therefore when the double-tongued white man says "integrate the Indian with the white population" the Indian concludes that means taking him off the reserve, putting him in open competition with the white man and taking away the treaty privileges his forefathers were promised.
As far as integration is concerned I think it must be as a result of self motivation on the part of the Indians; it must be by teaching the boys and girls that they can succeed very well off the reserves.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, quite.
67509-354i
Indian Act


John Horne Blackmore: No pressure must be put. on them in any way, shape or form. When; they integrate a good many of them will intermarry. I know of a good many combinations which are apparently quite successful, where Indians and white people have married. If they do that of their own free will and choice it is fine, and I believe they will eventually become white people; but let us have the instigation and pressure coma from them and not from us.
There is another matter to which I wish to devote some attention and that is the preservation of the native religion, history and culture. The Indians have a great, culture, a great history and a great religion.-The ancestors of our Indians created those magnificent pieces of architecture we find down in Central America. It was not second rate citizens who produced those great works, and no doubt they were created by people of the same blood and with the same ability as our Indians. The Indians have a great history and they should know about it, because it will inspire them. They had a great religion, or they would not have produced those great works; and they should know about it. Whether or not they choose to follow their native religion ought to be a matter of their personal choice, but I believe they should know about all these things.
There is another matter which I think deserves some attention, and that is the matter of choosing the band council. Formerly in all the reservations and among all the bands the Indians who led the bands were people who had a hereditary right to do so, and the Indians were led by those who came from great families. We are now-trying to introduce on many of the reservations the idea that the Indians should elect their representatives rather than select those whose heredity would qualify them for the position.
That poses a difficult problem, as the minister knows only too well, but my judgment is that the Indians themselves should be the judges as to whether they will choose as their band council those hereditary leaders or whether they will choose others whom they may consider better fitted for the task. Great care ought to be exercised in this matter.
Having visited the Indian reserve in my own constituency the minister will remember how far it is from one end of that reserve to the other. Just imagine-the minister will get the picture immediately-a meeting called just north of Cardston at which the Indians are going to elect a band council. How many of the Indians who dwell down

Indian Act
near Lethbridge are going to be able to attend that meeting? How many of them are going to be able to afford it? There will also be many Indians to the north and west who will be unable to attend the meeting, and the result will be that a great percentage of the Indians will not be able to attend. Who will be the people who will select members for the council? It will be a little group of Indians who live within three or four miles of the area just north of Cardston. That is the kind of thing which needs to be given much thought in managing Indians.
It was either the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort or the hon. member for Prince Albert who suggested that the Indians believed that if they got the franchise they would have to give up their treaty rights. The Indians in my constituency have that idea. They are fearful that if they vote they will disqualify themselves from getting their treaty rights. That shows there should be no relationship between an Indian voting and his being independent on the reserve and enjoying his treaty rights. If we feel that the Indian has reached the point where he can safely vote, let us give him the vote regardless of whether he is a treaty Indian or not. Let there be no strings attached.
This was emphasized by the hon. member for Mackenzie, who gave a very fine talk on this matter. When the Indian becomes qualified for a job he should have a job to go to. In fact, I am beginning to think that we must adopt that attitude toward white people as well. When boys or girls are qualified for jobs I submit it is the duty of the government to see that they get jobs, even if it is necessary to create a new industry in order to provide such. I know that will be looked upon as rather extreme, but there is nothing more disheartening to a boy or girl coming out of *university than to be unable to get a job no matter where he or she may go to try. If the Indians are going to be given education and training, jobs must be waiting for them when they have completed that education and training. I cannot see any way of escaping that conclusion if we are going to create among the Indians a sound morale.
The same thing is true of the goods they produce, the fish, the lumber, the furs and wheat. It is one thing for white men to compete with each other for a share of the 'world's markets, but it is another thing altogether for the Indian to do that. He does not possess anything like the facilities with which to force his way into world markets that the white man has.
I think that will constitute the main portion of what I have to say. There are two other matters which I think need attention, one
[Mr. Blackmore.l
having to do with liquor. I find a great deal of apprehension existing in the minds of the older men, those from about 45 years of age upward, regarding liquor. They want to keep liquor away from their youth.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but it is my duty to advise him that his time has expired.


Mr. McLeod1:: Mr. Chairman, I did not intend to speak on this subject at this time, but after listening to the well-prepared discourses we have heard this afternoon I feel that I have a story which I should tell in connection with the Indians in the territory which I am fortunate to represent. Incidentally, the reserve of these Indians is located within half a mile of my own home in the town of Enderby. We have heard in this debate calls for a royal commission, and we have heard details of the situation of the Indians in Saskatchewan and Alberta. We have heard the splendid plea by the hon. member for Lethbridge for the alleviation of distress among the Indians.
After listening to the details of the hardships suffered by many Indians I am beginning to think that the Indians in British Columbia are living in a pretty good part of the country. Of course I know that, and I have always preached that British Columbia is the garden of Eden. After listening to the details of the plight of the Indians in Saskatchewan and Alberta I am beginning to believe that is more and more the fact. I was surprised to hear that throughout the reserves in Saskatchewan there has been on an average one new house built per reserve during the past year. I have never gone through the reserve counting the houses, but I know that within two miles of Enderby there have been at least 25 houses built on the reserve during the past two years. They are scattered much farther afield than that. They are not just congregated in one place as a showpiece for the reserve. You can drive through the reserve and see the new houses.
As I listened to the pleas made for legislation and departmental action I wondered whether that was the answer. It appears to me that the problem is to find some way of integrating the Indian into the life of the local community. I do not mean to take the Indian off the reserve, I mean to make him acceptable to the community life of the white people in the areas adjacent to the reserve. I must admit that this is a local problem and its solution depends entirely upon the leaders in the white community who might be interested in the welfare of the Indian.
There is no doubt that the person best able to provide that leadership is the Indian

agent. I will go further and say that it is the responsibility of the department of Indian affairs to see that we have Indian agents able to give that leadership. I think we have perhaps not the only agent of that nature but certainly a young man with great vision.
I refer to Mr. Hett who is stationed at Vernon. He is certainly doing a mighty fine job in building up morale among the Indians of that area and getting the co-operation of the white community in assisting him in integrating the Indian into the life of the various communities.
Of course the place to start is with the young, and the Indians are no different than the white people in that respect. Sometimes old fellows-I am not excepting some of us in the house-are not amenable to change, but if we can get this across to the young generation it will be an easy matter to instil in them a different outlook and viewpoint.
For many generations we have looked upon the Indian as a second class citizen. I attach no blame for that feeling to either the Indian or the white man, but we must get rid of that stigma, if you want to call it that, and try to make the Indian a first class citizen. In my area we have no separate Indian schools. The Indian children attend the local public schools in Vernon, Enderby, Armstrong, Salmon Arm and I believe every place I could mention. They are not even in separate classrooms. They are free to mingle in their classes, in their sports and in their studies with the white children on a common ground and on a common basis.
It may be that there are many white people, who are not prepared to accept the Indians as an equal but in most cases, especially among children, you find no difference. We also find that the Indians have their bright students and their average students and some who are not even average, but the brighter students are certainly encouraged to go on to higher education, and we have them in the vocational schools and nurses' training schools, and we even have one or two students in the university. So a start has been made in that direction toward encouraging Indians to seek higher education.
We have had no trouble in placing educated Indians in employment. I will go further and say that we have found no trouble among the Indians in regard to earning a living in the local mills and in the woods and in the various jobs open to them in the white community. There is only one complaint I have. There is one large mill in my town that will not hire Indians, for the reason that they will work only two or three days or a week and then go away. For
Indian Act
that reason this particular man will not accept Indians, except possibly on a casual day to day labour basis. However, in the main we have Indians working in the mills and in the bush, earning a good deal of money on a scale equal to white people and building up very good homes for themselves on the reserves.
There is one other thing I should like to mention at this time. I spoke of the Indian agent giving leadership to the community or to the Indians on the reserve. Of course he cannot handle that by himself. The only way he can do that is by enlisting the support of people in the white community who are prepared to give some of their time and devote some effort to this work. I just want to tell you a little experience I had last summer. Mr Hett, the agent from Vernon, was anxious to get something started on the reserve, and a special meeting was called in our city hall. At that meeting we had the mounted police detachment-only two of them, by the way-I was at it, and also various other people of the community interested in trying to evolve some way to benefit and give a little lift to life on the reserve.
Of course at a meeting such as that there are always various ideas put forth, and at this one there were several. As a result we had some of the women and men from the town of Enderby who were prepared to devote one night a week or one night a month, as was required, to meet with the Indians and try to educate them into better ways of living. As a result we had a homemakers' club organized on the reserve. By the way, they have a very nice community hall less than half a mile from the limits of our city, and they meet there once a month. Different women from the town of Enderby attend these meetings and give hints and lessons on various phases of homemaking.
In a very short time results have been noticeable. When one drives along the roads through the reserve one sees that the washing on the line, for instance, is a little whiter than it used to be. One sees some brightly coloured curtains hanging at the windows, and one notices some painting and decorating being done on the houses. Inside the houses one will find action being taken in painting and decorating these homes. That is the result of the spirit that has been engendered in that community through the leadership of the people of Enderby.
We all know that sport is one of the greatest ways to level off the thinking of people. In that community we have Indians on the baseball clubs and on the hockey teams. Since I left there I have noted that a boxing

Indian Act
club has been organized in our little town. The corporal of the mounted police has offered his services to give lessons and supervise this club. I understand that among the membership are many Indian youths.
This is something that can be done by local effort; and you can build up the spirit that desires to see the Indian brought up to the standard or integrated into the white man's way of life. I think you can talk about legislation from now till doomsday but you cannot legislate these things for the Indians. They have to come through joint effort and through some encouragement from the white people. Leadership must come from the Indian agent and the white people of the communities surrounding the reserves. There are perhaps many other things I could mention, but my whole aim is to stress the point that I doubt very much whether legislation is the answer to this problem. That is the message I tried to convey to the meeting which, as I have said, was held last fall. It is up to us to remove that feeling of inferiority from the Indian and give him to understand that he will be accepted into the circles of the white man.
We have heard a little about drinking. In our province the Indians are allowed into the beer parlours. They get tight on occasion. I doubt if they get any tighter or act any worse than some of our white men. At the same time, I have not been too happy about legislation giving the Indians the right to enter beer parlours and to have liquor freely. The problem in giving liquor to Indians is that it is just one more means by which they get rid of their money, which is not too plentiful.
Many are heads of families. I happen to know quite well a family with 14 children. They have a new house, but I will grant you that it is not big enough for 14 children. The head of this household is working and makes from $10 to $12 per day. All the children of school age are attending school. They are very well dressed, too. However, with $10 or $12 per day the wife finds it difficult to provide school lunches and properly look after these 14 children, of whom I think ten are of school age. That is a problem that would be just as much a problem for a white person. However, I must say that, of the Indians of whom I have knowledge or acquaintance, they seem to be making progress in what I think is the proper way.
I would again emphasize what has been done in this area where leadership has come from the Indian agent, and it seems to be the only one we have heard about. I would say it is up to the Indian affairs branch to see that we have more of this type of Indian

agent. That is where the responsibility of the department lies. I think that is something that should be studied and considered. I have no doubt that it is being given consideration, and that possibly the officials of the department know a whole lot more about what is being done in Vernon and my area generally than I do. However, this is something that should be publicized for it does show, rather than through legislation or reserve improvement, one way in which the Indian can be made part of the community life and accepted on a par with the white man of this country.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Pickersgill thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 439, to amend the Indian Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



PUBLIC SERVICE SUPERANNUATION ACT


Walter Edward Harris: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Public Service Superannuation Act to extend the application of the act, and to provide further for certain changes in consequence thereof and also in connection with the administration of the act.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, as the resolution indicates, this bill is designed to extend the application of certain provisions of the act to certain persons or groups of persons who are not at present able to benefit from it. These extensions in turn call for certain consequential amendments, and in addition the bill will deal with other amendments of an administrative nature.
The principal amendment proposed has to do with the making of an election to continue as a participant after retirement under part II of the act, which provides the supplementary death benefits. It is proposed to provide a year in advance of retirement in which an election may be made in addition to the present very limited period of 3 days following retirement. A provision is also proposed which would validate elections which could not be accepted in the past since they were made just prior to retirement. Many hon. members are aware of this problem, which is a rather complicated one, and I would suggest that any detailed discussion

should be deferred until there has been an opportunity to study the amending bill.
Another major amendment proposed would repeal those provisions in the act which would have come into force on August 1, 1957, and which would have restricted the augmenting of pension credits through employment after the age of 65 on and after that date.
The other amendments proposed will, I think, commend themselves to the house as relatively minor in nature and, as I mentioned previously, relate primarily to the elimination of administrative problems. The most important of these would require that re-employed former contributors under the act on again becoming contributors would be treated like all new employees and would become participants under the supplementary death benefit scheme under part II of the act, regardless of the fact that they had elected not to participate when the death benefit scheme was introduced in the house a year or two ago.


Mr. Drew:: Mr. Chairman, I think that there should be general approval of the purpose expressed in regard to the amendments mentioned in the statement just given to the committee. However, I would strongly urge that the opportunity be taken to deal with a subject which goes much farther than the amendments now proposed and involves an improvement that I think is greatly needed in connection with the Public Service Superannuation Act. I mention that because while we are in the committee stage we are simply dealing with the desirability of introducing a measure to amend the Public Service Superannuation Act and to extend its application. For that reason it would be possible to redraft the bill, if it is in final drafted form, to include any suggestions that may be made. So it is appropriate on a motion of this kind to indicate the nature of amendments not already mentioned but which, in the opinion of many hon. members, could and should be included.
In the statement just made it has been indicated that the legislation is designed to extend the application of the present act to certain people to whom it does not now apply. It is also intended to provide a wider opportunity for election under the act. It seems that the remainder of the amendments are largely for the purpose of facilitating administration.
I believe the time is long overdue in Canada for an amendment to the act which will recognize the severe hardship being suffered by many former civil servants, members of the armed forces, former members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and others whose
Public Service Superannuation Act pensions were fixed at a time that the dollar was worth a great deal more than it is today. What I have to say does not of course apply to the disability pensions for service veterans, because consideration is given to them under another act.
I would point out, however, that it must be well known to all hon. members that there are men and women who gave long years of faithful service either in the civil service of Canada, as members of the armed forces, as members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police or in the related services, whose pensions today, with the present value of the dollar, are hopelessly inadequate to meet the minimum demands of decent living. When this subject has been discussed on other occasions there has been some tendency to suggest that the amount paid was in the nature of a contract. There is the suggestion that it would be a practical impossibility to review the whole field of pension payments in these categories. I suggest, however, that we should consider the reasons for which these pensions were established.
It is recognized that those in the civil service, in the armed forces, in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and in other similar services are not paid as much as people of similar skill, devotion to their task and general ability might earn in private occupations. The pension has been regarded as something that will make it possible for them to live in modest decency in the years of their retirement after the active period of their service. Actually the date of retirement may be a fairly early one. For that reason we must consider this matter as an obligation of justice. Their pensions were fixed at a time when doubtless, in many cases, they were adequate to meet the demands of the principle upon which they had been established. It seems to me that this is a question of justice to those who have served their country well. In making the suggestion that there should be a review and that there should be amendments to the superannuation act at this time, I am not making any suggestion that is impractical or that is in any way beyond the ordinary considerations of government.
I would point out that similar consideration has been given to this problem in both the United Kingdom and the United States. To take the United Kingdom, where the parliamentary system is similar to our own and where the form of service may be more similar, I would point out that there have been a number of acts increasing the pensions payable to people in the categories I have mentioned as well as to others.
5580	HOUSE OF
Public Service Superannuation Act As evidence of this I merely give the fact that in 1920 an act was rpassed known as the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1920. Again there was the Pensions (Increase) Act of 1924. Then there was the Pensions (Increase) Act of 1944. Later there was the Pensions (Increase) Act of 1947. Later still there was the Pensions (Increase) Act of 1956, which came into effect on April 1 this year. In the Pensions (Increase) Act of 1956 the increase of pension embraced 20 different categories. It would perhaps naturally embrace a wider number of categories in the United Kingdom than it would here in any event, because of the fact that with a single government there, a number of services that would fall under the provincial governments in this country fall under the central government there.
The amounts of the increases have varied. This year they have varied in accordance with the amount of the pension payable, and it is not a rigid pattern. At the time this bill was before the House of Commons in the United Kingdom I find the statement of the financial secretary to the treasury, Mr. Henry Brooke, as reported at page 585 of British Hansard for February 23 of this year. During the course of those remarks he had this to say:
What we have to do is to take into account a total body of about 600,000 pensioners, who have retired after different kinds of services, with different kinds of pension, at different times over the past 30 years and more. What matters is to do justice, as far as possible, among all those individuals. One has to discard the idea of a simple, new scheme as soon as one discovers that whatever scheme of that kind one can devise, it will do justice that is too rough to be called justice at all.
Mr. Brooks then went on to explain the system that was being adopted, and later in the same day he explained:
The fact is that the earlier acts have given a much greater percentage increase the smaller the pension.
That practice has generally been followed. Nevertheless there has been a general review in the United Kingdom of the whole problem of pensions fixed years ago, at a time when the value of money was a great deal more than it is today in terms of the same units. That bill passed this year was one of a long series, as I have indicated. It shows that it is an accepted part of their practice in the United Kingdom to attempt to deal with this subject on the basis of justice which relates to the duty to give to those who have served the country in various capacities a minimum decent living standard in keeping with their place in the community.


I would point out that this principle has been accepted by three different parties in Britain. It was accepted by the Conservative government which passed the act this year; by the coalition government in 1944; by a Labour government since then; and in earlier years by a Liberal government. Therefore in the United Kingdom no argument is presented that any cold, contractual basis should limit the amount payable to those elderly citizens who have given fine service to the country and whose pensions were intended to give them a minimum decent standard of living.
Mr. Chairman, as I have a few more remarks to make, although not extended ones, it might perhaps be well if-


William Alfred Robinson: Has the hon. gentleman unanimous consent to proceed?


George Alexander Drew: I think it would perhaps be just as well, Mr. Chairman, if we called it six o'clock and I continued briefly at eight o'clock.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
George Alexander Drew: At six o'clock I was speaking on the efforts that have been made in the United Kingdom to deal with the problem of pensions to civil servants, to members of the armed forces and others on the basis of the changing value of money, and I had given references to the acts which had been passed there to deal with that tremendously important problem. I did so merely to indicate that this is not a theoretical suggestion in any way, and I proposed that the act here be amended to take care of the situation with which we are confronted in this country.
I would like also to point out that in the United States which it is true has a different form of government, they have dealt with this same problem and on different occasions have made changes to bring the pensions in some way into balance with the changing value of money. In doing so they have recognized that this is not something which can be regarded merely as a contract for a fixed amount of money, but that what we have in mind is a decent living standard for people who have served their country in one public capacity or another. In 1930 they passed an act which provided for an increase of annuities and again, in 1955, they made certain changes in the earlier statute. I quote from page 4750 of what is described as the

United States code, congressional and administrative news, which covers the laws passed in the United States during 1955. I see that at page 4750 it says:
As will be seen from the schedule, the formula favours the low-annuity individual who most needs the increase.
Nevertheless, I find that in the United States laws, as well as in the laws passed in the United Kingdom, an attempt has been made to examine the whole situation and find, on the basis of justice, what would be a fair, decent and reasonable minimum standard for those who are dependent upon the pensions paid in this way.
I submit, Mr. Chairman, that when we find in the United Kingdom, which is under a similar system to our own, and in the United States, which is under a different system but which is so close to us geographically that they have dealt with this subject in the way they have, we should be prepared to deal with it here. I think it must be known to many hon. members that there are many people, who gave long years of devoted service, who are living in the most severely restricted conditions today and in fact are living in conditions that we should not feel to be satisfactory for those who have given long years of public service. I do think that in the amendments now proposed some steps should be taken to deal with this subject. I believe that as a first step a uniform percentage increase should be agreed upon. However, I think it is essential that the whole subject be examined both in regard to the time at which the pensions were granted and the years of service that were given.
Even a uniform percentage would deal to some extent only with the problem with which we are confronted. Many of the people now with no other resources than the pensions of this kind which they receive had those pensions established at a time when the dollar was worth a great deal more than twice which it is worth today. Others received their pensions at a later date. It would seem that there are variable factors which must be taken into consideration.
I do not wish to leave the impression that I am in any way suggesting we should hand over the responsibility for examining things of this kind to bodies other than representative bodies of this parliament; but we all know that there are occasions when a royal commission, which can proceed without any problem of the period during which parliament is sitting or otherwise, can perform services which are extremely helpful. Those who sometimes speak in critical terms of royal commissions forget how many useful achievements there are which can be directly 67509-355
2, 1956	5581
Public Service Superannuation Act attributed to the recommendations of royal commissions in this country.
The same is true in the United Kingdom; the same is true in each of the nations of the commonwealth which has a similar parliamentary system. It would seem to me that in this case it is not only desirable and expedient that a measure to amend the Public Service Superannuation Act be introduced for the purposes mentioned earlier in the discussion today, but also that this amending bill make some immediate provision for the people who are in dire need at this time in the face of the very real measure of inflation which has taken place here and elsewhere.
Then I suggest that this whole problem be examined by a royal commission, which could sit without interruption and could examine the scale of pensions that were granted at different times and make recommendations to us as to the way in which this very real and very human problem could be dealt with.
The suggestion is sometimes made that we abdicate our responsibilities when a royal commission is appointed to inquire into matters of this kind. That certainly is not so. A royal commission can only make recommendations, nothing more. It is then for parliament to decide what will be done in regard to the recommendations made. In this case the advantages of a royal commission would be that it could start its sittings as soon as it had been appointed, and could continue to hear evidence and examine the various aspects of this problem and then be prepared to make an appropriate recommendation which could be given due consideration whenever the next session of this parliament or a succeeding parliament meets.
In any event, whatever course is adopted I do wish to emphasize this fact which I am sure is known to many hon. members. There are many devoted public servants of other years who are living under most unsatisfactory conditions today because the pensions which were established in those earlier days are so inadequate for their requirements now.
I have made these recommendations at a time when the bill is not finally before us. It is open to the government to reconsider the exact wording of the bill that will be brought forward following this resolution. In view of the fact that this has been dealt with on numerous occasions over succeeding years by the parliament of the United Kingdom, and in view of the fact that it has been dealt with under similar principles by the congress of the United States, where living conditions are in many ways similar to our own, I urge that justice be done to those senior members of our civil service, our armed forces, our Royal Canadian Mounted Police and other

Public Service Superannuation Act similar servants so we may have the feeling that those who serve Canada well are at least receiving justice in this way.
May I suggest, without any thought other than the fact that the problem of maintaining the strength of this or any other country depends so much upon the civil service and the other services I have mentioned, that perhaps this is the day when we might most appropriately consider our responsibility to those who can only look to us for the measure of justice to which they are entitled.


Mr. Nicholson:: Mr. Chairman, I am sorry that the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre is absent in his constituency.


An hon. Member:: We do not share your sorrow.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: He is observing the birthday of our country in his constituency. I am sure the members of all parties appreciate the outstanding work the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has done throughout the years with a view to improving working conditions for civil servants generally. He has done a great deal for them and for superannuated civil servants.


Mr. Mcllraiih:: He has not done anything for them; not a thing.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: In the first place I want to associate myself with the Leader of the Opposition in paying tribute to the quality of the civil service generally. I think the Minister of Finance particularly must be constantly aware of the problem of securing and retaining in the public service the best available people in the country in view of the tremendous competition offered by private enterprise.
I have before me a sessional paper which gives the names of the lawyers who have been employed by government departments and the legal fees and expenses paid to them. This return runs to over 100 pages, and I cannot but contrast the fees paid to a very few lawyers across the country with the salaries we pay to the lawyers who are in the cabinet or who serve with various government departments. I am sure the Minister of Finance himself finds it embarrassing at times to be negotiating with some of the top people in the Canadian financial world and to have to admit that the Minister of Finance receives an amount which is very small compared with the returns offered by the large financial corporations in this country.
I realize I cannot go too far in pressing this. Last year when the superintendent of insurance had performed an outstanding piece of work I suggested that when increases were being considered he should be kept in mind for an increase. One of the daily papers

which circulates in my constituency drew attention to the salary he was receiving. Certainly it is not too easy to explain to farmers who are hard pressed why a farmer member should be advocating higher salaries for people who to them appear to be receiving fairly adequate salaries, but I think we should all agree that working in the public service of a country like Canada should rate high, and that those who are asked to make a career in various government departments should be given salaries while they are working and pensions when they are too old to work which will compare favourably with the returns which are available in other sectors of our economy.
I would like to stress particularly the point which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has made again and again concerning the large number of civil servants who have been forced to retire on pensions which might have appeared adequate when they started with the civil service 30, 40 or 50 years ago but are quite inadequate today. I am not like some members of parliament who stay in plush Ottawa hotels when they come here; my returns do not allow that. On three different occasions I have had a room in the homes of retired civil servants. I think it would be a good thing if more members of parliament would place themselves in positions where they can observe retired civil servants living in the city of Ottawa.


An hon. Member:: You retire and we will all be satisfied.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I did not hear that. Would the hon. member stand up? I would appreciate having him say it so I can hear it.
When the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre discussed this question on April 16, 1953, he pointed out that of the 10,572 retired civil servants, 1,468 were on a pension of less than $60 a month and there were 312 on a pension of less than $20 a month. The figures for widows of civil servants, who numbered 5,123, showed that more than half or 2,766 were on a pension of less than $40 a month, and 942 were on a pension of less than $20 a month.
There is a new Minister of Finance since the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre discussed this question; Mr. Abbott was the minister at that time. I am sure the present Minister of Finance will want to give careful consideration to the representations I am making before the bill is finally presented.
I notice that when Bill No. 334 was before the banking and commerce committee in April of 1953, Mr. Whitehouse, president of the Civil Service Federation of Canada, was called as a witness. In answer to a question

as to what other countries had done about the position of retired civil servants who were caught by inflation he was able to advise the committee that in the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, the United States and some parts of Canada something had been done. Later, upon being questioned, he admitted that Saskatchewan was the one part of Canada where some provision had been made so that retired civil servants who found themselves with pensions of $40 or $60 a month would be put in a better position.
I submit that this is a domestic problem that the Minister of Finance and his experts can solve without any serious repercussions on our economy. It is very annoying for this large group of our retired civil servants to read articles in newspapers such as the one which appeared in the Toronto Telegram on June 27 of this year. This is a story written by Arnold Agnew from Ottawa and it is headed: "3 Months' Profits Hit $728,000,000- See Huge Surplus". The articles reads:
Corporation profits soared to an estimated $728 million in the first three months of this year, an increase of 28 per cent over the same period last year, dominion bureau of statistics figures show.
The increase in profits before taxes amounts to $158 million. Income tax liabilities for the first quarter were estimated at $321 million, an increase of 23 per cent over last year.
The figures bolster predictions that the dominion treasury will find itself with a huge surplus at the end of the year.
Then the last dominion bureau of statistics weekly bulletin had this to say about the gross national product:
Canada's gross national product rose during the first quarter of 1956 to a level equal to an annual rate of $28-3 billion, about 6 per cent above the annual average for last year and nearly 11-7 per cent above last year's first-quarter level. The quarter's rise reflected mainly a further rise in the physical volume of production. The output gain was concentrated in mining, forestry, construction, transportation and other service groups; manufacturing was little changed from the last 1955 quarter.
If the gross national product can go up 11-7 per cent in the first quarter of this year as compared with last year, and if corporation profits can go up 28 per cent for the first quarter of this year as compared with the first quarter of last year, I see no reason why the Minister of Finance cannot before proceeding with this legislation review the matter and bring in the necessary provision so that the large number of civil servants who retired on the assumption that the bond of the government of Canada was as good as gold and that the cheque they would receive in the evening of their lives would be adequate, should have further consideration.
On April 16, 1953, the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre when discussing this 67509-3551
2, 1956	5583
Public Service Superannuation Act matter pointed out what had been done in the United States in 1948, when an act of congress was passed which increased the pensions of retired employees by 25 per cent or $300 a year, whichever was the lesser figure. If the United States in 1948 could provide either an increase of 25 per cent or $300 a year, whichever was the lesser, I am sure we could do the same thing in 1956. In 1952 a further increase was granted by another act of congress. As an example of how those two pieces of legislation worked out, a superannuant who was receiving $1,000 per year was increased in 1948 to $1,250 and in 1952 to $1,565.50. I ask hon. members to remember those figures, an increase of over 50 per cent since 1948. The figure for 1948, $1,000, increased to $1,250 and to $1,565 in 1952. I think the same thing is physically possible on the Canadian scene.
I might mention in passing that apparently it is not too wise a political move for any member of parliament to cast reflections upon these most reasonable representations. I notice that one of the few members who was critical was the former member for Regina, Dr. McCusker. It is significant that he did not come back to Ottawa after the election. Of course there were other factors involved, but I think the fact that he was not able to make out a good case when this bill was before the house indicated that it would have been better for him if he had kept quiet.
Some time ago the Department of Labour produced an interesting study having to do with older workers. I think at this stage the minister should be prepared to give consideration to the large number of people who have retired but who are unable to have that standard of living which the economy of Canada could provide for all its citizens. The statistical branch of the Bank of Canada has presented some alarming information with regard to consumer credit in Canada. Since the beginning of 1951 when these figures were first compiled up to the end of 1955 the increase has been most alarming.
It is only natural that in the Canadian economy when there is such a wide variety of goods in our stores and when there are such a large number of people who are not getting salaries or pensions large enough to buy those goods, many would be encouraged to go into debt. We certainly are not going to be able to solve the economic problems of Canada by encouraging our pensioners or those who are not on pensions to go in debt to the storekeeper, to the finance company or to the bank in order to get consumer goods.
I find that in the United States there is a great deal of concern about this same trend. Large numbers of people are unable to pay
5584	HOUSE OF
Public Service Superannuation Act for the things they want out of their current wages or pensions and are going into debt.
I notice the total mortgage and consumer debt in 1955 stood at 46-8 per cent of the disposable income, a rise of 5 per cent over
1954.	It is pointed out that in 1929, a wild year by older standards, the percentage was only 31-4 per cent. It would appear from this increase in the United States and Canada that the Minister of Finance and the experts in his department should give careful consideration to this large sector of our Canadian people whose wages or pensions prevent them from having their share of the goods which are available.
To be specific, I feel that the minister should be prepared to bring up to date the figures given on April 16 by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. At that time there were 1,052 retired civil servants who were finding it impossible to enjoy the standard of living to which they thought they would be entitled upon finishing their work and going on pension. I submit that provisions should be made similar to those which have been made by the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, the province of Saskatchewan and a good number of private organizations in Canada.


Mr. Low:: Mr. Chairman, I do not think it is necessary at this stage of this measure to say too much because we do not know what there will be in the bill. I understand the minister made no statement to introduce the resolution.


Walter Edward Harris: My parliamentary assistant did.


Solon Earl Low: I think it would be more desirable to have the bill in our hands before we make too extended remarks about it. However, I should like to add a word to the comments which have been placed before the committee by the Leader of the Opposition and the hon. member for Mackenzie.
It is only parliament which in the final analysis can provide a just measure of security for our civil service both by way of salary and superannuation. As has been said, they look to us, and I think it is essential that we give the most earnest consideration to the position in which civil servants find themselves and do what we can, not only to attract the best possible men and women to the service but to see to it that the level of their salaries and superannuation is such as will give them the measure of security to which they are entitled.
I have been somewhat critical of some of the competitions which have been advertised and notices of which we find so frequently in our mail boxes. In my judgment the salary schedule is ridiculously low in
IMr. Nicholson.]

many cases when one considers the qualifications and experience required before a person can qualify for the position.
There was a time when it could be said that it was desirable to get a fat civil service job, but I am afraid now there are very few such, except perhaps at the top, and even then they are not too fat. I am afraid that we are not competing successfully with private industry. I think we are going to lose such people to private industry, and unless we become much more realistic about both salary schedules and superannuation arrangements we shall find ourselves very largely with second rate people in the civil service.
Now I should like to say just a word about the matter raised by the hon. member for Mackenzie, about the retired civil servant who found himself ten or 15 years ago on what was then considered a fairly good level of superannuation, one which he thought would provide him with some security for the rest of his life. Since then the value of the Canadian dollar has been allowed to decline seriously until its value is little more than 50 per cent of what it was in 1939. As a consequence the superannuant finds himself in the position that he has not half enough to take care of his needs during his declining years.
Now he is in a desperate position. It was not his fault that the dollar lost its purchasing value. He therefore can say, "I looked ahead; I did the very best I could to provide myself with security for my old age. I put up dollars that would purchase a dollar's worth, but I got back dollars that will purchase only 50 cents worth. Consequently I have to look somewhere for justice. I have to do something to supplement this meagre income; otherwise I simply cannot live." Many of them cannot find work. They are told they are too old to work.
May I point out there are two sides to this whole question. There is the humanitarian side. We owe it to those old civil servants, who gave the best years of their lives to the public service, to see to it that the dollars they get back under their superannuation schemes are equal in purchasing value to the dollars they put in. I think that is only right. That is the humanitarian side, because they need the security they have purchased. It is not their fault that they are not getting it. Somebody else has fallen down; the managers of our system and of our money policy.
There is another side to it, and that is the business side. From the point of view of stabilizing our economy it would be desirable to make provision for these retired civil

servants to have a better scale of pensions right now. It can be done; there is no question about it. I draw the attention of the Minister of Finance to the fact that last year we produced in this country $26,600 million worth of goods and services. In the course of producing that quantity of goods and services we distributed to the people of Canada over $24 billion worth of purchasing power in all forms. There was a deficiency, and that deficiency was made up very largely by the people of Canada running charge accounts, buying on instalment credit and borrowing from the banks or the personal loan companies and so on in the form of cash personal loans in order to satisfy their present needs and wants. We forced the people of Canada to borrow to the extent of $2,600 million last year in all those forms I mentioned, just in order that they could consume what they laboured so hard to produce.
That situation is more or less true each year. It would be a better stabilizer to our whole economy if the incomes of the people of Canada were more nearly equal to the value of the goods and services we produced, if we could see to it that purchasing power gets into their hands so they could buy what we produce without forcing them to go to the loan sharks to do it. We are forcing them to do that. Many of them are paying as much as 24 per cent a year to get the purchasing power with which to buy the goods and services that go begging for sale. That is not a good sign. That is not a stable, sound economy. I say that, entirely aside from the humanitarian aspect of this whole business, the Minister of Finance ought to see to it that these retired civil servants are given a better show for the dollars they put up to buy their superannuation. When he does, then our economy is going to be much more stable, we are going to bring our purchasing power more nearly into balance with our production, and our economy will be stronger and better for it.
So I suggest to the minister that what was said by the hon. member for Mackenzie is perfectly true. Canada can afford it. Canada cannot afford not to see that its old retired civil servants get a decent show. There is no reason in this world why they should continue to subsist on dollars that will buy only 50 cents' worth. I say it is high time that we in this parliament gave them justice; and only we can give them justice. I am going to leave it at that until the bill comes in.


Mr. Richard (Ottawa East):: I should like to say a few words on the Public Service Superannuation Act. As you know, Mr. 2, 1956
Public Service Superannuation Act Chairman, we in Canada have the most loyal and efficient public servants of any country in this world. We have been blessed by the fact that throughout the years, whatever government has been in power, we have had a wonderful staff of civil servants throughout the country. That places us in the position of having to deal with them fairly, equitably and most generously. I have always said that in any country the best employer should be the government, and I am proud to say that the government of Canada has the reputation of being the best employer in this country.
I have no quarrel with the superannuation act as it stands today; and no doubt unless conditions change gravely those who have been receiving pensions for the past few years and for many years to come will have an adequate superannuation. But my plea, as it has been for many years in the past, is for those who had already begun to receive pensions before 1950, and for those who receive small pensions in any case.
Dealing with those persons who received pensions before, say, 1950, it is true that many of those pensions are substantial. But in any event those pensions, as has been stated, do not provide the expected results for those who contributed for some 30 or 35 years before they were put on their pensions. I would say that even for these people a small percentage, at least, of increase should be allowed in any plan affecting pensions already in force.
But my real plea is for those who have low pensions. Low pensions arise for many reasons, one of the main reasons being the fact, that the people were on low salaries before-the war years, and pensions based on those low salaries are very low indeed in 1956. Many people are suffering real hardships because of those pensions. But there are other-people who are suffering and who will suffer -because of low pensions. They are the people.-who have had to retire on account of sickness after a few years in the civil service. They are the people whose positions are abolished through no fault of their own. There are also the people who, because of certain unfortunate conditions of life, have to retire before they have completed 35 years of service.
If the pensions of any in these groups are below what is enough to provide them with a normal existence, with the result that they become a charge on others in the community or have to live a very meagre existence, then I say it is the duty and responsibility of parliament to see that those who were our former employees receive some

Public Service Superannuation Act additional benefits. This is not something that can be settled without proper study. I think the whole matter should be studied by whatever authority the government chooses, but it should be a body of qualified people who have had experience.
All these conditions I have mentioned previously should be studied, the conditions of life of the people who have low pensions, the conditions of life of the people who have retired because of illness or because of the abolition of positions. These conditions should be studied so the government and parliament will be able to see to it that those who were formerly employees of this country do not suffer for the lack of suitable pensions.
The answer is always given that those not formerly civil servants who are depending on pension or investment plans do not receive bonuses, but the conditions are different. Any person who joins the public service must come under the pension plan. He has to contribute to the plan. The government is already a partner in the plan, and much more than an equal partner so far as contributions are concerned. In the past few years the government has contributed $125 million or more to subsidize the fund. We have accepted the principle that we are backing the fund. If we can accept that principle, Ahen I think we can also accept the principle that this time we are going to create a fund once and for all to support those who have *been let down by the changes in salaries and ffhe new plan of superannuation introduced 'some years ago.
I therefore urge that the Minister of Finance give this matter a great deal more attention than it has been given in the past. I think it is a matter of justice, a matter of fairness, a matter of equity, and it is also a question of being humanitarian. I hope the day will come when we can say there is nothing wrong with the conditions of employment of civil servants in this country.


Mr. Green:: Mr. Chairman, the discussion on the resolution stage preceding the introduction of a bill gives one the opportunity to make suggestions as to what should be included in the bill, and this evening I should like to deal with two points. In the first place, there is the question raised by the Leader of the Opposition, which has also been dealt with by spokesmen from each of the other parties.
I believe the time has come when the government should take some action. I remember it being raised first in the session of 1949, I think it was, and every year since that time the same thing has been pointed out to the government. However, we have

been brushed aside each year primarily with the argument that a contract had been made, that these civil servants knew what they were doing when they paid into the superannuation fund, and that the contract could not be changed now.
I submit that is not an answer to this problem. It has been found to be no answer in the United Kingdom, the United States, some of the Canadian provinces and in the case of the Canadian Pacific Railway and many other private firms. I have here a letter from the superannuated federal civil servants organization of Vancouver written this year after checking the situation in other countries and with other organizations. They have this to say:
All countries that we have been able to contact have increased superannuation benefits to all those who were retired on the basis of pre-inflation salary rates, on humanitarian grounds. Two we might mention, namely, Great Britain and the United States, have given several increases to this class, and as recently as October 1, 1955, the United States have provided its fourth increase to the amount of 12 per cent to those receiving $150 per month or less and 8 per cent to those over $150.
I believe the organizations representing civil servants now in the service have urged from time to time that something be done to assist the superannuated civil servants, and surely the time has come to do something about it. Members of parliament have improved their own position on more than one occasion since this need was first pointed out, yet nothing has been done to help those retired civil servants. It really gets down to the basis of what it costs to live; and it costs a man who retired ten years ago, or his widow, just as much to live as it costs a civil servant retiring in 1956. I hope that in this bill or in other legislation the minister will make some provision to meet this situation.
The other point I should like to draw to the minister's attention has to do with the position of a widow who happens to be more than 20 years younger than her husband. Section 13, subsection 4, deals with that situation and reads as follows:
Notwithstanding anything in this act, the amount of any annual allowance to which the widow of a contributor may be entitled under this act shall, if the age of the contributor exceeded that of his widow by 20 or more years, be reduced by an amount determined in accordance with the regulations.
I suggest that a provision of a little different type should be placed in the act to cover that situation. When a civil servant has been married for a period of 25 years, let us say, it does seem to me pretty severe treatment, when he dies and his widow happens to be over 20 years younger, that

her pension should be reduced. Surely the way to go at it would be to say that if he had been married for 10 years or 15 years, then the widow would receive the full amount payable to other widows. But this section is so worded that if the man happens to marry a woman over 20 years his junior she cannot qualify for the full widow's pension.
I suggest to the minister that is unfair and should be remedied. I have no doubt that there would be a comparatively small number of cases which would come under that provision, but I happen to have run across one where the widow, although she was over 20 years younger than the civil servant, was nearly 60 when he died and she has had her pension cut drastically as a result of that particular section. Apparently they did not realize that there was any such provision in the act, and kept on making payments expecting that in the event of his death the widow would get the same payment as any other widow. I hope the minister will look into that particular situation as well and that perhaps something can be done about it at this present session.


Mr. Mclvor:: I should like to ask the minister a question. If these superannuated civil servants are not now getting enough to live on, can they claim benefit under the act passed last week under the sponsorship of the Minister of National Health and Welfare?


Mr. Regier:: Mr. Chairman, in the main I endorse the requests that have been made by members in all parts of the house. I also look forward with eager anticipation to the introduction of the bill which we all, I am sure, hope will offer some measure of relief to these people in need. However, at this point, I should like to emphasize the point that simply an interim award, welcome and necessary though it may be, is not to my mind at least a solution to the problem.
The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has over a goodly number of years helped to emphasize to the government and to the public at large the dire need in which many of our retired civil servants live, in that he has called for the production of returns showing the vast number who are obliged to live on incomes that are below the level of decency. However, I also have in mind the various references that have been made from time to time in this house by the hon. member for Winnipeg South-I regret that he is not here this evening-in which he has attempted to show the government that it must bear the responsibility for the decreasing purchasing power of the pensioner's income.
2. 1956
Public Service Superannuation Act
I realize full well that in private industry the worker working for a company pays a share of his wages; that the company usually matches that share; that this money is laid aside in a pension fund; and that the pension payments purchase a definite and fixed retirement allowance. Maybe not too much can easily be done with this matter. A year ago-it is almost exactly a year ago, Mr. Chairman-I asked the Minister of Finance whether any research had been done on the subject of ensuring to pensioners a pension commensurate in its purchasing power with the pension they had been purchasing through their working years. The minister's reply was to the effect that if he knew the answer to that question, he would be the most renowned minister of finance in the world. However, I should like to point out to the Minister of Finance that there are in the world places where there is recognition of the decline or rise in the value or the purchasing power of the pension dollar. Other governments have made attempts to meet the situation.
As I said before, maybe not too much can immediately be done with the pensions of those other than civil servants. However, at this time I should like to point out to the government that even toward these people the government has a responsibility because the purchasing power of the Canadian dollar- hence the standard of living that the pension will provide-is a direct result of the monetary and fiscal powers of the government of the Dominion of Canada. I therefore feel that even in that case they cannot shirk their responsibility.
However, when we come to speak of the superannuated civil servants, I am unwilling to agree with the hon. member for Ottawa East when he calls this government a model employer in the Dominion of Canada. I think nowadays it is one of the worst employers in the Dominion of Canada. I feel that it is only the public spiritedness of the civil servants that enables us to carry on the proper functions of government in Canada. One has only to look at the salary offerings of the civil service commission in order to realize that the government of the day is not by any means a model employer in Canada.
However, I see little need for this government not being able to tie the superannuation allowance to retired civil servants to the actual cost of living. I think that in the case of civil servants, the whole idea of a certain percentage of wages being deducted and the government matching the contribution is unnecessary and is a needless exercise of government red tape and expenditure. I have known of various pension schemes that depend for their reliability on
5588	HOUSE OF
Public Service Superannuation Act the government guarantee. If governments in Canada can do that with respect to other pension schemes-I have in mind the teachers' pension schemes in several provinces in Canada, where the contribution of the government consists only of a guarantee to maintain the solvency of the fund-I feel that this government, because it is a continuing institution and not like any private company, apt to disappear from the scene or its solvency to disappear, could adopt the principle that it will pay to its retired civil servants a superannuation allowance that bears some relationship to wages actually being paid from year to year in the particular line of employment from which the civil servant was retired.
I think this procedure would save an immense amount of money. I believe the minister will be obliged to agree that the present civil service retirement scheme is a matter of bookkeeping entry only. The civil servant receives 5 per cent or 6 per cent less salary and the government matches the contribution. However, the money is retained by the government anyway. I therefore see no need for these deductions and these contributions. Let the government contribution be a certain fixed percentage of the wages for that type of position for the year in question. If that were done I think the government, at least for those retired people who were its former employees, would be meeting the difficulty of the fluctuating purchasing value of the Canadian dollar.


Mr. Dinsdale:: Mr. Chairman, according to the statement of the parliamentary assistant this afternoon the purpose of the legislation to be brought into the house is to extend certain provisions of the Public Service Superannuation Act to persons not already included under the act. Along with the other members who have spoken today, I support that desirable objective. Recent amendments that have been made to the act generally have had the same purpose, namely to make provision for those who have been inadvertently omitted from the benefits or discriminated against.
I rise tonight to bring a specific type of omission to the minister's attention. We have had some correspondence on this matter, but I rise at this time because I feel that we have not been able to adequately \ communicate by means of letters, and I believe that if we can talk through the Chair man to man across the chamber we might come to a better understanding of the point I have in mind.
One of the problems with the Public Service Superannuation Act was the inability in earlier times of employees moving from


another type of employment to the public service to carry their benefits with them. Some time ago that defect was remedied by a suitable amendment which comes in section 5 (l)(b)(iii)(B) of the superannuation act, which says:
Subject to this act, the following service may be counted by a contributor as pensionable service
for the purposes of this act, namely,  any
period of service in pensionable employment immediately prior to becoming employed in the public service, if he elects, within one year of becoming a contributor under this act, to pay for that service.
I feel, Mr. Chairman, that that was a very important feature to introduce into the Public Service Superannuation Act. Obviously it placed this particular benefit of the public service in a more attractive light before those who were interested in serving Canada this way. Certainly it made it possible to attract more qualified people, people with experience acquired in various private activities, various private industries in this country, into the public service. However, the point I wish to raise, Mr. Chairman, deals with an omission that I feel is inadvertent but at the same time is a very important omission in the act.
The problem has come to my attention because of a specific instance, but I am not going to deal with any specific instances tonight. I want to deal with the broad general principle and category. According to the interpretation of the section I have read which allows pensionable benefits from other periods of occupation to be carried over into the public service, this provision does not include Canadians who have interrupted their work experience in order to pursue some form of study. I have had specific rulings from the chief of the superannuation branch in this regard, who lays emphasis on the fact that because the former period of occupation in other than the public service was interrupted by a period of study it eliminates the person concerned from the benefits of this part of section 5.
In other words the emphasis is placed on the words "immediately prior to becoming employed in the public service". I feel that the difficulty arises from a lack of communication, from a lack of understanding of the problem, and I have had that feeling confirmed by a letter I received from the Minister of Finance on May 4. In this letter the Minister of Finance points out that section 5 to which I have referred broadens the scope of application of the superannuation act to this particular category with which I am dealing. He points out the benefits arising from it. Perhaps I had better quote it

so we can have the words on the record. The letter says:
The introduction of the principle of making it possible to count service with another employer was done on the grounds that a person should not be penalized on entering the federal civil service by giving it up completely.
This is benefits from previous employment. I continue:
The section in the act to which you refer-
That is section 5.
-makes it possible for such a person to pick up this service. This is a particularly important factor in the case of persons over the age of 30 to 35 who would have very little prospect of serving the period of 35 years in the federal civil service which would provide the maximum pension and who would otherwise feel that they were giving up too much to leave their other employment.
I agree entirely with that. I think it is a very desirable objective. The minister continues:
If one were to go beyond that criterion and permit the counting of time spent gaining experience which improved the qualifications of an individual, it is hard to know where the dividing line could be drawn. While you suggest postgraduate training of university graduates, others would suggest other occupations where the employment did not qualify as pensionable employment yet it improves that employee's qualifications.
That is the end of the quotation. Here, Mr. Chairman, I feel is where I fail to communicate with the minister because he uses the the words, "others would suggest other occupations". Now, I do not think I have to point out that a student at the graduate level who is pursuing a course of studies cannot be regarded as being in a remunerative occupation. He is not occupied in the normal sense of the word; he has no employment. As a matter of fact, because of the lack of suitable adequate financial support in this country, because of our deficiency in bursaries and scholarships, most students pursuing graduate work find that they have to finance on the proverbial shoestring. They have to borrow and go into debt in order to pursue their particular line of interest and, unfortunately, many of them have to take advantage of the more generous bursaries and scholarships offered across the line. They carry on their graduate studies there and are inevitably drawn into the more lucrative job opportunities and are lost to Canada.
I think this use of the word "occupation" by the minister suggests a fundamental misunderstanding of the point I raised. I do not think it can be supported that a student is gainfully employed. In some respects the minister recognizes this point, because I understand there are provisions in the act-I cannot quote the particular section-which make it possible for a person already employed in
2, 1956	5589
Public Service Superannuation Act
the public service to obtain leave of absence for further study, for further instruction in his particular professional category. He is not penalized in any way shape or form for that period during which he is absent from his duties as a civil servant and is operating as a student. It is recognized that he is not employed; he is improving his qualifications so he might better serve as a servant of the public when he returns to his position.
The narrow interpretation of the act which disqualifies students who have come from any occupation other than the public service is a particularly discriminatory one to students who are moving from the teaching field into the public service and in order to do so have to continue studies of some kind. I say that because it is a well known fact that teachers are in a depressed salary category right across this country. A good many students who because of the scholarship and bursary deficiencies have to interrupt their work leading toward a Ph.D. and who take on teaching responsibilities in order to get sufficient funds to complete the work are further discouraged because of this unfortunate narrow interpretation of the act. They teach for three, four or five years, until they have raised the necessary funds, and they contribute to the teachers' pension scheme during that time. Then they are able to carry on for an additional two or three years in order to complete their Ph.D. and finally they are in a position to offer themselves to the public service. Because of this interpretation they do not get the benefit of the period of service they have put in as teachers, and it means just one more further discrimination against the teaching profession in this country which is already discriminated against from a salary standpoint.
I consider this is a very important point, and it can be dealt with quite simply by merely specifying that bona fide graduate students-and it is easy to get certification from the universities concerned-should be regarded as moving directly from previous employment to the public service without having their period of study counted as an intervening occupational period. I say it is important because Canada is in the position where she must offer every encouragement to her young people to qualify themselves to the utmost in the various professional areas of service in Canada. We have it drummed into us continually from various sources that we are short of trained personnel, that we need Canadians with the highest qualifications. I would suggest that if we ceased to discriminate against students in this way and to deny them the benefits which should be given under the section that has been under discussion during these few moments, it would

Post Office Act
assist immeasurably in encouraging these students to return to Canada and offer themselves for service here particularly in the public service, rather than staying south of the line and offering themselves for service where the lucrative attraction is much greater.
We talk about the loss of our trained personnel; we talk about the loss of Canadian brains to the United States labour market. I would suggest, just as strongly as I can, that this is one respect in which we might encourage our young people to serve in Canada. It does not establish any precedents that will make it impossible to draw the line. I am speaking only of genuine graduate students who can easily be vouched for by the institutions in which they are pursuing their studies and a simple amendment, even a simple change in the interpretation of section 5, would meet the situation quite adequately. I leave it before the minister for his attention.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Harris thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 440, to amend the Public Service Superannuation Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



POST OFFICE ACT


John Whitney Pickersgill: the second reading of Bill No. 351, to amend the Post Office Act.


Mr. T. A. M. Kirk (Parliamentary Assistant to the Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to give sanction to a practice whereby the Postmaster General has transferred a contract from the actual contractor to another person at the request of the former, when the action was in the public interest and did not entail any additional cost.
As hon. members are no doubt aware, this policy has been followed for a great many years. Recently the Department of Justice expressed the opinion that the Post Office Act in its present form does not provide for this long established practice.
It is considered desirable to continue the practice, which has been found to be most satisfactory from the standpoint of a minimum disruption of service, the elimination of costly temporary arrangements, and the time and expense involved in the invitation of tenders. The proposed legislation is simply intended to remove a doubt as to the legality of a long established practice.


Mr. W. M. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Mr. Speaker, we are dealing here with a bill which directly concerns a matter of principle, the principle being whether or not a service required by the government which is normally made the subject of tender should under certain circumstances be removed from that class and placed in a class where it is awarded at the discretion of the minister.
I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that if it is good, right and proper as a basic principle that a contract for rural mail delivery should be made the subject of a tender in one instance it requires very special consideration, far more than has been advanced today, to justify that same contract being placed otherwise by ministerial discretion at some other point in its life.
The parliamentary assistant to the Postmaster General has set forth briefly certain advantages which he suggests will accrue from the proposed practice. As I remember them they were, first, a minimum disruption of service; second, elimination of costly temporary arrangements, and third, a saving of time and expense involved in calling for tenders. I shall deal subsequently with these stated advantages.
He did not tell us the type of circumstances under which this amendment might become operative. From a study of the existing practice I have been able to find that a typical circumstance, and a usual one, would be where the contract holder had died and it was desired to transfer the contract to his widow or to other members of his family; or where a contractor had sold out and was intending to move and it was necessary to carry on the mail contract when he no longer wished to do so; or where a contractor had defaulted, the sureties he had been asked to provide at the time of entering into the contract were carrying on and it was desired to give the contract to someone who had been acting as courier on the route. I think those represent the major cases in which this particular piece of legislation would become operative.
We must remember that there is a break in the method of handling rural mail contracts. Those under $1,000 are handled without the calling of tenders at any point. They can be awarded in the first instance at the discretion of the government. Contracts having a value of over $1,000 must in the first instance be made the basis of tender. According to the present practice of the department, which was amended I think two years ago, once a contract for over $1,000 has been awarded-and such a contract cannot be for a greater period than four years-at the end

of any contract period it may be renewed, not once but as often as the department deems advisable, without the necessity of calling for further tenders.
During the life of such contract or any four-year period the department may renegotiate the amount being paid without the necessity of throwing it open for tender or for referring it in any way to public consideration. There are certain restraining influences upon that renegotiation, but they are not too stringent and it is quite conceivable that once a person is seized of a mail contract he could continue to hold it without it ever becoming available for public tender for probably 15, 20 or more years, and that during that period the remuneration under the contract could be increased every two or three years so that at the end of the period the remuneration paid would bear surprisingly little resemblance to what was paid when the contract was originally entered into.
That casts a certain light upon some of the possible advantages to anyone who might be unscrupulous enough to misuse this proposed piece of legislation. A contract properly tendered for in the first instance and awarded to the lowest bidder might become available at the end of a one or two-year period, and it would be quite within the prerogative of the department to seek out someone whom they wished to favour and place the contract with him. After all, the original contractor has opened it by wishing to get rid of it; the man he has sought out would presumably wish to have the contract, which would meet the second requirement, and since he would be the government's choice-there are many reasons which might dictate that choice, some admittedly legitimate and others open to some question-all the requirements of this particular piece of legislation would be met.
Those who have followed the course of history in Canada since confederation-and this practice has been in operation since confederation-are aware that for some of the very reasons I have outlined the practice has been constantly away from leaving discretion in the hands of the government in the awarding of contracts, and moving the awarding of contracts to an impartial tender basis. In the flush years of government, if a government ever has any flush years

I think of the earlier years of the government-before the tender system comes into general usage the pork barrel is a most important factor in government operations. We in this party are happy to see the pork barrel removed from the operations of government wherever possible. We have no desire whatsoever to
Post Office Act
be a party to its reintroduction or to legislation which will continue that type of operation which might be susceptible to pork barrel policies.
By no manner or means am I making light of the job being done by the rural mail carriers of this country. There are thousands and thousands of these men from coast to coast. Whilst any letter carrier has a difficult job, I think the rural mail carrier has perhaps the most demanding job in the entire postal service. Most of us see him in operation during the summer months when it is a rather pleasant sort of occupation. The roads are fairly good; the weather is nice; he gets over his route in perhaps a matter of a few hours; and the work is not too onerous. Few of us -because the weather, if nothing else, would make it impossible-see these men under more difficult circumstances, when they really earn more than their pay.
Our climatic conditions in Canada are not of the best the year round, but the mail must go on the year round. The result is that these men, who perhaps in the summer are able to deliver their mail by car, are called upon in the wintertime to deliver it by horse and sleigh, by dog team and even sometimes on foot. It was only a few weeks ago that I was reading of the retirement of one of the rural mail carriers, and I read that one of his proudest boasts had been that he had carried the mail without, I think, missing a day for a period of something over 20 years. During that time it had been necessary on more than one occasion to take his bags from the sleigh in the wintertime and slog through on foot. It had been necessary on one or two occasions to spend 15 to 20 hours making a trip which under normal summer conditions would have been made in three or four hours. But that mail had gone through, and that man was typical of the men who serve this country.
Because we have sympathy and understanding for the men who are doing this job, we do not necessarily-nor, indeed, I think, should we-support a measure which has nothing to do with the way this work is carried on, which has nothing to do with the individual rural mail carrier himself, but which purely on the basis of expediency perpetuates a practice which, I suggest, has been wrong in the past and, because it has been wrong in the past, will not by legislation be made right in the future.
What are some of the weaknesses of this proposed course of action? Here is one. When the tenders are called for a rural mail route, there may be three, four, five or more people who will tender for that route. Under this plan the second lowest tenderer or any

Post Office Act
of those other people who evinced interest in it will have no opportunity whatsoever by right to be offered the contract if the man who is awarded it in the first instance decides to step out from under it and ask the government to transfer it elsewhere. It seems to me that if a group of men are interested enough in operating a rural mail route to tender for it, they should be among the very first to be consulted and considered if that route is going to be transferred from the man who originally was awarded the contract.
Again, as I have pointed out in passing previously, this legislation puts a great deal of power in the hands of the department and in the hands of the department's local representatives, because to all intents and purposes once a contract for rural mail delivery has been awarded, it makes a closed corporation out of that contract. Once that contract has been awarded there is no obligation whatsoever on the government at any point to open that contract for tender again.
Rural mail contracts are, most of us would feel, very personal. Usually the man who tenders for them carries the mail himself. If he does not do so, the mail is carried under his very close personal supervision. This is not a business in the way in which we think of most businesses, that is, largely impersonal. The rural mail route is a small and, in most cases, a part-time operation, and it is something in which there is a close liaison and a close understanding between the person who carries the mail and the people who receive it.
Yet here again we are asked that the impersonal operation of a contract-letting system by tender be replaced by the very personal and possibly improper, under certain circumstances, direction of the government. Let there be no doubt about it; that is all this legislation is intended to do. It is intended to legalize the government placing rural mail contracts wherever they wish to do so, if and when the original holder does not wish to carry on the contract. As I have already pointed out, once that contract is awarded it can go on indefinitely with the new person or through as many new hands as the government wishes to push it. The amount payable for it can be increased time and time again, although, of course, there must be certain intervals which elapse.
In case anyone thinks this is a small matter and that there are only a few of these transfers being made, I point out that it is well known that in the period from October 1, 1953, to September 30, 1954, which is a 12-month period, there were 303 transfers of contracts under $1,000 and 162 transfers of

contracts over $1,000. That is a pretty sizeable slice of government business to have floating around the country and left to the personal discretion of the Postmaster General, because in the final analysis it is his responsibility.
There may be some basic justification for this measure in the advantages which were put forward by the parliamentary assistant, but I suggest that those same advantages could be obtained without this legislation merely by making it possible for a contract to be continued temporarily on arrangements such as this until such time as tenders for a new contract could be called. When the bill is in committee we shall have certain suggestions to make in that regard, which are not proper now but which will be proper at that time.
Certainly we are desirous of co-operating with the department in working out the best possible rural mail service, the most satisfactory type of service, and that with a minimum of interruption. Let me just summarize my observations by saying that, despite this, we have no desire to be a party to anything which is capable of being turned into government largesse and personal benefit to certain individuals selected by any minister of the crown.


Erhart Regier: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace began his remarks by saying that there is a principle involved in the amendment the government is seeking here. I should like to emphasize another principle which I also think is important, and that is that at all times we should adhere to the principle of ordinary common sense. After all, these tenders are let for a four-year period, as I understand the situation, and they are not renewed except by tender at the end of each four-year period.
I feel that for the government to open these routes to public tender once every four years is enough and should be adequate. If it is a lucrative occupation for someone to have entered into, I am sure that at the end of the four-year period there should be adequate competition. In fact we have heard many complaints in the house that the government has been awarding these tenders to people who were overly anxious to obtain awards and who later on found themselves in difficulty.
In my opinion far more of the rural mail carriers are underpaid than are overpaid. I believe that has been the feeling of the Post Office Department. I have only a limited number of these routes in my riding. However, I should like to compare my attitude on this matter with my attitude to what happens

every time one of these little sub-post offices changes hands. There will be a widow operating a little groceteria netting her possibly $60 or $70 a month, and in our suburban areas we have many of these little corner stores with sub-post offices for the purpose of augmenting the income of the owner of the store. They probably make $15, $20, $25 or $30 a month from the sub-post office, and they render a service selling postage stamps and what have you to the immediate community. Yet when this lady wants to sell her place of business she cannot assure the future purchaser that he will have the same rights she has. The little enterprise involving the post office has to be submitted to the Post Office Department in Ottawa, and the new purchaser of the business has no assurance or guarantee whatsoever that he will be left with this little favour or concession, as he may consider it at the time. There have been a lot of complaints reach my ears that these matters also should not have to be resubmitted to the Post Office Department every time the business changes hands.
I feel that we may be making much ado about nothing. Surely if we are interested In efficiency of government we will realize that it costs money to call for tenders. We are all in favour of the calling of tenders at the proper time and on the proper occasions, but surely it should be sufficient if tenders for these routes are called at the expiration of each and every term.
I notice that it is not mandatory but optional on the part of the minister. I have every confidence that if the minister noticed that racketeering was taking place; that the franchises, if you wish to call them that, were being sold for exorbitant amounts, or that any money consideration was involved that was out of line with reasonableness, he would exercise his option and would call for tenders. Therefore I think this is one case where we should follow the principle of common sense and give the Postmaster General reasonable leeway to the extent of four years. I do not think we will go wrong by so doing.


Ernest George Hansell: Mr. Speaker, this group does not look with too much favour upon this measure. In his statement the parliamentary assistant said this has been a long established practice and that they are now writing it into the law. That statement may change the picture a little, but on the other hand it only goes to show that the minister has been doing something that evidently he has had no legal right to do. However, there is the principle stated by the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace, and it does seem to me an open matter for
Post Office Act
political patronage purposes. We do not like to talk that way but it does appear to us to have that possibility.
The parliamentary assistant can correct me if I am not right in my thinking, but it does occur to me that the applicants for most of these positions are recommended by the various Legion branches throughout the country, or if they are not recommended then the man's service record does have a bearing in the final decision respecting these positions. That being so, this measure could reasonably interfere with that procedure; because as the bill reads the person to take the place of the carrier if he cannot complete his contract is to be recommended by the man who holds the contract. There is nothing to say that he is necessarily going to recommend a returned man. It may be that there is a principle being followed that sometimes these contracts remain within the family. We have no objection to that. But that could still be done even though the remainder of the term were open to competition.
There is another point, though I do not know whether it is worth while to mention it. There is the possibility that if a mail carrier or one under contract should "get in bad" with the inspector or with some of those on the mail route, he may feel that he is forced to resign and might even recommend someone who is worse than he is. That possibility should not exist. I do not think the cost can be so great. It is a matter of opening the competition to anyone else who desires to take the contract for the remainder of the contract period.
It seems to me that this is the thin edge of the wedge that could lead to a similar procedure in other matters. It could lead to a similar procedure in other civil service positions, even those not under contract for four years. What is the difference in principle? Is the time the difference? Suppose there is a civil servant who decides to quit his job. Why has he not a right to recommend someone to take his position? Even though it is for more than four years, the principle is the same. It is only the time element that is different. It appears to me to be the thin edge of the wedge in opening up this matter to rather unsatisfactory possibilities. As the matter now stands, I am afraid we cannot support the bill.


Mr. G. W. Montgomery (Victoria-Carleton):: Mr. Speaker, before the bill goes to committee I should like to say a few words. I was not here at the resolution stage. For that reason, through you, I should like to

Post Office Act
say to the parliamentary assistant and his departmental officials that I think the departmental officials in my area in New Brunswick deserve a great deal of credit for the perpetual following up of demands that we made for two post offices which were granted to us and completed last year, one at Plaster Rock and one at Woodstock. The one at Plaster Rock I am extremely proud of. I think it is too bad that the late postmaster general did not live long enough to see these two buildings, as he took a great deal of personal interest in getting them for us. For a long time there has been a need for them.
I felt that I should like to say that at this stage. I should also like to say that while I have not had too much trouble with regard to postal matters, there are quite a few rural mail routes in my area and we run into some quite perplexing difficulties. I want to compliment the officials in my own area for being extremely co-operative in working out those difficulties.
After looking at this particular amendment, I am wondering whether such a recommendation would be asked for or would even be suggested by those officials. The amendment looks very innocent on its face. I think the ground has been well covered by other hon. members who have spoken ahead of me. But I do not read the act as the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam (Mr. Regier) reads it. According to my understanding-and I am sure this is right; if it is not, I know the parliamentary assistant will correct me- these contracts do not come up for tender at the end of every four years, or they need not come up for tender. If a mail courier is doing a good job the local officials in the area may recommend that he be continued without any tenders being called at all. As I understand the act, his contract may be renewed for another four years. As the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace stated, that procedure may go on from term to term, as long as he is satisfactory to the department and satisfactory to the people whom he is serving.
But there is involved here a principle which has been fairly well covered. From my experience in the last three or four years I do not like this idea of opening a loophole in the law which has otherwise been a good one, namely the tender system, subject to renewal for the remainder of the term of the contract. If I may, I should like to narrow this matter down and point out to the parliamentary assistant to the Postmaster General
that what we are doing here is this. We are permitting political patronage to creep in.
The Minister of Finance may laugh, but I have already experienced some of this. It has been creeping in during the last year and a half; and if it were not for the good work and the good judgment of the area officials, of which I am sure the Postmaster General knows, there would have been more. He is being bothered considerably more than he used to be bothered. There is an opportunity here to work for political patronage. That is something that was almost unheard of under the old system. Like the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace, I should like any amendments to steer away from that sort of thing.
I do not say that just because I happen to be in the opposition. Some day I might have to deal with it otherwise, and I would be tickled to death to be able to say that the department handles this matter, that there is only one ground, namely satisfaction, and that everybody may put in his recommendations but not political ones.
As has been suggested, when we get to the committee stage I should like to see the committee study the amendment. I have no objection to this temporary arrangement for the carrying out of the contract, but I should like to see that particular contract come up for tender at the end of the term. I do not think I need say any more at this stage, Mr. Speaker.


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


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


An hon. Member:: Ten o'clock.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: May I move the adjournment of the debate?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Do I understand that the hon. gentleman wishes to speak on second reading?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Yes.
On motion of Mr. Herridge the debate was adjourned.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we shall continue with this debate. Then we shall take second reading of Bill No. 212, to amend the Telegraphs Act, and then second reading of the bill to amend the Income Tax Act.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, July 3, 1956

[Stage Direction]
89th anniversary of confederation
Right Hon. C. D. Howe {Acting Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, today Canadians are celebrating the 89th anniversary of the birthday of Canadian confederation. I should like to suggest that we follow precedents established in recent years when the house happened to be in session on this day and stand and sing together "O Canada" and "God Save the Queen".
Whereupon the members of the house rose and sang
O Canada and
God Save the Queen HOUSE OF COMMONS