1956-01-26

[Stage Direction]
A message from His Excellency the Governor General transmitting estimates for the financial year ending March 31, 1957, was presented by Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Finance), read by Mr. Speaker to the house, and referred to the committee of supply.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. W. G. Weir (Portage-Neepawa) presented the report of the special committee appointed to prepare and report lists of members to compose the standing committees of the house, as follows:

[Stage Direction]
Messrs:
Bourque	McWilliam
Bryson	Meunier
Cardin	Nowlan
Carter	Pallett
Cavers	Perron
Churchill	Rea
Dechene	Richard (Ottawa East)
Dickey	Tucker
Ellis	Valois
Fraser (Peterborough) Viau	
Hollingworth	Vincent
Leboe	White (Waterloo South)
Lefrangois	Wylie
MacDougall MacKenzie	Zaplitny-29. (Quorum-10)
RAILWAYS,	CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES Messrs:
Barnett	Garland
Batten	Gauthier (Lake St. John)
Bennett, Miss	Goode
Bonnier	Gourd (Chapleau)
Boucher (Chateauguay- Green	
Huntingdon-	Habel
Laprairie)	Hahn
Buchanan	Hamilton (York West)
Byrne	Harrison
Campbell	Healy
Carrick	Herridge
Carter	Hodgson
Cauchon	Holowach
Cavers	Hosking
Clark	Howe (Wellington-
Decore	Huron)
Deschatelets	James
Dufresne	Johnston (Bow River)
Dupuis	Kickham
Ellis	Lafontaine
Follwell	Langlois (Gaspe)
Gagnon	Lavigne
Leboe	Nixon
McBain	Nowlan
McCulloch (Pictou)	Purdy
Mclvor	Ross
Meunier	Small
Montgomery	Viau
Murphy (Lambton West)	Villeneuve
Murphy (Westmorland)	Vincent
Nesbitt	Weselak-60.
Nicholson	
(Quorum-20)	
MISCELLANEOUS PRIVATE BILLS	
Messrs:	
Anderson	Leduc (Jacques Cartier-
Balcom	Lasalle)
Batten	Lennard
Bennett, Miss	Lusby
Blair	Macnaughton
Brooks	Mang
Brown (Brantford)	Matheson
Cameron (High Park)	McCubbin
Campbell	McCullough (Moose
Carter	Mountain)
Decore	McWilliam
Dinsdale	Murphy (Westmorland)
Ellis	Perron
Enfield	Pommer
Eyre	Proudfoot
Fairey	Regier
Ferguson	Reinke
Follwell	Roberge
Forgie	Roy
Garland	Simmons
Girard	Thomas
Hansell	Weaver
Hees	White (Waterloo South)
Houck	White (Hastings-
Hunter	Frontenac)
Langlois (Berthier-	White (Middlesex East)
Maskinonge-	Wylie-50.
Delanaudiere)	
(Quorum-15)	
BANKING AND COMMERCE	
Messrs:	
Anderson	Henderson
Ashbourne	Hollingworth
Balcom	Huffman
Benidickson	Hunter
Bennett	Johnson (Kindersley)
Blackmore	Johnston (Bow River)
Cameron (Nanaimo)	Macdonnell
Cannon	MacEachen
Cardin	Macnaughton
Carrick	Matheson
Crestohl	Michener
Dufresne	Mitchell (London)
Dumas	Monteith
Eudes	Nickle
Fairey	Nose worthy
Fleming	Pallett
Follwell	Philpott
Fraser (St. Johns East)	Power (Quebec South)
Fraser (Peterborough)	Quelch
Fulton	Richardson
Hanna	Robichaud
Hellyer	Rouleau
[Stage Direction]
Standing Committees
St. Laurent (Temis-couata)
Stewart (Winnipeg North)
Thatcher
Tucker
Viau
Weaver-50.
(Quorum-15)
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS Messrs:
Anderson
Applewhaite
Argue
Ashbourne
Balcom
Beaudry
Boisvert
Breton
Bruneau
Cameron (High Park)
Cannon
Cavers
Cloutier
Denis
Fulton
Goode
Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace)
Hanna
Harkness
Hees
Henderson
Hollingworth
Holowach
Houck
Kickham
Kirk (Antigonish-Guysborough)
Laflamme
Leduc (Jacques Cartier-Lasalle)
Macdonnell
Maltais
McLeod
McWilliam
Menard
Mitchell (Sudbury)
Mitchell (London)
Monteith
Noseworthy
Nowlan
Pearkes
Pommer
Poulin
Power (St. John's West)
Proudfoot
Regier
Schneider
Thomas
Tucker
Van Horne
Weaver
Zaplitny-50.
(Quorum-15)

[Stage Direction]
Aitken, Miss
Buchanan
Carter
Denis
Fairey
Fontaine
Forgie
Green
Hanna
Harrison
Messrs:
Hollingworth
Knowles
Michaud
Monette
Quelch
Robinson (Bruce) Rochefort Van Horne Viau
Winch-20. (Quorum-8)

[Stage Direction]
Anderson
Applewhaite
Arsenault
Ashbourne
Barnett
Bell
Bennett
Boivin
Brisson
Bryce
Cameron (Nanaimo)
Cannon
Ferguson
Hahn
Hardie
Harrison
Henderson
Hodgson
Kirk (Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare)
Messrs:
Kirk (Antigonish-Guysborough) MacLean MacNaught Maltais Matheson McDonald Nowlan Patterson Pearkes Robichaud Simmons Stick
Stuart (Charlotte) Thibault Trainor Weselak-35.
Quorum-10)


[Stage Direction]
Messrs:
Anderson
Argue
Batten
Blackmore
Boucher (Chateauguay-Huntingdon-Laprairie)
Bruneau
Bryce
Byrne
Cardiff
Charlton
Clark
Decore
Demers
Deslieres
Diefenbaker
Dinsdale
Fontaine
Forgie
Gingras
Goode
Gour (Russell)
Harkness
Huffman
James
Jones
Jutras
Kickham
Kirk (Antigonish-Guysborough) Laflamme Leboe
Legare
Lusby
MacKenzie
MacLean
Mang
Masse
Matheson
McBain
McCubbin
McCullough (Moose Mountain)
Menard
Michaud
Montgomery
Murphy (Westmorland)
Nicholson
Perron
Pommer
Proudfoot
Purdy
Quelch
Roberge
Robinson (Bruce) Schneider
Smith (Battle River-Camrose)
Stanton
Studer
Thatcher
Villeneuve
White (Waterloo South) White (Middlesex East) -60.
(Quorum-20)

Messrs:
Brisson
Brooks
Buchanan
Byrne
Carter
Dickey
Dumas
Eyre
Garland
Gauthier (Nickel Belt)
Hardie
Harkness
Herridge
Hosking
LaCroix
Lafontaine
Leboe
Leduc (Gatineau) MacLean
McCullough (Moose Mountain)
Mitchell (Sudbury)
Pearkes
Ratelle
Richard (St. Maurice-Lafleche)
Robichaud
Rowe
Shipley, Mrs.
Simmons
Smith (Battle River-Camrose)
Studer Trainor Valois Van Horne Weselak Winch-35.
(Quorum-10)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS Messrs:
Bell
Brown (Essex West)
Brown (Brantford)
Byrne
Cauchon
Churchill
Cloutier
Deschatelets
Dufresne
Fairclough, Mrs.
Fraser (St. John's East)
Gauthier (Nickel Belt)
Gauthier (Lake St. John)
Gillis
Hahn
Hardie
Hosking
Johnston (Bow River)
Knowles
Leduc (Verdun)
Lusby
MacEachen

Maclnnis
Michener
Murphy (Westmorland)
Nixon
Philpott
Richardson
Ross
Rouleau
Small
Starr
Studer
Viau
Vincent-35.
(Quorum-10)
Balcer
Enfield
Hees
Jutras
McLeod
Meunier
[Stage Direction]
Messrs:
Michaud
Nicholson
Power (St. John's West)
Purdy
Rowe
Simmons-12.
(Quorum-7)

[Stage Direction]
Messrs:
Arsenault
Balcer
Bell
Boisvert
Breton
Cannon
Cardin
Coldwell
Crestohl
Decore
Diefenbaker
Fleming
Garland
Gauthier (Lake St.
Goode
Hansell
Henry
Huffman
James
Jutras
Knowles
Lusby
MacEachen
Maclnnis
MacKenzie
Macnaughton
McMillan
Montgomery
Patterson
Pearkes
Richard (Ottawa East) John) Starr Stick
Stuart (Charlotte) Studer-35.
(Quorum-10)
Mr. Weir moved: that the report be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister) moved:: That the standing committees of this house shall severally be empowered to examine and inquire into all such matters and things as may be referred to them by the house; and to report from time to time their observations and opinions thereon, with power to send for persons, papers and records.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
William Gilbert Weir: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
William Gilbert Weir: That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that this house has appointed Messrs. Bertrand, Bourque, Brown (Essex West), Carrick, Castleden, Coldwell, Dechene, Dinsdale, Fairey, Fraser (St. John's East), Fraser (Peterborough), Gingues, Gourd (Chapleau), Habel, Hamilton (York West), Hansell, Hellyer, Henderson, Howe (Wellington-Huron), Hunter, Jones, Jutras, Kirk (Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare), Knight, LaCroix, Leboe, Leduc (Gatineau), Legare, McCulloch (Pictou), McGregor, McWilliam, Philpott, Pickers-gill, Ratelle, Reinke, Robinson (Bruce), Small, Smith (York North), Smith (Battle River-Camrose), Thibault, Tucker, Tustin, Weselak and White (Middlesex East), a committee to assist His Honour the Speaker in the direction of the library of parliament so far as the interests of the House of Commons are concerned, and to act on behalf of the House of Commons as members of a joint committee of both houses on the library.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr. H. A. MacKenzie (Lamblon-Kenl) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. 7, to amend the Immigration Act.


Mr. Fulton:: Will the hon. member explain?


Hugh Alexander MacKenzie: Mr. Speaker, I assure the house that this amendment I have moved is not at all contentious. It is done with a view to trying to create among new Canadian citizens a little more citizenship consciousness. If hon. members will possess their souls in patience it will be in print in a day or two, and I think all hon. members will probably support it.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



HEALTH INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. L. S. St. .Laurent (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, hon. members will recall that the federal-provincial conference in October established a committee of federal and provincial ministers of health and of
[Stage Direction]
Inquiries of the Ministry finance to study health insurance questions. This committee has been meeting here this week in camera, in accordance with the expressed desire of the provincial representatives at the conference.
I made a public statement of the general policy of the government on this subject at the opening of the conference in October. This has been furnished to all hon. members in the proceedings of the conference. The main point of that policy statement was that when a majority of the provincial governments, representing a majority of the people of Canada, are ready to put into effect programs to provide hospital care as a measure of health insurance under provincial jurisdiction and management, the federal government would recommend to parliament legislation to provide financial support and technical assistance to the provinces for such programs.
Constitutional responsibility in this field lies, of course, with the provincial governments, and we have no desire to interfere in their exercise of it, nor to urge any provincial government to take this major step in social policy before it feels prepared to meet the substantial administrative and financial problems which are involved. Provincial spokesmen have made quite clear, however, that they would expect parliament to provide some share of the finances required by a grant in aid, as was done in the case of other major social security and health programs.
Public opinion appears to support the view that it would be proper for the federal government to recommend such assistance. The government has not felt it could rec-omtnend assistance for only a few provinces to undertake this great social innovation, but if a majority of provinces, such as I have mentioned, are ready to embark upon it, and wish assistance, we feel it would be justified.
The discussions with the provincial representatives have now reached a stage where it seems desirable that the federal government should state the nature of the financial assistance it would ask parliament to provide under the circumstances I have described. This is desirable in order that provincial governments can estimate the amounts they would have to finance in undertaking a program along these lines.
I think it is appropriate that I inform the house, in general terms, of the nature of the proposed basis of assistance at about the same time that the Minister of National Health and Welfare, in an adjoining room, is informing the provincial representatives.

He will be reporting in more detail upon these matters to the house at the first appropriate opportunity.
When a majority of the provinces, as I have mentioned, are ready to proceed we would recommend to parliament that it enact legislation to provide a grant to each province operating a hospital care insurance program. The amount of the grant would be a fraction of carefully defined shareable operating costs of hospital care, being 25 per cent of the per capita shareable costs in that province, plus 25 per cent of the average per capita shareable costs in Canada as a whole, multiplied by the population covered by the provincial program. The programs in which we would share would provide standard ward care.
This formula will leave a substantial incentive for economy and efficiency with each provincial authority, together with a large measure of federal assistance and equity in its distribution. It will mean that on the whole the federal treasury would bear about one-half of the net shareable operating costs of such programs of hospital insurance.
We would not propose under this legislation to share the costs of care for mental illness and tuberculosis, which provincial governments have traditionally provided and for the improvement of which parliament has already been providing grants under the national health grants program.
We are also prepared to include in our recommendation to parliament the addition to this hospital program of laboratory, radiological and other diagnostic services for patients outside of hospitals as well as in them. Already a start has been made toward these services under the national health grants program, and those who have studied the subject consider the provision of these diagnostic services to be a desirable step to take either before or along with a program of insurance for hospital care.
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Prime Minister a question in connection with the important announcement he has just made. If the agreement to which he has referred is reached at this conference or shortly thereafter, will the appropriate legislation be presented to parliament at this session?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: The question as to when legislation to implement the statement I have just made will be presented is something that will be considered in the light of circumstances as they develop further.



CRIMINAL LAW


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Justice, but in the minister's absence perhaps I should direct it to the government house leader. Now that the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne is completed, may we expect an early reconstitution of the joint committee on capital and corporal punishment in order that this committee may conclude its important work?


Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Finance):: My understanding is that it is the intention of the Minister of Justice to move that the committee be reconstituted.


Edmund Davie Fulton: At an early date?


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Leon Balcer (Three Rivers):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Is it a fact that the Canadian government has expressed its readiness to support the idea of creating an international police force to protect the borders between the Arabs and Israeli, as appeared in a news item in this morning's Gazette?


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: The answer is no; the question has not yet arisen.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) asked whether in the shipment of spare parts of world war II type tanks which in his understanding were included in the shipments to Egypt

he was mistaken in this understanding-included any breech blocks. Later on he asked whether in approving the sale of spare parts of world war II type tanks to Egypt the government had taken into consideration the fact that the British tanks which found their way to Egypt via Belgium were complete except for breech blocks.
I assured the house yesterday that in any decisions pertaining to the export of arms from Canada all relevant factors were taken into consideration. With the permission of
Inquiries of the Ministry the house I should now like to amplify that answer, particularly in order to correct the misconception which the hon. member for Eglinton appeared to be labouring under, as reflected in his question.
In the statement I made on January 24 I gave the figures for arms exports to Egypt and to the other states in the Middle East. I explained that the Harvard trainers and spare parts were responsible for practically the whole of the Egyptian figure. I went on to say that the main items covered by the other figures in the report included tracks and spare parts for world war II type tanks. These tank parts were not authorized for shipment to Egypt, as the hon. member assumed. I wish to make clear now that the parts for world war II type tanks to which I referred were not destined for Egypt. I would also wish to add that the lists of such parts as were approved for export included no breech blocks.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I should like to refer to a question asked yesterday of the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Churchill). The Prime Minister has asked me to answer the question. The question was as follows:
Have any supplies of' military equipment been sent to any South American country in the last two years?
The answer is, no permits were issued for guns, ammunition, or military weapons of any kind, or for military aircraft or military vehicles to South America. A considerable quantity of airframe and aircraft engine spares, and reconditioned engines and parts for military vehicles were export licensed. By no means all of these were necessarily for military use. It should be noted here that since 1954 Canada has become the only source of supply in the western hemisphere for spares for a type of engine in common use in commercial air transport throughout the world, namely the DC-3, and they would be included in those export permits.
The total value of permits issued in 1954 for all South American countries was $119,222, and in 1955 it was $577,231.79. These totals were divided between aircraft spares and vehicle engines and parts as follows: $292,328.29 for aircraft spares; $384,825.50 for vehicle engines and parts.

Inquiries of the Ministry POWER



SAINT JOHN RIVER DEVELOPMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucester):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Has the government given consideration to the possibility of co-operating in the overall power development of the Saint John river system in New Brunswick?


Hon. Jean Lesage (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for having given me notice of this question.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Jean Lesage: The hon. member did give me notice of his question yesterday, and I have studied the files. I can say that ever since the early plans for further development of power on the upper Saint John river began about ten years ago the federal government has been in close touch with the situation.
The federal government authorized the expenditures that made it possible for the Canadian section of the international joint commission to conduct an exhaustive survey which resulted in 1953 in the comprehensive report "Water Resources of the Saint John River Basin". On the basis of this survey the Tobique development has been completed, and the Beech wood project on the main river is now under way by the province.
All the way along there has been a constant exchange of views among provincial and federal technical and financial officials. These discussions appeared to indicate that the development to the end of the Beechwood phase could be carried out by the province of New Brunswick without jeopardizing its credit. It appears, however, that future developments in the province are likely to require additional power on a substantial scale. This larger future development has been represented to the federal government as likely to be beyond the capacity of the province of New Brunswick to finance on its own.
These matters were discussed at the federal-provincial conference last October. At that time it was made clear that provinces were at liberty to submit proposals with respect to provincial development programs, vital to the growth of the province and beyond the financial capacity of the province to bear. While Premier Flemming was here for the conference, we had a meeting together with some of his officials and officials of my department to discuss the power situation in

New Brunswick. Since the conference the premier of New Brunswick has written to the Prime Minister and to me about the subject. In his letter to me Mr. Flemming said:
New Brunswick would like to submit a suitable memorandum in connection with the matter mentioned at an early date.
The letters were dated October 20, 1955. I replied on November 1 saying:
Such a supplementary memorandum from you covering the specific matters you have in mind would be of great assistance to me.
I have no doubt that there have been a great many matters engaging the premier's attention, and I have not as yet received the memorandum to which he referred. I am informed that one of his advisers indicated in a telephone call to one of the officers of my department on January 23 that the memorandum was currently under consideration by the premier, and I have no doubt it will be forthcoming shortly.


Mr. A. J. Brooks (Royal):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a supplementary question. Am I to understand from that statement that there will be no financial assistance as far as Beechwood is concerned, but that the government would be prepared to give financial assistance for the further development of the Saint John river?


Jean Lesage: I have said and it has been known for some months that the Beechwood development could be carried out without jeopardizing the credit of the province of New Brunswick. That has been the case and it has been known for some months. As to future developments, I believe the statement I have made is quite clear to the effect that I am waiting for a memorandum from the premier of New Brunswick so we may give consideration in the cabinet to this request.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Was that for financial assistance? I did not understand whether the minister stated it would be financial assistance or just technical assistance as far as his department is concerned.


Jean Lesage: The words I used were both technical and financial assistance. As a matter of fact I do not know exactly what the request of the premier will be, but I expect it to be for both technical and financial assistance.


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kooienay Wesl):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister a supplementary question, of which it is obvious I could not give him previous notice. Would the government take exactly the same approach and point of view with

regard to the development of the water resources of the Columbia basin in British Columbia?


Jean Lesage: I have received no request from the premier of British Columbia.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Claude Ellis (Regina City):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare or, in his absence, to the Prime Minister. Is the federal government prepared to share in the costs of the maternity grants advocated by the Liberal party in the Quebec legislature?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I know of no consideration being given here to maternity grants, and I was not aware that it was advocated in the Quebec legislature.


An hon. Member:: Then increase the family allowances.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS   INQUIRY RESPECTING ANSWERS TO LETTER OF PRIME MINISTER TO PROVINCIAL PREMIERS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Léon Balcer: I should like to ask the Prime Minister if he has received any answers from the premiers of the provinces to his letter dated January 6, 1956, on fiscal matters. If so, when will these letters be communicated to the house?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: There have been five letters from four provincial premiers dealing specifically with the letter of January 6. In addition, the premier of British Columbia acknowledged receipt of it in a letter which also dealt with other matters. There is no objection to the tabling of these letters. I should like to advise the writers of the letters that the request has been made and that we should like to comply with it, and then lay the letters on the table.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Has the minister any comment to make on today's press report that, first, the department of immigration has
Inquiries of the Ministry refused the request of Theodore Detmers, a Dutch immigrant, to bring his 18-year-old son to Canada to join the rest of the family, the excuse given being that the youth is backward, although he is apparently employed as a bricklayer in Nijmegen, Holland? Second, would he also comment on the report that the department forced Mr. Detmers to sign a document that he would not reapply for the admission of his son to Canada?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, I feel I should raise a point of order about the hon. gentleman's question. It is not that I do not know the answer nor that I have any desire to withhold the answer from the house, but it does seem to me, inasmuch as we have between 100,000 and 200,000 immigrants coming into the country every year, that if questions about individual cases are to be asked on the orders of the day there will be no time left for the other business of the house.
My second point of order, sir, because I have two, is that this question relates to a case many years old and it does not appear, therefore, to be within the meaning of urgency under the rules for questions on the orders of the day.


Mr. Speaker:: I must say that I agree entirely with the point of order raised by the minister. There are many questions which should not be asked at this time. They could be dealt with by correspondence, by telephone calls or by visits to the department such as hon. members do make from time to time. I must point out further that a question must be so worded that it is not composed of three or four different parts. A member should not stand up and say first, second, third and fourth, as has happened on some occasions.
I am not referring particularly to the question asked by the hon. member for Oxford. I am speaking generally. It may be that if I had interposed previously as often as I should have, the hon. member for Oxford would not have followed today the bad example that has been set on earlier occasions.



NUMBER OF IMMIGRANTS IN 1955

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Edmund Davie Fulton: I should like to ask the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration a question arising to some extent out of the point of order he raised. Is it not a fact that the number of immigrants who came to Canada last year is a great deal closer to 100,000 than 200,000?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think that question

Inquiries of the Ministry has already been answered in reply to a question the hon. member put on the order paper, and it seems unnecessary to take up the time of the house to answer the same question twice.



STATUS OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH RUSSIA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, a few days ago the hon. member for Eglinton inquired about trade negotiations with the Soviet union. During the visit to the U.S.S.R. last October of the Secretary of State for External Affairs the possibility of a trade agreement based upon the most favoured nation principle was explored. At that time it was agreed that further talks should take place in Ottawa. On November 1 the Canadian government invited the government of the U.S.S.R. to send a delegation to Ottawa for this purpose.
This delegation will be arriving in Ottawa at the beginning of next week and will be headed by Mr. S. A. Borisov, first deputy minister of foreign trade. The head of the Canadian group of officials in the negotiations will be Mr. Mitchell Sharp, associate deputy minister of trade and commerce.



SASKATCHEWAN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Moose Mountain (Mr. McCullough) asked me whether I could inform the house of the amount of contribution the federal government will pay under the agreement with the government of Saskatchewan to which I referred yesterday.
No payments have been made and no claims for reimbursement have been submitted up to the present time. I understand that the officials of the Saskatchewan government are now processing the claims resulting from the floods of last spring, and that as soon as they have dealt with them they will no doubt submit a statement which at that time will give us the figure that would have to be recommended to the house in an estimate so the agreement for reimbursement may be carried out.
[Later:!


Mr. E. G. McCullough (Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question supplementary to the question I asked the Prime Minister yesterday. Can the Prime

Minister inform the house why the government has retracted from its policy, as stated by himself, according to the Leader-Post of October 18,	1954, which stated that the
government's policy was to treat every part of Canada on the same basis when disaster befell it? Can the Prime Minister explain to the house now why full consideration has not been given to the type of losses suffered by the people in the Saskatchewan floods?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, I do not think that we are retracting from any position previously taken. We have endeavoured to treat the claims that came in from both the Saskatchewan and the Manitoba areas in the same way that other claims have been dealt with in like circumstances.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. S. Harkness (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct to the Minister of National Defence a question in connection with the 25-pounder ammunition which was sold to Egypt, the delivery of which is now held up. What was the price per round paid for this ammunition?


Hon. R. O. Campney (Minister of National Defence):: I think the hon. member should specify what ammunition he refers to which has been sold to Egypt. I have not heard of any.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Israel.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The 25-pounder ammunition to which I referred in my question a moment ago, Mr. Speaker, was that which it was stated last week had been sold to Israel. As the result of a slip of the tongue I believe I said "Egypt" rather than "Israel".


Ralph Osborne Campney: I am not aware that any 25-pounder ammunition has been sold to Israel recently. I cannot take responsibility for all the statements that hon. members choose to make or that newspapers choose to make.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The statement was made by the minister.


Lester Bowles Pearson: No such statement was made by this minister. However, a statement was made that this request for 25-pounder ammunition was now before the cabinet for consideration.



DIVE BOMBER TRAINING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Ralph Osborne Campney: Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet may I refer to two questions that were asked recently. On Tuesday last the hon. member for Brandon-Souris (Mr. Dinsdale) asked two questions, the first of which was as follows:
Has dive bomber training, as was practised during world war II with Harvard aircraft, been discontinued or is it still continued as part of the training program?
The answer to that question is that dive bombing training as conducted during world war II was discontinued in the Royal Canadian Air Force in February, 1954.
The hon. member's second question was:
Has the Chipmunk aircraft not replaced the Harvard aircraft as a primary trainer?
In answer to that question I may say that, under arrangements now being introduced, Royal Canadian Air Force pilot trainees receive their first flying training on Chipmunk aircraft, but they still train later on Harvards in order to complete their basic training, so the Chipmunk cannot be said to have superseded or replaced the Harvard. Rather, it supplements it.



REPORTED USE OF BUTTER IN MILITARY ESTABLISHMENTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Ralph Osborne Campney: Yesterday, on the orders of the day, the hon. member for Vegreville (Mr. Decore) asked whether margarine has been or is being extensively used in military establishments. The answer is no. The tri-service ration scale provides for the use of butter, a two-ounce ration per man per day, and does not provide for the use of margarine at all. Consequently, supply officers do not purchase and supply depots do not maintain any stocks of margarine.
What I have just said applies only to food supplies purchased by public funds. Where non-public funds are used, as in canteens, snack bars, etc., operated on behalf of service personnel, purchases are not subject to service regulations or control, and such funds, being private funds, may be used to make purchases of any commodities which the owner of the funds may desire.
Inquiries of the Ministry POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT



THEFT AT VERDUN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Hugues Lapointe (Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, on Monday last the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace (Mr. Hamilton) inquired as to the amount involved in the theft which had taken place at the post office in Verdun, Quebec, a week previously.
I undertook to get the figures. The audit of the post office having been completed, I am informed that the total amount of theft was $19,530.78.


Mr. W. M. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Can the Postmaster General inform the house whether the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were called in to investigate the theft from the Verdun post office?


Hugues Lapointe: Well, I think it has been explained in the house previously, and I believe in answer to questions put in previous sessions by the hon. member for Notre Dame de Grace, that thefts from post offices are considered in the same way as any other criminal offences. Provincial and local police authorities are brought in and carry on investigations in co-operation with postal authorities. When it is found desirable to have the R.C.M.P. help and co-operate they are also asked to provide it but, as my hon. friend knows, the administration of justice is under the jurisdiction of the provincial governments.



REQUEST FOR REPORT ON LATEST ROBBERY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. W. Hodgson (Victoria, Onl.):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Postmaster General. Since the post offices in southern Ontario have been robbed from time to time, will he give the house a report on the latest robbery, which took place yesterday?


Hugues Lapointe: Mr. Speaker, I shall have to inquire. I am afraid I am not familiar with what took place.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Five in a row are quite a lot.


Hugues Lapointe: It is possible that my hon. friend knows more about it than I do, and he could inform the house.



NATIONAL PARKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Carl O. Nickle (Calgary South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National
562	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry Resources. Has the minister received a request from Mr. H. R. Chauncey, president of the Canadian automobile association, asking for the co-operation of the federal government in providing more adequate tourist information facilities at Banff and Jasper national parks? If so, can the minister indicate whether or not such facilities can be made available in time-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member
could first put his question and then hear what the minister says, and perhaps later come back with a supplementary question. It seems to me it is unfair to put a long question which may require a lengthy answer at this time.


Jean Lesage: In reply to the question asked by the hon. member for Calgary South, I may say that I received Mr. Chauncey's letter this morning, but I was busy all morning attending the federal-provincial conference on health insurance, and therefore have not yet had time to consider the subject matter.


Carl Olof Nickle: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources? In view of the urgency attached to the question raised by Mr. Chauncey, will the minister assure the house that at the earliest opportunity he will give an answer?


Jean Lesage: As soon as I can, Mr. Speaker. PENSIONS



REQUEST FOR INCREASE IN CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS MINIMUM PENSION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport? In view of the action of the Canadian Pacific Railway in increasing its minimum pension, effective next week, to $60 a month at least to the age of 70, does the minister not think it is time the Canadian National Railways raised its minimum pension from its present figure of $25 a month?


Hon. George C. Marler (Minister of Transport):: My attention has not been drawn to the action taken by the Canadian Pacific Railway, and I shall certainly not express any opinion on it until I find out what that action has been.



REQUEST FOR INCREASE IN PENSIONS OF SUPERANNUATED FEDERAL CIVIL SERVANTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John Pallet! (Peel): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State. Is the minister giving consideration to arranging for an increase of pensions of superannuated federal civil servants to bring those pensions more in line with the present cost of living?
Hon. Roch Pinard (Secretary of Stale):: shall have to take this question as notice. As my hon. friend knows, this also concerns the Minister of Finance, with whom I shall have to talk before an answer is given.


Stanley Howard Knowles: We would rather have your answer.



SMALL LOANS ACT


Mr. H. R. Argue (Assiniboia) moved: the second reading of Bill No. 3, to amend the Small Loans Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to reduce the maximum rate that may be charged by small loan companies from 24 per cent to 12 per cent per annum. I believe the prevailing rate of 24 per cent per annum is fantastic, exorbitant and unnecessary and that it should be reduced. I moved a similar bill in this house last year and I was amazed at the amount of support the proposition I moved at that time received from one end of the country to the other. I think I can safely say that I have never proposed a bill or any other measure that received such widespread support. The support was not only prevalent throughout the country but I find it has been quite general amongst members of this house.
I hope that we shall have a good discussion of this bill this afternoon so that the government will be able to learn the position of various hon. members and the position of the various parties in relation to the bill, and may use that information when it brings down an amendment to the Small Loans Act which I venture to hope will result in a substantial reduction in interest rates.
There are other amendments I might also have suggested to the Small Loans Act. The present ceiling on interest rates applies to loans up to $500. Certainly the purchasing power of a $500 loan in 1955 is very small compared to the purchasing power of a $500 loan in 1939 when the Small Loans Act was last amended. I might have suggested that the ceiling be raised from $500 to $1,500 or $2,000 but I have found previously that when a private member puts more than one idea in

a bill very frequently another hon. member, who for some reason or other is desirous of opposing the bill, will latch on to one part of the bill and indicate that if that one point were not there he would support the bill and that as far as the other part of the bill is concerned he is all for it. Therefore I have limited this bill to the simple proposition that an interest rate of 12 per cent should be the limit of interest charged by small loan companies. I have on the order paper another bill which I allowed to stand today which contains the proposition that interest charges throughout the country on all other credit should not exceed 12 per cent per annum.
As I said, I think an interest rate of 24 per cent per year is fantastic. I think it is incredible that in a country as economically strong as Canada a great many people-yes,
I would even say millions of working Canadians-have to accept loans and credit bearing an interest rate or charge of 24 per cent. These high rates are not confined to loans advanced by small loan companies alone. Extremely high rates are charged by finance companies when one finances an automobile, a television set or some other item. Finance companies, however, as X have been able to find out, do not necessarily charge the highest rates that are charged on credit advanced in this country. Some of the greatest offenders in so far as the rates they charge are concerned are the big mail order houses. On the smallest purchase on their budget plans, Simpson's and Eaton's levy the fantastic charge of 54 per cent. It is true that as the amount of the instalment purchase increases the rate goes down but it goes down to only 15 or 18 per cent a year, depending on the type of item that is purchased.
From time to time I have read accounts of the interest rates that are charged in other countries. I have heard hon. members in this house refer to the exorbitant interest rates that used to be charged in nationalist China. On one occasion I heard an hon. member say that interest rates in that country having been allowed to go to 50 per cent or more contributed to the cause that resulted in the subsequent revolution in that country. I remember my personal reaction in the past when I read of these high interest rates in other countries. I said to myself, "I am glad I am living in Canada where such interest rates are seldom charged"; but after having seen the practice of small loan companies, finance companies and mail order houses in Canada I discovered that many rates charged here are almost as high. For that reason I am proposing that the house consider imposing a limitation of 12 per cent on such charges.
Small Loans Act
The Canadian who is financially well off and who has a high income does not have the same need for credit as the ordinary working Canadian. The former can go to a bank and borrow money at 6 per cent or perhaps 5 per cent without much trouble. The ordinary working people of this nation, regardless of whether they live in the city or on farms, are often required to pay fantastic rates when they borrow money or finance purchases. The legislation we now have is in effect class legislation and constitutes class distinction. It means that the people in low income groups who from time to time have the greatest need for credit are forced to pay exorbitant interest rates because of the laws of this country. I believe that any progressive democracy, any civilized nation, should take steps periodically tc reduce the general rate of interest and tc allow the ordinary working people of the country to obtain credit at reasonable rates
In certain fields credit has been providec at reasonable rates by government legislation. We have a National Housing Act whicl enables a great many people to own theii own homes, paying an interest charge of 51 per cent. That is good legislation. We hav< the Farm Improvement Loans Act, whicl is another example, under which farmer! can obtain credit at a rate of 5 per cent That, too, is good legislation. There is, how ever, a vast field in which the people wh< must obtain credit have to pay the exorbitan interest rates I mentioned.
The amount of credit available in thi country is steadily increasing. I have in m; hand the latest Bank of Canada statistica summary which lists the amount of outstand ing credit as at 30 September, 1955, a follows: Ordinary charge accounts $535 mil lion, instalment credit through retail $30 million, instalment credit through financ companies $578 million, cash personal loan $790 million, a total credit of $2,212 millior If one made the assumption-and this migh not be a good assumption-that each out standing credit item amounted to a rathe large sum, let us say $1,000, then thes statistics show that 2,212,000 Canadians hav obtained credit of one kind or another. Th sum of $2,212 million in outstanding credi is just twice as high as it was four year before. I think we will all agree that in th future Canadians are going to use more an more credit; as our nation develops, as ou country expands, the need for credit wi increase. Therefore the value that will resu from the step I am suggesting will b enormous today and will have even greats benefit as years go by.
I believe that the parliamentary assistar to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Benidicksor

Small Loans Act
the federal government has had to pay out of the amount of its guarantee under the Farm Improvement Loans Act, %30 of the total guarantee. In other words, the amount that has been paid up to date is almost negligible. I wish to point out, of course, that all outstanding loans have not yet been paid, but nevertheless I do not think any hon. member of this house will say that when the present loans have been finalized the cost to the government will be anywhere near its total guarantee or, for that matter, will be many more times the very small guarantee that has already been paid.
I believe that 12 per cent is still too high. I know of no reason why ordinary Canadians who want small loans, who want to buy articles of furniture, who want to buy automobiles, who need money to pay doctors' bills or hospital bills, and so on should be charged even the high rate of 12 per cent when statistics and records show that the risk in this field is very small. I would like to see the interest rate at not 12 per cent but six per cent or five percent, the rate that has already been established under the Farm Improvement Loans Act. I am suggesting that if necessary the government should be prepared to pass an act parallel to the Farm Improvement Loans Act-it might be called a family welfare loans act-under which the federal government might make a 10 per cent guarantee to the banks as it does now under the Farm Improvement Loans Act, with the measure of risk so small that the Canadian Bank of Commerce has set up a reserve for bad debts of just -25 per cent. The government, by such action and by the payment over the years of a very tiny sum of money, would save working Canadians in the future hundreds of millions of dollars and would remove millions of Canadians from the necessity of paying exorbitant charges of 24 per cent to loan companies which themselves are now acting as sharks in the small loan field.


Mr. W. M. Benidickson (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member for Assiniboia has said, this bill in similar form was introduced late in the last session. At that time, it was indicated that it was unlikely that we could have through utilization of a parliamentary committee the type of public discussion that has in the past usually attended any amendment or legislative action with respect to this subject. But it was indicated it would be likely that during the present session of parliament this legislation would receive attention and possibly amendment. Hon. members will recognize that the speech from the throne has confirmed the fact that during the present session of parliament

certain amendments to the Small Loans Act will be introduced by the government.
I do not intend any discourtesy to the hon. member, to any opposition members or to private members generally when I suggest that there might be a more appropriate time to debate this subject as a government measure. I am going to propose that the debate be adjourned. I think there are many advantages in so doing.
Certainly it is obvious to all private members of all parties in the house that the order paper already contains something in excess of 40 items sponsored by private members. Under the rules the time for discussing these items is rather limited. On the other hand, if we are to have soon a bill sponsored by the government which will receive consideration in a parliamentary committee, I think hon. members will recognize that adjournment and postponement of the debate at this time would avoid repetition and in my opinion assure a more orderly discussion of the subject. Therefore I move the adjournment of the debate.


Hazen Robert Argue: Shame! The guillotine!



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 4-Mr. Argue:
For a copy oi all correspondence, letters and telegrams, from August 1 to December 31, 1955,
Motions jor Papers
exchanged between any department of the government and any person or persons with respect to advance payments on farm-stored grain.
Clarence Decatur Howe: There are thousands of pieces of paper reflecting on this question. It would save a great deal of work if my hon. friend would examine them in the office, or if he would select the ones he wants tabled. I do not think he wants all of them tabled; it would be very expensive for the government.


Mr. Speaker:: The motion will stand in the meantime?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps it could be passed with that understanding.


Hazen Robert Argue: That is agreeable, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: 


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 11-Mr. Slewarl (Winnipeg
North):
For a copy of all export permits for aircraft, trucks, and other equipment, armaments and munitions of war of any type, to the Middle East, from January 1. 1955 to date.
He said: In view of the fact I have received the information I wanted, I will ask that this motion be dropped.
Mr. Speaker:: Dropped.



FRASER AND COLUMBIA POTENTIALS

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 14-Mr. Fulton:
For a copy of all letters, memoranda, contracts, communications or instructions exchanged between the dominion government or any department or agency thereof and any other person or body, since the 1st January, 1955, concerning an investigation of the power potential of the Fraser river and/or the Columbia river and/or the feasibility and effects of the Columbia river diversion.
Jean Lesage: May I ask the hon. member whether he would allow this motion to stand? I would like to have some information about the documents referred to in the motion, which I have not been able to get yet. I hope to be in a position to have all of the information that I need next week. I will appreciate it if the hon. member would allow the motion to stand.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Apparently the notice I have given of this motion has not been quite as effective as the notice given yesterday by the hon. member for Gloucester (Mr. Robi-chaud). Therefore I will allow it to stand.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion stands.
Education



EDUCATION


Mr. A. H. Hollingworth (York Centre) moved:: That, in the opinion of this house, the government should consider the advisability of introducing legislation to provide national scholarships and bursaries for students at the university level who are in financial need, in so far as the subject matter of this resolution is within the competence of parliament.
He said: Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I move this resolution. I would hope for support worthy of the motion from all sections of the house. One can observe in this House of Commons hon. members who have played and are still playing a distinguished role in the field of education in Canada. One might mention the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson), who is chancellor of Victoria College at the University of Toronto, or the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg), who has been president of the University of New Brunswick, or the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Mac-donnell), who is chairman of the board of trustees of that noble seat of learning, my own Queen's University. This house is studded with Rhodes scholars and with other scholarship winners and gold medalists. The list is indeed impressive. We have former school teachers and university professors sitting in all sections of the house. I shall therefore assume at the outset that I shall receive a sympathetic hearing.
The purposes of this resolution are twofold; first, to provide financial assistance for students who have embarked, perhaps hazardously and with uncertainty, on a university career, and who might otherwise have to quit their studies for lack of money; second, to enable school graduates to attend university by providing financial assistance.
I should like at the outset to pay tribute to those private members who have in the past spoken on this or allied proposals, and I refer particularly to the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Knight) and the hon. member for Victoria, B.C. (Mr. Fairey), both of whom are distinguished educators. I think all hon. members will attest to the desirability of some form of specific federal assistance, provided that such assistance does not impinge upon the provincial jurisdiction in the field of education.
That, of course, has been the great difficulty with federal aid. It would mean assistance in the general field of education, which is proscribed by our constitution, the British North America Act. It would be unconstitutional, since general education comes

within the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces, as set out in the said act. That is the reason the federal government cannot provide grants holus-bolus to the provinces for education. For example, the federal government cannot say to the province of Ontario, here is a grant to hard-pressed North York township for its schools.
It follows, therefore, that any aid must not infringe upon or violate or interfere with provincial jurisdiction and control. It would appear that the answer may be found in the fact that although the federal government will not come into the general field of education, nevertheless it is willing and is receptive to assisting in specialized fields as for example, vocational training, D.V.A. student assistance and student aid. The purpose of this resolution today is to discuss a plan for more student aid. That is why I say my resolution is constitutionally unimpeachable, and hence should be acceptable unreservedly even to those who are the most zealous custodians of provincial autonomy.
I will point out to hon. members shortly how legislation in existence at the present time and jointly administered provincially and federally may well be the method of carrying out the request I am raising.
I should like to advance several reasons, Mr. Speaker, why my resolution would be not only desirable but obligatory if this country is to go on to its destiny. It might be desirable, however, at this point to mention briefly why the university is so important to our Canadian way of living.
It is almost unnecessary for one to extol the role of the university in our lives. The university is a force of incalculable good in a technological age. It has played a powerful and important role in shaping the destiny of Canada. The university is one of the founts of freedom. As I see it, the function of the university is to teach its students to think, to probe, to inquire, to elucidate, to inspire. It should be a forum for dissent, if need be, and not a stronghold of uniformity and orthodoxy, for the latter may inexorably snuff out the smouldering coals of creative ideas and thought and endeavour.
Let us be clear at the outset that these bursaries are not for the brilliant students of independent means. Such bursaries and scholarships as I propose would be allembracing for the students who need financial assistance. One readily knows the importance of engineers, scientists and technicians to this great nation, whose mineral potential has scarcely been scratched; whose power resources are limitless both with regard to water and atomic energy and whose manufacturing potential is as yet in its early stages.

Education
I am one who believes that the humanities and the arts are just as important as the sciences. Canadian universities have not neglected the humanities; in fact, I believe our Canadian educational system, of which the universities are an integral part, accounts in part for the maturity of the Canadian people and possibly indicates also why the virulent seeds of McCarthyism with its attendant hysteria and obscurantism have never managed to take root in the Canadian soil.
Many reasons could be cited for the desirability of my resolution. On a large canvas it may be affirmed that greater assistance to needy university students is a priceless investment in young Canadians and in Canada. As the Prime Minister said at McMaster University on October 20, 1955, when he received the honorary degree of doctorate of laws: The object of higher education and especially education in the arts and humanities is to teach us to think clearly. At no time in history has it been so important to think clearly when man's ability to destroy himself seems at times to have outstripped his ability to solve the problems which arise between him and his fellow men.
The whole concept was tried out on a large scale with D.V.A. students after the war. It worked magnificently. Many went into universities and the professions who would not have otherwise been able to do so. I dare say there are quite a number of such graduates in this house today.
The economic and financial barrier of education restraining many who were financially embarrassed was swept away. An interesting study at the University of Toronto revealed that the servicemen who passed through Varsity cut across all social and economic groups; and education, which ordinarily was for the families of wealth and for those from the professional and mercantile groups, was extended to those from the families of skilled, semi-skilled and even unskilled workers. Truly this was democracy in action.
The D.V.A. program was expensive, very expensive; from 1942 to 1955 somewhere in the neighbourhood of $220 millions were spent for vocational and university training, or an average of over $16,900,000 per year. I do not know how much of this sum was expended in assisting students through university. What I do know, however, is that it did not take the Department of National Revenue too long to collect this sum in income taxes from D.V.A. graduates. It certainly follows that revenue from personal income taxes will be greatly increased as more university graduates go out into Canadian life. University graduates become the architects, the engineers, the doctors, the dentists, the lawyers and are now sought for executive positions in industry. This scheme
therefore makes admirable sense from a national investment point of view. The federal government is vitally interested in the training of university personnel. Hon. members will note the number of top notch civil servants employed in government service and in important research bodies like the national research council, for example, who are university graduates.
It would appear that university education is practically necessary for almost any form of personal advancement and indeed, as I say, must be freely available if the best qualified are to hold key positions in Canadian society. At the present time stringent financial barriers do exist. Principal James of McGill University pointed out that in 1952 only 3 per cent of Canadian youth attended universities in Canada whereas 15 per cent attended universities in the United States. An editorial in the Ottawa Citizen of January 23, 1956, states that the Canadian university population has now increased to 7-2 per cent. In Australia students registered in degree granting courses in 1952 numbered 21,005 and of this number 7,000, or 33 per cent, received government aid. When one compares the Canadian average with the average in these other countries our position really is shocking. Canada is, I believe, the fourth largest trading nation in the world; we are proud, and justly so, of our national development. Our voice, our opinions, are respected in the councils of the world. And yet it appears that the Canadian university student is certainly the underprivileged legatee of our nation's most cherished traditions. Mr. Speaker, this imbalance must and will be corrected. A large number of those students who do attend Canadian universities live in the town or city where the university is located.
I had an interesting experience recently in this connection. I attended commencement exercises at one of the collegiate institutes in my riding and found that a majority of the graduates were attending university. On making further inquiries of one of the teachers I found out that these young men and women were able to attend university because they lived at home. This surely points out the need for assistance to those who do not live in a university city or town. Dr. Sidney Smith, president of the University of Toronto, put it very succinctly on January 21, 1955, when he said "It will be increasingly difficult for the boy in Swastika and Sioux Lookout to enroll, as a result of the latest fee increase. It will be a tragedy if universities become places where only the students who live near them are able to attend."
It has been pointed out that other students who attend university subsequently leave for

Education
reasons that are basically financial, and here you might include those who fail because of the strain of doing full-time work at the same time as studying.
Without doubt there has recently been a substantial increase in the number of students who are attending university. The national federation of Canadian university students, whose efforts have been tireless and even magnificent in promoting bursaries, represents over 50,000 students at more than 20 Canadian universities. Officials of this body informed me that a sum averaging from $1,000 to $1,200 is required to pay for fees and board and room for a year's attendance at a Canadian university or graduate school. As a student is unlikely to earn more than $600 in the summer season, it would seem imperative that the bursaries range in amount from $300 to $500. At the present time most bursary aid is rarely available in amounts of more than $250, and even this is high.
I stated earlier that the federal government is willing to assist in specialized and special fields. I should like to point out to hon. members that vocational training is now consolidated under the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, which is broken down into four agreements with the provinces for sharing costs under this act. The act, of course, is administered by the federal Department of Labour. The agreements are as follows: (1) vocational correspondence course agreements,
(2)	the apprenticeship training agreement,
(3)	the vocational schools assistance agreement, and (4) the vocational training agreement. The latter is broken down into training for the disabled, for the armed services, for the unemployed employables, and student aid. In this resolution I am concerned with the latter. The vocational training agreements were allocated $1,342,000 in 1954, out of which student aid received only $309,000. The allocation is still frozen at this amount. The total training program which I have cited above received an appropriation of $4,300,000 in 1954 and the percentage student aid received therefore is only about 7 per cent. My submission would be of course that this student aid should be increased substantially.
I mentioned that conceivably the present system could be enlarged upon. I think it is indeed unfortunate that it was not generally known that there is a system already in existence which is producing splendid results within its limitations. How does the present system then work with regard to student aid? Briefly, the federal government gives direct aid to students through a federal-provincial board called a selection committee. Students are selected by this committee made
IMr. Hollingworth.]
up of representatives of the provincial department of education with one member representing the federal Department of Labour. The provincial department of education would of course have a majority control of this board.
For example, I have ascertained that in the province of Ontario the provincial representatives number seven whereas there is but one member representing the federal government. At the discretion of the province help may be given in the form of either a loan or a grant. For example, the provinces of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba and Saskatchewan give loans only, while Ontario and Newfoundland give outright grants with Alberta, British Columbia and Quebec giving both.
The amount of assistance given to an individual may vary from province to province, but in most cases it ranges from $100 to $300. I have some interesting figures from my own province of Ontario. I understand that for the academic year 1954-55 the sum of $316,000 has been spent on bursaries, of which $216,000 came from the provincial government and $100,000 from the federal government through the Department of Labour.
The number of students receiving bursaries was 1,791 out of 2,860 applicants, or 62 per cent. Many of the 1,069 applicants who did not receive bursaries I am informed did not have the requisite 66 per cent academic standing. I have no information available as to the amounts of individual grants, but I understand that for the year 1955-56 the amount of $420,000 will be available, with $100,000 of this amount coming from the federal government.
This joint effort is to be highly commended and it is my plea today that the federal government substantially increase its share so that the joint effort may be considerably extended. This method also shows clearly how federal and provincial governments can work together amicably for the good of Canada. I repeat that the controlling interest here is with the provinces. I would go further and say that this system is forging a great weapon of national unity.
This would seem to me to be the most effective way of handling this whole problem. I am purposely not stating arbitrarily how much money is needed. I am informed that
20,000	university students need assistance and I would think that the student aid allocation would have to be at least doubled to $600,000 for a start. But I ask, when one thinks of the incalculable value accruing from this enormously successful venture in education,

in what other way can Canadians get such a good return on their national investment? The answer is obviously nowhere else.
I want to raise the question of assistance by industry and by privately-endowed organizations and foundations. We have noted that in the United States the national merit scholarships corporation has contributed over $20 million for scholarships and bursaries. Of course we have not anything comparable to that in Canada, but I think one should note the splendid work the Atkinson foundation fund has done in this regard.
An editorial in the Toronto Star dated Friday, November 11, 1955, pointed out that the foundation, which has done such magnificent work in the humanities, has helped more than 1,500 Ontario students obtain a university education which otherwise might have been denied to them by a lack of funds. At the end of 1955 contributions were to have reached $393,500. The bursaries, called entrance bursaries, ranged from $200 to $400. This is most commendable, but we must face the fact that there are no other Atkinson foundations.
Of course we should be thankful to such organizations as the I.O.D.E. Mrs. R. C. Bennett of Hamilton, educational convener for the I.O.D.E., stated on October 20, 1955, that for 1955 the I.O.D.E. awarded bursaries totalling $3,700 to college students, and interest free loans totalling $1,100. This fine organization is to be congratulated upon the splendid work it has done in this regard.
Business is becoming aware of the problem but, as President Sidney Smith of the university of Toronto pointed out last week, industry has not been fully cognizant of its responsibility in this regard. Perhaps in all fairness it should be pointed out that the income tax provisions are not conducive to assistance by industry in connection with this matter. No, I think that at the present time this problem can be handled only by the government.
It will be argued that we should not distribute more scholarships until we have more facilities available, and that brings up the related topic of federal assistance to universities generally. It may be asked, why cannot the federal government assist universities in financing of capital assets such as new buildings, laboratories, halls, libraries and so on. As a matter of fact the estimates of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Harris) indicate that unconditional grants to Canadian universities will be approximately $7-8 million for 1955-56. I say with respect that this would appear to be woefully inadequate even for the immediate future.
At the present time there are between
55,000	and 65,000 attending universities, and
Education
it is estimated that in ten years there will be from 100,000 to 135,000 university students. To confirm these figures one does not have to look any further than the township of North York in which my riding is located. I am informed that in 1960 there will be approximately 81 public schools in the township of North York. Now this is the shocker. In 1960 the township of North York, with an estimated population of 250,000, will have approximately as many schools as are now located in the city of Toronto proper with a static population of 750,000 people.
Let us look at the high school situation in North York. It is estimated that in 1960 there will be approximately 13,000 pupils. Is it any wonder, on the basis of this isolated example, that an estimate of 135,000 university students in 1966 seems to this observer at least to be conservative.
Therefore it appears to me that the federal government should now consider the setting up of a royal commission to study how much money should and could be allocated and dispersed to universities over a long-term period without of course there being any infringement upon provincial autonomy. If the money were allocated directly to the university this surely would not violate provincial sensibilities.
I should like to conclude my remarks in French as I am most anxious to have the support of my French-Canadian colleagues on both sides of the house.
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I would not like to miss this opportunity of saying a few words in French to my French-speaking fellow citizens and more particularly to those of my colleagues who represent Quebec constituencies.
I would ask them to support this resolution of mine. I sincerely think that it is one of the best means of promoting national unity in Canada.
Before introducing and explaining my resolution, I want to make it clear that I am among those who recognize that the provinces have competent jurisdiction in the field of education. That is the case in the province of Ontario as well as in all the provinces which stand guard jealously over their rights in the field of education.
I know that French Canadians are proud of their language, their customs and their traditions. They are right in feeling as they do, and I congratulate them on that score. In order to maintain this character, French Canadians mean to keep control of education, in so far as it concerns them. I recognize that fact, as indeed my resolution shows. 1 am also convinced that most Canadians

Education
French and English-speaking, recognize it too.
Of course, my resolution agrees with that principle. There now exists grounds for agreement, a way to get the federal and provincial governments to co-operate in this field of assistance to education. This federal provincial co-operation has already been successful and I believe that more liberal subsidies could now be distributed if the same method were used, that is to say by appointing a selection committee whose task would be to select the students who are in need of money to undertake, continue or complete their studies. This committee would include representatives of the provincial department of education, a representative of the federal government and a representative of the university concerned. Subsidies would be paid directly to the student who would have previously satisfied the said committee as to his genuine financial need. Hon. members will note, Mr. Speaker, that the province would exercise supervision over all the proceedings and maintain its authority. Then, that being the case, there could be no question of federal intervention into provincial affairs.
I say that such a policy is a major factor, not only for needy students, but for Canada as a whole. It is a policy of good understanding, a further step to national unity. We must encourage and multiply contacts and exchanges between French-speaking and English-speaking Canadians. I contemplate a brighter future for the time when there are more exchanges of students, students who will think, first and foremost, as Canadians.
I can assure French Canadians that the people of Ontario want to be their friends. Let me recall, in evidence, that many of the hon. members for Toronto, including the members for Trinity (Mr. Carrick), for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming), for Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell), for Broadview (Mr. Hees), lave made French speeches in this house.
Canada, our beloved Canada, is a bilingual country; a country with two cultures, one Trench, the other English. Are we not going ;o march forward hand in hand in order to make Canada the home of tolerance and of iberalism in its art as well as in its lumanity? My resolution is an appeal to lational unity, along with the respect of the ights and privileges of everyone.
[Text):


Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, as on earlier occa-ions, it will be our intention to support the rnrpose of this resolution.
We have had many opportunities to express >ur belief that the plan of scholarships, IMr. Hollingworth.]
which has already worked very satisfactorily through the co-operation between the federal and provincial governments, should be widely extended. We are not dealing with something that is in the realm of vague experiment. Actually there have been scholarships for a great many years, as has been pointed by the mover of this motion. The arrangements have been such that the provincial authorities have had a wide measure of responsibility for the details in this matter. For some time I had some administrative responsibility in connection with the operation of these scholarship arrangements. I know from my own experience that they work satisfactorily. I can recall no single occasion where any serious difficulty presented itself in carrying out those arrangements for scholarships and grants.
The purpose of this motion, undoubtedly, is to emphasize the need for an extension, a very substantial extension, of the award of scholarships to those who seek the opportunity to take advantage of the educational facilities that our universities afford. This can be done without in any way interfering with the exclusive jurisdiction over education which rests with the provincial governments under our constitution. This can undoubtedly be worked out on a satisfactory basis of effective co-operation between the federal and provincial governments.
I am not going to examine in detail the wording of this resolution. The purpose is clear. The purpose is to extend a system of scholarships which will widen the opportunity for young Canadians in every part of Canada, whatever their financial position may be, to avail themselves of the higher educational opportunities that our universities afford.
There are added reasons at this time why all of us should encourage the extension of opportunity at the universities. It is not only the advantage of the young people that is involved-and that is fundamental and vital. What is also involved in the consideration of this subject is the advancement and the strength of the future character of Canada itself. In a large measure, the kind of life that will be lived in our country will be shaped and guided by those who have the advantage of university education and from the pulpit and elsewhere convey those ethical and religious standards which have been the foundation of our life and which we trust will be the foundation of the life of this country in the years ahead.
We must never overlook the fact that, while it is not from university graduates alone that we must seek advancement of the general welfare of our country, one of the fundamental purposes of our universities is to

train people how to live and in turn to pass on the advantage of that training to others. A great part of our university instruction is devoted to the education of teachers themselves. Certainly in that field every encouragement should be offered.
Then there is the field of engineering and scientific skill that is so important at a time when it is so much a part of the great effort that we are making throughout the free world to maintain the strength of our free system. It surely must be a matter of concern to all Canadians and all people of the western world when we find a man, as careful in his statements as Sir Winston Churchill, telling us only within the past few weeks that from the information it has been possible to obtain Soviet Russia is outstripping us in the training of engineers and others with technical knowledge who are so necessary in this period when the great issue between these two different ways of life is being resolved.
Therefore, while it is vitally important that we remember the needs of the young people, while it is vitally important that we bear in mind that every young Canadian who is capable of using the opportunity to have higher education should have that opportunity if possible, we are also dealing with the building of our national strength at a time when national strength is part of the great struggle in which we are engaged. Having regard to the enormous sums of money that are spent on the common effort to build our military strength, it would take a relatively small portion thereof to extend on a very broad basis the kind of technical education, the kind of education in the specialized skills that is needed today. I think we would be serving the dual purpose of widening the opportunities for our youth and building the strength of our nation at the same time.
What happens in the United Kingdom, the United States or in any other free country will be the decision of the governments and elected bodies of those countries. Here our responsibility is for what takes place in Canada. To the extent that this resolution presents the proposition that we should seek a system of scholarships that will encourage young people to go to university, and widens their opportunity to have university courses, we certainly support this effort. To the extent also that this can be done in a way that will guide young people into those special branches of training where graduates are particularly needed at this time, we certainly should encourage the purpose embodied in the resolution.
I have stated before that I believe this can be done without in any way interfering with
Education
provincial authority under our constitution. I have seen it work satisfactorily. I have participated in the actual administration of funds of a similar nature. I know it can be done and therefore I am very happy to support the purpose of the resolution.
Mr. F. T. Fairey (Vicloria, B. C.) Mr. Speaker, I rise with pleasure to lend my support to the resolution. In fact I rise with some eagerness because on other occasions I have had the pleasure of putting forward the same idea in this chamber. Let me say at once that it is my purpose to form the core of my remarks around what has been so well said by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew). The resolution suggests that emphasis be placed upon the need for larger funds to be made available for higher education through the schedule of the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, which has been in effect for 17 years. In those seventeen years the federal government has spent approximately $3 million in co-operation with all the provinces of Canada to provide scholarships and bursaries to young people of high intellect whose economic situation will not allow them to proceed to a school of higher learning.
The subject has been very well covered by my colleague, the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth). He emphasized particularly the need for university training, and I should like to add one or two reasons to those he gave by way of support for a continuation of the schedule but with greatly enhanced facilities both material and financial. In those 17 years the province of British Columbia has sent to various faculties of universities of one kind and another some
7,000	students. As the Leader of the Opposition has said, his province, my province and every other province have added funds of their own to those supplied by the federal government. For some years now the federal government has provided about $30,000 in British Columbia. The British Columbia government has matched this amount and added another $100,000 to it for additional loans. The other provinces have done the same thing.
I mention that only to show that there is a realization of the need. What has always appalled me is the waste of intellect and ability of our young people that goes on in our schools. I say that because there are so many people who think that all those who have the ability to proceed to schools of higher learning have the opportunity to do so. I think we all know that financial ability is not always paralleled by intellectual ability. There are thousands of young people

Education
with intellectual ability who have no opportunity whatever to go forward. I have felt for many years that we should do more about it and I hope before I sit down to propose a plan which has some reasonable prospect of success.
I was intrigued by a remark made by the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Sinclair) before he left on his trip to Russia. He, of course, comes from my province and, if I may say so, I once had the pleasure of teaching him. He said he was hoping to see the universities in Russia because rumour had it that they were crowded with students. He said he had heard-and he believed it-that the method of selection was as one would expect in a totalitarian society, where they had young people, young men particularly, in the armed services. They had a wonderful opportunity to select those with ability and without any question about it they would simply say to one individual, "You go to university"; to another, "You go to technical school", and to another to go somewhere else. In other words, they had the opportunity to pick out those who could profit by further training and contribute particularly to the technical advancement of their own country.
In Canada today we claim great prosperity, particularly in the industrial field. During the last session of parliament I made a plea for a realization of the shortage we have in this country and I asked this question. If Canada is to progress in the industrial field and in the scientific field, where are we going to get our engineers? What are we doing about training them? Where are we going to get our technicians and what are we doing about training them?
Only the other day during the recess a personnel man of a large industry told me that he had gone to the University of British Columbia-as had others to all universities -recruiting graduates of the faculty of applied science. He said, "I hoped to get ten for my firm and I obtained only two". Only the other day in Ottawa an official of the federal government-I should not mention the particular department because I do not think he expected to be quoted-told me that they were going around to universities recruiting. Recruiting what? Recruiting the bright young men now in the universities and offering them jobs. There is a tremendous shortage of engineers and of technicians, particularly in the field of electronics.
How many schools are there in Canada capable of training technicians, particularly in that field which I have mentioned, namely electronics? There is one. It is the Ryerson Institute of Technology in Toronto. There are good technical schools but they are

mostly trade schools. We have one in Vancouver, one in Calgary, one in Winnipeg and there are one or two others. However, they are chiefly trade schools.
Here in my hand I have a letter from the principal of the Ryerson Institute of Technology who is a personal friend of mine. He wrote to me after my address of last session. In his letter he said this:
As you know, the original aim of the Ryerson Institute was to prepare its students to become engineering technicians and over two-thirds of our enrolment is in such courses.
This letter was written in April of last year. He said:
We have now an enrolment of 1,600 in our day classes and 5,200 in the evening school.
Farther on in his letter he said this:
The programs of study for the engineering technicians are based on the assumption that upon graduation their general and theoretical education should reasonably approximate that of a second year university student.
What I want to point out is this, Mr. Speaker. Despite the fact that we have a shortage of professional engineers and of those who design and of those who formulate plans, they are useless unless we have those who have in their hands and in their minds the skill to put those plans into effect. The technician is the important cog in the wheel; and the technician must be guided by those whom we call, for want of a better term, superintendents or foremen or lead hands. Here we have one institution in Canada that is fitted to do that job. Yet at the same time we claim to be growing by leaps and bounds as an engineering and industrial nation.
I said that I was going to suggest a scheme. It may not have any merit, but I think it has. For some years now we have had what is called the vocational training advisory council. I was a member of it. That body meets from time to time. It is supposed to survey the situation throughout the country in the vocational and technical field. It is composed of educators, representatives of industry, of unions-that is of labour-and of the business field. That council is supposed to present recommendations to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg), whose department is responsible in this field, in the hope that they may be accepted and be put into effect. I know that for years all we did was to ask for more money. That is a rather common practice of commissions. I am not too happy about the suggestion for a royal commission made by the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hol-lingworth). We have had too many of them suggested, and they take too long. We have a body which, in my opinion, is capable of doing this job.

Education
If we are going to tap the resources which we know are in this country, we could enlist the support of the educational administrators across this country. By that I mean the high school principals, the superintendents of education. We could ask them to do just one simple thing, namely to keep their eyes and their ears open for bright students in their schools and to earmark them. If-and I know it could be done-these youngsters could be discovered, watched and then guided in the proper channel, as their abilities would indicate, with the assurance that the federal government, in co-operation with their own educational authorities, would see to it that they had the opportunity to proceed and to develop those abilities which they have displayed, in that way I think we could ensure to every child in Canada with intellectual ability or special skill that he could be of use to himself, be happy in his own work and be of value to his community.
I would suggest to the minister that this problem be thrown into the lap of this vocational training advisory council, with the instruction that they should study this problem of the utilization of the wastage in the intellectual elite of this country and that they should formulate plans to use that valuable commodity which so far has been going to waste. But there would be no use in asking them to do this kind of thing unless they could be assured that they could follow it up. They should therefore be assured of adequate finances to put into effect a plan of increased bursaries. I like the word "bursaries" rather than the word "scholarships". A person who himself, through the generosity of his own people, can afford to proceed to university should be allowed to do so. It is those who have not that opportunity whom I think this government and all governments should assist. If a plan could be formulated and approved by the government, then I think we would be doing something to fill a need in the industrial potential of this country.
Lastly, I want to return for a moment to what I said about technicians. I said, with some heat, perhaps, that we have one school. Through the forceful effort of the Ontario department of education and the persistence of its present principal and others they established a school to do a particular job, namely, the training of tradesmen, if you like, mechanics and technicians, who are found in that large industrial centre. They have done a splendid work, but it is not enough. When I think that it was my pleasure to see the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters) lay the foundation stone of a post office in Vancouver that cost something over
$10 million or $15 million-and there are lots of them in the country-and we have one technical school worthy of its name, I just think that it is out of proportion. I know that the federal government is besieged with requests for all kinds of things. There are many desirable things that cost a lot of money that we cannot have, but I do feel that since we are growing in industrial stature we should do something drastic to man our industries.


Mr. R. R. Knight (Saskatoon):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to congratulate very heartily the mover of this private member's resolution. I am tempted to divert for a moment to express an opinion as to the value of private members' resolutions. I suppose this particular resolution about a subject which I think is vital may well do one or two things. It will air that important question before the country through the medium of this house. It will give us here an opportunity of discussing the matter and expounding our opinions in regard to it, and I think it will have some result in the creation of public opinion in favour of the particular proposition it advances.
This, of course, is not a new subject for myself; so much so, that I got tired of debating it, and did not think it was my duty to keep on. If the hon. member may be said to have in a way adopted a child that was at least partly my baby, I suppose that is all right because when one adopts some other person's baby he at least pays some tribute to the respectability of the family. This is not, of course, my particular cause; it is a cause that has been shared by many hon. members.
Before getting into the main debate, I should like to say I am interested to see my own people back at home taking an interest in this matter. I fancy the letter I hold in my hand, which was sent to me by the president of the student council of the University of Saskatchewan, or one something like it, has been received by many hon. members, because I am given to understand that a campaign is being put on by the students themselves to try to hasten the coming into effect of this resolution by way of legislation.
As I say, the letter was sent by the student council of the University of Saskatchewan. May I say briefly what they have in mind? They point out that many of the students in attendance at the university at the present time are in need of financial assistance; that many others who are not there have been prevented from attending owing to financial need. They point out that the cost of education generally has increased and is increasing

Education
gadgets, faster cars, bigger refrigerators and die rest of it. I suggest that there may be something wrong with o-ur sense of value. Perhaps we are growing materialistic and acquisitive. In that we are aided and abetted continually by commercial advertising, and :he worst of it is that it tries to increase our lesire to surpass our neighbours in what are actually tinsel propositions. We are urged ;o buy what they call swanky cars and are cold that we will be able to look out of the sack windows and see our neighbour left sehind. What an inducement that is!
I am going to suggest that perhaps we should hasten slowly in these things. We should not be in a hurry to exploit all our natural resources, to get our hands upon all the money at once, and improve our standard of luxurious living. Perhaps we should plough back some of that capital investment, some proportion of our gross national product, and invest more of it in the creation of the good life. By good life I mean things tike health and education and those things which rightly or wrongly we are inclined to talk about as being the fine arts.
We have passed the pioneer stage. We have dug the stones and cut the stumps. We are very comfortably off, and it becomes a question of how we are spending our money. Are we squandering it or are we spending it on things which will build our country into a great nation?
I am reminded of a dear old friend of mine at home in the old country. Perhaps I should not refer to it in that way because my home has been here for 50 years or so and my children have been born here. But one does think of the land of his birth. I went back for a visit and was still a young man at that time. I went to see this dear aid friend as she sat in her little cottage in the green fields of Northern Ireland. It was only a thatched-roof cottage but it was dean, the walls were white and the roses were growing around the door. This little aid lady in the evening of her years was sitting there among her flowers, her pictures ind her books, particularly her books. Being mpetuous and young I began boasting about ;he good things we had in Canada, the indentions and other modern things. She sat and listened to me with patience and then she said, "Yes son, perhaps you have a better standard of living, but perhaps we have a setter life." It was something to think about. Perhaps she was quite wrong, but that is something that has lingered in my memory "rom that day to this.
One of these items of the better life I lave been talking about is covered by the [DOT]esolution proposed by my hon. friend. He s suggesting more university scholarships.
Mr. Knight.]
We have to give these young people a chance if we are going to bring them up to be the kind of young people we want them to be, the kind of young people we need in our social and economic environment. A comprehensive scholarship plan involves increased accommodation. If the number of individual scholarships is increased it means increased attendance at the universities. I welcome that. These people will be running to our doors just as the people in Saskatchewan have been running to the doors of the hospitals under the hospital scheme. They need to run to those doors. God bless them, let them run, the more the better, so far as universities are concerned. I would not suggest that about hospitals.
This is going to impose a burden upon our universities and they can carry no more now because their burden is already too great. They are in a state of continuing and developing financial crisis. So assistance to universities paralleling grants to individuals will be needed. These things have been expressed much better than I can express them by university men of this country. The president of McGill University has been referred to today, also the late well-beloved Dr. R. C. Wallace of Queens, and also Dr. Sidney Smith who wrote a most interesting article in the University of Toronto Quarterly.
Someone has suggested that more should be done by business interests. I am not quite sure about that. I have not thought my way through to the end on that. To me education is a public responsibility and I do not want to rely on the profits of some candy firm or brewery or something else for the education of my children and my children's children. I think it is a public and therefore governmental responsibility. Nor do I want to be dependent upon distilleries to provide opportunity for my grandchildren's participation in sports or for awards that might come to them in that respect.
That reminds me that we already receive some foreign aid for education in this country, and I am referring now to what are known as foundations. I like to see money being given for education, but the people who run these foundations are beginning to think that this country is not carrying out its share of responsibility in regard to education. I am not able to quote this as a fact, but I have heard and read that some of these people are threatening to withdraw their support because the public of this country apparently do not sufficiently appreciate the gifts that are being made at least not sufficiently to match the outside assistance. Perhaps some of my hon. friends will be able to state whether that statement is true or not. I see some affirmative nods.

Our young people are clamouring for admittance to the halls of learning. I understand that between 7 and 8 per cent are now in attendance, but this percentage will increase, certainly under the scheme we are proposing today. The actual numbers will increase in any event. I think Dr. Smith estimated a total of 130,000 will be in attendance at the universities in ten years, or he may have been quoting an estimate by the bureau of statistics.
The logical question is, what does the government propose when faced with that particular situation? Is this proposed investment worth while or is it not? Is this the best way in which we can spend our money or is it not? Are we going to keep on putting our capital investment towards the manufacture of more gadgets and increasing our present luxurious state of living? It is quite true that luxury is enjoyed by everybody, and we would like to see it more generally shared, perhaps. But are we also going to look toward the future needs of this nation?
I think it is fair to say that the government has shied away from certain propositions in regard to education, certainly one that I have often advocated. What have they done about UNESCO? Have we as a country assumed our responsibilities? Have we from the early beginnings developed something worth while? We just shied away from it. In this connection I should like to quote the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent). I do not know whether he realises it or not, but one of his favourite expressions is "at this time": at this time we are not prepared to do anything. But that statement does hold out some hope for the future and hope is always a good thing. I am suggesting that we have shied away from these things, perhaps unnecessarily.
I think it is time that Canada grew up educationally. It is true that we have got rid of some of our inferiority complexes and are beginning to develop some of our native arts and literature, but we should be developing something for our children to read. When you give your child or grandchild 25 cents or 35 cents to go out and buy something to read, what does he come back with? What is available to him at that price. I say no more. Of all the countries I have ever been in there is in this country the greatest dearth of good reading for children.
The comparison simply leaves us astonished and ashamed. As far as my observation goes in this matter of a demand for education and for equality of opportunity in education, the government should be taking the lead in promoting higher learning by assisting those provinces which administer the systems of
Education
education. We should have a scheme of national university scholarships and we should have it now. I am glad to hear members on the Liberal side advocating it. When one of the gentlemen on the other side advocates some progressive measure such as this, we begin to think that they are getting some encouragement or that at least no prohibition is being placed on them against mentioning the nasty word "education" in this sacred house devoted to federal matters.
To go back to the scheme of my hon. friend, this scheme would be of inestimable value to the young people of this country, to the provinces of this country and to the nation as a whole. The welfare of the nation as a whole, as well as that of the provinces and the municipalities, is, in my opinion, directly dependent on the quality of the education of its citizens. Canada did something more than help many returned soldiers when it instigated the D.V.A. education grants. She contributed to the efficiency of the whole nation. Let us not forget that the scheme was operated with individuals who on the average would certainly not have attained the same standard of education as the people to whom we are proposing that these bursaries or scholarships should now be given. If we made a success of that, if we made our country better or stronger because of that plan, what are we now waiting for? Not money

I have dealt with that. We have money for other things.
I say I am glad that a member who supports the government brought in the resolution. I honour him for it and I wish him luck with it. It may be a good sign. Let us hope it is of some significance. Let us hope that something will be done.


Mr. A. J. MacEachen (Inverness-Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth) on his interest in the education of the young people of Canada as exemplified in the resolution now under discussion. This resolution calls for consideration of the need to provide national scholarships and bursaries for university students in financial need. In supporting this resolution, I am responding to an invitation from the students of St. Francis Xavier University, who were kind enough to forward me a resolution outlining their views on this problem of such importance to the university population.
Until my election to the House of Commons,
I spent all of my adult life in university, either as a student or as a teacher, and it is upon that experience I wish to draw in giving voice briefly to my views on this subject.	.

Education
In drawing attention to the need of financial assistance for university students, the hon. member for York Centre has singled out one of several problems involved in the task of making Canadian universities more effective instruments in the progress of Canada and in the intellectual and moral formation of its people.
Equally important is the question of direct financial assistance to the universities and expanded aid to programs of research, especially in the field of the social and economic sciences. This resolution, however, is not intended to provide a basis for the analysis of the total financial problem of the university and is therefore confined to the aspect of providing greater opportunities to the youth of Canada for securing a university education.
I do not share the attitude which regards a university education as solely useful in rising to a higher income status'or as replenishing the groups in the community who have exercised, in a traditional sense, social and cultural power. University education in a growing country must always have in mind the equipping of persons with skills for useful public service. It must be directed to the object of reducing social and geographical differences and divisions through its availability to all groups in a community. Finally, it must assist citizens to reach understanding by allowing them to share in the intellectual and spiritual heritage which it is the universities' duty to transmit.
I believe it is proper that each person should be allowed to choose freely his occupation. If the selected occupation requires university training, then a life ambition should not be thwarted and a contribution to society lost because the aspiring student has not the financial means. It may be that as society evolves, the notion of a university education will not be so closely bound with a gainful occupation but will be cherished as a desirable possession in its contribution to personal enrichment; and fortunate indeed is the community in which such persons abound.
If the case for assistance to university students is sound or appealing on theoretical grounds, it is more than justified by the needs of the present stage of Canada's development and is supported by the experience already gained in the launching of such assistance programs on a national scale.
Such favourable views exist on the success and efficacy of the education program of veterans under the D.VA. plan that it is really unnecessary to provide further proof. Let me say, however, that I had the opportunity of associating with veterans at one of our Canadian universities during the postwar years. These veterans were supported
(Mr. MacEachen.l
in their university education by government funds and they were in part composed of students who would not have had a chance to pursue their education otherwise. This group made up a serious and competent element in the campus community. They were, of course, more mature than the average student group, but not the least of the reasons for their success as students was the removal of a great part of their financial concern. Today we have a program by which financial support is offered students who will enter the services upon graduation. Both these systems of aid are more than noble experiments. They are useful precedents. Their success nourishes the hope that, as the state supports university students in reward, and to provide an inducement, for service in the armed forces, it will also make generous provision for students who are ready to serve in peaceful pursuits.
I do not intend to retrace the ground covered by other speakers who have stressed the demand for trained persons in many professions in our present expanding economy; of the need to provide assistance in Canada to university students on a basis at least comparable to that provided in the United States and the United Kingdom; of the need to supplement the summer earnings of students through the provision of financial assistance; of the desire to increase the proportion of our population in university or with university experience.
These arguments appeal to Canadians who wish to pursue the development of their country and Canada's capacity to make a wider contribution in the cause of peace. The Canadian public will support the purpose of this debate. In the province of Nova Scotia there still lives with undiminished strength a love for learning and I am sure that a similar feeling exists in all other parts of Canada.
I want to touch for a moment on the view sometimes expressed that paying one's way sifts out those students who really want university education and who will really benefit from it. This process of paying one's way is regarded as a great builder of character. I prefer to think that a university builds character in a different sense, in the true sense of graduating men whose lives and conduct are patterned on immutable principles of religion and philosophy. But we are today also bent on building a country, and it is my belief that it will be built more solidly and more quickly if a greater share of people graduate from our universities.
The process of university education is not a financial process. It is rather a moral and intellectual process. Education extending into

the professional and graduate fields requires discipline and hard work that make it so essential to remove at least in part the financial worries.
I have said nothing, Mr. Speaker, about the amount of such assistance, what standards of scholarship should be set as qualification, or how it could be administered. These are decisions that may provoke a type of discussion which at this time might frustrate the purpose of the resolution, namely, to establish the need for assistance to university students as a compelling national concern.


Mr. J. A. Smith (Battle River-Camrose):: Mr. Speaker, I should first like to congratulate the mover of the resolution. It is my opinion that in presenting this resolution to the house he has brought before the members a problem that needs to be given great concern. As a former teacher, I should also like to pay tribute at this time to the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Knight) for his efforts throughout the years in trying to secure federal aid for education. For many years the hon. member for Saskatoon has seen fit to place resolutions on the order paper requesting aid for education. He is well known throughout western Canada as a champion of aid for education.
We in this group intend to support the resolution primarily because we believe that the advantages derived from university training should be made available to all young men and women who would like to take advantage of such training. We do not feel that the young person who lacks the financial means to attend university should be deprived of that privilege. Again, Mr. Speaker, as a group we believe that the acceptance of the resolution would be good, sound business on the part of all hon. members.
If it can be said that any good at all comes out of war, perhaps the policy of giving aid to the young men and women who were fortunate enough to return to their native land as veterans of world war II and the Korean war would be at the top of the list. The young men and women who availed themselves at that time of this opportunity are now serving their country more effectively and are proving themselves to be of great value to their communities. Without going too far back in history, it is possible to find instances where other nations have recognized the value of education, particularly university training. I am thinking in terms now of the Japanese empire. Within the span of a few short years Japan was able to build itself into a power that threatened our western civilization. How did she do that? She selected the very best of the Japanese young people. Where were they sent? They
Education
were sent to such countries as Great Britain, the United States, Germany and France. For what purpose? To pick up ideas and bring them back to Japan in order to make that nation powerful and strong.
I should also like to point out that Hitler in his early days took over control of the schools and universities of his country and that with this control he was able to build up in Germany that terrible war machine which threatened us for years. What is Russia doing today? In the course of the debate it has already been pointed out that as far as the communist government of Russia is concerned university training is a must. On the other hand, what are we doing? Are we looking to the future? Are we saying to our young people: We want you to go to the universities of our land?
In this country we have some of the finest universities to be found in the world. Are we saying to our young people: We want you to go there and equip yourselves so that you can take your place in our democracy and assist us in the cold war now being waged? Surely, Mr. Speaker, it must be recognized that we need something other than guns, bombers and so on to counteract the evil forces surrounding us today. We need educated young men and women who are firmly conviced that our way of life is the true and only way of life.
As a former teacher I have all too often watched young boys and girls come up through the school system and graduate from grade 12 with good marks only to go no further with their training. Why? It was not because they did not want to do so but because they did not have the financial means to carry on. In my opinion this is a sad situation. Education should and must be made available to all young people throughout Canada who desire and are capable of taking it. We are very pleased to support the resolution.


Mr. S. R. Balcom (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, I was asked some time ago by the students of Dalhousie University to support the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth) when he presented his resolution, and I am very pleased to do so. A good case has been made for the desirability of more scholarships for university students by hon. members who have already spoken. Coming from a province where the need is great, may I say that we find there is a wide gap between what students can earn in their holiday periods and the cost of a year at university. The figures quoted by the national federation of Canadian university students show average earnings of $600 for men and $300 for

Education
women compared with an outlay of somewhere around $1,200. The figure of $1,200 for a year may be conservative. The difference has to be made up in some way. The result is that the decision whether or not to go to university hinges very often on the immediate financial circumstances of a student's family.
If the parents are able to take care of the cost of higher education it is all to the good. If not, the student who gets his or her training the hard way does so with considerable sacrifice and hardship. This in itself is not a bad thing, provided it does not interfere with a proper use of their time at college and thus prevent them from getting a well-rounded education.
A survey in 1950 showed that over half of those who drop out of school or college do so for financial reasons. But there are those who, willing though they be to make the necessary sacrifices, are still not able to go further than high school. This seems to be the breaking point for many students. In order to confirm this view, one has only to look at the number of college students in Canada in comparison with the total population in the college-age group. In 1952 four per cent of those between the ages of 15 and 24 were attending university in Canada.
Attention has been drawn to the position in Canada as compared with that in other countries. In the United Kingdom and in France a large proportion of the students receive government scholarships and assistance. In Canada only about 15 per cent of our student population-whether the figure is correct or not I do not know-is assisted through scholarships and bursaries. These are not government scholarships, for the most part.
Hardly anyone would quarrel with the objective of the national federation of Canadian university students in asking for a national scholarship program. When a potential student is turned away from our colleges or professional schools not because of lack of ability but because he or she cannot afford to attend, we are all losers. The individual himself loses the opportunity for his broadest development and our society is that much the poorer. I am thinking not only in terms of technical training but in terms of those other qualities of breadth of vision and tolerance which are just as essential to our way of life.
The experience of Canadian universities with student veterans under the D.VA. scheme clearly showed that there is represented in the youth of Canada a great deal of ability that ordinarily does not have the
[Mr. Balcom.l
opportunity to make its full contribution to the development of this country. Because of economic difficulties many gifted young people are unable to attend university even though they have the necessary talent to become doctors, teachers, clergymen, scientists or engineers. Although they have the ability necessary to give outstanding service to Canada they are deprived of the opportunity to contribute their full potential because of the lack of university education.
Reports from universities throughout Canada have shown that the record of the student veterans was exceptionally good and that it in fact helped to set a new standard. This record was partly due to the fact that the student veterans were somewhat more mature than their classmates but it stands also as a clear reminder that we are not taking full advantage of the potential we have.
Canada is still a young and expanding country. If it is to make the progress which all true Canadians hope for, it must make the maximum use of its most valuable asset, namely the ability and skill of its youth.
Today industries and businesses all over the country are literally clamouring for men with university education to fill positions in the technical fields and in management. The same thing is true of government services. Dozens of recruiting teams are visiting the universities in search of such talent and many times they are obliged to go away with empty hands.
The universities of my own province of Nova Scotia have a special interest in this problem for two reasons. First of all, Nova Scotia has been traditionally the source of a disproportionately large number of professional men and of leaders in business and finance. Second, the average income in Nova Scotia is only about half that in Ontario. It is therefore correspondingly more difficult for our young people to find the money required to fulfil their ambition for a university education. At this point I might say that in Nova Scotia we have more students per capita than has any other province in Canada.
However, I am not sure that a national scholarship scheme is the first step that should be taken. Certainly such a program launched by itself to increase the student body substantially at this time, by whatever means, would impose on some of our colleges an impossible burden; for, in most cases, the tuition fees of the students cover only a portion of the cost of their courses. This is especially true of the medical and dental faculties where roughly only one-quarter of the costs are

covered by their fees. However, there is a substantial difference in all faculties. An influx of new students, whatever the source of their tuition, would only increase the demand for services already overtaxed.
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock. .
Samuel Rosborough Balcom: Mr. Speaker, to continue the discussion of national scholarships where we left off at six o'clock, already during this session I have emphasized the need for a more generous policy of assistance by the federal government to our universities. Further financial aid is needed to enable the universities to make proper provision for salaries, for library research facilities and for all the other demands of modern education. We must emphasize quality and standards at this level. The institutions must have the best to offer or the students will turn away with dust and ashes instead of with capacities developed and attitudes that are healthy for responsible citizens.
Incidentally, I reiterate what I have said many times in this house namely, that the present method of distributing federal grants for education, resulting in a per capita rate per student so much lower than in most other provinces and so much less than that granted to provinces whose universities, being state supported, receive large benefits from the public purse, is a continuing source of dissatisfaction to the people whom I am proud to represent.
I am not suggesting that the government should bear the whole burden of cost. The Lord forbid that it should ever happen in Canada that the government should contribute so much money that they might possibly think that they should step in and have something to say in the operation of the universities. Individual graduates, business and industry, professional organizations and labour unions all have a stake and should make a voluntary contribution.
In no case that I know of do students' fees cover the cost of training. A graduate should take some responsibility for the continuance, the growth and improvement of the institution to which he owes a great deal. This sense of loyalty and responsibility is very important, not only in this connection, but throughout our whole society.
Under this resolution we are discussing and recommending scholarships and bursaries, but I believe the brief of the students should
Education
be broadened so as to make loans to students one of its main objectives. I believe the bright, ambitious students coming out of high school need loans which, with their summer work, would carry them through their full course, these loans to be eventually paid back; for today we realize that graduates in medicine, engineering, geology and other faculties have no difficulty in making a repayment.
I would be inclined to broaden the intent of this resolution with the suggestion, too, that hospital schools for nurses' training, provided that they meet the requirements of the various nursing associations' regulations, be included. We have a youth training program which was mentioned today, and which last year expended over $514,000 in Canada, of which only $46,000 went to Nova Scotia.
Then, in 1954 I think it was, the Department of Veterans Affairs, in its progressive legislation, brought in the education assistance act, under which the sons and daughters of deceased veterans are enabled to receive an educational course extending over four years. During that time their tuition fees are paid and they also receive an allowance of $25 a month. This assistance extends over the whole four years. I note from the booklet issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs that this course is extended to approved teaching hospitals which lead to registered nurses' degrees.
Then again we have one of the programs that were instituted by the Department of National Defence. I am not certain of the army and air force, but I know of the Royal Canadian Navy. Under this program university students join the reserve force and go into training. Over a period of their college course they receive something like $185 a month while they are on active service during the summer months, and during the study period in the winter months they receive half that amount. That seems to me to be very generous, and it has been taken advantage of by students all over Canada. In addition to all these benefits, a great many of these men go on tours and receive training in other points of interest all over the world.
The federal authority also contributes to the building and operation of provincial vocational schools. Any financial help that would educate and broaden our Canadian citizens should be assisted. I have in mind scholarships and bursaries to encourage all Canadians to learn the French and English languages. Let us do more to develop our bilingualism and consider it fitting, as obviously some help is needed, to do everything possible to make our two languages truly national.

Education
By all means I would support this resolution and I would add that the government should consider the advisability of further aid to universities generally.


Mr. G. C. Nowlan (Digby-Annapolis-Kings):: Mr. Speaker, this is one of the important matters which I think confront the country today. It is a very complex problem and one on which one could speak at considerable length if one had the opportunity so to do. But I do know that many hon. members wish to discuss this matter tonight, and I propose to speak very briefly indeed.
In the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne the other day I referred to the problem of university education, but I am not going to develop that further tonight. It is an anomalous situation in which we find ourselves in this country today, and which this resolution actually envisages. Practically every university in Canada is being taxed to the limit today to provide accommodation and service for the student body that is attending those universities at the present time. This resolution envisages the fact that still more students will be attending the universities. I think that is true, but it certainly does emphasize the fact that it is a complicated problem and not a simple one. The time has come when the government of Canada, the people of Canada generally, in co-operation with and through the provinces as well, will have to give more attention to the university's problem than has been given heretofore.
We have had many interesting debates on the matter contained in the resolution which is now before us. The atmosphere has been fairly well cleared with respect to it. Very little action has been taken. As I said, the time is rapidly approaching when some concrete action must be taken.
As I pointed out the other day, we are expecting an increase in our population. We look to world leadership, and we speak about the heritage which is ours and the challenge which is ours. The business leaders throughout this country are all saying we have to produce much more leadership material than is being produced at the moment. That must be done to a substantial extent through the universities. I realize it is only one phase of an over-all educational system. It is the one which is perhaps the most important and the most critical.
This resolution deals with only one phase of the problem, namely, the scholarship problem and the matter of financial support to students, and it is on that that I am going to speak for a moment.
Perhaps I can speak with a little feeling on this subject, coming as I do from a small

university town where I have lived all my life. I have watched boys and girls come there seeking employment and seeking to put themselves through university. I know what small scholarships or bursaries mean to these people. I was thrilled to read the other day in the Globe and Mail-and the statement also appeared in newspapers all across Canada-that a contribution had been made to medical science by a research man in a certain Canadian university. I shall not mention his name. I happen to remember that fellow when he came to Acadia 20 years ago. I know that through a little influence he was able to obtain a job as a waiter in the university dining hall and thereby put himself through college. When I read of his contribution in the paper the other day I thought to myself, that is a substantial contribution that is being made to the public welfare of this country and to the world arising from the fact that this fellow happened to be able to get a job.
I have known, as has, I am sure, every hon. member in this house, scores and hundreds of young people who have not been able to obtain jobs at all. Some have been able to work and put themselves through, some have had relatives who sacrificed and put them through, some have won scholarships, but some have had to fall by the wayside. This resolution, as I see it, envisages this responsibility and suggests that something more must be done to assist the Canadian students who want to make a real contribution to their country if they are given an opportunity to do so.
In giving assistance to the veterans we have not established a pattern but we have established a precedent which was a notable one carried out by this government or by this parliament-I do not care how you put it. In doing so we have made a great contribution to this country, one from which we are only now beginning to reap the benefits. National research scholarships are of tremendous importance and I know that the Minister of National Defence and his department have provided for the education of many young men and possibly of some young women provided they will undertake to enter the armed forces and stay there for a certain length of time. To date, however, our contributions have been haphazard and I feel that the time has come when we should try to put them into better focus. I am not complaining about what we have done in this direction but I would suggest that it has been inadequate. I say this because the national research scholarships and others in large part deal with graduate students. We must not overlook the fact that we also have the problem of the undergraduate student

Education
According to figures released by the bureau of statistics we are able to estimate that by 1960 the secondary school population of this country will have doubled, a 100 per cent increase over 1950. In a few years' time the students represented by that 100 per cent increase will be moving on towards university. Many of them need assistance in order to reach that goal. Universities also need assistance in increasing their facilities for dealing with the students. As I say, there is the undergraduate problem as well as the graduate problem.
My hon. friend from Victoria (Mr. Fairey) in speaking this afternoon mentioned the need for further technical study in Canada. I realize that this is important but I do not think our country is going to develop solely along material lines. I think the emphasis on the sciences and on technical studies can be overdone. You, sir, will remember that in the old days in your province the emphasis was on the classical studies, generally speaking. I think there should also be an emphasis on the humanities or social sciences. History, economics, et cetera, must not be overlooked in the days that lie ahead, as they might very easily be. There are no scholarships for studies such as these and generally speaking there are no scholarships for graduate students. For these reasons I welcome this resolution. I think it is bringing the problem- and I think it is a national problem-into focus. I must emphasize again, however, that it is only one phase of the problem because the problem of education is much more complex than this. However, I think the time has come when the nation as a whole must assume responsibility for this matter and must set up a system perhaps privately supported in part, or supported by the provinces in part and supported only in part by the dominion of Canada as a nation.
I hope we can inaugurate national scholarships whereby young men such as the one I mentioned a few moments ago and the thousands like him who will be coming along will be given the opportunity of obtaining a college education and will thus be able to make a contribution to this country and to the world.
Mr. Speaker, I heartily support the resolution.


Mr. Daniel Mclvor (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, I will be brief as usual. Many teachers have asked me at this time to support a resolution of this kind and although I shall support the resolution I have certain ideas of my own on the subject of education which I should like to express.
I think that if a young man-or woman- has a purpose in life he will eke his way through college. Canadian students do not want a handout from anyone-not even from the government of Canada-because if they have a strong purpose in life they will find a way to graduate from college. I could name men in this house, including the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Fairey) and the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner), who worked their own way through college because they had a purpose in life. We do not want to graduate a lot of sissies. If a man has a purpose in life he will achieve what he sets out to do and will serve God and his country and there will be no strings attached to it. If a student receives aid from the government of Canada or from any province he should, after he has graduated and is earning his living in law or some other field, be man enough to pay back the taxpayers' money. I realize that those who were overseas are in a different position and those veterans who have graduated from college are a credit to Canada. I could name a good many of them, including some who came from the city of Fort William.
I think this resolution deserves consideration but we do not want to jump on the band wagon simply because it is a popular attitude.
Mr. J. W. Nose worthy (York South): Mr. Speaker, it is very encouraging indeed to many of us to find the Liberals vying with the opposition in an effort to get the floor in order to speak on the subject now before us. It is extremely interesting and also gratifying to find this resolution coming from the Liberal benches.
The hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor), who has just taken his seat, for whom everybody in the house has a great deal of respect, has made the point that students today are not seeking government aid. He seemed to imply that in his day and in mine students were made of sterner stuff and were able to earn their own way through university. I was unfortunate enough to be one of those who had to earn their own way in order to go to university at all. When I attended the University of Toronto my freshman year, 1912, cost me less than $200. My room, board and university fees together amounted to $150. Some of us have attended, or have had our children attending, university in more recent years and we realize that what kept me at university for a year would not today keep a young person for a month at a university. It is true that it is possible for young people to earn more during their summer vacations than it was in my time, but the spread between the cost

Education
and what can be earned is much greater now than it was years ago. Most of us know from experience that today it is practically impossible for young people to work their own way through university and pay all their expenses.
One cannot help noting the interest in education which is shown in this chamber today as compared with the attitude when I came to the house in 1942. At that time we considered education so exclusively a provincial matter that we scarcely dared mention the word in this chamber. During my first session here I was ruled out of order on three different occasions when I attempted to bring before the house a subject matter similar to that which we are discussing today.
Debates on education have been welcomed in this chamber now for some years and in every party in the house we find supporters for some form of federal government assistance. I have often maintained here that, notwithstanding the British North America Act, education is a matter of great concern to Canada as a nation. No provincial department of education educates a child to become a citizen of that province alone. Those who are educated in the province of Quebec move into every other province of Canada, and many of those who are educated in Ontario do likewise. Whether the cost of education is borne by the municipality, by the provincial government or with assistance from the federal government, we are educating young people today as Canadian citizens and not as citizens of any one province.
The level of culture and education to which we can bring our young people, regardless of the province in which they live, is a matter of interest and concern to Canada as a whole. We recognize that fact in time of war when we spend federal money in order to educate men and women to play their part in the war effort in order to equip them to be better soldiers, sailors, airmen and workers in munitions factories. There was no quarrel with the provincial governments over the expenditure of federal money for education in time of war. Why should we consider war so much more important in the life of the nation than peace, or education in time of war so much more important than education for peaceful living?
We are inclined to measure our progress today in terms of economics. We are hearing constantly of the great development of our natural resources and the ever-expanding production of our factories. We estimate our total national product solely in material terms. We forget that there are other values in life than those material things which can be estimated in dollars and cents.
fMr. Noseworthy.]
A very learned economist, Dr. Galbraith, a Canadian who is now professor of economics at Harvard University, appeared before the royal commission on Canada's economic prospects a few days ago and he had this to say regarding the value we set on progress:
More urgent than resource development is the problem of human development, and Canada, like the United States, has suffered an enormous wastage of talent by making higher education dependent not on ability, but on ability to pay.
I do not think there is anyone in this chamber who does not recognize the truthfulness of that statement. Today our universities are crowded but the people who are selected or who find it possible to attend are not necessarily the young people with the greatest ability or those who can profit best by a university education. By and large they are those who have the ability to pay for a university education. Dr. Galbraith made another significant statement when he said:
But far more Important than resource development Is the problem of human development. The most serious current failure In both Canada and the United States Is the failure to keep abreast of the technical and scientific requirements of growth.
The present scramble for highly qualified people is a measure of our failure. We must plan to spend generously to correct our mistakes in this area.
If Canadians are to keep abreast of the times, if Canadian industry is to be supplied with specialists who are Canadians, then we must find the means of permitting many of our ablest young people who cannot now attend university to be able to do so. Even at that, we have fallen behind in providing specialists in the fields of natural science and engineering. But we have fallen much farther behind the times in the provision of graduates in the humanities, the arts and the social sciences. If we are to make this nation the best nation possible, if we are to produce a race of Canadians who can hold their own with the peoples of other countries, then we must be prepared to spend more money and to give more attention to those things which cannot be measured in terms of dollars and cents, those things which will eventually add to human happiness and development.
This is a matter which today has very broad support throughout the country. Even as conservative a group as the Canadian chamber of commerce in its December newsletter commented on the fact that we in Canada are not training our young people of the greatest ability for the positions they will be needed to fill.
This afternoon we heard that the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson) and the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Sinclair), who have returned from their trips behind the iron curtain, were greatly impressed by

Education
the urge to learn in those countries and by the opportunities for learning provided there. True, we may think that much of what is learnt there may be communist doctrine. We may not approve of the tactics that are used. But we dare not ignore the fact that behind the iron curtain the communists are providing for their young people every possible opportunity to gain an education, such as it is.
If we are to maintain our position in the battle for men's minds that is now going on throughout the world, then it behooves us to see that provision is made whereby more of our most capable young people will be provided with an opportunity of attending university. I sincerely hope that some way can be found, within the limitations of the British North America Act and without overriding provincial authorities, to make those opportunities available from federal funds.


Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo):: Mr. Speaker, as one whose attendance at a university would have been impossible without the assistance provided by scholarships and bursaries, it gives me very great pleasure to support this resolution.
So much has already been said by previous speakers that the subject has now been rather well covered, but I believe the organization whose scholarships made it possible for me to attain a college education would have every reason to consider me lacking in appreciation and gratitude did I not take advantage of this opportunity to support this resolution.
In the light of the opening remarks by the hon. member for York South perhaps I should explain also that, in addition to the scholarships and bursaries, it was necessary for me to earn upward of $1,000 during my college term, and the financial worry and physical effort which that involved was a very serious handicap all through my college life. I therefore commend the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth) for bringing this resolution before us today. In so doing, he has performed a service to our country by focussing our attention on a matter of vital national importance.
Canada is a country that is blessed with fabulous natural resources, and we are rightly concerned with their conservation and development. How much more, therefore, should we be concerned with the development of our human resources, which are the most important and most precious resources of all?
We hear a good deal about the wonders of the electronic brain. How much more wonderful is the human intellect, which has produced not only the electronic brain and automation but all the other wonders of 67509-38i
science which have contributed so much to our material comforts and conveniences. Up till now, every minute of man's life has been occupied in trying to survive. It is only now, with the perfection of the machine and the coming of the machine age, that man is beginning to find time to live. The very vastness of Canada's natural resources makes it all the more imperative that we develop our human resources, because the efficiency with which these natural resources are conserved for future generations, or developed and distributed among the living generations, will depend directly upon the development of our human resources.
The emphasis that Soviet Russia is placing upon education generally and upon university education in particular shows that they are very much aware of this fact. As the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Knight) pointed out this afternoon, the Russian output of scientists and engineers will soon exceed that of all the countries of the free world combined. The very shortage of scientists, engineers, physicists, chemists, doctors, teachers and those of other professions in Canada shows that either we are not alive to the problem or that existing facilities are not adequate. In any case we are not meeting the need.
I was very glad to hear the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth) emphasize the importance of the humanities. One of the causes of the troubles in the world today is that scientific training has far outstripped our moral and mental training. Material progress has outstripped our spiritual progress. Our greatest problems today are not scientific or economic. They are social and political. We need minds trained in the humanities to come to grips with these problems and find a way out. We need minds trained in science and the humanities to grapple with what is perhaps the greatest problem of our age-to find a way so that the wealth produced by the machine can be distributed, so that the machine can be employed with maximum benefit and all the blessings that can flow from the machine may be fully enjoyed by all mankind.
Another reason why I support the resolution is that it will help in some degree to offset one of the defects in our present system of education. Today our educational system is such that we try to educate our children en masse and because we do that the only selection of students that is made is that performed by the universities themselves. It sometimes happens that a person attends university who perhaps should not be there. He is there because his parents have money and ambition, and because they have money and ambition they decide that their son must

Education
be a doctor, lawyer or engineer. Although he turns out to be only a very average student, because his parents have the means he is able to take one or even two years longer than necessary to secure a degree. On the other hand, there are many brilliant students who would be a great credit to a university, who would render great service to their country and their fellow men but who cannot get the necessary training because of lack of means.
The hon. member for Victoria, B.C. (Mr. Fairey) drew attention to the waste of intellect and ability that is a product of our present educational system. As an ex-teacher and one who spent a number of years supervising schools I can testify to the accuracy of his statement. Time after time I saw tremendous talent, a tremendous brain, buried in some little outport village, a young person whose parents were barely existing on a subsistence level and who perhaps had no hope whatever of even being able to go to high school. Time after time I saw children with great talent for art, sculpture or music who were without the opportunity or even the hope of being able to develop these God-given talents.
The mover of the resolution has not given us very much information as to the methods by which the resolution might be implemented. As it stands now, it calls for grants to be furnished by the government. I believe there are greater possibilities than those implied in the terms of the resolution. I have become intrigued with the idea that it might be possible to tie in such scholarships with the idea of a national memorial to veterans of both wars. In the course of his remarks the hon. member for York Centre stressed the idea that such scholarships would serve to build unity in our nation, and if we can kill two or three birds with one stone I think we should endeavour to do so. It has occurred to me that if a student in Newfoundland received a scholarship given in memory of some deceased veteran from Quebec what a bond of unity would result. What an opportunity there would be for better understanding! Two different families from two different provinces and with two different backgrounds would have a mutual or common interest in each other and an incentive to learn more and more about the family, the background and the life of the person who was being commemorated by that scholarship. I do not know whether or not that idea is feasible. It just occurred to me as I was listening to the speeches this afternoon. I mention it because I think it deserves some consideration.
Perhaps it would be better not to set up any arbitrary rules as to how these scholarships might be implemented. Perhaps it would be

wiser to set up a committee that might consider all the aspects of the situation and make recommendations. I heartily agree with my friend the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Balcom) in what he said about providing scholarships for nurses and for students who wish to become bilingual in the two official languages of our nation. I should like to go even further than he has gone. I should like to see scholarships provided for people who have talent for art and painting, music, singing and literary pursuits. All of these things are needed in Canada. All of them will enrich our culture and our nation.
Before I close, Mr. Speaker, I should like to offer just one more idea. I think it would be a fine thing if we could also extend some national scholarships to students of other countries, particularly to students from Asia, India and Africa. In November, 1954, it was my privilege to attend the conference of UNESCO at Montevideo in South America. While there I had occasion to meet a number of students who were proud to tell me that they had been educated in Canada, having been enabled to come to Canada by means of a scholarship. It was, of course, a scholarship that was provided by the university which they attended. In the interests of mutual understanding and in an effort to show our interest in our friends in other countries who are clamouring for education but who do not have the facilities we have, and who are trying to build up their own country and their own economy, I think it would be a great thing if we had something like a Colombo plan in education. I am sure that money spent in this way would come back repaid a thousandfold.


Mr. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, last December by request of President Eisenhower some 2,000 United States educators met in Washington to discuss a national emergency. That national emergency was the United States school system which, according to this group, was rocking dangerously on its foundations and also on its premises. We in Canada would not approach the problem of education from that dramatic standpoint. However, from the interest displayed in this debate today, it is obvious that we are becoming more and more concerned about the problem of education in Canada.
As I look at the resolution before the house, it seems to me to be a nice, middle-of-the-way course between two other educational problems that have been discussed from time to time in this chamber. In the first instance there is the perennial resolution put forward

by the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Knight). It suggests that consideration might be given to general federal aid for education. On the other hand we have the resolution of the hon. member for Lambton West (Mr. Murphy) who draws attention to the fact that our research facilities in this country are far from adequate and that some action should be taken by the federal government to increase our activity in that regard.
To come to the resolution recommending a more extensive use of scholarships and bursaries in order to deal with this growing problem, it seems to me that it gets around the difficulty with which this parliament is always confronted when we discuss federal aid for education. I refer to the constitutional problem involving the exclusive right of the provinces to deal with any matters relating to education. I am happy to support the resolution that we have before us this evening. I say that it is encouraging to note the increased interest displayed by hon. members on all sides of the house and from all parts of Canada. However, if we look outside this chamber, Mr. Speaker, I think we shall find that there is an even more intense and wider interest in the matter of education-particularly on the university level-in Canada today.
When the royal commission on the arts, letters and sciences was meeting in the various parts of Canada no less than 143 briefs presented to that commission made a suggestion to the effect that some form of bursary assistance should be made available to our brighter young people. As you scan through the recommendations of that report you find that two basic principles emerge relating to this matter. First of all, a democratic educational system must ensure that capable students shall not be prevented by financial need from completing their education. That is the first' general theme that runs through all the recommendations that were presented to the royal commission. The second general theme is that Canada's future development depends upon an adequate supply of intelligent and well-trained research scientists and scholars.
To deal with the first general principle, Mr. Speaker, it is of course obvious that we are not making the most of our potential human resources on the university level. We are not ensuring that capable students shall have the opportunity to proceed to advanced education. Unfortunately, the main deterrent to the realization of this end is the economic and financial factor. That of course is not the only deterrent. We are still a young nation. Some parts of the country are still in the frontier period of development, and on the frontier
Education
in the outlying areas of the country there are neither the traditions that would encourage our younger people to continue their education on the higher level nor the personal incentive. Therefore, in addition to the financial and economic factor, we must also keep in mind that there are other problems producing Canada's relatively poor record on the level of higher education.
However, this resolution deals mainly with the economic and financial factor. From a personal contact with the problem in one of the western provinces, I can say there is a close relationship between the amount of schooling a child receives and the economic status of the parents. That conclusion has been arrived at by statistical analyses. You find that by far the larger percentage of your students at the university level come from relatively more well-to-do families in Canada.
It is true, as several hon. members have mentioned in this discussion, there was a time in the earlier stages of development that anybody who so desired could receive a university education by means of working his-way through college, and a good many hon, members have already given testimony of their own experience in this regard. Unfortunately, today costs have risen to such an extent in our universities; board, room and the costs of books and so forth, have risen so excessively that it is almost impossible for a student to go through college, and particularly to take some professional training, unless he has some form of financial assistance, or unless his family happens to be in the higher income brackets. Therefore it seems obvious to me, Mr. Speaker, that we need to broaden quite extensively the scholarship and bursary basis behind our system of higher education.
If we were to take the time to examine the bursary situation already prevailing in Canada we would find it to be totally inadequate. Most universities make a very noble gesture in this regard. Some commercial firms, and private corporations have provided very generous scholarships, scholarships of sufficient size to make it possible for an exceptional student to carry right through to the end of his professional training. But if you examine the catalogue of any of our universities you will find that most of the bursaries and scholarships are in the $200, $300, $400 or $500 category, and that is far from adequate to meet the average costs of a year at university today, which amount to something like $1,200. When only a small part of that necessary money is available, it becomes more of a headache than an asset in helping the

Education
student to pursue his chosen course. I know that at the college in our own city, which is a liberal arts and sciences college, we get very generous support from the local merchants who give memorial scholarships of various kinds, but again they are within the smaller limits that I have already mentioned.
I want to make this observation. At the level of graduate studies, Canada is in a much better position than she is at the level of undergraduate studies. One of the reasons for this relatively better position in the graduate studies is the generous encouragement that Canada's national research council gives to graduate students pursuing advanced work in the field of the physical sciences. Of course, the national research council is sponsored by the federal government.
The Department of National Health and Welfare has also given some encouragement to graduate students. I should like to suggest, Mr. Speaker, that good as this is, it is rather looking at the problem from the wrong end. In order to get to graduate level, you must proceed through four or five years of strenuous and expensive undergraduate activity, with the result that many of those who would be qualified to proceed to the rarefied atmosphere of graduate studies and become the leading scientists and scholars in this country are prevented from ever embarking on that worthy goal because they are stymied at the level of university entrance.
We should also note that a good many of our graduate students working in Canada have their eyes on the United States rather than on Canada when they have finally finished their courses of studies. One of the reasons is that the United States has a much more comprehensive program for graduates. They are quite happy to invite and to induce our brighter Canadian students across the border by means of their very generous scholarships program. We are constantly reminded that migration across the border has been taking place at rather alarming proportions for many years in Canada and unfortunately among the migrants are many of Canada's brightest young people, who go south to seek higher learning and pursue the wider opportunities available there. Therefore, I think we can conclude, without enlarging on the subject further, by saying that we are hardly providing a sufficient financial inducement to make it possible for bright young Canadians to pursue a course of study.
What about this other matter of the adequate supply of intelligent and well-trained research scientists? I will agree with those who have suggested tonight that not everybody is capable of making the most of a university
[Mr. Dlnsdale.)
education. I think that is implicit in the resolution here before us because the program of scholarships and bursaries operates to a certain extent as a screening procedure. It encourages only the brightest and the most capable young people. I include in that phrase "most capable" not only those with the highest intellectual capacity but also those with that more intangible quality of character and moral stamina. In the very nature of a bursary program there is a tendency to encourage those who are qualified from that broader perspective. In fact, the royal commission has laid down specific recommendations as to the type of scholarship program which might be sponsored by the government of Canada. For instance, it suggests that 100 annual scholarships of $1,000 each might be made available to students of outstanding ability; only 100 annual scholarships mind you. It suggests further that 250 scholarships of $500 might be available and 2,000 bursaries of $500 for diligent students on the basis of need. That is not a particularly broad or comprehensive program but if we were to actually look at the picture presented by the normal curve of the distribution of intelligence the number of people in any population grouping who possess the higher intelligence quotient making it possible for them to take the best advantage of advance training is a relatively small percentage, 15 or 20 per cent of the total population at most. The rare category among the human species, those of unusual brilliance who are potential geniuses represents only 5 per cent of the total population. The tragedy is that many of our students who are possessed of this high degree of intelligence are denied the opportunity of advanced training to prepare themselves to serve in the various fields that are waiting for people of exceptional talent, because of economic factors, because of isolation from centres of university training and because of lack of incentive. The scheme proposed by the royal commission on the arts, letters and sciences and supported by many hon. members here today would, I am sure, go a long way to deal with the very urgent problem that is confronting Canada at this time.


Mr. T. H. Goode (Burnaby-Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, I have listened most attentively to this debate which has been held on a very high level. Most of the hon. members who have taken part in the discussion have been those gentlemen who have received university education and they knew something about the subject which they were discussing. I have not had a university education. I wonder what contribution to this debate would be made by the hon. member from Vancouver-Kingsway (Mr. Maclnnis) if he were in his

Education
seat tonight? Many of us remember his telling us of the time that he drove a milk wagon through the streets of Vancouver. He also did not have the opportunity of a university education. I think my hon. friend from Medicine Hat who had such a distinguished career with the government of Alberta could make a valuable contribution. He could speak of the people whom he knew who had had university education whereas he and I did not have such an opportunity. I think, therefore, it would be of value if someone who has not had a university education should rise and contribute to the dis-cussibn on this resolution.
I had to leave school at grade 7; I did not complete grade 7. At that time I was 12 years of age. I had to go to work because of sickness in my family and I kept my small family on my wages which amounted to $15 a month. I frequently wonder how much a university education would have done for me. I had not completed grade 7 and I was one-half of 1 per cent away from the Governor General's medal in Saskatchewan. Two people in the school I attended could have been awarded the Governor General's medal. I was one-half of 1 per cent away from receiving it and the young man who did receive it had a father who could afford a university education. That young man's name is now a household word in Canada. I do not know what the future might have held for me if I had had the same advantages. However, that is an example of what can be accomplished with higher learning when one has financial resources behind one as compared to not having sufficient money to obtain university training.
As I said, I wonder what my friend the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway would have said in this debate if he was not busy in his office at the moment. I can well imagine what he would have said about the advantages of having an education in his own inimitable way in regard to his associates. I also wonder what my friend the hon. member for Kootenay East (Mr. Byrne) would have said in this debate. Without a university education he has done a magnificent job in the labour field, as we all know. Whether a university education would have assisted him is a matter of question but there is no doubt in my mind that it would not have hampered him in his career.
I wonder about the value of education in relation to the problem of juvenile delinquency which confronts us. Some time ago I was fortunate enough to be the chairman of the school board in Burnaby, and because I held that position I suppose I know a little about what young people think. I remember
that one young boy who was attending Burnaby South high school wanted to become a chemical engineer. His father was killed in a traffic accident and six months later he left high school and took a job delivering groceries in a truck. That young man was a potential scientist. I wonder what his contribution to our society would have been if this government or all governments had joined together to assist this young man who had attained wonderful marks in high school. I know of another young man who was working as a truck driver. He wanted to become a physician. His parents were killed in a train wreck just outside of Saskatoon some years ago. I wonder what this country is missing by not having the contribution of a young man with that type of mentality.
We have listened to several splendid speeches concerning the problem of juvenile delinquency. I wonder about the relationship between juvenile delinquency and the frustration of young people who get themselves into trouble partly because they envy other young people whose parents' financial position enables them to attend high schools and universities. I wonder if that frustration has anything to do with the juvenile delinquency problem in Canada? Perhaps not, but I suggest we give it some thought; it is a thought on the level of a man who never went to university. Perhaps those people who went to university could judge it in a different way. I envy the hon. member from Brandon-Souris (Mr. Dinsdale) because he seems to know exactly of what he speaks in this matter. He puts it so well. I appreciate the experience behind the remarks of the distinguished hon. member for Victoria, B.C. (Mr. Fairey) when he spoke in the debate this afternoon. By ability alone he became the deputy minister of education in his province. These men speak from experience.
I do not know whether someone like me, getting up in a debate like this and asking the government to spend more money for the greatest asset we can have, is making any contribution, but I have made what little contribution I could. I believe that with this government's help and the help of other governments every young person in Canada should have the opportunity to have his own future in his own hands.


Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, I am tempted by reason of the last speech to digress for a moment, because while we are talking about university education tonight, and while those of us who have been at university would like to think that we have not wasted our time, nevertheless I think we all recognize that education is

Education
not confined to university people. It so happens that when I was in business I was associated closely with two men neither of whom had ever been near a university. They were two of the best educated men I have ever known. Incidentally one of them could use the English language better than 90 per cent of university graduates, for the very simple reason that he had been saturated with the King James version of the Bible which had given him a beautiful English style.


Mr. Murphy (Lambion West):: He would not be a Presbyterian?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: He was not a Presbyterian, no, and that was one of his few defects. I think we all ought to be grateful for this debate. We ought to be grateful to the mover of this motion, and we ought not to forget those to my left who have brought this matter up year after year and who have also made a notable contribution today.
It is interesting to be told by the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) that when he came to this house 14 years 'ago they just did not talk about education. We have moved since that time and it is no longer so exclusively provincial. Those of us who have been associated with universities have every reason to be grateful for the substantial assistance which we have had from the dominion. As has been recalled tonight, we are also most grateful for what has been done, particularly in the realm of the national research council and in connection with war veterans.
One of the things that has interested me today is to realize that apparently university graduates are much more appreciated than they used to be. There was a time when people did not flaunt too much the fact that they were university graduates. It was considered that you had better get into business and try to make your way and win confidence and then let people discover gradually that you were a university graduate. There was a feeling in those days that a university graduate was apt to be high-hat and superior.
I would infer from what has been said during this debate that those days are pretty well past. It is clear that the need is great and the problem is going to press hard. It is not only a problem of technicians, but happily it seems clear that those in business who have to make selections from young people are appreciating much more than they did years ago that a broader education, which has been in danger of being shoved into the corner, particularly in wartime when

we had to stress the technical side so much, should now take a more important place in our educational program.
It seems to me that there are two or three questions which arise with regard to these scholarships. The hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings (Mr. Nowlan) pointed out that there had been a tendency to regard scholarships as being confined to graduates and he stressed the fact that these scholarships should go to undergraduates as well. I find myself in sympathy with the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor) when he suggests that there should be a lot of selfhelp in these matters. I was made rather dizzy when the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter) said he had earned $1,000 toward his university course. I never got within sight of $1,000; if I earned $100 during the summer I thought I was doing pretty well. I am assured by the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings that he was also under the dire necessity of earning his way through university.
The universities are going to be faced with tremendous problems. I am reading now from the Toronto University Quarterly in which they make the calculation that in 10 years from now there will be from 110,000 to
135,000	in Canadian universities as compared with the present total of 65,000. I read to the house the other day a formidable series of comments by the British press reflecting the great burden which is being put on us in the matter of competition with Russian education.
A suggestion has been made that a royal commission should be appointed. One is inclined to be afraid of royal commissions, but on the other hand it does seem to me that here is a problem every bit as important as the economic problem which is being studied by a royal commission. Indeed you could argue that to try to look forward into the course of our education is more important because if we do not have education, no matter what the royal commission may find as to our future, we will not be able to satisfactorily carry it out.
It seems clear to me after listening to the discussion that there are two sanctions, so to speak, for these scholarships. One is what you might term a scholarship given on an economic basis, by reason of need, and the other is a scholarship given on the basis of talent. That seems to me to involve very difficult questions. All universities are seeking scholarships which are usually scholarships for talent-I think I can say that almost universally they are scholarships for talent.

Education
Of course the universities would be glad to get any assistance they can from governments. The Massey report made many recommendations as to scholarships, only a few of which I believe have been carried out. As I understand it, they are on the talent basis, what you would call the professional basis. They are to be given as assistance to all kinds of people whose talents we desire to cultivate and nurture.
It seems to me that the problem is a difficult one and I am wondering whether there is not some way in which the government and the university authorities could consult with each other. I am sure that the university authorities are constantly giving their best attention to this. I believe there is an association of university presidents. Even a believer in private initiative like myself would hope that in some way there could be a common plan, there could be co-operation among the universities and we would not be left just with the rugged individualism of each university doing what it could. I would hope that in some way there would be a plan.
It seems to me that the one thing that arises immediately is how far are we going to allow the problem which is being so much discussed, the tremendous technical progress of Russia, to twist or even to distort our education. How far are we going to maintain the balance between the humanities and technical subjects? I do not think I need take up the time of the house any longer. I feel that this is just as important as the economy of Canada, and somehow or other as a result of this discussion I would hope that progress could be made to this end.
Before I resume my seat I should like to say that I would not want university presidents to be faced suddenly with some cut and dried plan. I should think that the university presidents would be the best people to offer information as to how the matter might be studied, how progress might be made, because there are many aspects of this and it will require all the wisdom we can summon to solve them satisfactorily.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Will the hon. member permit a question. He stated that when the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) came into the house education was practically never discussed, or that the hon. member had said so. I am sure the hon. member did not want to be unfair, and I imagine he had forgotten that my hon. friend, the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin), started talking about scholarships in the first session he was here, in 1936, and that he got some results.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am ready to make whatever apology I should to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In those days I was merely one of the underworld, working away in business, and perhaps I was not as familiar with those great things as I should have been.


Mr. J. A. Blanchette (Compton-Fronlenac):: Mr. Speaker, the subject matter of this resolution reverses the flight of time for me some 18 years or so back to 1937, when I had occasion to speak on a similar resolution. As the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has just stated, the resolution for national scholarships had at that time been introduced by the then member for Essex East, who still has the honour to represent-and ably represent-this same constituency in the person of the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin).
The resolution of 18 years ago was very well presented, and the expose that the sponsor made at the time fully outlined the needs as well as the possible consequences of putting the resolution into effect. Since that time similar resolutions have been introduced into this house, predicated always on the beneficial results which would be derived nationally by the implementation of its subject matter. Although 18 years have passed since the first resolution was introduced by the hon. member for Essex East in 1937, we have had this afternoon positive and tangible evidence of another very able presentation of the subject matter of the present debate, by the hon. member for York Centre, who introduced the resolution. I wish to congratulate him on his speech this afternoon on national scholarships, and his invitation, especially to the members from Quebec, to take part in this discussion is the reason why I am only too glad to support the resolution presented to us by him.
It is patent to us all that the purpose of the resolution is to supplement, if possible, the educational efforts not only of the federal and provincial governments but of all existing organizations interested in the subject of education.
Education is a heritage that we ourselves in this generation must assist in every possible way so that, as we pass from the field of activity, we shall leave behind us those who are probably better educated than we have had an opportunity of being. The resolution also means a greater use of our educational system and making of that system a greater national asset and a greater national benefit.
That there is often financial embarrassment to many of our students cannot be gainsaid.

Education
It we take into consideration the fact that 44 per cent of the children of the country issue from 14 per cent only of Canadian families, the assistance which can be given to needy students is recognized by all of us as one of the best investments a country can make.
In 1948-49, when university enrolment in the country had reached the total of 80,000, 30 per cent were ex-servicemen holding bursaries from the federal government. Apart from ex-servicemen, only one out of six or seven students in Canada, or less than 14 per cent of the total enrolment in Canadian universities, were holders of scholarships, even when participants in vocational training schemes were included.
In 1938, 14 per cent of Canadian students were scholarship holders. It must therefore be admitted that we have not made very much permanent advance in the 10 years from 1938 to 1948.
On the other hand, in Great Britain, in 1947, 25 per cent of the students, apart from ex-servicemen, held bursaries. Present government plans in Great Britain will result in the increase of this proportion to 70 per cent of the total number of university students. In the United States, 20 per cent of university students are on scholarships.
The report of the royal commission on national development in the arts, letters and sciences mentions that 143 briefs had been presented to it up to 1950, and among these were those presented by the National Conference of Canadian Universities, the Trades and Labour Congress, the Canadian Congress of Labour, the Canadian and Catholic Confederation of Labour, and the Professional Institute of the Civil Service of Canada.
All of this goes to show the very high importance of the matter of education in the view of Canadians.
It is admitted by almost each and every one of us that, in accordance with the confederation act, education is under provincial jurisdiction. In no way must this requisite be interfered with, and at all times must this precept be adhered to.
I have been impressed this afternoon by the declaration of the hon. member for York Centre of the very small percentage of financial grants affecting students directly, out of the total grants made. I am wondering whether the matter could not be gone into with a view to increasing that percentage of only 6 or 7 per cent-if I recall correctly-that directly affects the students.
I know that it behooves each and every one of us to do all we can to increase, whenever it is possible to do so, the assistance for

needy and worthy students. I am wondering also whether some of our industries could not do a little more than they have done in the past in the establishment of scholarships particularly for worthy needy students. Corporation profits in 1954, for example, totalled $1,800 million. The figure for 1955 is estimated to be over $2i billion, an increase in profits of over $400 million in the last year. Surely here is a splendid opportunity for the corporations of Canada to lend their assistance to the establishment of national scholarships. In doing so they will not only assist needy students but will also assist themselves at the same time to secure the scientists and technical men they will need in the future.
The great need is for first-class men to give leadership and inspiration through their own brilliant, original discoveries. The future depends not only on the continued liberality of government agencies but on the number and quality of the men induced to do research work. The greatest need is to discover and train these men, and surely the resolution of the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth) will, if implemented, assist us to attain the aim envisaged.


Mr. G. H. Casfleden (Yorkton):: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to enter this debate and with the assistance of one of the cabinet ministers to have on record the very important fact that this matter has been before parliament for about 18 years. My plea this evening is simply that we have a change from words to cabinet action. I regret, and I am sure we all do, that the resolution does not come from a cabinet minister as it would then be the prelude to a bill which would do something about the matter. In the time I have been in the house I have read a number of copious commission reports. I could refer to the Massey commission which was set up to find out what should be done in Canada to assist in the development of the intellectual resources of our country having in mind the keeping in Canada of young men trained in our universities instead of watching them migrate in their thousands to the big country to the south of us.	'
I want to congratulate the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth) on adopting this great cause. I wish him well, and I can guarantee him support similar to what he has had from all the opposition. I hope he can convince the cabinet that something should be done about the matter.
I could not speak tonight without paying tribute to the member from the university city of my own province, the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Knight), who spoke so ably this afternoon and who for years has sponsored the cause of education of Canadian

Education
youth and university training. I want also to congratulate the Canadian university students association on the work they have done in contacting members of the house and asking them to support the resolution by letting the government know that by and large the Canadian people are solidly behind something being done at this time.
I do not suppose any teacher in Canada could fail to be moved by the shocking waste of some of the finest intellects that enter our public schools, a waste brought about because of poverty, with the result that these young people are not able to take higher education and some of the brightest minds of our country are lost to the nation. This has been a matter of concern to me ever since I was a student in high school. I will never forget the plea expressed in Thomas Gray's "Elegy in a Country Churchyard" where, referring to the graves of the people from that rural area, he said:
But knowledge to their eyes her ample page
Rich with the spoils of time did ne'er unroll;
Chill penury repress'd their noble rage,
And froze the genial current of the soul.
Full many a gem of purest ray serene
The dark unfathom'd caves of ocean bear:
Full many a flower is born to blush unseen,
And waste its sweetness on the desert air.
The time has come for Canada to stop wasting these gems of intellect, these flowers of beauty. Today the world is changing very rapidly. It is more evident than ever that no nation can hope to rise in the scale of peoples unless it maintains the highest possible training of the greatest number of its people who are capable of taking university training and benefiting from it. Scientific and cultural advances are made in the world today at breathtaking speed, and the very existence of our nation depends more and more on our ability to train the intellect of our youth.
A few years ago, when more opportunities were available, young people could earn enough to put themselves through universities much more easily than they can today. The resolution of the Canadian university students association, forwarded by the students' representative council of the University of Saskatchewan, draws this fact to the attention of hon. members in these words:
Whereas there are many university students in real need of financial assistance;
And whereas still more persons anxious to attend university are prevented from doing so by financial necessity;
And whereas the cost of attending university has been rising more rapidly than the earning power of students;
And whereas assistance available to Canadian students compares unfavourably with that available in other countries;
And whereas it is a loss to our Canadian social, cultural and professional life as well as to the
individual concerned whenever anyone abandons or does not enter university for financial reasons;
Be it resolved that the students' representative council of the University of Saskatchewan;
1.	Supports the current national student campaign for increased and more numerous government scholarships and bursaries.
They also go on to say:
In view of the urgency of this situation, specific and immediate governmental action should be taken to provide such scholarships.
They do not need to urge the members of this group to support such a resolution. Every year we lose thousands of university students and many university graduates to the United States. Surely that is a sign that we in Canada are not providing opportunities for them within our own country. The development of the natural resources of this country should be the job of the young people whose minds have been trained in Canada. Can we not provide that opportunity here? The time is long past when effective action should have been taken by the government with regard to this matter.
I support the idea put forward this evening by the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor) with respect to the provision of a revolving fund. Many students would welcome the opportunity to take advantage of a revolving fund program under which they could borrow money to attend university. After they had graduated they could then make use of their higher earning power to repay the money to the fund in order to assist other students in the same way.
There is one thing, however, that we must all face and that is the question of educational facilities in Canada today. If we are going to have more students in our universities then it is quite evident to anyone who has surveyed the situation at all, that Canada needs additional university facilities most urgently. Dr. Sidney E. Smith points out that we are very inadequately equipped even for the 65,000 students who are attending our universities today. The problems facing our universities are most serious; they are inescapable and imminent. The trouble is that the basis of support of our universities is entirely inadequate. It is a matter of serious national dimensions which cannot be overcome and remedied without government assistance on the national level. As a nation we dare not neglect this matter. As a parliament, we are each and all responsible fqf immediate action in Canada on this matter.
Modern society is making greatly increased demands on the universities. Obviously those demands can be fulfilled only if society is willing to meet the demands of the universities. The universities just cannot exist, Ie1 alone expand, on "good will and fair words",

. Education
This problem is bigger than this government appears to realize. It is the present government that is responsible. Action is urgently needed. Surely the word of the greatest experts in education in the dominion should be taken when they put forward such reports as we find in the Toronto University monthly of January 1956. Every recent report on higher education throughout the country stresses this point-indicating that a matter that previously was sponsored just as a good cause today has become one of national necessity. From a federal government point of view, our record in this field is pitiable. In view of the national importance of the matter, I think the record is just one of complete neglect. I regret exceedingly that there has been no evidence of federal action at the cabinet level before this time.
I take great pleasure in supporting this resolution. I only hope that what has been said here today will be a step forward in convincing the cabinet of Canada that the Canadian people are aware of this extremely important and imminent problem. It is their responsibility to act on it now.


Mr. P. T. Hellyer (Davenport):: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Hansell:: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: At this moment I think I should call on the hon. member for Davenport if we are to follow the pattern that has been followed since the beginning of this debate.


Paul Theodore Hellyer: Mr. Speaker, it is a real pleasure for me to support this resolution sponsored by the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth). He is to be commended for his initiative and for the considerable research which was necessary in the preparation of his opening address.
In November, 1954, the students administrative council of the University of Toronto invited all members of parliament for the Toronto metropolitan area to attend a meeting sponsored by that council for the purpose of seeking support for increased and more numerous government scholarships and bursaries for Canadian students. The meeting was well attended. The hon. member for York Centre was there, as were the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) and many others. It was ably presided over
by Mr. William Angus, who occupied the chair. Mr. Angus at that time was president of the students administrative council.
I should like to mention a few of the points that were contained in their brief. The first point they mentioned was that there are a substantial number of Canadians who are qualified to obtain higher education and who do not obtain it because they lack the necessary means. From my own personal experience, Mr. Speaker, I know of a number of people in my year at school who were unable to proceed beyond the high school level and to take university training simply because their parents did not have the financial means necessary to support them.
Canada lags far behind other countries, particularly the United Kingdom, in the amount of assistance provided students. If the twentieth century is truly to belong to Canada we must overtake other countries in this field. As was mentioned earlier, the Russian government is sponsoring many scholarships, particularly in the sciences, in the hope of graduating a sufficient number of engineers to overtake us in technology. We must do everything possible to make sure that we keep up to, and indeed ahead of them in every field.
A university education is increasingly necessary to any sort of personal advancement. It therefore must be freely available if the best qualified are to hold the key position in Canadian society.
A bursary scheme of this kind would aid in recruiting older students with work experience who add greatly to a university, as was shown by the D.V.A. experience. I was one of those people who were fortunate enough to receive government assistance after the war. I feel that it is my responsibility and duty to do anything I can to obtain the same assistance for others. The benefits conferred on this country by this program are so great as to be difficult to calculate.
Such a program would be broad enough to assist the valuable "good" all-round student as well as the merely brilliant one.
Mr. Speaker, may I move the adjournment of the debate.
On motion of Mr. Hellyer the debate was adjourned.


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

[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. Murphy (Lambion West): 
APPLE AMD POULTRY PRODUCTION, N.S.
Mr. Balcom: 1.	What was the dollar value of the apple production in Nova Scotia in (a) 1945; (b) 1955?
2.	What was the dollar value of the egg and poultry production in Nova Scotia for the same years?
3.	What proportion of Nova Scotia's agricultural production does each represent?
Answer by: Mr. Howe (Port Arthur):
1.	Value of apple production in Nova Scotia: 1945, $1,178,000; 1954, $2,114,000; 1955, not yet available.
2.	Value of egg and poultry production in Nova Scotia: 1945, not available; present series commenced in 1946. 1946, $6,942,000; 1954, $11,945,000; 1955, not yet available.
3.	Proportion of Nova Scotia's agricultural production:
Apples Poultry and Eggs
% %
1945	
3.32	-1946	
-	15.731954	
3.89	22.01955	
not yet available


WHEAT STORAGE AND DELIVERIES
Mr. Johnson (Kinders-ley): 1.	What was the quantity of wheat, ail grades, in store at (a) Fort William-Fort Arthur; (b) Churchill; (c) Vancouver; (d) other terminals, on the first of each of the months of August, September, October, November, December, 1955, and on the 1st of January, 1956?
2.	What was the quantity of wheat, all grades, delivered to the above terminals during the months of (a) August; (b) September; (c) October; (d) November; (e) December, 1955?
598	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Questions
Answer by: Mr. Howe (Pori Arlhur):
1.

-	Fort William and Port Arthur	Churchill	Pacific Coast Terminals	Other TerminalsJuly 31, 1955	-bushels- 2,266,337 8,279,185	15,727,985August 31, 1955	2,261,283	9,414,427	15,750,925September 28, 1955	1,979,819	11,626,298	15,828,815November 2, 1955	2,349,747	8,542,440	15,550,232November 30, 1955	3,509,184	5,378,686	15,552,660December 28, 1955	4,205,749	7,173,231	15,078,9972.	RECEIPTS	-	Fort William and Port Arthur	Churchill	Pacific Coast Terminals	Other TerminalsAugust, 1955	-bushels- 4,833,260 8,277,438	596,480September, 1955	4,684,499	6,035,143	131,942October, 1955	3,294,656	3,068,269	20,294November, 1955	1,205,953	3,271,786	48,161December, 1955	696,565	7,641,454	37,840


FINGAL AIRPORT
Mr. McBain: }[DOT] Has any painting been done at Fingal airport within the last six months?
2.	If so, were tenders called for such painting?
3.	If tenders were called, in what publications were such tenders advertised?
4.	What were the dates of such publications?
5.	What were the names of the contractors tendering?
6.	What was the name of the successful tenderer and what was the amount of his tender?
Answered by: Mr. Howe (Pori Arlhur):
1.	No.
2,	3, 4, 5 and 6. Answered by No. 1.
1ESCUE OPERATIONS, B.C.


USE OF HELICOPTERS
Mr. Pearkes: In how many instances, during 1955, were heli-[DOT]opiers of (a) United States coastguard; (b) Royal Canadian Air Force; (c) Canadian companies, employed in rescue operations in British Columbia and waters adjacent to that province?
Answer by: Mr. Campney:
(a)	5.
(b)	1.
(c)	2.
Record is kept only of those instances in vhich helicopters were used in rescue opera-ions co-ordinated by the R.C.A.F.


OSHAWA, ONTARIO, PUBLIC BUILDING
Mr. Slarr: 1.	Has the government made any further attempts to dispose of the old post office and customs building in Oshawa, Ontario?
2.	If so, have they been successful?
3.	If not, what are the plans for the use of these two buildings?
Answer by: Mr. Winters:
1. No; matter under consideration.
2 and 3. Answered by No. 1.


CHARLOTTETOWN, P.E.I.  PURCHASE OF LAND
Mr. Malheson: Friday, January 27, 1956


MAIN ESTIMATES, 1956-57
[Stage Direction]
A message from His Excellency the Governor General transmitting estimates for the financial year ending March 31, 1957, was presented by Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Finance), read by Mr. Speaker to the house, and referred to the committee of supply.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. W. G. Weir (Portage-Neepawa) presented the report of the special committee appointed to prepare and report lists of members to compose the standing committees of the house, as follows:

[Stage Direction]
Messrs:
Bourque	McWilliam
Bryson	Meunier
Cardin	Nowlan
Carter	Pallett
Cavers	Perron
Churchill	Rea
Dechene	Richard (Ottawa East)
Dickey	Tucker
Ellis	Valois
Fraser (Peterborough) Viau	
Hollingworth	Vincent
Leboe	White (Waterloo South)
Lefrangois	Wylie
MacDougall MacKenzie	Zaplitny-29. (Quorum-10)
RAILWAYS,	CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES Messrs:
Barnett	Garland
Batten	Gauthier (Lake St. John)
Bennett, Miss	Goode
Bonnier	Gourd (Chapleau)
Boucher (Chateauguay- Green	
Huntingdon-	Habel
Laprairie)	Hahn
Buchanan	Hamilton (York West)
Byrne	Harrison
Campbell	Healy
Carrick	Herridge
Carter	Hodgson
Cauchon	Holowach
Cavers	Hosking
Clark	Howe (Wellington-
Decore	Huron)
Deschatelets	James
Dufresne	Johnston (Bow River)
Dupuis	Kickham
Ellis	Lafontaine
Follwell	Langlois (Gaspe)
Gagnon	Lavigne
Leboe	Nixon
McBain	Nowlan
McCulloch (Pictou)	Purdy
Mclvor	Ross
Meunier	Small
Montgomery	Viau
Murphy (Lambton West)	Villeneuve
Murphy (Westmorland)	Vincent
Nesbitt	Weselak-60.
Nicholson	
(Quorum-20)	
MISCELLANEOUS PRIVATE BILLS	
Messrs:	
Anderson	Leduc (Jacques Cartier-
Balcom	Lasalle)
Batten	Lennard
Bennett, Miss	Lusby
Blair	Macnaughton
Brooks	Mang
Brown (Brantford)	Matheson
Cameron (High Park)	McCubbin
Campbell	McCullough (Moose
Carter	Mountain)
Decore	McWilliam
Dinsdale	Murphy (Westmorland)
Ellis	Perron
Enfield	Pommer
Eyre	Proudfoot
Fairey	Regier
Ferguson	Reinke
Follwell	Roberge
Forgie	Roy
Garland	Simmons
Girard	Thomas
Hansell	Weaver
Hees	White (Waterloo South)
Houck	White (Hastings-
Hunter	Frontenac)
Langlois (Berthier-	White (Middlesex East)
Maskinonge-	Wylie-50.
Delanaudiere)	
(Quorum-15)	
BANKING AND COMMERCE	
Messrs:	
Anderson	Henderson
Ashbourne	Hollingworth
Balcom	Huffman
Benidickson	Hunter
Bennett	Johnson (Kindersley)
Blackmore	Johnston (Bow River)
Cameron (Nanaimo)	Macdonnell
Cannon	MacEachen
Cardin	Macnaughton
Carrick	Matheson
Crestohl	Michener
Dufresne	Mitchell (London)
Dumas	Monteith
Eudes	Nickle
Fairey	Nose worthy
Fleming	Pallett
Follwell	Philpott
Fraser (St. Johns East)	Power (Quebec South)
Fraser (Peterborough)	Quelch
Fulton	Richardson
Hanna	Robichaud
Hellyer	Rouleau
[Stage Direction]
Standing Committees
St. Laurent (Temis-couata)
Stewart (Winnipeg North)
Thatcher
Tucker
Viau
Weaver-50.
(Quorum-15)
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS Messrs:
Anderson
Applewhaite
Argue
Ashbourne
Balcom
Beaudry
Boisvert
Breton
Bruneau
Cameron (High Park)
Cannon
Cavers
Cloutier
Denis
Fulton
Goode
Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace)
Hanna
Harkness
Hees
Henderson
Hollingworth
Holowach
Houck
Kickham
Kirk (Antigonish-Guysborough)
Laflamme
Leduc (Jacques Cartier-Lasalle)
Macdonnell
Maltais
McLeod
McWilliam
Menard
Mitchell (Sudbury)
Mitchell (London)
Monteith
Noseworthy
Nowlan
Pearkes
Pommer
Poulin
Power (St. John's West)
Proudfoot
Regier
Schneider
Thomas
Tucker
Van Horne
Weaver
Zaplitny-50.
(Quorum-15)

[Stage Direction]
Aitken, Miss
Buchanan
Carter
Denis
Fairey
Fontaine
Forgie
Green
Hanna
Harrison
Messrs:
Hollingworth
Knowles
Michaud
Monette
Quelch
Robinson (Bruce) Rochefort Van Horne Viau
Winch-20. (Quorum-8)

[Stage Direction]
Anderson
Applewhaite
Arsenault
Ashbourne
Barnett
Bell
Bennett
Boivin
Brisson
Bryce
Cameron (Nanaimo)
Cannon
Ferguson
Hahn
Hardie
Harrison
Henderson
Hodgson
Kirk (Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare)
Messrs:
Kirk (Antigonish-Guysborough) MacLean MacNaught Maltais Matheson McDonald Nowlan Patterson Pearkes Robichaud Simmons Stick
Stuart (Charlotte) Thibault Trainor Weselak-35.
Quorum-10)