1956-03-14

Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinion):: On a
question of privilege, Mr. Speaker; in yesterday's Hansard, at page 2115 there are recorded six questions that I placed on the order paper concerning the C.B.C. "Tabloid" program on February 6 of the film of a marriage that was solemnized on February 4. There were six questions and apparently the Minister of National Revenue referred them all to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The answers given yesterday are answers that come from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation because those answers are preceded by the words, "The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation advises as follows".
Now, the sixth question was:
Does the government consider such programs in good taste on television?
The only answer I have been given is that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is not in a position to answer this question. May I have the question answered by the government, to whom I directed the question, as to whether the government considers the programming of a marriage ceremony actually solemnized to be in good taste for television programs?


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps this matter could be dealt with when we reach the orders of the day.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. H. B. McCulloch (Piciou) presented the second and third reports of the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines, and moved that the third report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.


Hon. George C. Marler (Minister of Transport):: I wish to inform the house that this afternoon I tabled the annual report of
Canadian National Railways for 1955 and the budget for 1956. I am sure all hon. members will be pleased to know that in its operations last year Canadian National realized a surplus of $10,717,689.
I also tabled this afternoon the annual report for 1955 and the budget for 1956 of the Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited. The operation last year resulted in a loss of $95,964, which represents an improvement of $532,446 over the result for 1954. May I be permitted to make a brief statement as to the future operations of the company.
After the company had experienced a very disappointing year in 1953, an impression grew that the government had in mind the termination of the company's operations. My predecessor reassured the house on April 12, 1954, that such was not the government's intention, but said that the results of operations would be carefully considered in relation to the usefulness of the service. Following the consideration of the accounts of the company by the sessional committee on railways and shipping last year, a thorough study was made of the prospects of the company.
Hon. members will recall that until the Canadian National service was started the government had found it necessary to grant substantial subsidies to steamship companies to induce them to provide regular service between Canada and the British West Indies. As the subsidized service was not entirely satisfactory, the government decided to inaugurate a service with Canadian ships. During its 27 years of operation, the Canadian National service incurred annual losses from 1929 to 1940, considerably reduced its accumulated deficit between 1941 and 1948, but experienced further losses after 1948. In 1954, the loss was reduced to about one-half the figure for 1953, and in the year just ended the loss has been a very modest one.
The company has taken measures to reduce operating costs and to develop new traffic, and is expected to participate fully in a gradual increase in the volume of trade between Canada and the British West Indies.
It is anticipated that the service will operate at a loss, but it is expected that the deficits will not average much more than $200,000 per annum and there are reasonable prospects that they may be less. The government believes that this is not too high a price to pay for the continuation of dependable steamship service between Canada and

Canadian National Railways the West Indies and for the tangible and intangible benefits for our trade and our relations with the British West Indies.
In the circumstances, the government has decided to continue the Canadian National (West Indies) service for at least five years, at which time the subject will again be reviewed in the light of the experience in the intervening time and of conditions then prevailing.
Mr. Speaker, if I have permission of the house, I would now move:
That the annual reports for 1955 of the Canadian National Railways, the Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited, and the Canadian National Railways securities trust, the auditors' report to parliament in respect of the Canadian National Railways and Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited, and the budgets for 1956 of Canadian National Railways and Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited, tabled this day, be referred to the sessional committee on railways and shipping owned, operated and controlled by the government, together with the following items of estimates for 1956-57:
Vote 454 Prince Edward Island car ferry and terminals deficit, 1956:
Vote 460 North Sydney-Port aux Basques ferry and terminals deficit, 1956;
Vote 466 Maritime Freight Rates Act;
Vote 467 Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited deficit, 1956;
and that the resolution passed by the house on January 26, 1956, referring certain estimates to the committee of supply, be rescinded so far as the said resolution relates to votes 454, 460, 466 and 467.


Mr. Bell:: Will this mean any new ships for the Canadian National (West Indies) run?


Mr. Speaker:: That question could be 'asked when the orders of the day are called.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Miller Bell: May I ask the Minister of Transport a question arising out of the statement he just made with respect to Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships? Is it reasonable to expect some replacement will be made of the old vessels and if so when will an announcement be made?


George Carlyle Marler: I might say that no consideration has been given to this matter by the interdepartmental committee which considered the subject of the activities of Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited since the last session of the house. I would suggest to the hon. member that, since he is a member of the sessional committee on railways and shipping, he might take up the subject during the sittings of that committee.


Thomas Miller Bell: Does the minister not remember that at the last session it was pointed out the condition of those vessels was very

serious, and if future plans were being made it would be essential that the boats be replaced immediately?


George Carlyle Marler: I have no such recollection.



STARRED QUESTIONS


Mr. Fulton: 1.	What consideration has the remission service given under the Ticket of Leave Act to the case of Clifford Williams?
2.	Is it a principle followed in recommending ticket of leave that the convicted person should have served one-half of his sentence? If so. on what basis has this principle been established?
3.	Is it considered that Williams is rehabilitated to the point where he could now safely be released on ticket of leave with the prospect of leading a useful and orderly life? If not, what steps are being taken to rehabilitate this young man so that he will not be doomed to spend 28 unproductive years in prison?


Mr. Garson:: Mr. Speaker, I propose to deal first with the second question asked by the hon. member for Kamloops, namely whether it is a principle followed in recommending ticket of leave that the convicted person should have served one-half of his sentence and, if so, on what basis this principle has been established.
For many years the remission service of the Department of Justice has followed a rule of general application that requires at least one-half of a sentence of imprisonment to be served before an inmate of a penal institution becomes eligible to be considered for release on ticket of leave, that is, on parole. I am not aware of any parole authority in any country that does not have a rule similar, in principle, to the half-time rule applied by the remission service in Canada.
The proportion of the sentence that must be served varies from country to country, but in every instance the general rule is that some minimum period is required to be served. The rule is applied to the general run of cases in which the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the court is not more than is adequate as punishment for the offence nor more than is required for the reformation and rehabilitation of the convicted person as a result of the treatment that he receives in the institution. Exceptions are, of course, made to the rule in cases such as the Williams case. Those are cases involving very long sentences where after a reasonable period of imprisonment, having regard to the circumstances of the offence, the inmate has shown evidence of reform sufficient to justify the granting of parole to him. I emphasize the fact that in these cases the rule is not applied. Indeed, 6 to 12 per cent of all paroles are granted before the inmates concerned have served half of their sentences.

The half-time rule is well known to the courts, the police, prison officials and inmates. The rule is designed primarily, in the cases where it applies, to ensure some degree of equality of treatment as between inmates. In the cases where it is applicable it does remove uncertainty from the mind of the inmate concerning the time when he may expect to be considered for release on parole and thus helps him to accept the reality of his sentence. If no such rule existed an inmate might during the early part of his sentence continually build false hopes for early release only to have those hopes dashed when he was not released as soon as he expected to be. Such a state of affairs would impede rather than promote his reform and rehabilitation. Moreover, the rule makes possible a minimum period during which the officers in the institution can plan and carry out a proper program of treatment and training for the inmate. Again, it furnishes to the courts and law enforcement authorities generally some assurance that a reasonable proportion of the sentence imposed by the court will be served by the convicted person and that, thereby, the deterrent value of the sentence will be preserved.
In administering the Ticket of Leave Act the remission service of the Department of Justice does not purport either to fulfil or to interfere with any function that should, under our system of law, be performed by the courts. The release of a person on ticket of leave, that is, on parole, is not an interference with the sentence imposed by the court but is, rather, a step designed to assist in the rehabilitation of the offender in society.
The first and third questions relate to a particular case in which the remission service of the Department of Justice is interested. It is the case of Clifford Williams, now an inmate of St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary.
To answer these questions in the sense in which they are framed would necessarily involve a discussion of the merits of the case and disclosure of the contents of confidential reports that have been received in the department concerning it. Hon. members will realize, of course, that confidential reports concerning the background and the development in the penal institution of every inmate are received from a great many sources.
Since the Ticket of Leave Act was first enacted in 1899 it has been the invariable practice of my predecessors to avoid discussion in this house of the merits of individual cases of persons undergoing imprisonment.
Without going in any way into the merits of this particular case, may I say that the latest occasion on which the case of Clifford Williams was placed before the Solicitor 67509-134
Questions
General, who has charge of these matters, was October, 1955. At that time, after a careful review of all the reports, he was unable to recommend that Williams be granted parole. This was not the first occasion when my colleague considered the case. A sentence of 28 years upon conviction for the first time is not a usual sentence in Canada and its length itself was sufficient to ensure that the case would not be dealt with on any routine basis and that no arbitrary rules would be applied that would result in the confinement of Williams in the institution for a period that in all the circumstances is not warranted.
I do not propose to express any opinion on the question whether it is considered that Williams is now rehabilitated to the point where he could safely be released on ticket of leave with the prospect of leading a useful and orderly life. To do so would necessarily involve a discussion of the merits of the case and disclosure of the contents of some, at least, of the confidential reports that have been received concerning the case. As to the steps that are being taken to rehabilitate this young man so that he will not be doomed to spend 28 unproductive years in prison, I may say that the officers of the penitentiary have given and will continue to give to him the treatment and training that are appropriate to the circumstances of the case and his willingness to respond. There are in the institution concerned rehabilitative facilities from which every inmate may derive benefit and, in all fairness to this young man, I feel that I should say there is no indication that he is unwilling to avail himself of these facilities.



DIET SURVEYS


Mr. Knowles: 1.	Is the Department of National Health and Welfare conducting a survey amongst civil servants in Ottawa to ascertain whether or not the said civil servants are eating adequate breakfasts?
2.	If so, what are the results of such survey?
3.	What steps are being taken with respect to any inadequacies disclosed by such a survey?
4.	Will the benefits resulting from this survey be published?
5.	Has the department conducted any survey amongst old age pensioners, in any city in Canada, to ascertain whether or not the said old age pensioners are eating (a) adequate breakfasts; (b) adequate meals at any time?
6.	If so, what are the results of such survey?
7.	What steps are being taken with respect to any inadequacies disclosed by such a survey?
8.	If no survey amongst old age pensioners has yet been made, will consideration be given to the conducting of such a survey in several cities at an early date?


Mr. Roberison:: This question consists of eight parts. The answer to part 1 is that a

Questions
survey of the breakfast habits of approximately 20 p,er cent of civil servants in Ottawa was conducted from January to May, 1955.
Part 2: Of those employees surveyed it was found that 75 per cent ate a breakfast which conformed to recommended health practices; 16 per cent ate a breakfast definitely below recommended health practices; and 9 per cent ate no breakfast.
In answer to parts 3 and 4, I would say that in each building in which the survey was conducted the results were publicized and the fundamentals of a good breakfast as well as the reasons for eating a good breakfast were explained. The nursing counsellors of the civil service health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare gave particular emphasis to good breakfast habits in all subsequent interviews and are continuing their program of health education.
The answers to parts 5, 6 and 7 are no.
The answer to part 8 is that assistance has been given and will continue to be available to provincial groups of various kinds who are conducting surveys, including some surveys on older Canadians.



NATIONAL CENOTAPH

Mr. Jones: 1.	Have any representations been received for a national cenotaph to honour Canada's fallen of all wars?
2.	If so, from whom, and what consideration has the government given to this suggestion?


Mr. Lapointe:: Mr. Speaker, this question seeks to find out whether representations have been received by the government regarding a national cenotaph to honour Canada's fallen of all wars. I must say that such representations have been received from time to time from various veterans' organizations. More specifically, the dominion executive council of the Canadian Legion, in its annual brief presented to the cabinet on November 10 last, recommended that such a national cenotaph be erected. However, prior to that time, the cabinet had authorized the establishment of an advisory committee to consider and report to me on various matters including the choice of a repository for the world war II book of remembrance. This committee was composed of representatives of government departments concerned as well as the chairman of the federal district commission, representatives of the Canadian Legion and of the national council of veterans' associations in Canada, and the contracting artist for the book of remembrance.
Following the presentation of the Legion's brief, the committee was also asked to make a recommendation regarding the construction of a national cenotaph. The committee

submitted its report a short time ago, and it is receiving the attention of the government at the present time. I propose to make a statement on this matter at an early date.



FAY ELIZABETH SPALDING

Mr. Fulton: 1.	Was Fay Elizabeth Spalding, a British subject, bora in Australia, refused admission to Canada and/or ordered deported in April, 1955?
2.	Was she in that same month required by the Department of Citizenship and Immigration to post a cash bond in the sum of $1,000 and to surrender her passport?
3.	Was the deportation order subsequently quashed in the supreme court of British Columbia in April, 1955? If so, has the department yet paid the applicant her taxed costs of that action, and if so, when?
4.	Did the Department of Citizenship and Immigration then appeal to the court of appeal of British Columbia and receive a judgment dismissing the appeal in July, 1955? If so, has the department yet paid the respondent her taxed costs of that appeal, and if so, when?
5.	Has the time for appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada expired, and if so, when?
6.	Has the department yet refunded the $1,000 cash or returned the passport, and if so, when?


Mr. Pickersgill:: Mr. Speaker, on an earlier occasion, when the hon. member for Oxford (Mr. Nesbitt) asked a question about an individual immigration case, I raised a point of order, and I think perhaps an additional point of order might be raised in this case, in that the question appears to transgress the rule that questions are to elicit information and not to give it to the house. In view of the fact that this question deals with a case which has been before the courts, about which there has been a great deal of interest and about which there are some points of law involved, I think perhaps, with your permission, I might answer it.


Mr. Speaker:: Let us perhaps go further into the point of order. I have not had a chance to peruse the question, but it seems to me that if through this medium we are going to ask questions about every case that goes through the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, where there are perhaps over 100,000 cases dealt with, we are going to have to enlarge the order paper. Is this case considered to be of urgent importance, or is it not one that could wait until the estimates of the department are discussed?


Mr. Fulton:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Would the hon. member for Kamloops explain?


Edmund Davie Fulton: As you will see on reading the question, this is a very unusual case, and the circumstances surrounding it are unusual in that nearly a year ago the person concerned was required to post-I suggest, quite wrongly -a cash bond in the sum of $1,000. Her case

has been heard in the supreme court of British Columbia and the court of appeal of British Columbia, and a judgment favourable to her rendered in both courts. I believe the time for appeal to the supreme court has expired and I am informed that neither has the cash bail been returned nor have her taxed costs in any of the courts been paid. I understand there are some further developments in this case in recent days about which I hoped to have the opportunity of asking a supplementary question today. This is far from being a routine case. It is one of those cases which I think reveals in its clearest light the improper conduct of the department.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: I do not know how many unusual cases of this kind there may be. The hon. member says this is one unusual case. In his view there may be thousands of unusual cases. I am glad that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration raised the point.


Edmund Davie Fulton: May I be permitted-


Mr. Speaker:: I will allow the minister to answer the question, as he was prepared to do, but I am glad he raised the point because I think that in future I will be more careful with respect to such questions.


John Whitney Pickersgill: 

QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Green: 1.	Are all ships which are owned by the government ol Canada, including any agency thereof, registered under the provisions of the Canada Shipping Act?
2.	If not, which ships are not so registered?
3.	By what department or agency are any unregistered ships operated?


POST OFFICE PERSONNEL, MONTREAL  CHRISTMAS SEASON
Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame: de Grace):
1.	How many additional employees, on a parttime or full-time basis, were retained in the Montreal area by the post office to handle the additional work load during the 1955 Christmas season?
2.	How many of these had their application supported by a letter from a member of parliament?
3.	What were the names of these members of parliament and how many successful applications did each member support?

Orders for Returns


FRUIT IMPORTS, B.C.
Mr. Jones: What quantities and what varieties of fruit have been imported into British Columbia, during the last year?


POST OFFICE STATISTICS, MONTREAL-TORONTO
Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace): 1.	For each of the cities of Montreal and Toronto, how many postal stations are in operation?
2.	For each such postal station (a) what civil service grade was held by the person in charge on December 31, 1955; (b) what was the revenue for the last fiscal year; (c) how many permanent employees were on the staff at December 31, 1955?


ALEXANDER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, EDMONTON
Mr. Thomas: 1.	What is the total number of contracts awarded to Alexander Construction Company of Edmonton since January 1, 1950?
2.	What is the amount of each of these contracts and where located?
3.	Has the total amount of payment exceeded the original tender in any of these contracts? If so, by how much?
4.	Have materials used by this company ever proved substandard? If so, in what instances?
5.	From what suppliers does Alexander Construction purchase its materials?


OLD AGE PENSIONS
Mr. Knowles: 1.	What was the total amount of money paid to old age pensioners, (a) by the federal government; (b) by the provincial governments, in each of the following years; 1927, 1928, 1929, 1930, 1935, 1940, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1951?
2.	What was the total amount of money paid to pensioners under the Old Age Assistance Act, (a) by the federal government, (b) by the provinces, in each of the following years; 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955?
3.	What was the total amount of money paid to pensioners under the Old Age Security Act, in each of the following years: 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955?
4.	What was the total amount collected for old age security from the three 2 per cent taxes imposed for the same, in each of the following years; 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955?



FEDERAL DISTRICT COMMISSION


Mr. Harkness: 1.	Since the 15th day of May, 1952, what lands or buildings have been acquired by the federal district commission in (a) the city of Ottawa; (b) the county of Carleton; (c) the county of Russell; (d) the city of Hull; (e) the county of Hull; (f) the county of Gatineau, giving the date of acquisition, the legal description and total acreage of the property in each case?
2.	From whom was such property acquired?
3.	What was the total price paid to the vendor or any other persons in respect to the acquisition of each such property?

4.	For what purpose, either present or future, was each such property acquired, and to what use is each such property presently being put?
5.	At the present time, has the federal district commission any agreements of sale or options for the acquisition of other property, or has it commenced expropriation proceedings for the acquisition of other property in any of the aforesaid cities or counties?
6.	If so, what is the legal description and total acreage of each such property?
7.	From whom is each such property to be acquired?
8.	What is the total price payable to the vendor or any other person under any such agreement of sale or option in respect of the acquisition of each such property?
9.	What is the total price which has been offered to the owner of any such property in respect of which expropriation proceedings may have been commenced?
10.	For what purpose, either present or future, is each such property to be acquired, and to what use will each such property be put?



DIVORCE STATISTICS

Mr. Knowles: 1.	How many divorces, (a) a mensa et thoro;
(b) a vinculo matrimonii, have been granted by parliament, through the enactment of private	bills,
in each of the	following years;	1867,	1868,	1869,1870, 1871, 1872,	1873, 1874, 1875,	1876,	1877,	1878,1879, 1880, 1885,	1890, 1900, 1910,	1920,	1930,	1940,
1950, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955?
2.	What is the total number of divorces, (a) a mensa et thoro; (b) a vinculo matrimonii, granted by parliament, through the enactment of private bills, between July 1, 1867, and December 31, 1930? What is the breakdown of each of these totals as to provincial domicile?
3.	What is the total number of divorces, (a) a mensa et thoro; (b) a vinculo matrimonii, granted by parliament, through the enactment of private bills, between January 1, 1931, and December 31, 1955? What is the breakdown of each of these totals as to provincial domicile?
He said: Mr. Speaker, I believe the information sought by question 243, which is on the order paper in my name, could more appropriately be obtained by addressing a communication to the Clerk of the Senate in his capacity as Clerk of the Parliaments. On that basis perhaps question 243 could be withdrawn from the order paper.


Mr. Speaker:: Question withdrawn.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 35-Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de
Grace):
For a copy of the instructions issued by the Post Office Department to its postmasters concerning the procedure to be followed when a theft or burglary is discovered.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 37-Mr. Fleming:
For a copy of contracts, draft contracts, and correspondence, exchanged during the last five

years, between the government and Renfrew Aircraft Engineering Company, respecting the purchase and sale of land or buildings or capital equipment or houses at or near Renfrew, Ontario.


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 38-Mr. Diefenbaker:
For a copy of all invoices or other records revealing prices paid for each and every painting or picture purchased for $500 or more for the national art gallery, since January 1, 1950.
John Whitney Pickersgill: I informed the hon. gentleman privately the other day, Mr. Speaker, that the board of trustees of the national gallery had advised me that if this return were made it would make it much more difficult for them to carry on negotiations for the purchase of pictures to the greatest possible advantage of the national gallery. I can only respect that opinion, but I also recognize that this refers to an expenditure of public m-oney and that not only the house but any hon. member in the house is entitled to this information if he wishes to press for it. While I have no intention of opposing the motion, I wonder if the hon. gentleman would not consider whether it is advisable to press it, in view of the position taken by the board of trustees.


Mr. Diefenbaker:: I would allow it to stand at the moment.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion stands.



DISABLED PERSONS ACT


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 40-Mr. Zaplilny:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, memoranda, and other communications exchanged between municipal authorities in the province of Manitoba and the federal government or any department thereof, with respect to the Disabled1 Persons Act, since January 1, 1955.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: I
should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. In view of the vital importance of Cyprus to the strategic defence of the Middle East, to the commonwealth lifeline, to NATO, and of Canada's position as interpreter to the United Kingdom of the United States and vice versa, has the secretary made any representations to the' Department of State of the United States regarding intervention by officials of that country in the dispute between Great Britain and Greece?


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: No, Mr. Speaker, no such representations have been made.
Inquiries of the Ministry IMMIGRATION



ELIZABETH FAY SPALDING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Edmund Davie Fulton: May I ask the
Minister of Citizenship and Immigration a question arising out of the answer he gave to a starred question a few minutes ago? Has the minister just recently issued instructions for the removal of this lady from Canada- where I might say she is now legally married and a resident-under section 7 of the Immigration Act, which would have the effect of circumventing the decision of the court?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The answer, sir, is no. If the hon. gentleman has any information about the alleged marriage of the woman in question I would be glad to have it.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Might I ask the minister if he would direct his inquiry to departmental counsel who, I understand, is in possession of all the information.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. W. Stuart (Charlotte):: May I direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries? Has any order been issued by his department restricting the rights of employees to take part in municipal elections or to be candidates for municipal office?


Hon. James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries):: No order has been issued, and we have no objection to officers taking part in municipal affairs as long as the municipal duties do not conflict with the proper discharge of departmental responsibilities.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare arising out of the answer given earlier today by his parliamentary assistant with respect to a starred question in my name? He probably expects me to ask whether his department has surveyed his own breakfast habits. Are there available to us any results of the surveys referred to by the parliamentary assistant in his answer to part 8 of my question?

Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. Paul Marlin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: I was trying to understand what my hon. friend had asked in his first question and I had asked my colleague to tell me; consequently, I missed the purport of the second question. Would my hon. friend repeat it?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Perhaps the minister would rather answer the first question. Are there available any results arising out of the surveys referred to by the minister's parliamentary assistant in his answer to part 8 of my starred question?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think that the obvious answer is the Minister of National Health and Welfare himself.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask the minister if he is an old age pensioner and, if so, how he is getting along on $40 a month?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I apologize in part, Mr. Speaker. I was referring to all the questions except the last one. If my hon. friend reads them carefully, he will see how apt my earlier reply was. With regard to the question pertaining to old age pensioners I can only say to my hon. friend, what he knows, that this government gives this matter its continuous concern and attention.


Stanley Howard Knowles: But only $40 a month.
(Translation):



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Paul E. Gagnon (Chicoutimi):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Is it true that the government does not dare impose peacetime conscription for fear of an unfavourable reaction on the part of the people of the province of Quebec?


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: No, Mr. Speaker.
(Text):



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: In
connection with the reply given by the Minister of Justice respecting the Clifford Williams case and the rather shocking length of the sentence, would the minister give consideration, the time for appeal having elapsed, to having an order in council passed to have that case placed before the court to determine whether or not that sentence is far beyond what is fair?


James Sinclair: Are you not against government by order in council?


John George Diefenbaker: Twenty-eight years.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: Mr. Speaker, so far as I am aware, we have taken the position at all times in the Department of Justice that the responsibility for the imposition of sentences in criminal cases is that of the courts, and that it is an improper exercise of executive authority to interfere with what is essentially a judicial function.
I understand that in the present case, through the influence of a lady who is taking an interest in this young man, legal advice has been made available to him. I think my hon. friend will agree with me that it would be quite possible for the legal advisers of Mr. Williams to apply for leave to appeal now notwithstanding the fact that the appeal period had passed, based upon the fact that Williams had no legal adviser at the time that the appeal period expired. In the absence of Williams' legal adviser doing that, the only way we would have any authority to take the steps that my hon. friend refers to would be upon an application for remission. Even in that case, I think we would hesitate very much to interfere with the exercise of the function of the courts.


John George Diefenbaker: Why not follow the same course you did in the Coffin case?


Edmund Davie Fulton: May I ask the Minister of Justice whether it would not be open to him to take the same action with respect to the Clifford Williams case as he did with respect to the Coffin case, by way of reference to the Supreme Court of Canada? If so, why does he not take that action, the time for appeal having gone by?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: In reply to my hon. friend's question I would suggest if he examines the two cases he would find that the two sets of circumstances are quite different, and that we were not at all warranted in applying to the Williams case the reasoning that was applied in making the reference to the Supreme Court of Canada in connection with the Coffin case.


John George Diefenbaker: Not at all.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Is it not the only way in which this matter can now be submitted to any court?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: No,, it is not the only way. The first way would be for counsel for the accused-


Edmund Davie Fulton: He has not one.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: Yes; my information is that he has, and that he could apply to the court

of appeal for leave to appeal notwithstanding that the appeal period had expired. Then, if that were refused, the only way in which it could get before the provincial court of appeal would be if, in connection with an application for remission to myself, as Minister of Justice, I should invoke the relevant section of the Criminal Code to refer it to the provincial court of appeal as to sentence. But I apprehend that that is not the proper course for the Minister of Justice to take until there has been an application on behalf of the accused.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, in this case, if a waiver of appeal was signed, is it not a fact that no application is then open to the accused? Is that not the position in this case?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: Mr. Speaker, if it is the position, I am not so informed.



SASKATCHEWAN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. H. Casileden (Yorkion):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Can he give a reply to my question of February 28 last regarding flood control on the Assiniboine river in the Kamsack area in Saskatchewan?


Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, I have not the information yet. I have to get it from Regina.



CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, earlier today I raised a question of privilege which you suggested might also be raised on the orders of the day. May I now ask the Minister of National Revenue whether he is prepared to answer the question which appears on page 2115 of Hansard in relation to the CBL-T.V. "Tabloid" program of February 6, a film of a marriage which was solemnized on February 4? Does the government consider such programs in good taste on television?


Hon. J. J. McCann (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, personally I did not see the telecast, and as one member of the government I am not prepared to make any answer with reference to whether it was in good taste or not. I am afraid the hon.
Inquiries of the Ministry gentleman does not quite understand my position with reference to the C.B.C. He complains that I had made the answer:
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation advises as follows:-
Now, I am not in charge of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. I have never interfered in its operation or in its policies. The Department of National Revenue has nothing to do with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The order in council, by which I was appointed, appointed me as the one who would report to parliament for the C.B.C. That I have attempted to do. I purposely have seen that the answers are put as they are, that the C.B.C. replies to the questions that are asked, and they take the full responsibility.
Now, it is not my particular job to poll the members of the government to see whether or not they are in favour of any particular broadcast. If he wants to do that, the hon. member can ask questions of the members of the government and they will give their own opinions. I doubt very much whether any of them have enough interest in those broadcasts to say-


Donald Methuen Fleming: May I ask the Prime Minister whether he approves of this type of television broadcast of an actual marriage solemnized, a film being made of it and broadcast on television, at some expense, which he will find set forth on page 2115 of Hansard, including performers' fees?
Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime
Minister): The hon. gentleman has obtained the facts now. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is responsible to parliament. It is a body that has been set up by legislation of parliament, with powers that are provided in that legislation.
I have seen several things on the C.B.C. that I did not think were in good taste. I did not see the telecast to which this question refers, but I have never attempted to exercise any censorship over the activities of the C.B.C. I do not think my personal opinion about the manner in which they select their programs is a matter about which there should be any debate in parliament.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, is the way in which the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation carries on its affairs and programs not a matter for discussion in this house, and a proper matter for questions in the house when this house is being called upon to vote

Inquiries of the Ministry substantial sums of money for the upkeep of the C.B.C. and its programs?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: It is a
matter that is one of public interest, and because it is a matter of public interest we appointed a royal commission to inquire into the whole matter of both television and sound broadcasting. That commission is now sitting and it is-


Donald Methuen Fleming: Not yet.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Yes, it is.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Not yet; it has been appointed but it is not sitting.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Perhaps it is not hearing witnesses at this time, but it is proceeding. It has given notice of the time during which it will be prepared to receive briefs prior to setting the dates for the public hearings. It is because it is a matter of great public interest, and because it is a matter that involves the expenditure of large sums of money, that the royal commission was appointed to inquire into it and to make a report.


Donald Methuen Fleming: May I ask the Minister of Finance this question? In view of the fact that the estimates of the Department of National Revenue have been referred to the committee on estimates, will the government give consideration to referring also to the committee on estimates items 54, 55 and 56 of the estimates relating to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation?


Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, the government has been in the habit of having a special committee on the C.B.C. every second or third year, usually at the request of the opposition, and I do not see any particular point in acceding to this request.


Donald Methuen Fleming: In the light of the answer given to me by the Minister of Finance, may I ask the Prime Minister whether the government is prepared to have set up at this present session a special committee on radio broadcasting and television, similar to that which was set up at last year's session?


Mr. SI. Laurent (Quebec East):: No, Mr. Speaker. That question was considered and we came to the conclusion that, having appointed a royal commission, it would not be proper to recommend the appointment of a special committee to proceed to make the same inquiry at the same time.



ATOMIC ENERGY


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Thursday, March 1, consideration of the motion of Mr. Howe (Port Arthur):
That a special committee be appointed to examine into the role of government in the field of nonmilitary research in Canada, including:
(a)	operations in the field of atomic energy,
(b)	operations of the national research council.
That the committee be empowered to sit during
the sittings of the house and to print such papers and evidence from day to day as may be ordered by the committee and to report from time to time; and that notwithstanding standing order No. 67 the committee shall consist of 20 members-
*-and the amendment thereto of Mr. Green.
Mr. George H. Hees (Broadview):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Lambton West (Mr. Murphy) for several years has been urging the government to set up a committee of parliament to investigate the results which might reasonably be expected to accrue from a greatly expanded program of research in this country. He and other hon. members in this party have strongly urged the government to empower this committee to call outside witnesses with particular knowledge and experience in these matters so that the committee might gain the kind of information which would be necessary for putting forward to the government useful recommendations for future action. The committee which the government is proposing today does not permit the calling of such outside witnesses. It will permit only the calling of government employees before it, and as the large government majority on the committee can be counted upon to endorse whatever the government has or has not done in matters of research, this committee will amount to nothing more or less than a whitewash committee.
Because of the limitations which have been placed upon it, this committee is denied the means of obtaining the information necessary to reach constructive and useful conclusions, and that is the reason for the amendment which is presently before the house.
One of the reasons why a research committee with power to call outside witnesses with particular knowledge and experience in these matters is so urgently needed is that this country is today steadily dropping behind its industrial competitors in manufacturing progress. This fact was most recently driven home by the latest monthly bulletin of statistics produced by the United Nations in January last and shown on page 12 of that report. These figures, Mr. Speaker, show the percentage increase in manufacturing production which has been made by the leading industrial nations of the world during the six-year

Committee on Atomic Energy
period from 1948 to 1954, the latest year for which comparative figures are available. These percentage increases are as follows: Japan, 230 per cent; West Germany, 205 per cent; France, 38 per cent; India, 36 per cent; United Kingdom, 33 per cent; Belgium, 25 per cent; United States, 22 per cent; Canada, 17 per cent. The average percentage increase for the whole world, excluding the U.S.S.R. and communist Europe, was 39 per cent. Thus we see, Mr. Speaker, that the percentage increase which Canada made in manufacturing progress during the six years for which comparative figures are available is considerably less than that made by each of its industrial competitors.
Now, why should that be the case? We have a perfect right to ask why that should be so; why a country such as Canada with all its natural attributes, raw material, power and the other facilities which it has at its disposal should trail so markedly behind all its industrial competitors. The reason is that in order to make manufacturing progress you have to make sales, and today our products are losing out to products manufactured in other countries because of price or design or both.
One of the steps which we can take to improve our competitive position and to accelerate our industrial expansion is to follow the example of our more successful competitors. They have made full use of greatly expanded research to develop new and better products, new and better designs and more efficient methods of production.
In order to encourage industrial firms to undertake a great deal more industrial research than they are doing at the present time, I think Canada would do well to follow the example of Great Britain, whose percentage increase in manufacturing during the past six years has been double that of Canada. The deductions for tax purposes which are allowed by the British government are as follows, and I will quote from the information given me a few days ago by the United Kingdom information office:
The United Kingdom-Deductions allowed.
1.	Current expenditures.
(a)	All current expenditures on scientific research related to that trade and directly undertaken by the taxpayer or on his behalf.
(b)	Sums paid to any scientific research association, approved for the purpose of research by the committee of the Privy Council for scientific and industrial research.
(c)	Sums paid to university, college, research institute or other similar institution approved by the research council.
2.	Capital expenditures.
(a)	Expenditures of a capital nature incurred on scientific research related to that trade and directly undertaken by the taxpayer or on his behalf.
(b)	Expenditures of a capital nature on research undertaken by the taxpayer or on his behalf and thereafter sets up and commences a trade connected with that research.
The report goes on to say:
In the United Kingdom there is a committee of the privy council for scientific and industrial research, a medical research council established under the committee of the privy council for medical research, and an agricultural research council under the committee of the privy council for agricultural research.
In any question of dispute as to what claims for allowances constitute research, the commissioners of inland revenue shall refer the question to the appropriate research council listed above for decision, and the decision of the council shall be final.
Thus we see that in Great Britain all expenditures for research, whether they be current or capital expenditures, are allowed as deductions for tax purposes. In this way, all industrial firms have every possible incentive to improve their competitive position by undertaking greatly expanded industrial research. The results have been clearly demonstrated by the manufacturing progress they have made, and by the industrial expansion which has taken place in that country.
In Canada the government has taken a far less generous attitude toward allowing deductions for tax purposes. I will quote the regulations in force in this country today, which are as follows:
Not more than 5 per cent of the taxable income of the taxpayer for the year preceding the taxation year may be deducted unless the research program in respect of which the expenditures were made has received the approval of the Minister of National Revenue, after he has, if he considers it necessary, obtained the advice of the national research council, that is, the honorary advisory council for scientific and industrial research as constituted by the Research Council Act.
Thus we see that a Canadian firm which wants to start an industrial research program which may cost in excess of 5 per cent of its taxable income for the previous year, may have to wait until half the current year is over before it knows the decision of the minister, and then, of course, that decision may be an unfavourable one. Decisions to undertake research programs must be made well in advance of the beginning of a year. A firm simply cannot wait until the previous year's figures have been audited and then subjected to the red tape of the Department of National Revenue for a decision.
Another factor which militates against a firm undertaking an industrial research program in this country under the present tax arrangements is the fact that industrial research is most needed after a bad year, and in a bad year the amount available for tax deductions will be lower. Thus we see that program affecting research in this country is a completely unrealistic one. Instead of encouraging firms that are doing badly to do better by undertaking industrial research, this government, by its taxation program.

Committee on Atomic Energy makes it as difficult as possible, if not completely impossible, for a firm to undertake such a research program.
I believe that this government should encourage firms to undertake greatly expanded research programs, as firms in every other industrial nation in the world have been encouraged to do, by concrete means such as tax inducements of the kind I have just cited as being in effect in Great Britain. I believe that this country should introduce some kind of realistic tax allowance program such as they have in Great Britain and which has in no small degree enabled that country to make double the industrial expansion and progress which this country has made during the past six years.
If it will do so it will be taking a very important step forward in accelerating industrial progress and expansion in this country; the kind of industrial progress and expansion which this country should expect when we think of the almost unbelievable raw materials, sources of power, and every other advantage which the country has. That is the way to stop this country being largely a hewer of wood and a drawer of water, and enable it to become one of the really great industrial nations of the world.
In conclusion I would again urge strongly that this government should permit the powers of the committee which is being set up under this motion, to be extended so that outside witnesses with particular knowledge and experience in these matters may be called before the committee, to give the information which will be needed if the committee is to make worth-while and useful recommendations to the government for future and much needed action in this important field.


Mr. H. R. Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, we in this group are prepared and pleased to support the resolution now before us that a special committee be appointed to examine into the role of government in the field of non-military research in Canada, including operations in the field of atomic energy and operations of the national research council. There is no doubt that, in addition to the role of government in the field of atomic research, corporations have a useful role to play. I listened most carefully to the suggestions made by the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Hees), but it seems to me that almost all of his remarks were directed, not particularly to the role of government in the field of atomic energy research but rather to how the government by various policies could assist corporations in carrying on their own research.
Of course that is one aspect that is important and which should be considered, but


I believe the government should be careful in granting further concessions of the nature suggested without at the same time giving consideration to what the final results on the economy will be of promoting that type of research rather than the type of research being carried on by the national research council. It is all very well to say that the government by taxation credits or taxation policies should promote private research, but at the same time it should be remembered that by doing so those corporations which develop new inventions may be able, because of our patent policies, to create for themselves a monopoly from which they will get large profits and returns over the years to come. While the encouragement of such research may be advisable, I think other safeguards should be thoroughly considered.
I am sure that the members of this committee will approach this problem with open minds. The members of the various parties in this house view the general role of government in business or the role of government in research in ways that are well known. The Liberal party, the Conservative party and the Social Credit party say that they would like to see the role of government kept to the very minimum. Their emphasis has always been that the government should get out of the business field and, I take it also, out of the research field if they are going to be completely consistent, in so far as it may be possible.
On the other hand, we believe that the government has a useful role to play in this field. We should bear in mind that the original development of atomic energy which resulted in the explosion of the first atomic bomb was brought about mainly, not through the efforts of private corporations or individuals but because governments accepted the important role of leadership in this field and were able to acquire the services of scientists who were experts in this field. By placing national resources at their disposal they were able to develop the first atomic bomb. I believe that the future will show that the government has an important role to play in the field of peacetime research and that we should not hand this field over to private corporations. Rather the government and the members of this committee should consider the advisability of extended government activity in this regard.
Personally I can see no reason why this committee should be confined to considering the role of government in the field of nonmilitary research in Canada. Of course, I would not want anything to be produced before that committee which could be termed classified material, but it seems to me that in

large measure atomic information with regard to military equipment is public and such information might well be made available to the members of the committee. If the members of this committee are going to assess the role of government in this whole field they should be given every facility to inquire into all aspects of atomic energy research of a non-classified nature.
I have shown my own attitude in that regard when I have questioned the government at various times as to whether they had asked that Canadian observers be given the right to see atomic bomb explosions and hydrogen bomb explosions being conducted by the United States and by the United Kingdom. I can see no reason why the government should not at least give consideration to the advisability of having the public representatives, members of parliament, view some of these tests. If my information is correct, members of congress have had such facilities made available to them in the past. I think it would be valuable information for the members of this committee if those same facilities were extended to them, if that were possible.
I should hope that the government would be prepared to provide all possible information to this committee, that its hands would not be tied, that the government would not try to keep as much information away from the committee as possible but rather would take the attitude that it would facilitate the work of the committee. I hope it would not attempt to give the committee a primer in atomic energy or an elementary class in the development of atomic energy, but rather would lay before the committee the fundamentals of this field so that members of parliament can come to a reasonable conclusion as to the role the government should play in this regard.
The hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Cameron), in his address on this subject on March 1, referred to the great dangers involved for the world in a continuing build-up of background irradiation, as he termed it. He quoted a number of prominent scientists to prove that there was a danger, in their opinion, that a continuing build-up of background atomic irradiation could result in very serious consequences to the human race. In that same regard, I have in my hand a quotation from a book, "The Story of F A O", written by the North American regional representative, Mr. Gove Hambidge. He has this to say on page 98:
According to a recent report by geneticist A. H. Sturtevant of the California Institute of Technology, "the entire human race, present and future'', is risking damage by irradiation from atomic or thermonuclear bombs exploded in current experiments. "There is no possible escape from the 67509-135J
Committee on Atomic Energy conclusion that the bombs already exploded will ultimately result, in future generations, in the production of numerous defective individuals. And every new bomb exploded . . . will result in an increase in this ultimate harvest of defective individuals".
That is a quotation from a prominent scientist. The hon. member for Nanaimo a few days ago quoted other prominent scientists along the same lines. I would suggest that if it is, as these scientists say, a real danger, this committee and the government should consider whether or not the time has now arrived when further hydrogen bomb explosions should be stopped. I myself believe that, with this possible danger to the world as these scientists express it, this committee should inquire into the genetic effects of the build-up of background irradiation to see whether or not the very genetic makeup of the human race is, in fact, imperilled.
Of course, atomic irradiation, if applied in a non-military field, can be very useful. Atomic irradiation is now being used by the national research council. It is being used in important experiments being conducted by the University of Manitoba in the spreading and development of various plants, including potatoes, tomatoes, carnations, apples, lyth-rums and so on. I might say that using atomic irradiation on various plants increases the number of mutations that take place as compared with the number that would take place without irradiation. Mutation is a genetic change that is handed down from one generation to another. So, if a large number of mutations in plants can be brought about, then the scientists can select those plants that show the best characteristics and, by a rigid process of selection, can in a short' time improve the plants with which they are dealing.
I should like to emphasize that most mutations caused by irradiation are detrimental and that only a few beneficial ones occur. When such mutations are applied to human beings, of course, there is no method of selection that we would want to consider. So, if human beings are exposed to irradiation, and changes in the genetic makeup should take place, then, since most of them being detrimental, there would be a general adverse effect on the human race. However, using atomic irradiation for the development of better varieties of grain and other plants can assist mankind very substantially. The report I have in my hand shows that the use of atomic irradiation with selection has resulted in eight new varieties of Montcalm barley being produced in a short time. Montcalm is a malting barley and is in great demand at the present time, but one of its drawbacks in the field is the fact that it has a weak straw. Irradiation applied to Montcalm barley has
2132	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Committee on Atomic Energy resulted, with rigid selection, in the development of a number of strong-strawed varieties, which should result in increased yield.
That is the way we should like to see atomic energy used, in the main, for the improvement of human welfare by applying it to peacetime uses. The government has had much good work done through the national research council. Last fall I had the privilege of going through the national research council laboratories on the campus of the University of Saskatchewan and I saw some of the very interesting and promising work that is being done in the way of developing boards from straw and in the way of separating protein from grain, the glucose separation process, as it is called, and a great deal of other important work.
I think it would be highly useful and highly desirable if the members of this committee could be given the opportunity to see the work of the national research council at Saskatoon and perhaps also at Halifax. I know from talking to some of the scientists, Dr. G. A. Ledingham and Dr. Burton Craig in particular, that they are most anxious that their facilities and the work of the national research council should be placed before the committee. They felt and I felt also that they were doing valuable work and that the setting up of this committee would result in some public attention being given to that valuable work. I hope the government will consider the advisability of stepping up the grants for the purpose of making atomic energy available to underdeveloped countries. More and more frequently we read reports and statements by prominent people in the western world that we are now beginning to lose the economic battle with the communist world and that unless steps are taken, and taken soon, to make available to underdeveloped nations atomic energy and more of the resources of this continent that are in surplus supply, the U.S.S.R. may fill that need with very drastic results to the free world.
I have in my hand a statement made by Senator William Benton of Connecticut as reported by Marquis Childs in the Washington Post of February 28, 1956. Quoting Senator Benton, the report has this to say in part:
. . . Soviet education . . . system is producing a surplus of engineers and technicians who will be assigned to carry out technical assistance in every uncommitted country of the world.
It goes on to say:
The Soviets are now challenging us frontally at what have historically been two of our strongest points, technology and mass education. The present rate of Russian educational advance is faster than our own, just as their growth rate in industrial production surpasses ours. The gap in total performance is closing. It is closing rapidly.

If that is the case, Canada should lose no time in stepping up the appropriation to be used for making atomic energy available for peaceful uses in underdeveloped nations. I am very glad that $8 million is now being used to provide for part of the cost of an atomic plant for India. I think that is a good thing and I should like to see the government do more along that line. This same article goes on to say:
In two speeches late last year, Admiral Lewis L. Strauss, chairman of the atomic energy commission, sounded an equally grave alarm. He said it was evident the United States was rapidly falling behind Soviet Russia in the training of scientists and technicians with the "certainty that we are turning out less than one-half the number of scientists and engineers we require-an alarming statistic by itself".
If the government is to play a full role in the field of non-military research, then I suggest that very large grants should be made available to assist students to go through our universities so that our supply of scientists and technicians may be ample to meet our own needs and to assist us in playing our full part in making atomic energy available to underdeveloped nations. We are pleased, as I have said, that the national research council is doing a good job. We believe that in many respects the government, through the national research council, should be undertaking more research and placing greater emphasis on this field. I suggest that when the national research council sets its energies to the production of some invention that may be of real benefit to the nation and that invention is achieved, not only is such an invention likely to be of much greater use to Canadians generally than if it is controlled by a private corporation but also the cost of producing such an invention is likely to be very much less than if it is produced in the competitive field.
A few weeks ago I had brought to my attention very forcibly an invention of two scientists of the national research council, Dr. A. Frederick Sirianni and Dr. Ira E. Puddington. The thing that they developed is not a large or heavy gadget. It is something that looks rather insignificant but I suggest that in the future it is likely to be of tremendous value to this nation and other nations in the world. It is a little thing they call a sodium plug. The sodium plug can be placed in the crankcase of an automobile or any ordinary piston engine. After this very cheap and economical plug has been placed in the crankcase of the motor the oil does not have to be changed nearly as frequently as would otherwise be the case.
As a matter of fact, two such plugs were placed in automobiles in September, 1953, and since that time they have been driven

17.000	and 20,000 miles respectively without changing the oil. Was this invention something that cost the country a great deal? I do not think so because these two scientists on the staff of the national research council are not paid large sums of money by way of salary, as we consider large sums of money in these days. According to the public accounts, Dr. Puddington is paid a salary of $11,000 and Dr. Sirianni a salary of $6,600.
Ordinarily one has to change the oil in an automobile every thousand miles or so. If the plug does what these scientists expect it will do, make it possible for the automobile owner to change the oil only once every
20.000	miles, it means that the oil in an average automobile will only have to be changed once a year.


Mr. Byrne:: I never change mine.


Hazen Robert Argue: The plug keeps down the development of an acid which results in damage to the automobile. We have about 4 million automobiles in Canada at the present time and also large numbers of tractors and stationary engines. If a person has to change the oil in his automobile only once a year instead of every thousand miles he will probably save $25 to $50 a year. Here is the plug. It sells for a small price. I was able to purchase one for $3.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: You are not selling them?


Hazen Robert Argue: I am not selling them.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: You should go in the business.


Hazen Robert Argue: No, I have enough trouble in the business of farming without trying to branch out. The plug developed by the national research council is being produced under licence by a private corporation, and in my opinion if it performs as it would appear to perform it will probably save the nation $100 million a year in oil consumption, certainly tens of millions of dollars a year.
I have referred to this, Mr. Speaker, to demonstrate that there is a place for the national research council, that our investment in the national research council has been sound and that should be increased. If the national research council had done nothing else but produce this plug all the money spent for that organization in recent years would probably have been fully justified in an economic sense. If this had been developed by a private corporation, I am very much afraid that the big oil companies in this country would have made certain that such a plug never reached commercial production and would never be placed in the hands of the automobile owners in this country.
I am sure that the deliberations of this committee will be useful indeed, and I want
Committee on Atomic Energy to express the hope that their recommendations will be to increase the role of government both in atomic research and with regard to the national research council.


Mr. Murphy (Lambton West):: I wonder if I could ask the hon. member who has just taken his seat a question, Mr. Speaker? Would he tell the house whether he has used that particular plug or does he know anyone who has used it successfully?


Hazen Robert Argue: To answer directly, I have not used the plug myself. However, I intend to do so.


James Joseph McCann: On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, according to the rule should not the hon. member table this exhibit?


Mr. Speaker:: At the moment I rose I was going to point out that the displaying of an exhibit is not in order. This one that the hon. member held in his hand while he was making his remarks is a very small one, but there have been larger exhibits shown in this house. On September 18, 1945-see Hansard, volume I, second session of 1945, page 289-Mr. Speaker Fauteux made a statement to the house that the displaying of exhibits was not to be allowed. I have had no opportunity to apply the ruling or to make a similar statement, except perhaps once in the case of an item submitted by the hon. member for York West (Mr. Hamilton) which was a thermos jug, if I recall correctly. I did not make any remarks then, and that case having gone without my saying anything, we are now faced with this one. I think the position should be protected by the remarks I am making now. In the future, we do not wish hon. members to come into the house with small or large exhibits.


James Joseph McCann: I submit that the hon. member having used the exhibit to corroborate his statement, it ought to be tabled and become the property of the house.


Mr. Speaker:: I do not think we ought to apply to exhibits, which are not supposed to be shown, the same rule which is applied to documents quoted in a debate. As the minister knows, there is a distinction. Official documents must be tabled, and they can be tabled when the Speaker is in the chair during routine proceedings. But when it comes to private documents-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Now Your Honour has it.


Mr. Speaker:: It may be worth while to look at it if it does bring the economies the hon. member has predicted. To come back to the point that has been submitted by the Minister of National Revenue, I would say that if his: point had to be agreed to this instrument

Committee on Atomic Energy would go to the Clerk and remain in his possession. He would be the one who would benefit from the exhibit. It turns out that the purchase made by the hon. member for Assiniboia is greatly appreciated, and I now give this exhibit to the Clerk.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I move he try it out in his car.


Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: When this committee on research is set up, I think one of the very important problems it will have to consider is the implication of Russia's new industrial offensive. I think all members are quite familiar with the fact that, apparently because of nuclear stalemate, Russia is, to all intents and purposes, embarking on a new development program to further her ultimate aim of world domination. This has come to the attention of editorial writers and prominent people throughout the world. I should like, very briefly, to refer to an article in a prominent periodical known as Newsweek. It is the issue of February 6, 1956. There is a special business section in this magazine which relates to this problem. The article is entitled "Industrial War, Can Russia Win?" It reads:
The clash of giants resounds around the world. Moscow has declared industrial war.
At a time when the U.S. prospers as no nation has before, the soviet union is launching a massive economic offensive. The objective: To destroy capitalism by outproducing its U.S. base, capturing its markets and potential friends in under-developed lands.
Then it goes on:
Close to one billion people in Asia, the Middle East and Africa are likely to throw their weight to the stronger side. On their decision largely depends the outcome of the cold war.
In that same article there are numerous other references showing how Russia has the ability to carry out this offensive to its ultimate conclusion. I think all hon. members realize the vast resources of raw materials available to the Soviet union, the vast resources of people, and also, a most important thing with which I am going to deal at some little length, the fact that the Soviet union has embarked on a program to produce scientists and engineers such as no other country has ever attempted before.
I should like to make a brief reference to this' economic offensive and in doing so to [DOT]quote briefly from this article in Newsweek to which I have referred. It points out, and I will not quote it but merely paraphrase it, that since the second world war, 600 million Asians and Arabs have won political independence from old world colonialism. Now, these same people who have secured their political independence are looking forward to the day of economic independence. These people in the east and in Africa are sick of never having enough to eat; they are

sick of never having enough of what we consider to be the simple essentials of life and what to them are the luxuries. I do not think it is just a question of whether or not these people in the east and in Africa are going to get these things; it is more a question of how they are going to get them. Russia is making an allout attempt to outbid us.
At the present time, in roughly 38 short years from the revolution, Russia has transformed a defeated, semi-feudal society into the world's second mightiest power. Since 1913, shortly before the revolution, Russia's gross national product has increased by more than 10 times. I believe it now amounts to almost that of Germany and Britain put together. This is something we are going to have to face. In order to increase this great potential that Russia has, and in order to make proper use of their resources in both materials and people, she has to have more scientists and engineers. In a broadcast towards the end of last January, Matthew Halton reporting on the well-known radio program on Sunday afternoons, "Capital Report", presented some very disquieting figures. He pointed out that this year the Soviet union will graduate 60,000 engineering students, whereas the United States will graduate 22,000 and Great Britain 3,000. There was no figure available for Canada, but after making some inquiries I understand there would probably be only a few hundred.
Now, the Soviet union undoubtedly is attempting to become the master of the world through science and technology. What is more, apparently last fall a group of very prominent British scientists visited the Soviet union and had an opportunity of talking to their graduates in engineering and examining their education system. According to Mr. Halton, it was their opinion that when you compared these groups in Russia, Britain and the United States, the Russian scientists and engineers were superior to those in the United States and Great Britain. Apparently Sir Winston Churchill referred to this situation as an emergency, and something had to be done about it. It is bad enough to have superiority in the number of engineers and scientists, but much worse when that superiority is in quality as well. Apparently, 1,200,000 students of science generally, including engineers, will graduate in Russia this year, and approximately 900,000 in the United States. These figures are very disturbing, Mr. Speaker. They should be disturbing to all hon. members. It is something that I hope this committee will look into.
The resolution to set up this committee refers particularly to non-military research.

In the modern world of science and technology military and non-military research cannot be basically dissociated. It is also apparent that Russia leads in military research in some fields as well as in non-military. I am going to refer hon. members to an article which appeared in the New York Times of January 29 of this year, by Hanson W. Baldwin. I am not going to read it. If hon. members are interested they may look it up. Mr. Baldwin is a well-known and well respected commentator. He points out that in the field of intercontinental missiles Russia is apparently ahead of the United States and Great Britain.
This business of Russia continuing to develop scientists had a parallel in the past. Hon. members know that before 1914 the government of imperial Germany set up a very extensive plan to make Germany the leading country in the world in science and technology. This was done by the government subsidizing the universities and in other ways. This worked very well, as hon. members know. The calibre of German scientists became a byword. Russia is doing the same thing today, but on a much larger scale. In addition, they have at their disposal not only their own scientific brains but the scientific brains of the Germans taken from East Germany at the end of world war II. They also have the advantage of the scientific brains of a few traitors of the western countries who have gone over to the Soviet.
It is quite apparent that Canada's great resources cannot be developed to the fullest extent without adequate scientists and engineers, and apparently there is a considerable shortage at the present time. I refer briefly to comments by a very noted Canadian which appeared in the Montreal Gazette, of Wednesday, March 7 last. They are the comments of Dr. O. M. Solandt, former chairman of the national research council. I quote briefly from the article:
Scientist Shortage Critical Problem
The shortage of scientists and engineers will be the dominant factor and a critical problem in Canadian scientific and economic development.
In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, Dr. Sidney Smith, president of the University of Toronto, a person whose opinion cannot be brushed lightly aside, has this to say, according to the Montreal Gazette of Wednesday, March 7, 1956:
Industry was warned by a university president today that by continuing to draw off top-notch university professors through high salaries, it may kill the goose that laid the golden eggs.
Dr. Sidney Smith, head of the University of Toronto, said his institution-and others, too-are facing a serious problem in getting sufficient high-calibre instructors to train the increasing number of students required in Canada's economic expansion.
Committee on Atomic Energy
In this same regard there was an article by Henry Eyring, of the University of Utah in the United States, regarding federal support of basic research at a state university. I do not wish to take up the time of the house to read the article. I just wish to point out that Professor Eyring said that universities in the United States are up against the same problem. They have insufficient funds to pay professors, and the professors are going into more lucrative jobs, and there is no one to train the students. Let me quote briefly from this article:
Since the top 10 to 15 per cent of the faculty make the difference between distinction and mediocrity much of a university's quality depends on how long it has been since it last went through the wringer.
There is a great deal more in this article, but I shall not take up the time of the house to read it.
On Thursday, March 8 last, the engineering institute of Canada, a well-known and highly respected organization in this country, and again an organization whose opinions cannot be casually brushed aside, appeared before the Gordon commission and pointed out the serious shortage of engineers in Canada. They also pointed out, as I have done this afternoon, that Russia was training vast numbers. I think that is also very important.
To win the industrial war with the Soviet union we have to develop fully our resourced, and we cannot do that without technicians The Russian economic offensive depends on efforts to build up the economies of the underdeveloped countries of Asia and Africa. They intend to do that by means of technical assistance. This means sending scientists and engineers to those countries, plus outright gifts and loans of material.
I should like to refer briefly to an article which appeared in a newspaper of the capital of Indonesia. As hon. members know, the capital of Indonesia is Djakarta. The name of the newspaper is Pedoman. The quotation reads:
Heavy industry is a magic word to underdeveloped nations. Compared with what Russia has planned to undertake, all FAO and Colombo plan aid fades into insignificance.
That is the opinion of the press of Indonesia. Indonesia is a country which has not decided for either the east or the west. It is in the balance. Apparently the action that Russia is taking is just the thing that is going to make those countries, with vast millions, fall into the Russian orbit. Canada and other western countries-I am referring, of course, only to Canada-must find ways of encouraging and training scientists and


Mr. W. M. Howe (Wellingion-Huron):: Committee on Atomic Energy would not bring about a resumption of the growing of this crop and the development of a linen industry in this country.
Another phase of industrial research was brought to my attention a few days ago by a question asked in connection with the use of stilbestrol in cattle and poultry feeds. When I heard the answer given by the Minister of National Health >and Welfare I gathered that the minister was not too sure about the matter himself. We are told that this is a very powerful drug which has to be used with care, and I wonder whether it should be put on the market before additional research is carried out to prove that it is not detrimental to the health of the people of Canada.
We can find many instances where research would be of great benefit. When we think about this question of research we cannot help but wonder what is going on in the rest of the world. I have often wondered why Danish butter was always in first demand on the British market, and the same with Danish hogs. But then I read that in Denmark, a country much smaller than Canada with a population of approximately 5 million people, there are 28 agricultural colleges. No doubt the boys and girls going through these colleges are able to carry on some research activity at home and are better able to interpret the policies developed by their agricultural colleges.
There are many other matters in connection with which additional research could be carried on, such as the handling of fresh vegetables and fruit, the refrigeration of vegetables, meats and perishable products and the packaging of all types of agricultural products to make them more palatable and attractive to the consuming public. Even in ;he face of our apparent surpluses, I think ;he main question is the possibility of develop-ng means of increasing our production as our copulation increases in order to prevent the lituation which has been mentioned by so nany of our learned men, that before too ong we will be short of food supplies.
To the urban dweller research is usually issociated with atomic energy, medical drugs, dtamins, television and so forth, but to a armer research means hybrid corn, disease [DOT]esistant crops, better control of insects, liseases of weeds, animals that grow faster ind cows that give more milk. It means more fficient ways of pricing and marketing his iroduct. It adds up to a higher standard of iving for the entire community.


Mr. John B. Hamilton (York West):: Mr. peaker, I doubt very much whether under le terms of reference mentioned by the hon. lember for Oxford (Mr. Nesbitt) I could 
qualify as even an amateur scientist in so far as my ability to take part in this debate is concerned. I have not even read the pulp magazines to which the hon. member referred. But I do feel that I have considerable responsibility in presuming to speak on a subject of this kind. It seems to me that the terms of reference under which this special committee will operate cover a most important field of activity, one which will affect not only our economic life but perhaps the moral and spiritual values throughout the whole world for hundreds of years to come. In that respect it may plot a course for us which will have far-reaching effects.
I only hope that as a result of setting up this committee we may have a continuing flow of information made available not only to the committee but to the public at large, on the widest possible basis. I hope I will be forgiven if I read briefly from the preface of a book which was sent to me by Dr. R. L. Hearn, an outstanding engineer and head of the Hydro Electric Power Commission of Ontario. This preface is by Roger H. Evans, director general of UNESCO and the book is entitled "Nuclear Energy and Its Uses in Peace". The preface reads:
Almost any new discovery in science may be used for good or for evil. It is men who decide, according to their needs of the moment, and according to their moral and philosophical conceptions. With peace now prevailing, with the peoples of every nation eager for the good life, and with ample knowledge now available from 15 years of research, the time is certainly ripe for developing the beneficent and constructive uses of the atom for peace.
And later:
Thus a new era opens. The science of atomic materials and the engineering uses of atomic energy will be shared by all the world. It becomes as important for the public to learn the new facts as it has been to understand the use of coal and steam. The new power will be widely used long before school textbooks can be rewritten and before the children who study them can become adults. An introduction to the new knowledge and to its use in ordinary peaceful living is needed at once.
There is little doubt that this knowledge is needed at once. As I listened to General Gruenther this morning I began to wonder whether we could accomplish all that we would hope to accomplish in this committee if we attempted to keep separate the fields of military and non-military research. In this respect I agree with the opinion expressed by the hon. member for Oxford that it is going to constitute a most serious question. No one here wants to urge that the committee be given classified material, but it is going to be very difficult to make the best use of this committee; it is going to be very difficult to produce the best results in atomic research, if we are going to have it developed on two parallel lines, developed with two separate and distinct groups of scientists,

developed with two separate and distinct votes of government funds, and developed for two separate and distinct purposes.
I think I might be forgiven if I refer again to the problem of development and research in the field of aviation as a typical example of the problem that faces us here. No one can deny that the progress we have made in the commercial aviation field has been tied very definitely to the development of aviation as a means of waging war. The aircraft industry in this country is concerned, I believe it is distressed, because it feels that the government is not prepared to take that one additional step which is required to integrate the benefits that are being produced in military research, by bringing them forward and producing the results that can be produced right within this country in connection with commercial aircraft development.
Now I should like to refer, in connection with this phase of the matter, to the submission made by Avro at Malton to the Gordon commission on economic prospects. I shall read only a few words from this submission:
At the outset, it should be stated that military aviation requirements provide the impetus for practically all aeronautical advances. It is a historical fact that, except for one or two cases, every commercial airliner flying today is a direct offshoot of a military aircraft. The reason for this is that the research and development needed to bring about a major advance are so costly that seldom can they be justified from a purely commercial point of view. This limitation does not apply to the military. When it becomes a matter of survival, economics are secondary.
Further on the submission says:
The use of atomic power in military aircraft also probably is not far off. Its introduction will make a difference mainly in economy of operation and almost unlimited range, rather than in speed and altitude, since atomic energy will be, in effect, a substitute for fuel in already existing power plants. However, until a shielding process can be found which does not involve the tremendous weight of material needed at present, atomic power will be used only in the largest aircraft.
The application of all these advances to civil aviation undoubtedly will depend, as in the past, on how quickly they can be proved reliable enough and economical enough for use in transporting passengers and freight. The nature of the advances will be governed by advances in military aviation.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I perhaps am not as charitable in my forgiveness as most hon. members. I think we have heard sufficient of these quotations in this debate. These matters, and certainly opinions of experts, could be much better brought before the committee and not before the house as a whole. We have 265 members here whose own opinions I am very anxious to hear, but I think the place we should hear these technical opinions is in the committee. For that reason I believe the hon. member is out of order.
Committee on Atomic Energy


John Borden Hamilton: I think the
committee in question would be delighted if it had the power to call Mr. Crawford Gordon, junior, of Avro Aircraft at Malton, and ask him exactly how he felt about this particular phase of investigation and research.


Mr. Dickey:: Would the hon. member permit a question? Does he suggest for a moment that the committee has not the power to invite Mr. Crawford Gordon to come here and give evidence, if he is willing to come here, for as long as he wants to give evidence?


John Borden Hamilton: Instead of the parliamentary assistant phrasing that in the form of a question-


John Horace Dickey: Just answer the question.


John Borden Hamilton: -if he will inform the house that the committee will definitely have men such as Mr. Crawford Gordon here, I assure you I will not need to quote all the remarks to which I have been referring.


John Horace Dickey: It is not up to the parliamentary assistant. It is up to the committee.


Mr. Green:: Then give it power to send for witnesses. Why hamstring it?


An hon. Member:: What will the committee do?


An hon. Member:: What it is told.


John Borden Hamilton: This has certainly been an interesting aside. At least it has brought some of these things to the attention of the members of the house, and perhaps I may be allowed to continue.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: I think I am perfectly right-


An hon. Member:: Sit down.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: -in raising this point of order as to the reading of excerpts from too many technical opinions.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. The hon. member for Kootenay East has raised this point of order with regard to the reading of extracts. The extracts to which the hon. member for York West was making reference did not in my opinion, offend the rule with regard to commenting on proceedings within the house or the remarks of members within the house. Hon. members, I think, are well aware of that rule.
I presume that the point of order raised by the hon. member for Kootenay East is with regard to the reading of long extracts, which in effect introduces another member into the House of Commons and which at times has the effect of expressing not the opinions of the member who has the floor

Committee on Atomic Energy but the opinions of some other person. I believe Speakers have invariably ruled that the reading of such long extracts is not in order. I am not aware of any rule against the reading of short extracts as long as they do not offend against the citation I mentioned earlier. Therefore I can only ask the hon. member to take care that he does not offend any custom of the house against the reading of such lengthy extracts that he is in effect expressing not the opinions of himself, but the opinions of another.


John Borden Hamilton: Perhaps I should have used a procedure I have found necessary to use in court from time to time, adopting the words of the expert and using them as my own. I am quite sure that I shall be within the rules of order of the house. However, I do not have to quote these things. I thought that in doing so I was bringing before the house the opinions of experts in this field.
When I began to speak I said I thought that anyone who took part in this debate was presuming a great deal if he did not qualify as even an amateur scientist, as set out by the hon. member for Oxford. However, the extracts I have quoted indicate that the nature of the technical advances in the industry will be governed by advances in military aviation. This opinion is confirmed by the submission to the same commission by Cana-dair Limited of Montreal, which sets out very clearly that in all phases of commercial aircraft development the background has been based very firmly on the lessons learned from research done in the military field. As a matter of fact, in that submission Geoffrey Notman referred very definitely to the setting up of a nuclear products division of the company on which a considerable amount of money, two or three million dollars, was being spent for the purpose of continuing research on a very definite basis as to the use of atomic materials in so far as aircraft are concerned.
Here are two plants engaged at the present time primarily in the production of military aircraft whose executives plainly see that there is a tie-in with respect to the research required in the one type of endeavour and the progress which may be made in the peaceful uses of aircraft in this country. Yes, Mr. Speaker, in reply to the question raised by the parliamentary assistant I say that the committee very definitely should call such men as Crawford Gordon, jr., of Avro and Geoffrey Notman of Canadair and have them outline in full their programs of research to see if it is not possible to take those programs one further step in order to enable us to take


such terrific commercial advantage of the many millions of dollars being spent on military research in this field.
If we did that, perhaps we would not have the Minister of Defence Production losing so much sleep because he has invested $65 million or some such amount in a plant and is worried because we have not had a single plane in some time off the production line. If it were possible to ensure that the money being spent for that purpose, with the little additional help that might be required, would result in commercial planes for peaceful purposes coming off the same production lines, I think there would be a lot less concern in the country about the amount of money being spent in these activities.
I am wondering whether the Massey commission did not have something like this in mind in its recommendation under the heading, "Scientific Research Under the Federal Government". In that regard it had this to say:
That under the direction of the privy council committee on scientific and1 industrial research, a study be made as soon as possible of all research activities of the federal government, with a view to their adequate co-ordination, the avoidance of any wasteful duplication, and the maximum co-operation that may be possible.
These words certainly fit the terms of reference that are required for this particular committee.
I should like to speak about one or two other phases of the problems that will confront the committee. The other day I received a letter from a constituent of mine who had heard a radio address by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell). She wrote me a letter in which she suggested that we should increase our gifts under the Colombo plan. I guess it was a pretty appealing radio address and had an effect. I had to write back and say that I was not exactly sure I could criticize the government in connection with the amount of money it was spending under the plan because after all I knew that whatever help was given had to come out of the taxpayers' pockets, and to a great extent I thought we were near the breaking point in that connection.
But I am wondering whether there is not another answer to such problems, another answer that may be produced before the committee. You know, scientists are able to equate the prosperity of a country or the standard of living of a country with the amount of energy, the amount of fuel that is available in that country. They talk about coal, petroleum, natural gas and even water power, but they lump them all together and talk about energy. They say that using this

formula you can determine just how far a country can go in raising its standard of living. They point out that on an annual basis the United States, which most people agree has the highest standard of living in the world, uses 8 tons of coal or energy, whatever you want to call it, per person; that Britain and Norway use 4-5 tons per person per annum, Japan 1 ton and India -01 ton.
Then they say, compare this with the annual income per person in these countries. The United States figure is $2,000 as against 8 tons, the United Kingdom or Norway $1,000 as against 4-5 tons, Japan maybe $100 and India maybe $50. Their complete standard of living is determined by their ability to produce the energy required for the production of goods used in everyday life.
We are entering an entirely new field now. If we wanted to raise the standard of living of all people throughout the free world to our own living standard we would probably have enough energy of the coal-petroleum type to last us 25 or 30 years, but with the use of new materials, with the use of uranium and thorium as sources of energy, it would be possible for us to raise the standard of living of the peoples of the free world to our own basic standard and keep it there for a thousand years.
Perhaps this is the answer to the problems that face us in a period between peace and war. I do not think anyone believes that merely to complete the building of massive defence forces is going to be the ultimate answer. It seems to me that the one sure way of maintaining peace is to see that there is an exchange of this information, an exchange of the material which creates energy, and the raising of the living standards of substandard nations to our own level.
If we do that we will write the best insurance policy so far as peace is concerned that we can get anywhere. How are we going to do it? First of all we in this house have to get the information, and later we have got to do our part as parliamentarians to see that the information is distributed to the right people and ensure that the basic commercial quantities of the goods we have that will do this job are also made available to them.
I do not see why we cannot have the type of parliamentary and scientific committee they have at Westminster. The committee there can meet regularly. It can call before it scientists of all types. It can bring them from other lands as well. These scientists give lectures on this type of topic, so that every bit of information that is of commercial value is placed right on their doorstep.
Committee on Atomic Energy
If 'we could get such information perhaps we could help to solve some of the problems to which the hon. member for Oxford rereferred, when he mentioned the fact that we were losing out in the educational race. He pointed out that we are not producing the engineers we require to carry on this job. If we did that perhaps we could get away from such headlines as that which appeared in the Toronto Telegram last year, namely, "Lack of Engineers Surprising to Howe." If it is surprising to him, let us get the committee going and find out all about it. Maybe the Minister of Defence Production will be able to learn the answer as to why we do not have the engineers. In the article he is reported as saying:
"This is hard for me to understand", Mr. Howe told the annual dinner of the association of consulting engineers here.
I had a letter from a friend in the United States the other day, and he said it was not very hard for him to understand. In the last three or four years we have had $395 million of engineering work done in this country, and all but approximately $33 million of it was done in the United States and shipped here. Perhaps that is one reason we do not have people with engineering skill remain in this country.
All in all, here is one opportunity. Let us not allow it to slip through our fingers. Surely the amendment which has been proposed by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra places with the committee the power to get the answers, the power to see that the information made available to it is given to the proper people in this country and the proper people in other countries to ensure that we all go forward, as freedom-loving nations, in the development of atomic energy for the use of all mankind and not just for the use of a few.


Mr. J. M. Forgie (Renfrew North):: In my
constituency lies the atomic energy plant at Chalk River. I am very happy indeed to note that this committee will be formed and an opportunity probably will be given to the members of that committee to visit the plant at Deep River. I very well remember that this atomic energy plant was begun when I was in the army at Petawawa in 1942. Today, carved out of the forest, we have one of the finest towns in Canada with a population between 4,000 and 5,000 people. It is composed mostly of brilliant scientists, people who are making a great contribution to the life of our country and to the scientific research which is being conducted at the present time. I deeply regret the passing the other day of Dr. Cipriani at Deep River. He was one of the leading scientists in Canada, perhaps in the world.
2142	HOUSE OF
Committee on Atomic Energy As I say, no doubt the committee will' have an opportunity of visiting the place where these great developments have occurred during the last four years. As we all know, of course, one of the outstanding developments has been the cobalt bomb, which has been distributed throughout Canada and to many other nations in the world. It has been of great value in the treatment of cancer. These scientists at Deep River are quiet, modest and industrious people who are working away without receiving what I consider to be adequate compensation. I am sure when this committee go to Deep River during the coming months they will be greatly impressed by the devotion to duty of these people and the work that is being carried out there.
Later on in the year there will be developed by the government, in co-operation with Ontario hydro and Atomic Energy of Canada, a plant lying farther to the west at Des Joachims, which will make a substantial contribution to the use of atomic energy for industrial purposes. I think I am right in saying that the Minister of Trade and Commerce has stated that this will be a pilot plant and not a profit-producing plant. However, it will go a long way toward establishing the various uses to which atomic energy can be put in peacetime pursuits.
We are looking forward therefore, Mr. Speaker, to the visit of this committee to Deep River. I am quite satisfied that the personnel of the atomic energy plant there are looking forward to the visit of this committee as well.


Mr. F. G. Robertson (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of National Health and Welfare):: It gives me great pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to support this resolution at this time because I believe the work of this committee will be a valuable contribution to the development of Canada. We are specifically to inquire into two sections, namely the operations in the field of atomic energy for peacetime purposes and the operations of the national research council. The national research council is an important government bocvy in Canada, and I believe it will be very valuable to examine the operations of that council because I think we will be struck by its accomplishments. The national research council is responsible for co-ordinating all federal government research, I speak particularly of medical research as the Department of National Health and Welfare is very much interested in the development of such research.
I think it is quite evident to all of us that in many fields Canada is taking a lead in research. I propose to discuss at some length research in the field of health and welfare, [Mr. Forgie.l

in which field I believe hon. members will agree that progress has been rapid and accomplishments great.


Mr. Trainor:: In Canada?


John Alexander Robertson: Very definitely, and I will prove that point as I go along. The need for research in health and welfare matters has been long recognized. The Minister of National Health and Welfare has laid great stress on the need for research in these fields. He has always felt that only by extensive research can we provide the foundation necessary for success in all aspects of health and welfare planning. Research in health matters has been enormously extended in the post war years, and it was during this period that welfare research first began to command serious attention.
Health and welfare research in Canada is now limited by several factors. The first and most important of these is the shortage of trained personnel. There can be no doubt that the most important need is to have well trained and eager scientists who are prepared to give their life to research. I should like also to join with the hon. member who has just taken his seat in paying tribute to Dr. Cipriani, who died a few weeks ago. We in our department know what a splendid contribution he made to medical research in this country. The second limiting factor is financial resources, although when we consider the vast sums which are presently being spent on health and welfare research in Canada this is not of primary importance at the moment. The need for additional financial assistance is probably limited by the lack of trained personnel.
Perhaps our greatest need at the present time is in the professional co-ordination and planning of research so that, as far as possible in this complex field, we direct our work to the most productive field and prevent needless duplication and overlapping. In so far as health research is concerned, all projects supported by the federal government are considered by a co-ordinating committee of technically competent experts before being recommended for approval or rejection to the research advisory committee. The general policy covering all medical research is under constant examination by the privy council committee on scientific and industrial research policy. In welfare research there is close liaison among the Department of National Health and Welfare, the provincial welfare agencies, the Canadian welfare council and other voluntary organizations and the schools of social work.
Let us examine the expenditure on medical research in Canada. Over $7 million is now being spent in Canada in health research. Of

this amount, $4 million comes from federal government sources and the remainder is contributed by universities, charitable organizations, the provinces and commercial organizations.
The federal budget for health research is eight times as large as in 1938, and four times as large as in 1948. In addition to the national health and welfare department, three other federal agencies sponsor programs of medical research; a division of medical research of the national research council, the medical section of the defence research board, and the Department of Veterans Affairs. These four agencies contribute more than half of today's annual expenditures in health research.
Through the national health program, $1-8 million was made available for research in 1954-55. Nearly $8 million has been provided under this program since its commencement in 1948. The percentage of the amount available which has actually been spent has risen from 59 per cent in that year to 88 per cent last year, the average expenditure during the life of the program being 85 per cent of the funds available.
In addition to these funds for specific research projects, $1 million has been provided under this program for technical equipment for research performance. Only a few weeks ago the Minister of National Health and Welfare approved a grant of some $24,000 to the University of Toronto for the purchase of special equipment for the extension of research work on heart disease in the province of Ontario. This grant brought to more than $125,000 the amount of federal assistance for heart research in this province during the current fiscal year. This equipment will be established in the Toronto General hospital under the supervision of the department of medicine and surgery at the university. It is part of a province-wide program for the extension of research and the development of new diagnostic and treatment techniques.
Similar assistance is being provided in the province of Quebec to the institute of cardiology and to other agencies, and similar grants have been made available for research work at the University of Saskatchewan and-


Howard Charles Green: On a point of order-


Frederick Greystock Robertson: -the Royal Jubilee hospital, Victoria, British Columbia.


Howard Charles Green: I submit this is a speech on health estimates, not on this resolution at all. Furthermore, the hon. member is reading every word of his speech.
Committee on Atomic Energy


Mr. Howe (Port Arthur):: Mr. Speaker, I call your attention to the nature of the speeches that have been made throughout the afternoon by a series of Conservative speakers. If any of them spoke on the resolution before us I have not been able to follow them.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Applewhaite):: In
view of the speeches to which I have listened all day and previously in this debate, I certainly would hesitate-in fact, I would decline-to rule the hon. member out of order on the grounds of irrelevancy. He is discussing an aspect of non-military research and the government role in connection therewith. This debate has been so general that it would be grossly unfair for me to rule the hon. member who now has the floor, or any other hon. member on either side of the house, out of order for discussing some particular aspect of research in this country.
On the other question raised by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, of course I think the house and I are in complete agreement on two points; first, that the house and all members thereof always disapprove of the reading of speeches except when we do it ourselves. Second, I think the feeling of the house, as has been pointed out by Mr. Speaker in the lengthy statement which will be found on page 100 of the Votes and Proceedings of this session, is that there is apparently no procedure of which I am aware at the moment which will enable the occupant of the Speaker's chair to say that a certain member is reading his speech and must desist. I think Mr. Speaker made it clear at the time he made his lengthy statement that until such time as the representatives of the parties get together and agree on a procedure which perhaps will have to be included in our standing orders, the hands of the Speaker are pretty well tied, and whether speeches shall be read or delivered without reading must be left entirely to the good judgment, good sense and good debating ability of the members delivering these speeches and of those, as Mr. Speaker said, particularly who sit around him. The hon. member for Northumberland, Ontario.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I might first of all tell the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra that in the first place I am not reading my speech. It is true I have extensive notes.


Howard Charles Green: Somebody else's notes.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: I have also very extensive indentations here. I am sure if the hon. member came over and looked at my notes he would make a very poor speech indeed
2144	HOUSE OF
Committee on Atomic Energy if he attempted to read them. Furthermore, I have listened to speeches made by hon. members of the opposition and I maintain, Mr. Speaker, that I am in order whereas many of them were completely out of order.
If medical research is not an important division of the national research council, then I am completely uninformed on the work of the national research council. I venture to say that members of the opposition themselves will ask what is being done in medical research when this committee meets. I would not be surprised if the hon. member for Van-couver-Quadra himself were interested in the medical implications of this committee.
Under the public health research grant $500,000 is now made available each year for research in public health. More than $2,400,000 has been allocated under this grant in the past seven years. In addition, contributions are made from six other grants to research. These are the medical health grant, the general public health grant, the cancer control grant, the tuberculosis control grant, the crippled children grant, and the child and maternal health grant. Allocations made under these grants have increased from over $100,000 in 1948 to more than $1-25 million in 1954-55.
Under the mental health grant, $2-2 million has been made available; and when we look into the records for the year 1948-49 we find that only two projects were under investigation at that time. We find that in 1954-55 some 43 projects were being investigated. The sum of $1-5 million has been made available under the general public health grant; $600,000 under the tuberculosis control grant; $700,000 under the cancer control grant.
In this connection I would like to make reference to what the hon. member for Renfrew North said regarding the cobalt bomb. As hon. members know, this bomb was developed at Chalk River and has proven of great value in the treatment of cancer. In fact Canada is recognized as a world leader in this field. Not only have we installed many of these units in various cities in Canada, in Vancouver, Winnipeg, Windsor, London, Saskatoon and Port Arthur, but arrangements are being proceeded with to instal them in Ottawa, Kingston, St. Boniface, Saint John, New Brunswick, and St. John's, Newfoundland.
Last year I had the pleasure of going to the home town of the Minister of Trade and Commerce to represent the government at the official ceremonies marking the presentation of the cobalt bomb. While there I had the pleasure of sitting beside a very lovely lady at dinner.


Mr. Mclvor:: They are all lovely.


John Alexander Robertson: But the thing that struck me was this. I have been in this house now for some six years, and I have listened to considerable abuse heaped upon the minister by members of the opposition parties. I talked to this lady at dinner and she said to me, "I have always been a lifelong Conservative, but I always vote for Right Honourable C. D. Howe."


George Harris Hees: Was she good looking?


Frederick Greystock Robertson: She said, "If I did not, remembering his great contribution to Canada, I could not sleep at night".


Thomas Miller Bell: Are you trying to out-bid Bennett for the cabinet job?


Frederick Greystock Robertson: I say that is the high regard in which the right hon. minister is held by the majority of the Canadian people; and further, in their hearts I know that is the feeling of the hon. members of the opposition.


Mr. Charlton:: Go on with research now.


John Borden Hamilton: This is political
research.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: Further, we have contributed $70,000 under the child and maternal health grant and $130,000 under the crippled children's grant.


Owen C. Trainor: Mr. Speaker, is all this information available elsewhere; in the estimates, for example?


An hon. Member:: This is political research.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: I believe the hon. member who has just risen questioned whether there was much we could tell him about medical research in Canada. I think what I have put on the record is possibly a little more than he knew about. In addition, substantial sums have been allocated for the training of health workers-


An hon. Member:: Oh, tell us about the lady you had dinner with.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: -so that 9,350 additional health workers have been trained, among whom are a large number of research workers thus helping to overcome one of the serious bottlenecks in health research.
I think it is quite evident, therefore, that the federal government has taken the lead in providing financial assistance toward research projects of all types. Evidence of the value of such financial assistance is not hard to find. All members of the house are well aware of the important role played by Canadian research in the production of Salk poliomyelitis vaccine.


An hon. Member:: They did not discover it.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: At one stage it was found that in order to grow the poliomyelitis virus, live tissue cells in a culture medium were required. While numerous investigators were engaged in the search for such a medium, a synthetic solution developed in Canada in connection with cancer research, medium 199, proved to be the answer and this combination was used by Salk in the production of poliomyelitis virus.
This not only permitted the original developmental work to progress at a greatly accelerated pace but also paved the way for the production of massive quantities of the vaccine. Further, the research investment at the Connaught laboratories has resulted in the cost of the final product there being much lower, in actual figures about one-third of the cost of the commercially produced vaccine.
Research on the production of ACTH and cortisone at the Connaught medical research laboratories made possible improved and more economical methods for the production of these drugs, so that the cost of the 25 milligram vial, which in 1950 cost $5, was reduced to $1.75 a few years later.


Owen C. Trainor: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. gentleman say who owns and operates the Connaught laboratories?


Frederick Greystock Robertson: Mr. Speaker, I believe the University of Toronto controls it.


Owen C. Trainor: It is the province of Ontario, is it not?


Frederick Greystock Robertson: I can also tell the hon.
member that the large grants provided specifically for this purpose made possible the development of ACTH and cortisone.


Owen C. Trainor: What proportion?


An hon. Member:: But this government
should not take the credit for it.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: Mr. Speaker, hon. members opposite are very prone to give credit to certain provincial governments, but I think the facts I have placed on the record show that the federal government is taking the lead in medical research. I give you another instance, Mr. Speaker. Research on the influenza virus at the institute of microbiology and hygiene in Montreal has produced a vaccine which is now undergoing field trials in three areas in Quebec, and the results made will pave the way for the ultimate production of a dependable preventive agent for influenza. Other studies at this and other centres are being performed on recently discovered viruses responsible for acute respiratory diseases similar to influenza, and interesting developments may also be anticipated here.


Owen C. Trainor: Another provincial government achievement.
14, 1956	2145
Committee on Atomic Energy


Frederick Greystock Robertson: In the study of heart disease and related afflictions remarkable progress has been made, particularly in experimental surgery. In centres in both Quebec and Ontario to which I have already referred, clinical research workers are conducting extensive studies on such conditions as valvular disease of the heart, coronary thrombosis and congenital heart disease, hypertension, the peripheral blood vessels, and the development of instruments used in the determination of cardiac function. Techniques have been evolved and put to practical use which have meant relief from suffering and prolongation of life for increasing numbers of people.
Only about a month ago I had the pleasure of talking to a lady who lives here in the city of Ottawa. She told me of the great distress she had for many years before she went to the surgical clinic in Toronto. She had been unable to climb stairs or carry out any of the ordinary activities of daily living. However, following an operation at the heart clinic of the Toronto General hospital she was restored to almost perfect health and is now able to manage the ordinary affairs of her home life. That is a very concrete example, Mr. Speaker, of what has been accomplished by medical research in Canada.


An hon. Member:: In the province of
Ontario.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: I am not suggesting at any time that all the credit belongs to the federal government. I think I have paid compliments to the work of the provincial governments. Our department has always been willing to give credit where credit is due, but I for one will not take the narrow approach which hon. members of the official opposition are taking in this matter.


An hon. Member:: You are constantly quoting the achievements of provincial governments.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: A few months ago the Minister of National Health and Welfare convened a meeting of leading heart authorities from all parts of Canada, and as a result the Canadian heart foundation was formed. This foundation will have affiliated provincial associations, and its main purpose will be to raise money to carry out basic and clinical research on all heart disease. I am sure it will make the same splendid contribution to research which is being made by the national cancer institute, the Canadian arthritis and rheumatism association, and other similar bodies in Canada.
There are numerous studies being carried out in Canada on arthritis and rheumatism. These studies should contribute materially to the finding of some satisfactory cure for these

Committee on Atomic Energy crippling diseases, which affect some 225,000 Canadians of which number 115,000 are severely or totally disabled.
Time does not allow me to dwell longer on the various research projects being carried on through the federal health grants. Over 400 individual projects have been approved by the minister and are in various stages of completion. Many of these will produce results of profound importance.
Mention should be made, however, of the Canadian sickness survey which was carried out between 1950 and 1951 and involved the study of some 50,000 persons in all age groups and social classes throughout Canada. This survey indicated the nature and extent of sickness among Canadian people, the effect of illness and disability on the population and the health care they received. This survey has been published in detail and has received world-wide recognition for its successful prosecution and productive outcome.
The national health survey was carried out early in the national health program in order to assist the provinces to take an inventory of their health resources. The research and statistics division of the department will shortly publish a comprehensive half-million word report on this survey. Both these reports have been of great value in laying the basis for the health insurance studies which have been going on in the department for some years.
Comprehensive bulletins have been produced on health insurance systems in force in the principle countries of the world, and on our own public non-profit and commercial schemes in Canada.
Extensive analysis of costs and utilization of data have been carried out both by the provinces and the federal government, and this analysis proved of immense value at the recent federal-provincial conference on health insurance. Without them a scientific and responsible approach to the problem of health insurance would have been impossible, and the proposal made by the federal government at this conference for the introduction of health insurance in Canada would have been impossible.
Welfare research has not made the advances that health research has, but a number of important studies have been carried out by the Department of National Health and Welfare. The research done for the old age security committee of this house made possible an intelligent approach to and solution of the old age security problem.
Studies carried out by this department made possible the commencement of the disability allowance program. A survey of welfare


positions in Canada a few years ago indicated the need for increased members of welfare personnel. We have also made studies of the various welfare services in Canada and these have been published in bulletin form for the assistance of welfare planners. Studies have been made for the United Nations and its specialized agencies on various aspects of welfare services in Canada.
I believe this brief outline of the various research activities in the health and welfare field which I have presented proves very definitely that medical research workers are quite well aware of their responsibility and are taking every possible means to improve the quality and quantity of medical research. We can, I think, look forward to gradually unlocking the doors behind which are the secrets of many of the most formidable diseases now afflicting the human race.
I believe that the establishment of this committee and the work it will do will make a further important contribution to medical research in this country.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, on this occasion it is possible for me to commence my remarks with the well-worn phrase that I did not intend to take part in this debate. The remarks I shall make will make the truth of that well-worn statement obvious. I have been prompted to take part in this discussion by the very interesting speech which has just been made by the hon. member for Northumberland (Mr. Robertson). I am also delighted that a point of order was raised during the course of the hon. member's speech on which Your Honour ruled, making it clear that we are permitted to discuss any phase of nonmilitary research.
I agree with the hon. member for Northumberland as to the important part which has been played in this country by research of the type made possible by the Department of National Health and Welfare. I welcome, as do all hon. members, the medical research which has been carried on by the department or which has been facilitated by federal grants made under the direction of the Department of National Health and Welfare.
I agree also with the hon. member that the research which has been carried on by the research division of the Department of National Health and Welfare with regard to health insurance has been extremely valuable. It is still my view that after 37 years of talking about bringing in health insurance the Liberals ought to have plenty of material of their own on which to base such a program. However, it is a fact that the research into this important problem which has been carried on by the department has provided the

basis upon which a national program of health insurance can now be established.
As a matter of fact I am satisfied that the extent of the research which has been carried on would make possible a much bolder step in the field of national health insurance than is envisaged in the proposals made by the federal government to the provinces at the conference held recently in the city of Ottawa. If we are not moving ahead as fast as we should it is not the fault of those who have done the research, it is the fault of the government which is still dragging its feet in this important field.
Likewise I join with the hon. member for Northumberland in expressing thanks to the research division of the Department of National Health and Welfare for the excellent work they did for our committee on old age security which met in 1950. I am sure that the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources (Mr. Lesage), who was a joint chairman of that committee, will agree with me that the research done by the department provided the basis on which we were able to make intelligent decisions in the important field of old age security.
It is precisely because of the importance of the groundwork which is done by those who do research that I feel further research should be done into the whole question of how our older people are getting along. There were a few twitters in the house this afternoon when a starred question of mine was called. I refer to the one that asked about civil servants' breakfast habits. There were further twitters when the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Health and Welfare made his reply.
I want to say that I was quite serious in putting that set of questions on the order paper. I was serious with respect to both parts of it. I approve of what the nutrition branch of the Department of National Health and Welfare is doing by way of conducting research into the eating habits of some sections of the Canadian population. I feel that by continuing such research, information can be obtained on the basis of which education can be made available in an effort to improve the health of our people through better nutrition.
I was not only quite serious in my interest in what the nutrition branch of the Department of National Health and Welfare is doing among the Ottawa civil servants, I was also extremely serious in my suggestion that similar surveys might be made among groups of old age pensioners in this country. In fact my question suggested that research might be made not only into the question of whether
Committee on Atomic Energy or not old age pensioners are eating adequate breakfasts, but as to whether or not they are getting adequate meals at any time of the day. Therefore I urge most strongly that the research envisaged in the motion now on the order paper be extended into this whole field of how people of 65 and 70 years of age and over are faring in this wonderful country at this time.
Some days ago I suggested to the Minister of National Health and Welfare that a special committee might be appointed to review all our old age legislation. The Minister of National Health and Welfare in one of those typical responses of his chose to present a question to me rather than to answer my question.
I remind the house now that my request for research into how our older citizens are faring was based on the fact that the welfare council of greater Winnipeg has carried on research into this matter and has produced an interesting report entitled "Age and Opportunity". When I referred to it on February 29 the Minister of National Health and Welfare indicated that he had seen a copy of this report, and I hope that in the meantime he has had an opportunity to study it.
I remind the minister and others that in this report are included a number of recommendations. One of them is to the effect that the whole policy of our old age legislation should be reviewed every four or five years. The welfare council points out that this was the recommendation of the Canadian Welfare Council when it appeared before our old age security committee in 1950. A number of years have gone by since then, and it seems to me that the position of the welfare council of greater Winnipeg and of the Canadian Welfare Council is well taken, that the time has come for a review of this matter and for research into this whole question.
That was the point of the questions to which I have already referred, namely that in my view research into whether or not old age pensioners are eating adequately is just as important as some of the other fields of research which it is suggested should be undertaken. This indeed would be research into how old people are able to keep alive on $40 a month. I am satisfied that if such research were carried on it would be ascertained that it is impossible to live on that amount of money. I am sure that any objective group carrying on such research would come back with the recommendation that there should be an increase in the amount of the old age pension.
I have already referred to this excellent report prepared by the welfare council of

Committee on Atomic Energy greater Winnipeg. I have indicated that on page 41 is the suggestion that the government's $40 per month program should be reviewed. I should like hon. members also to look at page 26 of the report, where it is stated that so far as Winnipeg is concerned, this body of researchers has discovered that for couples and single persons over 70, median incomes are only slightly greater than the old age pension. The report states:
This means that half of the aged-at 70 or over- depend almost entirely on the pension for cash income. It is also clear that the pension in itself is not sufficient for purchase of the necessities of life in an urban community.
I am not going to read further except to indicate that the very next paragraph on page 26 is entitled " 'Life On Forty' Is No Pleasure." The paragraph goes on to make it crystal clear that trying to live on $1.31 per day is an utterly impossible task. This report, I might point out, is based on research into all the activities of older people in the Winnipeg area, how they manage to eat, their medical problems, the kind of housing conditions under which they live, and so on. There is a mass of information but it is, of course, related only to older people in the city of Winnipeg. If research like that could be made into the lives of old age pensioners in various cities across Canada there would be amassed evidence that even the Minister of National Health and Welfare could not resist, in fact, evidence I believe he would be glad to use in a campaign within the cabinet for an increase in the amount of pension to at least $60 or $65 a month.
Mr. Speaker, I realize that Your Honour was not in the chair when I took the floor, and you may wonder just what is before the house. When you left the chair you thought we were discussing a motion having to do with research into atomic energy and matters of that kind but, as no doubt your assistant deputy has pointed out to you, the debate has taken a rather wide turn while you have been out of the chamber.
I do not object to the wide turn it has taken. In fact I welcome it; that is obvious. It was made particularly wide by the very interesting speech made by the hon. member for Northumberland, who expressed pride, in which we all share, in what has been done in this country in the way of research that has been carried on under the Department of National Health and Welfare, or by means of grants made under the direction of that department. I do not wish to detract by one iota from what the hon. member for Northumberland said. Rather I suggest we go further. The Department of National Health and Welfare, which is so proud of the research that has been done and the progress that has


been made on the basis of that research, should initiate further research into the question of how old people are getting along on $40 a month.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member knows that is being done right now.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister says I know that is being done right now. I know no such thing. As a matter of fact this afternoon, when I asked him for some information on the basis of alleged surveys in this field, he said he was the best example of the results of that kind of research. Obviously he got a little mixed up, but the fact of the matter is that we have had no indication that any serious attempt is being made by the department to find out whether $40 is sufficient for our old age pensioners.
I read with interest the report of the Department of National Health and Welfare, which was published just a short time ago. It refers to the research mentioned by the hon. member for Northumberland. It refers to the breakfast survey, about which I questioned the minister earlier today. It has a page or two about the old age security pension. It gives the statistics as to how many people are drawing the pension, how much money is being paid out in pensions, the age at which pensions are paid and so on, but there is no suggestion that anybody in the department has inquired as to whether or not this is an adequate pension.
I tell the minister, I tell the government and I tell this house that a long time has passed since the figure of $40 was set. It was set in 1949. In the meantime there have been increases in many other fields. In the meantime there has been an increase in the cost of living. In the meantime there has been a tremendous increase, 65 per cent or more, in the gross national production of the country. I tell the minister that there is a case building up in this country for an increase in the old age pension which he cannot resist and which he dare not resist. If he does, he will find that before long he will be on some form of relief or public assistance himself. This is just as important an issue for this country today as it was when it was first advocated before and during the first war. It is just as important as when it was first accomplished, largely through the efforts of Mr. J. S. Woodsworth in the middle twenties. It is just as important as it was in 1950, when we-


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You are too late.

Committee on Atomic Energy


Paul Joseph James Martin: My estimates are going to be The house divided on the amendment (Mr. discussed in the committee, I understand, on Green) which was negatived on the following Friday.	division:


Stanley Howard Knowles: Tomorrow morning.


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend will have an ample opportunity to make his speech and I will have an equal opportunity of pointing out how unfair and inaccurate his statements in the past 15 minutes have been. In any event, I say this is wholly out of order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Perhaps the Minister of National Health and Welfare was not here either, as I know he was not, when his parliamentary assistant made an excellent speech. The point of order was raised that it was the kind of speech that should be made on the minister's estimates. That point of order was raised by one of my Conservative friends. The Speaker in the chair at the time said that this debate had become quite wide and that it was possible to discuss anything that came under the heading of non-military research. It was from the parliamentary assistant that I took my cue.


Frederick Greystock Robertson: I think the hon. members who were here this afternoon will definitely agree that I confined my remarks entirely to medical research in Canada. I did not discuss what we should do about old age security.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am afraid the hon. member forgets what was in the speech he read to this house. He definitely made references to research regarding health insurance. He definitely made statements regarding research into old age security. In fact he took credit for that research as being the basis for the legislation regarding old age pensions that we now have. I do not object. I just want it to continue. I want research to be carried on so that we can deal with this matter intelligently. Thus far we have just had a figure out of the air on which our old people are asked to live. I want basic scientific research on what is needed to provide ior our older people of 65, 70 and over. I want basic scientific research as to what this country can afford to pay its old age pensioners. I am satisfied that out of our present gross national production we can increase the amount tremendously, and on the basis of that research I call upon the government to meet this country's demand for a really substantial increase in our old age pensions so that our older people can enjoy a decent life, to which we believe they are entitled.
YEAS Messrs:
Aitken, Miss	Leboe
Argue	Macdonnell
Balcer	MacLean
Barnett	McBain
Bell	McCullough (Moose
Blackmore	Mountain)
Blair	Michener
Brooks	Mitchell (London)
Bryce	Montgomery
Bryson	Murphy (Lambton
Cameron (Nanaimo)	West)
Campbell	Nesbitt
Cardiff	Nicholson
Castleden	Nowlan
Charlton	Pallett
Churchill	Patterson
Coldwell	Pearkes
Diefenbaker	Perron
Drew	Poulin
Ellis	Quelch
Fraser (Peterborough)	Rea
Fulton	Regier
Gagnon	Robinson (Bruce)
Gillis	Small
Green	Smith (Battle River-
Hahn	Camrose)
Hamilton (York West)	Stanton
Hansell	Starr
Harkness	Thatcher
Hees	Thomas
Herridge	Trainor
Hodgson	Tustin
Holowach	Van Horne
Howe (Wellington-	White (Hastings-
Huron)	Frontenac)
Johnson (Kindersley)	White (Middlesex East)
Jones	Yuill
Knight	Zaplitny-72.
Knowles	NAYS
Messrs:	
Anderson	Dickey
Applewhaite	Dumas
Arsenault	Dupuis
Ashbourne	Enfield
Batten	Eudes
Benidickson	Fairey
Bennett	Follwell
Blanchette	Fontaine
Boisvert	Forgie
Bonnier	Fraser (St. John's East)
Bourget	Gardiner
Bourque	Garland
Breton	Garson
Brown (Brantford)	Gauthier (Lake St. John)
Brown (Essex West)	Gauthier (Portneuf)
Bruneau	Gingras
Buchanan	Gingues
Byrne	Goode
Cameron (High Park)	Gour (Russell)
Cannon	Gourd (Chapleau)
Cardin	Gregg
Caron	Habel
Carrick	Hanna
Cauchon	Hardie
Cavers	Harris
Clark	Healy
Cloutier	Hellyer
Deschatelets	Henry
Deslieres	Hollingworth
2150	HOUSE OF
Committee on Atomic Energy
Hosking	Mitchell (Sudbury)
Houck	Monette
Howe (Port Arthur)	Nixon
Huffman	Pearson
Hunter	Philpott
James	Pickersgill
Jutras	Pinard
Kickham	Pommer
Kirk (Antigonish-	Power (Quebec South)
Guysborough)	Power (St. John's West)
Kirk (Shelbume-	Proudfoot
Yarmouth-Clare)	Prudham
Laflamme	Purdy
Lafontaine	Ratelle
Langlois (Gaspe)	Richard (Ottawa East)
Lapointe	Richard (St. Maurice-
Leduc (Jacques Cartier-	Lafleche)
Lasalle)	Richardson
Leduc (Verdun)	Roberge
Lefrangois	Robertson
Legare	Robichaud
Lesage	Robinson (Simcoe East)
Lusby	Rochefort
MacDougall	Rouleau
MacEachen	St. Laurent (Temis-
MacKenzie	couata)
Macnaughton	Schneider
McCann	Simmons
McCubbin	Sinclair
McCulloch (Pictou)	Stick
Mclvor	Stuart (Charlotte)
Maltais	Viau
Mang	Villeneuve
Marler	Weir
Martin	Weselak
Menard	White (Waterloo
Meunier	South)-127.
Michaud


Mr. Speaker:: I declare the amendment lost. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the main motion?


Mr. Ellis:: May I move the adjournment of the debate?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Regina City (Mr. Ellis) moves, seconded by the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Cameron), that this debate-


Walter Edward Harris: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, if I may say so, I assumed-I did not take my hon. friend into my confidence, but I did say the other night that I thought we had an understanding that we would wind up this debate during this afternoon. I agree that there was no particular undertaking given, but I understood privately that would be what would take place.


Alfred Claude Ellis: I had no knowledge of this understanding, Mr. Speaker. I had intended to speak on the amendment but since it was five minutes to six I thought it might be advantageous to have the vote taken and I would make my remarks on the main motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Then the hon. member for Regina City moves, seconded by the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Cameron), that this


debate be adjourned. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt this motion?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: If hon. members do not accept the motion moved by the hon. member for Regina City, I shall have to remind them that it is now 10 minutes past six and therefore the proceedings are interrupted. Whether or not an hon. member moves the adjournment of the debate at this moment does not make any difference. If they want to carry the main motion, we do that by unanimous consent. If they do not want to carry the main motion, then because it is after six o'clock the proceedings are interrupted and I must leave the chair.


Walter Edward Harris: May I speak to the point of order again? I appreciate that the hon. member for Regina City would undoubtedly contribute to the knowledge of the house in what he wishes to say, but I am wondering if there could be another occasion on which he could make this speech, either in the committee if he is a member or perhaps on the report when it comes forward later.


Mr. Coldwell:: I knew nothing of the
arrangement, but I would suggest that it would be well to let this motion go through now so the committee could be set up and get down to work.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreeable to hon. members to adopt the motion moved by the hon. member?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Speaker:: This debate is adjourned.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Shall I call it six o'clock?


Walter Edward Harris: My understanding is, sir-I
may be wrong-that we are in agreement now that the motion will carry.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Alfred Claude Ellis: No.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Regina City says no.


Walter Edward Harris: All right.


Mr. Speaker:: Inasmuch as the debate is to be continued, perhaps I should tell hon. members immediately that I think I have allowed a great deal of latitude during the course of this debate. The next time we resume the debate I shall have to ask for strict adherence to the rule. I think we are getting away from the regular practice, especially after an amendment has been moved,

that speeches should be strictly confined to the subject matter of the amendment. We have done away with that in amendments to the speech from the throne-see citation 336 of Beauchesne, third edition-but I do not think the house would want to depart from
Committee on Atomic Energy the practice as far as other debates are concerned. Therefore I would like the house to know what are my feelings in this regard.


[Stage Direction]
It being fifteen minutes past six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Questions

[Stage Direction]
The following answers, deposited with the Clerk of the house, are printed in the official report of debates pursuant to standing order 39:

Mr. Argue: 1.	Is atomic irradiation being used by Canadian agricultural scientists in the development ol new varieties of crops?
2.	If so, what is the type of equipment and the approximate cost of its use by federal employees?
3.	What improvements in various kinds of crops have been obtained by this method?
4.	To what extent, if any, does atomic irradiation increase the number of mutations that plant breeders can obtain in a given period of time?
Answer by: Mr. Gardiner:
1.	No, but X-ray irradiation is being used by the experimental farms service in cooperation with the national research council. Some work is also being done at the University of Saskatchewan.
2.	The experimental farms service has, up to the present time, not purchased any special equipment for either X-ray or atomic radiation work.
The X-ray irradiation equipment at the national research council has been made available for our work. The approximate cost of this equipment is $25,000.
3.	No productions of economic value have been developed in Canada. However, this program of work has not been active for a sufficient time to evaluate this method from the standpoint of the production of useful mutations in various species and varieties of farm crops.
4.	Genes in a given plant species mutate at a very low rate under natural conditions. Irradiation greatly speeds up mutation rates. Thus, in barley the mutant gene influencing strength of stems occurs with a frequency of two per 1,000 spike progenies, following an irradiation of 10,000 r-units. The rate of mutations here has increased manyfold over that occurring under natural conditions.
In the case of genes controlling rust resistance in oats, a tenfold increase in the mutation rate of irradiated material over natural rate has been brought about with the proper dosage of irradiation.


BUTTER IN STORAGE
Mr. Proudfooi: How many pounds of butter were held in storage by the agricultural prices support board as of March 1, 1956?
Answer by: Mr. Gardiner:
On March 3 the accounts of the agricultural prices support board showed stocks on hand of 62,829,323 pounds.


BUREAU OF STATISTICS BUILDING, OTTAWA
Mr. Diefenbalcer: 1.	Since what date has the dominion bureau of statistics building located in Tunney's pasture been occupied?
2.	When was the said building completed?
3.	Have complaints been received from the office occupants of said building regarding lack of heat? If so, how many such complaints were received?
4.	Are additional or storm windows now being provided for the said building? If so, what is the estimated total cost of such new windows and the work and services of installation?
5.	To whom was the contract let for supplies and labour or services in respect of such new windows?
6.	What was the total of such contract or contracts. and what was the date thereof?
7.	When did work for installation of new windows commence?
8.	When is it expected such work will be completed?
9.	Have any additional contracts been let, or are any contemplated, for any modifications of the heating or ventilating system? If so, what are the particulars thereof?
Answer by: Mr. Winters:
1.	June, 1952.
2.	Building was accepted by the department on January 14, 1953.
3.	Yes, several.
4.	Yes-$82,900.
5.	McIntyre Aluminum Products Limited, Niagara Falls, Ont.
6.	$82,900-Contract was awarded on September 13, 1955.
7.	February 16, 1956.	[DOT]
8.	April 15, 1956.
9.	No.


FEED GRAIN ASSISTANCE GRANTS, ATLANTIC PROVINCES
Mr. Balcom: What subsidy was paid the farmers of the provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, through implementation of the feed grain assistance grants, during 1955?
Answer by: Mr. Gardiner:
Freight assistance was paid during the calendar year 1955 on shipments of western feed grain into Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland in
the following amounts:
New Brunswick	$ 1,074,893
Nova Scotia	 1,749,575
Prince Edward Island	 398,495
Newfoundland	 409,279


$ 3,632,242 POSTAL EMPLOYEES  NEW WESTMINSTER, SASKATOON, TORONTO
Mr. Knight: 1.	What is the present number of postal employees in New Westminster, Saskatoon, Toronto?

2.	How many of these individuals were employees of the Post Office Department one year ago, in the case of each city?
3.	How many were taken on as employees during 1955, in the case of each city?
Answer by: Mr. Lapoinle:
1.	New Westminster, 105; Saskatoon, 282; Toronto, 3,707.
2.	New Westminster, 97; Saskatoon, 267; Toronto, 3,387.
3.	New Westminster, 10; Saskatoon, 16; Toronto, 442.


ENGRAVINGS FOR STAMPS
Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace): 1.	What is the procedure by which the design of individual postage stamps is approved?
2.	Are proofs of the printing plates as prepared by the engraver subject to approval by the department?
3.	If so, for what purpose?
Answer by: Mr. Lapoinle:
1.	The designs are approved by departmental officers after consultation with officers of the national gallery as to artistic quality and after review by people qualified technically to say that the subject is portrayed accurately.
Questions
2.	Yes.
3.	To give formal approval prior to printing.



TELEVISION CAMERAS


Mr. Fraser (Peterborough): 1.	What is the estimated cost of the instalment of the five television cameras in the Peterborough post office?
2.	Were tenders called for this installation?
3.	If not, how was the contract placed?
4.	What has it cost to date for wiring, drilling holes in the new building, and generally getting ready for the installation of the cameras?
5.	What is the estimated cost per year for the upkeep of these television cameras?
6.	Is payment for this installation being paid for out of (a) post office funds; (b) by the public works department?
Answer by: Mr. Lapointe:
1.	$50,092.50.
2.	Yes.
3.	See answer to No. 2.
4.	Included in contract price.
5.	First year's maintenance included in the contract price, and this trial period will enable future cost to be estimated.
6.	Post office funds.
2155

Thursday, March 15, 1956