1957-03-06

COMMONWEALTH OF NATIONS


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to remind hon. members that on this day the commonwealth of nations is welcoming a new member, Ghana, formerly known to us as the Gold Coast. The Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys (Mr. Prudham), who is representing the government and people of Canada at the independence celebrations, had the rare privilege yesterday of witnessing the final step in the evolution of a British African colony, the Gold Coast, into the fully self-governing African nation of Ghana.
It was with a deep sense of regret that I was obliged, because of my duties here at home, to decline the warm personal invitation from Dr. Nkrumah to attend these important ceremonies taking place today in Accra. I should have very much welcomed the opportunity to have a personal talk with my most recent commonwealth colleague and hope that I shall be given such opportunity in the not too distant future.
The government of Canada, and I am sure all hon. members of this house would wish to associate themselves with me in this regard, is most happy to welcome our newest commonwealth associate. We wish to assure the government and the people of Ghana of our friendship and support in the first testing years of independence. As the first member of the commonwealth to emerge from colonial status barely 90 years ago, we feel we should warn the Ghanaians that their government may perhaps receive a lot of advice, some of it unsolicited, about the conduct of its affairs, from other commonwealth nations which have gone through the same process. This gesture will not of course be meant in any meddlesome sense of wishing to interfere; it is merely another indication that we are all still quite close to our own achievement of independence. The Ghanaians will also find a fund of warm good will and a desire to help which is, I am sure, quite unprecedented among any other group of nations on the face of the earth.
Canada will have a particular interest in developing a close political relationship with
Ghana as an African member of the commonwealth, and in fostering trade with it as well. For these purposes we intend to open a diplomatic mission in Accra and appoint a Canadian high commissioner as soon as it may be possible for us to do so.
We are indeed pleased to see the people of Ghana emerging from colonial status in Africa into a world community of nations and we very much hope that in the near future it will be possible for us to welcome Ghana as a new member at the United Nations.
I feel that at this time we should also pay a warm tribute to the United Kingdom which has led the people of Ghana to selfgovernment and national freedom by its enlightened and constructive policies of colonial administration, policies which are in such startling contrast to those of the communist empires with their reactionary and oppressive satellite colonialism. As Ghana becomes the newest and very welcome member of the family, we can all rejoice in this new demonstration of the ultimate goal of those enlightened and constructive policies of the United Kingdom as the centre and heart of our commonwealth.
(Translation):
And, as both languages are official in this house, I wish to add a few words to assure the government and the people of Ghana that Canadian citizens of French descent and language wholeheartedly join their fellow citizens of other origins, whose mother tongue is the one I just spoke, in welcoming them most cordially into this group of free nations which constitutes an association unique in this world, one which contributes to the welfare not only of its members, but also, I think, to that of all free peoples on earth.
(Text):


Mr. Howard C. Green (Vancouver-Quadra):: Mr. Speaker, this is one of those happy occasions when we are in complete agreement in this house. Those occasions perhaps are more frequent than the Canadian people realize. A very outstanding event, with which we are dealing today, is the granting of selfgovernment to Ghana, and on behalf of the members of the official opposition I should like to extend to that sister nation our best wishes and a warm welcome to the commonwealth.

Commonwealth of Nations-Ghana
I agree heartily with what the Prime Minister has said to the effect that some credit should be given to the United Kingdom. This move is a complete answer to the charges of colonialism so frequently levelled against her. Surely there could not be a finer way to refute those false charges which are made from time to time.
I feel confident, Your Honour, that it will not be very long until we are welcoming the British West Indies as another fellow nation of the commonwealth and then probably Malaya and also Nigeria.
This is a trend, and probably one of the most important trends of our time, and I believe that we are very privileged to be associated with the United Kingdom and the other nations of the commonwealth in the taking of those progressive steps. I am very happy to join with the Prime Minister in his welcome to this new sister nation.


Mr. Alistair Stewart (Winnipeg North):: Mr. Speaker, we in the C.C.F. rejoice with the people of Ghana in their independence and we are happy that they have decided to stay within the community of the commonwealth.
In the last day or so history has been made in that part of Africa which was known as the Gold Coast, and the effect of that history is going to spread very much farther than perhaps some of us may think. What we are seeing is another nail in the coffin of colonialism. But a short while ago the people of Ghana were a subject people; they were colonials. Now they are free and independent and there is no more potent argument against the totalitarians than this fact, an argument far greater than all the pacts and promises which have been made since the war ended. We are happy to see that the present government of the United Kingdom is carrying on the same sort of policy initiated by Mr. Attlee and his colleagues when they assumed power in 1945.
There is no question but that the difficulties which will face this new country are great. However the Prime Minister of Ghana may believe that the omens are propitious. He finds himself in distinguished company. He has received an accolade. Hands have been laid upon him in more senses than one. He has been imprisoned and accused of sedition and he joins other esteemed members of the commonwealth in that position. We have one whom we honoured in this house not long ago. I refer to Mr. Nehru, the Prime Minister of India, who also found himself in prison for sedition. To come nearer home there was of course the founder and first leader of this

party, Mr. J. S. Woodsworth, who found himself imprisoned for the same reason because he had the temerity to quote from Holy Writ. Then there were friends of mine in Winnipeg who were thrown into prison because they had a rather fierce belief that in a free society men had certain inalienable rights. Fortunately while they were in prison they were elected to the legislature and one can only congratulate the percipience of their constituents. And so perhaps Dr. Nkrumah will find himself, as I said, in good company.
We wish him well and we hope that the people of Ghana as time goes on will see the fulfilment of their aspirations and we most sincerely hope that as they journey down the years they will have as their constant companions freedom and justice.


Mr. E. G. Hansell (Macleod):: Mr. Speaker,
I do not think there is much that we can add to what has already been said. This group joins with the others in welcoming this new nation into the commonwealth as an independent nation and we trust that the relationship between all nations of the commonwealth will continue to be compatible and happy and that all nations will co-operate one with another in bringing about an even stronger commonwealth of the British peoples.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I might have the permission of the house to have appended as an appendix to Hansard of today a copy of the letter I asked the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys to hand to the Prime Minister of Ghana expressing the congratulations of the government on their attaining independence and becoming a member of the commonwealth.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
(For text of letter referred to above, see appendix, page 1956.)


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: And may I
move as a suggestion, seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra (Mr. Green), that you, Mr. Speaker, instruct the Clerk of the house to send a copy of the transcript of the proceedings of today to the Prime Minister of Ghana.


Mr. Speaker:: The Prime Minister has moved, seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, that the Clerk be instructed-


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: -to forward to the Prime Minister of Ghana an official copy of the official report of this day's sittings.


Mr. Speaker:: If the Prime Minister does not mind, I shall not delegate to the Clerk

my responsibility of being the communicating channel between this house and the house of Ghana, and instead of instructing the Clerk I will take it that it is an instruction given by the house to myself to do precisely that.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: It is rather a prayer to Your Honour.



MARINE AND FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
Mr. T. G. W. Ashbourne (Grand Falls-White Bay-Labrador) presented the first report of the standing committee on marine and fisheries, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.

Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, in reply to a question asked yesterday by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra I should like to make a brief general report to the house of the discussions which I had over the week end with the President of the Council of Ministers of France, Mr. Guy Mollet, during his visit to Ottawa. Let me say at once that no formal or informal agreements were concluded between France and Canada during this visit. Mr. Mollet and Mr. Pineau did not come to Ottawa for that purpose. They were paying us an official visit for the purpose of exchanging views on a wide range of topics of importance to both governments. In the course of these discussions Mr. Mollet expressed his point of view and I expressed mine, but we found ourselves in a very wide measure of agreement and I can assure the house that from our point of view the discussions we had with our distinguished visitors were not only very timely but highly satisfactory.
Mr. Mollet has already given the house a general indication of the topics which our discussions covered and these will be found in the transcript of the address he made to the house. I do not think it is necessary that I repeat them. He reported to the house his discussions and even expressed his view about the advantages of this solid basis of the new Franco-German relations; the European atomic energy community, Euratom; common European marketing; the Atlantic alliance in its political, military and economic aspects; the Algerian problem; the Middle East situation; the future of the Suez canal;
External Affairs
and the prevention of subversive Soviet infiltration into the Arab world. I agree fully with the summary he expressed to the house, which will be found in the translation of his remarks as recorded at page 1871 of Hansard of March 4. I quote in part:
The problems of which I have been speaking to you have been-
I am reluctant to go into any greater detail than Mr. Mollet did because the conversations were of a confidential character and covered the matters which he enumerated. I can assure the house that we both felt we had had a very useful exchange of views. I think I said in opening my remarks that no agreements or understandings had been reached. The discussions formed the basis, however, of certain things the French government would be glad if we found it possible to do and to which we promised to give careful and sympathetic consideration.
On the other hand I was informed that the French government hope to be placing with my colleague, the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe), in the near future very substantial orders for Canadian wheat.


Howard Charles Green: There was one question mentioned by Prime Minister Mollet which was also mentioned by our own Prime Minister today, and that had to do with the Suez canal. Mr. Mollet is reported to have said on page 1871 of Hansard:
The Suez canal is also one of the "geographic" causes of tension. Its sabotage by Egypt without any military motive to justify it, and the blackmail exercised since then over the pace of clearing and opening the canal, shows the little confidence merited by the government of Egypt.
Is the Prime Minister now in a position to give the house further information on the clearing of the Suez canal and its future use? One of the reasons I ask is that Mr. Dulles is quoted today as having said in Washington yesterday-and I read from the report:
State Secretary Dulles called on Egypt today to stop "dragging its feet" and get the Suez canal clear and open now that Israel has scheduled the withdrawal of her troops from Egyptian territory.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: No, Mr. Speaker, I have no more recent information about that. I understand that the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson) is returning to the United Nations for further conferences with the secretary general, and that the secretary general is apt to be leaving for Cairo on Monday. We all know that all these questions are linked together, and we hope that now a start has been made on the elimination of the causes of conflict, that start will lead quite rapidly to significant results.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Howard Charles Green: A supplementary question. It would appear, then, that the prompt clearing of the Suez canal is still dependent on the whims of this dictator Nasser. Is the Canadian government making any demand that this work should be proceeded with without any further delay? After all, we now have a financial stake in that work.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: The Canadian government's demands are being made through the United Nations. It is quite true that unless there is acquiescence-and there should be acquiescence-in the attitudes adopted by the majority of members of the United Nations the only alternative would be the use of force to overcome resistance, and that is an alternative which I hope it will not become necessary to consider.



MIDDLE EAST


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John B. Hamilton (York West):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Prime Minister which may be in some respects supplementary to questions asked by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra (Mr. Green).
In view of the report that congress has approved the Eisenhower doctrine for taking unilateral military action in the Middle East if necessary, does the Prime Minister feel that Canada now has any freedom of choice if the United States becomes involved in a major war in that area?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, I do not know to what the hon. member is referring by "freedom of choice" but Canada does not go to war without making the decision of the government known to the house and asking for the approval of the house.


John Borden Hamilton: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Did the Prime Minister in making his answer take into account the fact that we have United States servicemen and defence installations on Canadian soil?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I take into account everything that is pertinent to that kind of problem.


Mr. Daniel Mclvor (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, because the Secretary of State for External Affairs is filled to overflowing with good news I was just wondering when we will receive an optimistic report from the minister?



GHANA-INQUIRY AS TO ADOPTION OF FLAG

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Paul E. Gagnon (Chicoutimi):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Prime Minister. May I ask if the Prime Minister could inform the house if Ghana, the new member of the commonwealth, has adopted a new and distinctive flag?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I have made no inquiries, Mr. Speaker, and in fact I do not know of any country that has selected a flag by legislation or by its constitutional legislation.


Paul-Edmond Gagnon: May I ask-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Surely the matter to which the hon. gentleman is referring in his question does not come under the jurisdiction of any department of the Canadian government.


Paul-Edmond Gagnon: May I direct the same question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Perhaps he would be in a better position to answer my question than the Prime Minister.


Mr. Speaker:: The comment I would have to make would be identical.



FINANCE


Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to announce the signature of an agreement amending the 1946 financial agreement between Canada and the United Kingdom. This amending agreement covers both the 1956 interest payment, for which a waiver was requested by the United Kingdom last December under the terms of the original agreement, and also the question of waivers generally.
The original agreement provided that, if certain conditions were met in any particular year, the interest instalment in that year would be waived, that is, cancelled. The new agreement provides instead for deferments of annual instalments, not only of interest but also of principal. A deferment may be taken at the option of the United Kingdom in time of foreign exchange difficulty on not more than seven occasions during the remaining life of the agreement. The only condition is that the United Kingdom must in the same year defer payment of interest and principal to the United States. Formerly waivers were subject to the same condition.

The instalments of interest and principal that are deferred are to be paid, in succession, in the years immediately following the end of the present schedule of repayment, that is to say, beginning in 2001. In the meantime they will bear interest at the rate of 2 per cent, payable annually. This is the rate already written into the agreement.
The 1956 interest payment is to be treated as an additional deferment.
Our negotiations leading to this new agreement have been closely associated with concurrent negotiations between the United Kingdom and the United States, and a new agreement along the same lines as ours between these two governments is being presented to the United States congress today.
The original agreement between Canada and the United Kingdom was submitted to parliament and approval was granted in the form of an act. I shall be submitting an amending bill covering this new agreement. In the meantime, I am tabling the agreement so that the house may study it.


Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the minister for giving me a so much more adequate answer to my question than he gave yesterday. This is a good deal better than his one-syllable reply of yesterday. I note that this agreement is to be submitted to the house for approval and I think further comment can be deferred until then. I note also that it is apparently tied in with the arrangements with the United States.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, would the minister permit a question? Will these interest payments that are deferred until the year 2001 and after bear interest in the meantime? If so, the United Kingdom will be bankrupt by that time.


Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask a supplementary question of the Minister of Finance. In view of this agreement and payments being deferred until the year 2001, may I ask why we as a senior dominion of the British commonwealth do not cancel the whole thing as a contribution to our mother country? That was a serious question, Mr. Speaker, and it was seriously put.


Walter Edward Harris: It may have been a serious question, Mr. Speaker, but it is one which is seeking to obtain opinions of the government about policy and not about fact. I want to emphasize again that the question period is for the purpose of eliciting information and not opinions.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, I am not asking for policy but information as to why we should not make this contribution now to our mother country.


Mr. Speaker:: May I suggest that we have not reached the question time yet. We are still dealing with motions.

On the orders of the day:


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. I hold in my hand the agreement which he summarized a few moments ago and I notice that article 2 says:
This agreement shall become effective at such times as shall be agreed upon by the two governments.
I do not know whether the minister commented on that. If he did not, I wonder whether he would tell us whether other things have to be done before this agreement becomes effective or whether this is just a formal reservation.


Walter Edward Harris: The provision was put in there so that the Canadian parliament might pass on the wisdom of the agreement, and when we bring the bill forward and it passes through the house then, if it is approved, orders in council will be passed bringing the agreement into effect.
[Later:!



SUGGESTED CANCELLATION OF LOAN TO GREAT BRITAIN

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Harold Edward Winch: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance based on the statement he made just a short while ago with regard to the repayment of the principal and interest of the loan to Great Britain, which country is in debt to both Canada and the United States. Can the Minister of Finance inform us whether or not consideration has been given, in view of the economic situation of Great Britain and her contribution to the peace of the world, and considering the financial position of Canada, to forgiving and forgetting that loan as a contribution by Canada to our mother country?


Walter Edward Harris: This seems to be a matter of opinion. I must say that this is the first time it has been suggested I believe that this loan be forgiven. I had better deal with the question and the reasons that might have prompted the hon. member to ask it when we are discussing the bill amending the agreement.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Harold Edward Winch: I am prompted to ask that question because I believe we are in position to make a contribution.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Harold Edward Winch: It is funny, but we hear "order" called when anything has to do with Great Britain.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Michael Starr (Ontario):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of Finance now has the information to answer my question which I asked the other day with regard to the loan to the United Nations for the clearing of the Suez canal?


Walter Edward Harris: The $1 million was paid over to the United Nations on February 22.



ALLEGED FAILURE OF &quot;READER'S DIGEST&quot; TO PAY EXCISE TAX

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Finance arising out of a report in the Winnipeg Free Press. Has Reader's Digest failed to make the payment of the tax levied against it under the legislation passed last year providing for a special excise tax on advertising in non-Canadian periodicals? If so, what course of action does the government propose to take in connection with this matter?


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, I think this is more properly a question that should be directed to the Minister of National Revenue, but I think I can answer by saying I do not believe a tax has been assessed yet and until that time has come one would not expect any further action.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Has Reader's Digest failed to take out the licence required under the regulations passed under the act and has it failed to pay the $5,000 deposit also required by the government's regulations?


Hon. J. J. McCann (Minisier of Nalional Revenue):: Well, Mr. Speaker, I cannot give definite answers as to whether or not the licence has been taken out. A licence is required. It is the policy of the department to collect all outstanding debts.



LIVESTOCK


Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minisier of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, two days ago the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) asked me to make inquiry with regard to hog prices. In view of the rulings you have made in the last two days, and in view of the length of the statement, I think I should make it now rather than wait until question time.
Hog prices are usually influenced by a variety of conditions rather than any one particular factor. During recent months the major factors influencing the level of hog prices have been the supply position-hog marketings to date this year are 12 per cent below a year ago-and the embargo against the importation of United States pork by reason of disease conditions in that country. As a result of these two conditions, plus the fact that, as at January 1, storage stocks were over 9,500,000 pounds below January 1 a year ago, hog prices in Canada have been substantially higher than during the first two months of 1956.
In January this year the price for A grade hogs at Toronto averaged $31.64 as compared with $23.47 for January a year ago. In February, A grade hogs in Toronto averaged $33.45 as compared with $23.51 a year ago. Hog prices in Canada have also been substantially higher than the United States. The average price for choice barrows and gilts, 200-220, Chicago, dressed weight equivalent, was approximately $24.20 in January as compared with $31.64 for A grade hogs in Toronto and $23.60 for February as compared with $33.45 in Toronto.
By reason of the relatively short position in supplies, hog prices progressively advanced from $31.33 during the week of January 5 this year at Toronto to average $34.13 during the week of February 16. During the week ending March 2, hog prices declined at all markets in Canada, and the average price for the week at Toronto was $31.25 with a low at the end of the week of $30.50.
This decline in hog prices may be attributed to the fact that hog prices had progressively advanced to a point where at Toronto they were over $11 per hundred, dressed weight equivalent, higher than Chicago, and were also relatively higher than other meats, particularly beef. Other contributing factors might be the approach of the lenten season and the fact that during the week of February 16 hog marketings in Canada totalled 120,028, 10 per cent higher than the marketings of 109,150 during the same week in 1956.

With the consent of the house, Mr. Speaker, I should like to place on the record the tables upon which these statements are based.


Mr. Speaker:: Is that request			agreed to?
Some hon.	Members:	Agreed.


James Garfield Gardiner: The		tables are	as follows:
	HOG PRICES		
	1956		
	Toronto Winnipeg		Chicago
			(Dr. Equiv)
Jan. 5 	20.50	15.6012 	
23.07	20.50	15.3319 	20.50	15.8626 	20.58	17.86Average 	20.52	Feb. 2 	20.75	19.209 	20.75	17.5316 	20.92	16.4023 	21.67	16.20Average 	21.04	Mar. 2 	21.33	16.40HOG PRICES	1957	Toronto	Winnipeg	Chicago(Dr. Equiv)Jan. 5 	.... 31.33	28.12	23.6712 	
31.50	29.08	23.4119 	29.30	24.6126 	.... 32.12	29.75	25.05Average 	.... 31.64	29.12	24.20Feb. 2 	30.41	24.809 	
33.06	31.05	24.0016 	32.26	22.9323 	32.75	22.73Average 	
33.45	31.63	23.60Mar. 2 	29.79	22.70(closed 30.50)	4 	22.30GRADINGS	1956	1957Jan. 5 	123,155	86,87412	135,909	127,50019	131,559	108,24126	133,518	112,798Total	524,141	435,413Feb. 2	118,247	114,9639	134,933	115,35116	109,150	120,02823	120,454	109,467To date 	895,222Mar. 2 	126,883	99,312
Average weekly domestic disappearance pork:
Jan. 1956	 102,200 hogs
1957	 97,200 hogs



PORK IN COLD STORAGE

[Stage Direction]
1956	1957
Jan. 1	 18.8 mil. lb. 9.2mil.lb.
Feb. 1	26.9	"	"	10.5	"	"23	
28.2	"	"	11.9	"	"
National Defence

[Stage Direction]
Fresh Loin	1956	1957
Jan. 4 			55.0*
11 			54.6
18 			54.1
25 			54.7
Feb. 1 			55.2
8 			56.2
15 			57.1
22 			56.5
Smoked ham boneless		
Jan. 4 			75.9c
11 			77.7
18 			77.4
25 			77.7
Feb. 1 			78.4
8 			79.1
15 			79.6
22 			80.9
New York shoulder		
Jan. 4 			44.2*
11 			44.4
18 			43.1
25 			43.8
Feb. 1 			44.4
8 			45.5
15 			46.3
22 			45.9
Relationship-Hog and	cattle prices	
The 20 year average 1937-56 shows the price of good steers as 95 per cent of the price for live B1 hogs. Recently this figure has been only 74-75 per cent despite the fact that cattle prices are about $1 above a year ago.
Mr. E. G. McCullough (Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister a question. From the figures he has put on the record, is it not true that it is the old story, namely that if the producer has some hogs, there is no price; and if he has a price, there are no hogs?


James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Speaker, this is hardly the question period. However, I should like to reply to my hon. friend and remind him that a poor farmer is the one who acts in that way; that is, he does not have any hogs when the price is up and he has hogs when the price is down.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


Hon. R. O. Campney (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, on February 5 I informed the house that the United Nations had requested that Canada augment its contribution to the United Nations emergency force, Middle East, by providing additional army administrative personnel of the types already there and by providing a reconnaissance unit of approximately 105 officers and men equipped with scout cars and other necessary equipment.

National Defence
The Canadian government has now agreed to meet this request and the following arrangements have been made as to transport of the required personnel and equipment:
29 Canadian army scout cars, wireless vehicles and related equipment for the new reconnaissance unit have been put aboard ship at Saint John, New Brunswick, and the ship is, I understand, expected to sail today.
39 Canadian army personnel to carry out administrative duties at emergency base units will leave by R.C.A.F. airlift tomorrow from Dorval for the Middle East.
105 officers and men comprising the new reconnaissance unit are now assembled at Petawawa and will be airlifted to the Middle East by the R.C.A.F. from Uplands commencing on Monday next.


Mr. D. S. Harkness (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, may I just ask a question on that statement. From what units were the personnel drawn? I refer to the personnel which comprise this force. From what units were they drawn? Did Egypt give its consent to sending these new troops and armaments?


Ralph Osborne Campney: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the first question may I say that the reconnaissance unit is a composite unit and the personnel were drawn principally from the armoured regiments. As to the last question, that matter is not within my purview, and I shall not therefore deal with that phase.
I might say, however, that negotiations were carried out between the commander of the United Nations force, through the United Nations, and us, and we have agreed to accept the request he made.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I wonder whether the
Secretary of State for External Affairs could answer that question?


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I shall be glad to try to get from the secretary general an answer to that question for tomorrow.


Mr. Speaker:: May I remind hon. members that when a statement is made by a minister, only questions for the purpose of clarification can be asked at that time arising out of the statement which has been made. As to other questions, hon. members should wait until question time.



EGYPT-POSITION RESPECTING WITHDRAWAL OF UNITED NATIONS EMERGENCY FORCE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Howard Charles Green: May I ask the Prime Minister whether the United Nations emergency force going into

the Gaza strip and to the shores of the gulf of Aqaba will be subject to being ordered out by Egypt at any time?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: That is a question I cannot answer, Mr. Speaker. The discussions that are going on are on the basis that Egypt having consented to the organization and entry of the United Nations emergency force, no request for their withdrawal could be entertained until it had been communicated to the United Nations and dealt with by the United Nations. Now, there again this is the attitude taken by the United Nations, and we all trust that this attitude will receive implementation.
These attitudes are taken in the hope that they will avoid fighting in the area, and not with the intention of enforcing them by military measures. We hope that will work, and it is in that spirit that the members of the United Nations have been devoting a lot of time, both in the meetings in the hall and in their discussions outside the hall, in trying to bring about compliance with what is the right thing to do without there being any resort to the use of force.


Howard Charles Green: Would it be correct to say that in this particular case also we are dependent upon the whims of this man Nasser?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: We are
dependent upon the whims of the man who happens to be at the head of the government of the country where the United Nations force is at the present time. It was well understood at the time that his consent was necessary and was given to the stationing of forces in the territory of his country, and that consent having been given the attitude has been taken by, I think, most of the members of the United Nations, that that consent authorized the force to be there until a request is made for its removal, not to the troops but to the United Nations and dealt with by the United Nations. It is the United Nations that has discussed the question with the government of Egypt and made the arrangement for the acquiescence of that government in the placing of troops in that area. The troops have no direct relationship with the government of Egypt. They have direct relationship with the United Nations, and all the relationships regarding their presence are between the United Nations and the government of Egypt.


Howard Charles Green: But Nasser has the last word.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Nasser has the last word just as we in Canada have the last word about the placing of any armed forces of other nations in our territory. This is something upon which we are very insistent, and I am not surprised that the government of Egypt would be just as insistent.

I am not surprised that there are now discussions going on to obtain the consent of the government of Israel to the placing of United Nations emergency forces on both sides of the demarcation line because one side would be Israeli territory.


Howard Charles Green: Surely the Prime Minister is not comparing Canada with Egypt?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: We signed a charter under which there is an express provision that every nation, whether big or small, has the same sovereign rights over its territory.


Mr. Brooks:: I think we should point out that Canada has not the Suez canal.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: But Canada has a St. Lawrence seaway.



STARRED QUESTIONS


Mr. Barneii: 1.	Are the regulations made under authority of section 69 of the Indian Act published in the 1955 consolidation of statutory orders and regulations?
2.	If so. under what heading are these listed in the index?
3.	If not, what is the reason for their omission?
4.	Have these regulations been amended since section 69 of the act was amended in 1956?
5.	If so, in what way?
Right Hon. L. S. Si. Laurent (Prime
Minister): Mr. Speaker, the first two paragraphs of the question are as follows:
1.	Are the regulations made under authority of section 69 of the Indian Act published in the 1955 consolidation of statutory orders and regulations?
2.	If so, under what heading are these listed in the index?
The answer to the first question is no, and of course that also answers the second question.
The third question is, "if not"-that is if they are not published in the consolidation of statutory orders and regulations-"what is the reason for their omission?"
The answer is the provisions of subsection 6 of section 9 of order in council 1954, No. 1787, regulation under section 9 of the Regulations Act.
The fourth and fifth questions are:
Have these regulations been amended since section 69 of the act was amended in 1956? If so, in what way?
The answer is as follows:	Under the
authority of paragraph (c) of subsection 1 of section 69 of the Indian Act, which was added to that act in 1956, two minutes of treasury board approved by the governor in council, 1956/9-1575, October 25, and P.C. 1956/1-1831, December 13, 1956, were passed prescribing as a purpose for which loans could be made the purchase of houses by 82715-122
Questions
Indians employed at Pickle Crow gold mine in northern Ontario. Copies of the two minutes of treasury board approved by the governor in council are tabled herewith. No other orders have been passed under this section of the act since the original order establishing the revolving funds regulation, P.C. 1954/39, which was published in the Canada Gazette of January 27, 1954.


OLD AGE SECURITY CHEQUES LOST
Mr. Knowles: 1.	When an old age security cheque is lost in the mail or fails to reach its addressee for any other reason, what steps are taken to replace such lost or mislaid cheque?
2.	How long does a pensioner have to wait before receiving a cheque replacing such lost or mislaid cheque?
3.	Has consideration been given to the issuing of a replacement cheque forthwith? If not, will consideration be given thereto?


Walter Edward Harris: The answer to No. 1 is that when the department learns that the cheque is lost in the mail it is usually by way of letter from the addressee complaining he has not received the cheque. Thereupon forms are sent to the addressee to fill in for the purpose of establishing ownership. In the meantime, a check is made to see that the cheque has not, in fact, been cashed by someone else. After that is proven then a replacement cheque is sent forward. The department does not think that it would be desirable to issue a replacement cheque immediately on the first complaint having been received of the non-delivery of the monthly cheque because subsequent investigation has shown that nine out of ten cheques about which complaints have been received do turn up after delays in the mail or wrong addresses or the like.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister did not answer
question No. 2.


Walter Edward Harris: Well, that depends, Mr. Speaker, on how quickly he complains about the loss of his cheque or non-delivery. It varies usually between 10 days and 30 days. From the time the complaint is received it runs between 20 and 30 days.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. McCullough (Moose: Mountain):
1.	What sections of the trans-Canada highway have been completed in the various provinces, and what is the federal percentage financing In each case?
2.	What sections through Ontario are still under construction?
3.	Is there a minimum standard for all sections of trans-Canada highway?
4.	If so, what is this standard?

Inquiries of the Ministry
5.	Were all completed sections of trans-Canada highway, on which federal contributions were paid, inspected by federal engineers?



PRIVATE RESEARCH


Mr. Johnson (Kindersley): 1.	How much money was spent by the government in financing research by private firms for the fiscal year 1954-55?
2.	What percentage of money so spent goes to large corporations or firms employing over 500 workers?
3.	Has the government given any consideration to ways and means of making more contracts for such work available to smaller businesses?
4.	Are firms concerned in these projects permitted to patent and control inventions developed as a result of such research?
5.	Does the government share in royalties from the sale of such inventions?



SPONGES AND CHAMOIS


Mr. Knowles: 1.	From January 1, 1954 to June 30, 1956, how many contracts were let by the government for the procurement of natural sponges, cellulose sponges and chamois?
2.	With respect to each such contract, (a) what
were the exact items supplied:	(b) in what
quantity; (c) what were the prices; (d) who were the suppliers; (e) which were the procuring departments; (f) what was the date of each such contract?



HIGHWAY AND BRIDGE EXPENDITURES

Mr. McCulloch (Piclou): 1.	What is the estimated total federal government expenditure for the fiscal year 1957-1958 on roads, bridges and grade separations?
2.	Of the total amount, approximately how much will be paid to provincial governments; and how much directly by the federal government for work under its jurisdiction?
FURNITURE PURCHASES & SALES

Question No. 204-Mr. Fraser (Peterborough):
1.	What office equipment, such as desks, chairs, filing cabinets, etc., has been purchased by the government since January 1, 1956?
2.	What was the value of this equipment?
3.	Has any or all of it been disposed of through Crown Assets Disposal Corporation or by any other means?
4.	If so, to what firms or individuals was it sold?
5.	What quantity was sold to each individual or firm, and at what price in each case?



HEALTH INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister of National Health and Welfare if he is now in a position to make a statement on his conference this morning with the provincial treasurer of Ontario regarding the proposed hospital insurance plan?


Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: I hope my hon. friend
will not be disappointed if I say we had a very satisfactory conference and that I am confident that within the text of the federal proposals we can look forward to an agreement in the future with the province of Ontario.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask a supplementary question? In view of the answer the minister has given, can he now answer my question of yesterday as to how soon the house will proceed to debate the resolution having to do with the federal government's proposals?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend knows that the program of the government is announced by the house leader and I hope he will be in the house when that is done.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister knows I will be.


Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Is it not a fact that perhaps a little over half an hour ago he released to the press a quite full report of the discussions between himself and the provincial treasurer of Ontario held this morning? If it is a fact, why is it that the House of Commons is not entitled to as full information as the press received in that press conference?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend is only half correct. There was a joint release by the treasurer of the province of Ontario and the Minister of National Health and Welfare, and I shall be very glad to repeat it for the benefit of my hon. friend. I think this is consistent with what I said to the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. The release simply said:
At a meeting held in Ottawa this morning between Hon. Paul Martin, Minister of National Health and Welfare, and Hon. Dana Porter, treasurer of Ontario, an understanding was reached on the essential terms to be embodied in a formal agreement establishing hospital insurance in Ontario. The principal point under discussion concerning the interpretation to be placed upon the requirement of universal availability was satisfactorily resolved. Confirmation of the details relating to the understanding reached on the various points discussed will be provided through subsequent exchanges between the governments concerned.



COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. S. R. Balcom (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister? Is the Prime Minister in a position to indicate

whether or not the government is extending assistance of any kind to those who are setting up the federation of the West Indies? Will he also assure the house that the important trading position of the Atlantic provinces will be maintained with the new federation and that vigorous efforts will be made to stimulate the mutual development of trade?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I thank the hon. member for sending notice to my office of his intention to ask these two questions.
To the first question the answer is that in addition to traditional forms of assistance to the British West Indies, such as the tariff preference on sugar and the provision of certain shipping services, we are providing some technical assistance. Officials are also giving careful study to the development of the new federation against the background of our relations with the area. This study is continuing and it will be a little time yet before we know what its results might be.
As to the second question, the answer is yes. The government has been keeping in close touch with the various governments of the British West Indies and with the arrangements being made for the new federation. The Canadian-British West Indies trade agreement of 1926 will remain in effect until it is replaced by a trade agreement with the federation of the West Indies. The government has made clear its willingness to enter into negotiations for a new trade agreement at an appropriate time.
I might add that trade between Canada and the British West Indies has been increasing and is at a high level relatively to the population of the British West Indies and the population of Canada. In 1956 Canadian exports to the British West Indies amounted to $49 million, an increase of $7 million over 1955, and the Canadian imports from the British West Indies in 11 months of 1956, for which we have reports, were of the value of about $61 million.



HARBOURS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. G. J. Hahn (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. In his absence I should possibly ask the Minister of National Defence the question. Will the minister now be so good as to announce to the house the details of the new dredging policy made public by the Minister of National Defence in New Westminster on Friday of 82715-1221
Inquiries of the Ministry last week and again in Vancouver on Monday of this week, and which I asked the Minister of Public Works about last Monday?


Ralph Osborne Campney: Among my many duties I do not enunciate dredging policy for the government.
[Later:1


Frederick George Hahn: Mr. Speaker, in view of the lapse of memory on the part of the Minister of National Defence I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters), and possibly his parliamentary assistant can take it as notice. Would the minister advise the house whether it is now intended to dispose of the dredge King Edward and whether future dredging on the Fraser river is going to be let by contract?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I must make the same reply I made before. I am not the custodian of dredges nor do I announce dredging policy.


Frederick George Hahn: Apparently the Minister of National Defence misinterpreted my earlier statement. I am asking the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Public Works to take this as notice and give me an answer later on.


Mr. Bourgel:: I will take the question as notice.



EFFECT ON CANADA OF PROPOSED EUROPEAN TRADE AREA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinfon):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister in a position to acquaint the house with such representations as he may have made to Premier Guy Mollet concerning the proposed European trade area in the light of the effect that it might have on Canada's trade interests?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I would not like to go into details of our confidential conversation, but I can say that I brought to his attention the anxieties that are felt in certain sectors of Canadian industry about the possible effects of the tariff union arrangements as we hear of them through the press and I was assured we would not find that there was going to be anything in those arrangements which would be prejudicial to the export trade of these different sectors of our Canadian economy and of course that is, I am sure, the honest belief of the premier of France. But, in these economic matters, opinions are not always

Inquiries of the Ministry borne out by the facts as they develop, and I did tell him that we were still going to be very critically scrutinizing all further information we get about the terms of this agreement and about the attitudes of those who would be participating in the agreement. He gave me quite a positive assurance that this agreement would not lead to an increase in the production of cereals in France. That was something about which I did convey to him some anxieties that I had heard expressed, and he explained to me that they could not sell wheat at anything like what it cost them to produce it and that they had to alternate yearly between the production of cereals and the production of sugar beets, and that there was a surplus of sugar beets that had to be converted into alcohol that could not be sold at anything like the prices that went into the process and into the raw materials, and that that was an economic fact that should reassure us that there would not be an increased competition for wheat markets arising out of the terms of this tariff union.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Have there been any recent exchanges between the Canadian government and the government of the United Kingdom on the same subject? If so, what is the purport of them?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: These matters are under and have been under constant study by our experts here and periodically the result of those studies is communicated to the High Commissioner in London and by him discussed with the appropriate officials of the United Kingdom.



REFERENCE TO ANNOUNCEMENT CON- CERNING PRICE REBATES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. A. Bryson (Humboldi-Melfort):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Is the 8 cent per bushel subsidy paid to Canadian flour millers by the western wheat producers the government's remedial action designed to discourage United States millers from exporting United States flour in sacks bearing Canadian brand names, as referred to by the minister on February 28?


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I have tried to make it clear on occasion that the government does not fix the price of wheat. That decision has been entrusted by parliament to the Canadian wheat board and that board exercises its own judgment in regard to the price at which Canadian wheat will be offered for sale. To assist in that process the wheat board has the advice of an advisory


board made up of the leaders of the various farm organizations in western Canada. The board in fact exercises the function delegated to it by parliament and never asks the government whether it should raise or lower the price of wheat. If there is a substantial price change the government is later advised of any action taken.
That was the case in connection with the special price to flour millers. It is all right for my hon. friend and his associates to parrot the phrase that the government has done this and that for the flour millers, but the government has taken no action whatever in this matter.


Edward George McCullough: May I ask a supplementary question. What action has the government taken following the statement made on February 28 by the minister, as reported on page 1730 of Hansard. At that time the minister said:
I expect to be able to announce remedial action shortly, probably some time within the next week.
What action has the government taken to remedy this situation?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The government mentioned remedial action, but the remedial action taken was not taken by the government. It was action taken by the Canadian wheat board and was announced as such. My hon. friend can ask that same question five times more and the answer will be the same.
[Later];



EXPORTS FROM U.S. UNDER CANADIAN BRAND NAMES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Edward George McCullough: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Can the minister inform the house if export orders for flour from the United States under Canadian brand names are being made by companies which are subsidiaries of Canadian milling companies or are they separate companies which are filling the orders on behalf of Canadian millers?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have no information on the subject and therefore cannot answer the question.


Edward George McCullough: A supplementary question. Can the minister inform the house whether the wheat board has met any special difficulty in supplying wheat of sufficiently high protein content to fill the orders of the Canadian wheat board to meet export demand?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, the wheat board does not sell Canadian wheat on the basis of protein content; it sells on the basis of Canadian standard grades. There have been complaints about the low protein content of wheat from this year's crop, but the wheat board does not take protein content into account in selling wheat either to the flour mills or abroad.


Edward George McCullough: Is it not
true that American orders now being filled under Canadian brand names are of high protein content, supplanting our Canadian export market?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I do not know that; perhaps the hon. member does, and I assume that it could be true. All I know is that the report came to the government that American wheat in the form of flour was being exported in bags with Canadian brand names. Beyond that I have no information.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Colin Cameron (Nanaimo):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Has the minister's attention been drawn to the reported statement of Mr. J. D. McLennan, counsel for the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, to Mr. Justice Sullivan of the supreme court of British Columbia, that the Department of Citizenship and Immigration is preparing to deport Christian George Hanna on the ground that he is not in possession of a passport? If so, is the minister prepared to assure the house that every person admitted to Canada as a landed immigrant in the last six months has been in possession of a passport?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, my attention has not been drawn to any such statements. I have no information whether it has been made or not. This case is still before the courts and I do not think it would be appropriate for me to say anything about it.
With respect to the second question, the hon. gentleman knows just as well as I do that immigrants from the United Kingdom, the United States and several other countries are not required by law to have passports and we do not ask them to have passports when they come here as immigrants.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, in view of the exchange of questions and answers that has just taken place I would
Inquiries of the Ministry like to ask if the minister is prepared to assure the house that no steps will be taken to deport Mr. Hanna until the case before the courts is resolved.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, Mr. Speaker, if that requires any assurance I give it.


Donald Methuen Fleming: How condescending.



NATIONAL PARKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. E. Johnston (Bow River):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. I understand there are tenders being called on May 31 for the construction and operation of two gondola lifts in Banff. Could the minister assure the house that these tenders will be called on an individual basis and not as a package deal?


Hon. Jean Lesage (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I gave that assurance the other day in answer to a similar question.


Charles Edward Johnston: The previous question referred to chair lifts. I am now referring to gondola lifts.


Jean Lesage: There was no invitation to tender for chair lifts.



CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Alistair McLeod Stewart: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. In view of the minister's legitimate pleasure in welcoming to Canada not only new Canadians but also new Canadian babies, will he tell the house if he approves of the Manitoba government exporting Canadian babies to the United States?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I have communicated with the minister of health and welfare of the province of Manitoba and I am assured that the allegation contained in the hon. gentleman's question is completely untrue. That is what I would expect, because the minister happens to be a former student of mine and I am sure he would share my views about exporting Canadian babies.
1934	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry


Alistair McLeod Stewart: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Does the minister know that 11 babies have already been exported and that the minister has admitted it? What is wrong with his tuition if that is so?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, Mr. Speaker, I know no such thing and I might add of course that I am the minister of immigration, not the minister of emigration.



ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Ralph Osborne Campney: Mr. Speaker, on Monday, March 4, the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) asked a question with respect to the possibility of grounding Royal Canadian Air Force Mitchell aircraft following two recent accidents, a question which he renewed again yesterday.
The investigation into the crash which occurred on February 17 at Winnipeg is nearing completion and from preliminary reports it would appear that the aircraft had run out of fuel at the time of the accident.
The inquiry into the cause of the tragic and very regrettable accident near Uplands has, of course, pnly just commenced but the circumstances of the crash appear to have little resemblance to those at Winnipeg.
I should point out to hon. members that Mitchell aircraft, of which the air force has some 100 in service, have been in operation for an average period of less than six years and that the United States air force employs them in present operations in far greater numbers than the R.C.A.F. Both the R.C.A.F. and the United States air force consider that despite new aircraft developments there is a continuing requirement for these aircraft. Generally speaking, they have a very good performance record.
I am advised, therefore, that under all the circumstances there would appear to be no justifiable reason for taking the action suggested by the hon. member.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, on February 27 and March 4 the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) on the orders of the day asked certain questions relating to one James Carey who,


having been convicted of the offence of murder, is now under sentence of death in British Columbia.
The hon. member's questions related to the extent and nature of assistance that is alleged to have been given by Carey to police officers in British Columbia in connection with police investigations.
In reply to the hon. member I may say that a very thorough and comprehensive investigation of these allegations has been carried out and a complete report of the investigation will be available for study by the governor general in council when the question whether the sentence of death should or should not be commuted comes to be considered.
In their work in this case the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were acting under the police contract between Canada and the province of British Columbia in enforcing the law in British Columbia. When so acting they are under the direction of the attorney general of British Columbia. For this reason I wish to keep to a minimum the announcement or tabling in this chamber of information which has more to do with the responsibility of the provincial government and the provincial legislature than it has to do with the responsibility of the federal government and the parliament of Canada. I have, however, no objection to discussing this matter privately and in confidence with the hon. member for Vancouver East.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker,
I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Would the minister give consideration to making money available for home building in Canada by increasing the flow of mortgage funds for builders' loans, since the increase in the interest on mortgage loans from 5J per cent to 6 per cent has not made money available for that purpose?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. gentleman is suggesting a method of improving a certain situation which he thinks needs improving and he is asking the minister if he has considered taking a certain step which he is suggesting to the minister. This to me is far from asking the government for information as to what has happened in order to be informed. There is a distinction which many hon. members fail to make between asking for information because something has happened, because something has been done and

therefore the house wants to know, and an hon. member wanting to lift the veil on government thinking and asking the government if they would consider doing this and then proceed to tell them what they should do. It is a different proposition, but perhaps I have misconstrued the question.


Michael Starr: I asked the minister if he was
considering making money available for home building in Canada by increasing the flow of mortgage funds for builders' loans, since the increase in the interest on mortgage loans from 5J per cent to 6 per cent, which the government increased recently, has not made money available for that purpose.


Mr. Speaker:: That is the point. Many
hon. members may feel that the increase in the interest rate has not had the effect of making less money available for home construction. This is introducing into a question debatable material which is not allowed under our rules at the present time.


Michael Starr: Can the minister advise
whether funds will be available to enable the construction of the estimated 100,000 homes which the Minister of Public Works estimated would be built in Canada during 1957?


Walter Edward Harris: I cannot estimate it. I assume that the 100,000 homes that are being built are being built by contractors or private owners who may have many sources of obtaining the necessary funds.


Michael Starr: A supplementary question. Is
not the minister aware of the fact that builders in Canada are unable to obtain loans for the construction of homes?


Walter Edward Harris: I have just finished saying
that since there is every indication that there will be 100,000 homes built-I understand that is the figure given by the Minister of Public Works, and indeed I have used it myself on occasion-it must be that the money is being obtained to build that number of homes.



DISABLED PERSONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. S. Zaplilny (Dauphin):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Is the minister now in a position to report progress on the conversations being held between his department and appropriate
Inquiries of the Ministry provincial departments with regard to humanizing the regulations under the Disabled Persons Act?


Paul Joseph James Martin: What my hon. friend
means, I am sure, is "liberalizing".


Stanley Howard Knowles: That word has lost its
meaning.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I did not catch the interjection of the hon. member.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I said that word has lost
its meaning in this country.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I do not think that last
interjection is deserving of prolonged comment. I simply say that suggestions have been made to the provinces and we have not heard from them as yet.



REQUEST FOR MORE COMPLETE ANSWER TO QUESTION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hugh Alexander Bryson: wish to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. On February 19 last the Minister of Agriculture answered one of the three questions I had previously placed on the order paper relative to a certain P.F.A.A. inspector. My second question was not answered, and because of that the answer to my third question contained only partial information. Will the minister review my question and provide an answer?


James Garfield Gardiner: I have already reviewed the question, Mr. Speaker, but I would just like to point out that the statement which has been made-a statement which was supposed to be a statement of fact-is not correct.
The question is: Is Joseph Marshall of Okla, Saskatchewan, on the staff of P.F.A.A.; and the second question is: if so, when was he appointed? The answer is, to one and two, "No". Information was given in addition, as follows: Mr. Marshall was one of the many who are called upon as needed to do inspection work on a daily rate basis. Of course none of these men doing this inspection work who are on a daily rate basis are appointed to a position in the sense referred to on the civil service staff or anything of that kind. The third question is answered by giving the wages paid on the daily rate basis. All the information which was asked, and more, is there, fully given.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Surely the minister is not
suggesting that when a man is working for the government, regardless of whether he

Municipal Grants Act
has been appointed to a position or not, he is not in government employment, and this man was in the employ of the government back in 1944. Can the minister tell me just what service was rendered in 1956?


James Garfield Gardiner: He has checked crops from time to time. He never had an appointment with the government.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Has he worked for the government since?


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: It seems to me that if the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort had put a question to which he claims he has not received an answer he was entitled to ask the minister if he had any further information to give him. The minister has indicated that he is not in agreement with the hon. gentleman as to the meaning of certain terms in the hon. member's question, and which appear in the minister's reply. Where do we go from here with regard to the rule that a reply to a question is not debatable?


Hugh Alexander Bryson: May I ask a supplementary question, sir? Was this man employed by the minister's department in any year or years prior to 1956 as an inspector of P.F.A.A. work?


James Garfield Gardiner: He has been employed
exactly as the answer says. Mr. Marshall was one of many who were called upon as needed to do inspection work on a daily rate basis, and he had been employed on that basis from time to time for years and on no other.



MUNICIPAL GRANTS ACT


[Stage Direction]
The house in committee on Bill No. 158, an act to amend the Municipal Grants Act- Mr. Harris-Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
On clause 1-Effective rate.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Chairman, this matter was fully discussed during the resolution stage in this chamber, and the bill went before the banking and commerce committee where it was further discussed, and I do not propose to go round the course again.
There are one or two brief comments I wish to make. I indicated at the resolution stage that it seemed clear that this was a step, although a very small one, in the right direction, and, as I say, 1 do not propose to add to that.
I do want, however, to put very briefly on the record one point which arose in the banking and commerce committee and which I

thought was important, and that had to do with the position of crown corporations. There was a great deal said about the position of crown corporations, and the minister's parliamentary assistant made a very frank statement on that subject which I wish to put very briefly on the record. There had been questions asked by the hon. member for St. Paul's (Mr. Michener) and the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) with regard to the practice followed by crown corporations, and questions were asked as to whether there had been a directive from the minister for use by his department and by the crown corporations, and the answer given by the parliamentary assistant at page A12 of the reporter's unpublished transcript was:
I do not know that it was ever a formal directive. I think it was, rather, an informal instruction.
Then there was a later reference to this question of a directive or instruction. I myself asked this question of the parliamentary assistant at page A13 of these notes:
Can we take it from this that the situation-as between the minister and the corporations-is being reviewed in the sense that a crown corporation should behave as the department is behaving in respect to crown property which is owned, controlled and used for government purposes?


Mr. Benidickson:: Yes. that was the point which I made. Because when we-
That is, the Department of Finance.
-are doing that on normal federal government property, it is natural that the department would now look again at the practices of the crown corporations. But it is embarrassed by the different roles that these corporations have, and their different contributions to the communities in which they have property.
I think that is understood. The parliamentary assistant pointed out that there were, in certain cases, statutory provisions regarding certain corporations with regard to taxes. That is true, I think, in certain respects, with regard to the railways. The hon. member for St. Paul's (Mr. Michener) then said:
Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a further point. As this is the time of year when many municipalities are dealing with taxes, it seems to me that it would be desirable for the Department of Finance-which gave a directive, instructions, or made a suggestion some years ago as a result of which the corporations have been negotiating taxes in the intervening years-while waiting for a full review, that they put the principle of this bill before the boards of directors of these corporations, or the managers of the agencies, so that when they negotiate this year's tax arrangements with their various municipalities,'they will come as near as they can, in respect of the allowances that Mr. Benidickson has referred to, to the position the crown is properly taking in respect to this bill. It seems to me that that would solve a lot of the problems arising out of the bill.
I have put that on the record, Mr. Chairman, because it seems to me that this was a very practical collateral result from the bill. I was glad it took place; and Mr. Michener's

suggestion as to bringing it to the attention of the municipalities and trying to put them in a position as soon as possible to take whatever advantage they can of it seems to me a practical one, and I want to get it on the record, too.
As to the bill itself, it was discussed at length. It mainly had to do with technical points with regard to the incidence of taxation. Mr. Burns, the representative of the department, indicated to us that in his administrative work he had little difficulty with the municipalities. I hope that will continue to be the case.


John Borden Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I realize that it is almost impossible to say anything in connection with this legislation without repeating what has been said several times before. On the other hand, I do not think that we need to make any apologies in that regard because it is only by the continual pounding that has come from this side of the house that we have seen some gradual improvement in connection with the taxation situation that faces municipal governments in the country.
I think that we should say first of all that this legislation today is far from solving all the problems that face municipalities. As a matter of fact, as far as it goes, it is good legislation; but in most respects it will probably help those municipalities which, on a comparative basis, need it least. By that I mean that there are a large number of municipalities which are at present undergoing rapid expansion. In most cases they have little government property from which they can expect additional revenue as a result of this legislation. I would think for the most part that those which are of a more static nature, with larger type buildings, are the ones that will benefit most.
I mentioned the question of development because, of course, unless there is continuous development throughout all municipalities there will be a drying up of the tax revenue source for this government as well as for all other governments. As a matter of fact, I am reminded today that this action is similar to what the physicians are complaining about now in connection with tranquilizer drugs. In a report from Montreal dated March 5 and appearing in this morning's Globe and Mail I noted this statement:
A Manitoba doctor today suggested that medical men may be giving patients too many tranquilizer pills and that a pill in many cases is not as good as a bit of understanding.
Of course, I think that is the type of treatment that the municipalities are getting in this legislation. This is the type of legislation where we say to them, "We will give you a few dollars here, and for gosh sakes go away 82715-123
Municipal Grants Act
and don't bother us for a while". They are not going to be able to go away because, as I say, their problems are multiplying with the development of the country. I might say as well that their problems are multiplying especially at this time because of an indiscriminate application of the tight-money policy to all borrowers. The Toronto Star Weekly in an editorial of October 27 of last year, referring to criticism made by the premier of New Brunswick, had this to say:
Mr. Flemming's criticism is that the tight money policy fails to distinguish between the special economic needs of the various sections of the country. As he puts it, "it is about as sensible as a man with ten children feeding them all castor oil regardless of their individual needs".
The same editorial goes on to say this:
Mr. Frost feels the tight money policy disregards the essential nature of provincial and municipal development. "The provinces and the municipalities," he declares, "are the right arm of this country's development; cut off the right arm and then see what you are left with."
We face this situation in connection with municipal requirements of funds for developing these services which are needed for an ever-increasing number of people coming into the country. The municipality is caught in a very tight squeeze. It is required to provide all these facilities and at the same time it just does not have the revenue source to take care of the job.


Mr. Hunter:: Where is the relevancy of all this?


John Borden Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member for Parkdale can be convinced of its relevancy. When he gets his municipal tax bill, and he happens to be a constituent of mine, he will be more sure that what I am saying is relevant.
The Minister of Finance (Mr. Harris) said today that he was quite sure that 100,000 homes would be built if the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters) had said so. Those homes will be built, Mr. Chairman, if the money is available to builders and if the municipalities can supply the services for those homes. In an article from Montreal which appeared in the Ottawa Citizen of January 10 I notice this statement:
Unless the federal government loosens up on mortgage money, Canadian home builders are facing a construction slump this year which may drop home construction as much as 50 per cent below the 1956 peak of close to 135,000 completed dwellings.
I suppose the hon. member for Parkdale says, "What connection is there in this quotation?" What I say is this. If these people do not get the funds required to build the homes, then we will have it working out that the municipality will be having to take care of the additional people

Municipal Grants Act
without the tax source of the additional homes which ordinarily support the school services and the various services required.
It seems to me that here is a definite opportunity to do something about the tight-money policy without using controls. It may be that we feel that a great many of these restrictions are necessary. But surely they are not necessary in connection with municipal debentures and the borrowing for services of this type. For every dollar that we can see that the municipalities get, it means one less dollar for which they are going out into the borrowing market. They certainly can ill afford to pay the type of interest that is asked at the present time. I must say that I was amazed when I heard the Minister of Finance a short while back saying something to this effect, "Well, of course, if it were something which was really essential, they would pay the additional interest rate but if it were of a nature that it was not so essential, then of course they would not build it". Mr. Chairman, they have no choice. These things must be built. Hence I say that until the government is prepared to sit down on a sincere basis with the provinces and divide up the tax base properly, the municipalities are going to be caught in this tight credit squeeze that we have at the present time and they have no way to go.
I have heard people say, "Well, things are all right in Ontario. We have had a new budget and we have raised an additional $100 million. That $100 million is going to close the gap and everything is all right". What I say is this. Any hon. member who has read the remarks made by the member for Riverdale in the local legislature-I refer to Mr. Macaulay in the provincial house- will see that this amount of money does not solve the problem of the municipalities.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, surely my hon. friend's remarks are not in order on this particular bill. They may be appropriate when we come to the budget or on the estimates of the Minister of Finance. But this is a bill which is purporting to give the municipalities in ex gratia payments the equivalent of full taxes on federal property. Surely all this reference to dominion-provincial relations and in turn the relations between the municipalities and the province is out of order on this bill.


The Chairman:: Order. I must say I agree entirely with the point of order raised by the parliamentary assistant. I have been allowing the hon. member to lay the groundwork for his remarks, but I do think that he should begin now to discuss this bill rather than discuss collateral matters. May

I point out that in committee of the whole we are governed by the strict rule of relevancy. My own opinion has been that these general discussions are not permissible on clause one of the bill, although some members disagree with me on that point. It would require an expression of the house on appeal, I suppose, to decide that because from the precedents one could make a pretty good case in either direction.
However, I am not going to develop that thought now. I am merely going to ask the hon. member to devote his remarks to this bill which is, after all, very confining and refers to grants to municipalities by the federal government.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Could I offer one remark? So far as the general discussion under clause one is concerned, I thought the principle was well understood. It was only for that reason I did not rise while the Speaker was in the chair. With regard to the other point, as to the relevancy of the remarks of the hon. member for York West, the same argument was made to me when I was speaking on this and the answer I made at that time was that surely one could not establish the position of the municipality without showing its relationship to the other situation. I think at that time my suggestion was accepted.


John Borden Hamilton: First of all, I appreciate the help from the hon. member for Greenwood. I might say to you, sir, that you have not only allowed me to lay the groundwork for my remarks but you have allowed me to make almost all the remarks I was going to make. This may indicate the ineffectiveness with which I have been hammering away at this point. On the other hand, I have no apology for it. I shall continue this line of attack in connection with the situation which faces the municipalities. Surely in connection with discussing the general content of this bill, which I understand is my privilege under the first clause, I am entitled to say that I do not think the government is going nearly far enough in this legislation which is before us. Surely, I am also permitted to go the additional step and say how I think they might have handled this particular situation to work out a more permanent solution.
I will only say one or two things in conclusion. I would hope that proper attention might be paid to the situation that faces the municipalities in Ontario. This is one of the great developing provinces of the country, yet when I look at the amount of money which is collected by this government and the proportionate amount which is returned to Ontario, it actually staggers me. I find that the federal government collects $1,100

million in corporation taxes and Ontario contributes about half of that amount. We get back only $127 million. When we talk about personal income tax-


William Moore Benidickson: I must rise on a point of order again. If my hon. friend will look at the explanatory note to the bill, and from his remarks I think perhaps he has not, he will find the main purpose of the bill is to increase grants on federal property to pay the full tax equivalent. He suggests he should be entitled to speak about the things that this bill does not do. Surely, he must still relate that to grants in lieu of taxes. Now, the bill proposes to pay the full tax equivalent. Is my hon. friend suggesting that we should discuss whether or not we pay more than 100 per cent of full taxes-more than would be paid by anybody else on that property value? Surely that is the only discussion relevant to this bill.


John Borden Hamilton: I am suggesting, sir, we will never have a solution to the problem which this bill is apparently designed to cover unless we are prepared to use some other method of working out a solution. In concluding I will say this, that the same remarks I have made on the tax base covering corporation taxes could be made on the whole tax field, personal and otherwise. Until such time as we have a conference in good faith, then I say we are going very quickly down the road to cut off our own sources of tax revenue right here in Ottawa.


Mr. Gillis:: I know the subject matter to which the minister objected in so far as the last speaker's remarks were concerned is out of order. I wish it were not because I should like nothing better than to debate the issue of the amount of money that is taken from Ontario. In my judgment a large percentage of what Ontario claims by way of taxes is wealth that comes from the different provinces across this country. I should like to put on the record, item by item, the amount of money. Personally, I am firmly of the belief that a country like Canada, with its centralization, can only get equality in education or health or for municipalities, as well as the many other desirable social objectives for which most of us are aiming, by a redistribution of the wealth in the way it has been done under these provincial agreements. If the Ontario and Quebec members are not prepared to go along with that kind of thing, then the answer to our social and economic problems in this country is decentralization of industry or by paying taxes in the province from which you take the wealth.
82715-123J
Municipal Grants Act
A large percentage of the wealth produced in British Columbia and a lot of the revenues of the main offices of corporations in Ontario and Quebec comes largely from other provinces, but the taxes are paid through the central office. This is equally true of succession duties. Fortunes are amassed in the central part of Canada because of centralization. The taxes are collected there, and I think if you are going to attempt to redistribute these moneys as evenly as possible, the dominion-provincial agreement is the only way it can be done. Otherwise, you have to start revising your economy by decentralization of industry and paying taxes where the wealth is produced. At any rate, I know I am out of order in saying that but the hon. member provoked it. It is a subject about which I feel pretty strongly. Sometime we may get into a real discussion on the subject when it is in order and we may be able to sort out some of the fallacies that are thrown around from time to time in statements such as the one which provoked me to get up at this time.
The bill itself has only one objective and that is to try to provide more assistance for the municipalities in the matter of the taxation of crown property. It is an improvement over what we had but it certainly does not answer the problem of placing the municipality in a financial position to take care of its responsibility. However, that is another subject and I do not think it comes within the purview of this bill. This bill is an improvement over what we had. There are some questions I should like to ask later on the clauses but I only rose now to give you that outburst because it was provoked by my hon. friend.


Frederick George Hahn: Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to become involved in a discussion of dominion-provincial relations. Unfortunately the hon. gentlemen who have just taken their seats did not see fit to do so during the debate on the bill a year ago.


Clarence Gillis: Yes, we did.


John Borden Hamilton: We keep on doing it every year.


Clarence Gillis: I would say your memory is at fault.


John Borden Hamilton: You must
have been away that day.


Frederick George Hahn: We find ourselves in the position where our Conservative friends are deciding that now is the time, now is the hour, to make an issue out of something that should have been made a real issue a year ago. Certainly, I agree with the hon. member for Cape Breton South in respect to

Municipal Grants Act
the division of taxes and the fact that we should have more decentralization of industry and let the provinces share industrially rather than on a taxation basis.
The reason for my rising at this time is that two years ago I had the pleasure, at the time the minister introduced a bill along similar lines, to commend him for it. In these circumstances I am very happy to see this bill before us at the present time.
I am not a member of the banking and commerce committee, and therefore there are some questions that do come to me with respect to this bill and I should like some clarification on at least one or two of them. One has to do with the spelling out of the lands or buildings that would be taxable so that municipalities would be in a position to know whether they are taxable or not.
The parliamentary assistant was in the committee when I was there as a guest and I passed along a question to one of his colleagues, who was good enough to present it, as to whether telecommunication stations were taxable, and it was not determined whether they were or not. I have one in the riding which I represent and that, of course, makes it desirable to find out whether they are taxable.
The hon. member for Fraser Valley, who is in the fisheries committee at this time, asked, I believe, whether experimental stations were taxable as such, the land or buildings, or both, and to what extent. We understand that Polymer is fully taxable and yet certain other crown companies are not taxable at all. Possibly, if the parliamentary assistant would spell this out it would be of some help to the committee.
Another reason for my rising at this time is that on February 15 of this year I had the pleasure of raising a question in the house which the Speaker declared was out of order. My question had to do with a clipping from the British Columbian of February 12, the heading of which read:
Credit Failure Stalls Hospital.
I do not wish to read the whole of this clipping, sir, but I feel that I must read some of it because of the fact that on that day the minister was good enough to make a statement following the Speaker's declaration that my question would not be allowed. He said, as reported at page 1322 of Hansard:
I think I can answer the question by saying that the facts that appear to be put on the record are not known to me. If my hon. friend will write me a letter. I shall answer it promptly.
Well, I did write that letter quite promptly and to date I regret that for some reason I have yet to receive an answer. Therefore, I must avail myself of this opportunity to

present the facts as I see them in the hope that possibly the minister has the answer. I understand that he is in the process of preparing the letter but I have not received it yet. Possibly the parliamentary assistant is in a position to answer.
Part of this clipping goes on to say this:
Surrey council-
Surrey is the municipal district in which the hospital was being built. I continue:
Surrey council was informed yesterday by their fiscal agents, A. E. Ames and Company, that it was impossible to sell the hospital bonds or any other large municipal debenture issues on the Canadian market.
The only alternative suggested by the agents is for the municipality to place the issue on the American market, which would cost the taxpayers 6i per cent interest plus per cent bonus rate on American funds.
That, Mr. Chairman, is a most unfortunate situation and probably the parliamentary assistant recognizes it as such. It does make it very difficult indeed for the municipalities who find themselves in the position of having to erect public buildings. It is not a question of wishing to build a hospital or wishing to build additions to their schools, but when you have a district such as the one in which I live where the population has increased by over 20,000 in the past four years, you find that they require more schools.
I see the parliamentary assistant shaking his head. I suppose he is indicating that he feels this is completely out of order. I am satisfied that probably in the true sense the remarks may be out of order but, Mr. Chairman, I would say this. In view of the fact that we are discussing the finances of municipalities and the assistance to municipalities at this time, this bill is intended to alleviate their condition, and we do have certain proposals which would augment municipal finances and assist them to a greater degree. I intend to come to that very shortly.
I do hope that the parliamentary assistant finds the time to make a statement on a situation such as this where municipalities in general across Canada find themselves in the position of having to go to a foreign market in order to sell their bonds so that they can carry on the work that they have been set up to do.
I realize full well that the minister from time to time has said that the municipalities are the creatures of the provincial governments. Certainly, the municipalities are the creatures of the provincial governments but at the same time the federal government is the creature of the provincial governments owing to the fact that we would never have had a federal government if it had not been for the decision of four of the provinces

to go ahead and form a dominion, and in so doing we have arrived at this position.
We might debate for some time as to who is responsible, but that would not answer the problem in so far as the municipal officials are concerned. The answer to this particular problem, I feel, might well be found in the communication I received from Mr. E. R. Parsons, the reeve of the corporation of the township of Richmond. The council of Richmond passed a resolution, a copy of which was sent to me. I expect copies were sent to all members from British Columbia. It reads as follows:
Whereas the federal government of Canada has deemed it desirable that standards of safety, health, housing and welfare be raised within this country:
And whereas the federal government, through the enactment of new legislation, and through the administration of existing statutes, has withheld its support of and participation in both private and public community development projects, where such schemes are jeopardized by inferior municipal services:
And whereas the majority of the municipalities of Canada are anxious to achieve the high standards of safety, health, housing and welfare which the federal government deems desirable;
And whereas it is no longer economically feasible for municipalities to borrow money from nongovernment sources the funds necessary to provide urgently required public services:
Therefore be it resolved that the government of Canada establish a fund from which municipal corporations may borrow money at a nominal rate for the following purposes:
(a)	sewers and sewerage plants,
(b)	water mains and works,
(c)	roads, bridges and street lighting,
(d)	parks and recreation facilities.
I am satisfied, sir, that hon. members will recognize in this resolution a proposal that has been made not only on one occasion but on several occasions by members both from this group and other groups in the house.
Certain of the provinces have recognized their responsibilities and they also have what we term a revolving fund to assist some of the municipalities; but the very fact that this government recognizes the need for further municipal assistance, which is indicated by the introduction of this bill, is indicative itself of a recognition of the need, which is only being partially met, and very partially, by the government of today in the way in which the hon. member for York West mentioned just a few moments ago.
Certain of the municipalities that have these public buildings are going to receive that assistance while others which have very few or no public buildings will receive very little benefit from it. It is not helping them in any way, shape or form.
It is not necessarily my plea that only those municipalities that are fortunate enough to have taxable buildings or property under the terms of this act should receive
Municipal Grants Act
benefit from it. I feel, as do hon. members of this group, that each and every municipality across Canada should have means made available to them whereby they can receive money at a low cost in order to carry on with progressive construction in the continuation of their work.
Before closing my remarks, Mr. Chairman, I should perhaps add in fairness to the Minister of Finance that when I raised this other question with respect to the letter he promised in return-I believe he was writing to my district to get in touch with Ames and Company-I appreciated that this would take some time. However, I think that for the information of all hon. members if the parliamentary assistant could make a statement on the subject it would be of value to each of us.


Charles Edward Johnston: Mr. Chairman, before the clause is carried I would like to ask a question. Since the purpose of Bill No. 158, according to the footnote, is "to increase the grants on federal property up to the full tax equivalent", my question is this. While Banff is located in a national park, for the purposes of collecting hospital and school taxes it is considered as a municipality. That arrangement was entered into when hospital service was introduced in Banff and of course it has been considered in that light for a long time as far as the collection of school taxes is concerned.
Perhaps the parliamentary assistant could answer the following questions. Will the people of Banff be able to collect taxes for school and hospital purposes under this new schedule of rates? I understand a new schedule of rates will be created or at least the assessment will be increased and the overall amount of taxes collected will be considerably greater. The position of Banff is unique in that the town is located in a national park. I wonder if the minister could explain just how this is going to apply in the town of Banff? Will the people of Banff now be able to collect a higher rate-for their schools and hospitals under this legislation?


William Moore Benidickson: Perhaps I could answer that now. My hon. friend will know that the Municipal Grants Act ever since its enactment and even under the amendments proposed specifically excludes from a grant in lieu of taxation a park, historical site, monument, museum and other public amenities of that kind; but I am able to tell my hon. friend that irrespective of this legislation the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources has been negotiating with the school district to which my hon. friend refers. I understand there are approximately

Municipal Grants Act 17 children living in government dwellings and going to school in the school district to which he referred. I believe an arrangement has been made through the Department of Northern Affairs and Resources to pay to the school district the equivalent of the nonresident fee that would be set by that school district for someone who did not reside within it but whose children for some reason required schooling.


Charles Edward Johnston: I know that
arrangement exists, Mr. Chairman, but that applies only to the 17 children who are attending school there. These are the children of people who live in government-owned houses in Banff. Under this new legislation the federal property will become subject to tax. For instance, there is a post office there and an administration building. If they were located outside the park, let us say in Calgary, there would be no question but that they would be subject to tax on their assessment. Is that not so?


William Moore Benidickson: That is so with respect to the type of property to which my hon. friend refers but I point out to him that in no municipality would this act be applicable to such a property as a park, a historic site, a monument, a museum, a public library, an art gallery or an Indian reserve.


Charles Edward Johnston: But the point is that the buildings the parliamentary assistant has itemized are exempt and there is no indication that a post office or an administration building is exempt. When you come to put a value on the post office building, the administration building and other such buildings excluding those which the minister mentioned, there is a vast difference as far as Banff is concerned. The federal government is now paying the tax on only these 17 children.


William Moore Benidickson: That is right because all the land is federal government park land.


Charles Edward Johnston: Certainly when the federal government has property such as a post office and an administration building situated in Banff and they are supplied with all the utilities then the buildings are put in a different category. That is my point. I want to know at this time whether the people of Banff are going to be treated in the same way as the people in any other municipality.


William Moore Benidickson: What utilities outside of the school services of the school district are provided within that area that are not paid for by the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources?


Charles Edward Johnston: The water and sewerage system and the gas and electricity,


for instance. Certainly it cannot be said that the federal government is paying its share for the water and sewerage, just to take one example. I mentioned this before but I think it bears repeating. The federal government has now gone in on its own and is going to extend the water and sewerage system in Banff, making it approximately two or three times as large as it was before. That is not being done to accommodate the people of Banff; it is being done to accommodate the increased tourist trade that will be there for two or three months each year. The people of Banff are expected to pay half of that and their rates have been doubled. The rates in Banff are now higher than those in Calgary for equal service.
I believe that under this legislation Banff should be considered as any other municipality would be considered at least for the purposes of the application of this tax to educational and hospital services. Certainly the people of Banff should not be required to maintain school services and pay for them merely to accommodate these 17 children who attend school there because they are the children of departmental officials who live in government-owned houses.
The federal government owns a vast amount of property in Banff. Other municipalities have been recognized under this legislation and that has been the fight all the way through right here in the city of Ottawa. The fight has been that the federal government should pay its fair share of taxes on government property within the municipality of Ottawa. Why should not the same thing apply to the town of Banff, because the situations are similar?
I am not suggesting that the federal government is not paying a good share of the cost of the Trans-Canada highway, but let me point out again that the Trans-Canada highway and all governmental expenditures of that kind are not designed for the benefit of the people of Banff in particular but rather for the benefit of all the people of Canada and with regard to the tourist trade. Why should the parliamentary assistant say this is a service for which money is spent to accommodate the people of Banff when it is not so? The people of Banff have to maintain the exceptionally good educational and hospital services which they have there. In fact, a new hospital is being built at the present time. The town of Banff is now sharing in the hospitalization scheme inaugurated by the provincial government. When that system was brought in it was stated that Banff was to be recognized as a municipality for the collection of those taxes. The same thing applies to the collection of school taxes.

Surely in this case the government should recognize some responsibility in this regard. The federal government has large holdings. There is a beautiful administration building and a fine new post office. I am not suggesting that these buildings are not beautiful but they are located on government property and they receive the services to which I referred from the public utilities. I say that they should pay an increased proportion of the tax in regard to this, and I have mentioned hospitalization and schools. I think there should be some consideration given to that, and at this moment.


Mr. Palletl:: Mr. Chairman, in rising to take part in the debate on this bill I should like to point out that this is of particular importance to the municipalities in my riding because there are large and extensive federal holdings in the area. Owing to the rapid growth in the area of the past few years these municipalities have not always been able to qualify for the minimum grants given previously. We welcome this very small increase in federal assistance to the municipalities.
Peel county has enjoyed the second fastest rate of growth of any county in Ontario, the first position being occupied by Halton county immediately to the west. Every municipality in these two counties is faced with the problem created by rapid development.
I think it would be of interest to the committee to see the amount of taxes collected by the municipalities and compare the expenditures they are required to make, and also the taxes collected by other branches of government. I should like to refer to the consolidation of public finance statistics put out in March, 1957 by the dominion bureau of statistics. This gives the revenue and expenditures of all governments for the year ending December 31, 1954.
In that year the federal government obtained $4,204,469,000 and was required to spend $4,056,161,000, slightly less. When we go to the lower levels of government we find that the provinces collected $1,054,979,000 but were required to spend $1,349,385,000, which was in excess of what they collected. When we consider the municipal tax picture we find that they collected from their limited tax fields $885,082,000 and were required to spend in the provision of municipal services $1,214,033,000. That rate of required spending, and I say it is required spending, cannot continue without there being other sources of taxation available to the municipalities. I suggest that the municipalities must look to that branch of government which has the broadest base of taxation, that is, this government.
Municipal Grants Act
There is probably more value obtained from the municipal dollar than from the dollar of any other level of government. That is because of the people who occupy municipal councils and who are able to give more direct attention to expenditures. In some measure this act recognizes that assistance should be given to the municipalities, but it should go even farther than it does. This matter was touched upon slightly by the hon. member for York West who referred to interest charges.
Municipal taxes must be based upon estimated expenditures for the year, and those estimated expenditures include interest charges on debentures. This government is saying that they will pay full municipal taxes and as a potential municipal taxpayer they should be interested in seeing that the municipal tax rate is kept down. One effective way of doing that I suggest is to lower the cost of money to municipalities. Mr. Chairman, I think that keeps me entirely within the rules.
I urge this government to consider seriously the setting up of a municipal fund similar to that set up by the provinces to permit municipalities to borrow money at low rates of interest. There are services which must be provided in the development of areas such as sewers, water and, what is most important, education. In referring to the expenditures by municipalities under various headings I indicated that $1,214,033,000 had been spent by the municipalities during the year ending December 31,	1954. Of that amount
$426,620,000 was spent for educational purposes, or one-third of the municipal budgets across Canada. In many areas the percentage is higher than that.
In its recent legislation providing for educational grants the province of Ontario has recognized this, and one municipality I have in mind for the first time in the past five years has been able to hold its tax rate because of the increase in educational grants. I urge the government to take some steps along these lines and make similar benefits available to the municipalities. It might be interesting to compare the expenditure upon education by the federal government in that same year which amounted to $27,536,000, a considerably smaller amount.
The source of taxation for municipalities is based largely on real estate, which includes homes. In 1954, the municipalities were required to levy a tax of $651,859,000, on real and personal property, and total receipts were $885 million. That is an indication that there is a direct levy on home owners, on the type of person and the type of activity that we wish to encourage in this country.

Municipal Grants Act
As a matter of economics, home ownership is one of the basic methods of attacking the situation which this government itself describes as inflation. I would suggest that aid to the municipalities to enable them to hold the line in real property taxes would encourage home ownership, which in itself would be one step to assist in meeting the problem which the government has created, and which apparently its own measures have not been successful in meeting. If hon. members will note, the cost of living index for January is up again, which shows that the steps taken by the government have not yet been effective.
Another suggestion I would like to put forward concerns some federal property held for non-immediate use, property which, if it were in the hands of private persons or municipalities, could be productively used and not held vacant. If the government is serious in its wish to help municipalities then I suggest it should review its real estate holdings, and where those holdings are not being put to the best use they should be released either to municipalities or to private individuals, receiving in return, of course, if the property is being released to municipalities, some nominal value, and if it is being released to private persons, the whole market value of the property.
In my riding I refer specifically to the area known as the Long Branch rifle range. Over the years there have been some promises that these properties will be released for development. They are ideally located for good development, and if good buildings were put on the land now occupied by the ranges they would be of practical assistance to the municipality in providing increased tax returns. While the present bill pretends to assist municipalities, I suggest that taxes on vacant land are obviously considerably less than taxes on developed land.
There is recognition in part in the bill, Mr. Chairman, as to the education tax rate. In the committee, in answers to questions, it was indicated that there would be no separation of the cheque given by the federal government to a municipality indicating how the amount was arrived at, and it was explained that if it was going to the same municipality it did not really matter. I would point out that the average municipal tax bill clearly indicates on its face the amount levied for education and the amount levied for general purposes.
Under the complex formula set out in the act for determining the educational payment I suggest that there would be different interpretations in different municipalities, and for clarification it would be very material to indicate, if only in the letter enclosing the

cheque, that X dollars is for the general rate and Y dollars for the educational rate. There are areas where there are public and separate schools and it would be in those cases, where the same municipality must take the cheque and divide it among those schools, that difficulty would arise. But if a division was clearly set out in the letter accompanying the cheque I think it would overcome this potential problem.
As I said before, Mr. Chairman, this legislation has come about as a result of repeated demands by members of the opposition. It is again a case of the government being forced to act when it is approaching an election.


Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: Oh, yes?


John Cameron Pallett: I am glad the deputy whip agrees with me. I wish that in matters such as this we could have just a little farsighted leadership instead of the government always leaning back and having to be pushed from behind.


Mr. Smith (Battle River-Camrose):: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the parliamentary assistant whether or not the Wainwright municipal district will receive grants from the federal treasury as a consequence of an army camp being within the boundaries of the municipal district?


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, we have a special section dealing with what are called "self-contained defence establishments" I imagine that Wainwright is one of these establishments. The arrangements then are different from those made with regard to property of the federal government of other descriptions. The government itself generally provides the usual municipal services required at such military camps, so what is done is to arrange to pay on the value of the land only, and to accept an assessment with respect to the dwellings occupied by its personnel. That is done because among families in these dwellings there would be people getting schooling from an organized school board. But as to these self-contained military camps, in this bill they are specifically excluded from the normal assessment. Under the amending bill the federal government will simply be assessed on the land and, roughly, additionally on the dwellings occupied.


James Alexander Smith: Suppose this land happens to be under lease to the federal government? How does that fit into the picture?


William Moore Benidickson: We have a new provision in this bill, something that has not been in the existing act, which permits the federal government to make a grant in respect of

federally owned buildings even though they are not on land owned by the crown.


Charles Edward Johnston: I would like to ask a further question of the parliamentary assistant with regard to the situation in Banff. He mentioned a moment ago that the federal government was paying so much to the school district for these 17 pupils. I would like to ask him how much the federal government pays.


William Moore Benidickson: I am not familiar with the actual rate for each pupil, Mr. Chairman, because the money is under a vote of another department; it is in the vote provided for the parks branch of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. However, I know it is the same rate the school district would charge any non-resident.


Charles Edward Johnston: It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that where the government has property in a place such as Banff-and I mentioned two a moment ago, namely the administrative building and the post office- they should be treated about the same as any other occupants of that area. For instance, the Canadian Pacific Railway has a hotel there, namely the Banff Springs hotel. It is my understanding that they pay on an assessment basis. If an institution such as the C.P.R. is taxed on an assessment basis for school purposes and for these other services that are rendered there, surely the federal government should be assessed on the property they hold, such as the administration building and the property which is used for postal services.
I hope the parliamentary assistant will give some consideration to this question which I have raised, and that it will be possible for some scheme to be worked out whereby the federal government, under this new arrangement, will be obliged to increase its contributions toward the services they receive in the national parks, particularly in Banff. It would also apply to Jasper and to other areas situated in national parks which are in a similar position.


John Borden Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I was not able to see the minutes of the committee meeting; we had them only in typewritten form. Was any reference made to the method of arriving at a valuation which was satisfactory not only to the municipalities but also to the department? Is there any connection with the advertisements we have seen asking for assessors? Has that any bearing on what the department plans to do in connection with fixing a satisfactory assessment for these buildings?


William Moore Benidickson: Some 700 or 800 municipalities that do not now get grants will,
Municipal Grants Act
under the present bill, be entitled to grants in lieu of taxes. In the committee we had evidence from the officials who administer the act. In the course of it they said that 98 per cent or 99 per cent of the assessments that came in caused very little trouble and that, generally speaking, if they were satisfied that the federal properties were being valued on the same basis as that on which the municipality would assess any other taxpayer, they were not complaining. It was only where there might appear to be a lack of understanding of a certain type of building which probably only the federal government would own, or where there appeared to be some desire to be a little bit more onerous in assessing the federal government than in connection with any other taxpayer within that area, that there would be any trouble.


John Borden Hamilton: Is the department taking on additional assessors to assist in this work?


William Moore Benidickson: This staff has been very small. As the number of municipalities with whom they have to deal is now being greatly enlarged, I have no doubt that some additional staff will have to be taken on.


John Borden Hamilton: Would it not be possible to employ competent valuators already in these areas to do this type of work for the department, keeping in mind that once the general job of dealing with all these buildings throughout the 800 additional municipalities is finished, at that time there might not be any need for increasing this staff? I think all of us are concerned about the fact that in connection with almost every bit of legislation that comes before us here, one of the first items that has to be taken care of is the additional number of persons to be employed by the department. If we keep this up there will be less money in actual fact for the municipalities.


Mr. Murphy (Lambton West):: I do not
intend to take much of the time of the committee. I think the parliamentary assistant to the minister is aware of what I intend to speak about. It is a situation which concerns my own riding, but the same conditions might exist-and I am sure they do-in many other ridings in Canada. I have reference to the services rendered by the municipality to an Indian reservation within the city of Sarnia.
Along with other property which was formerly in the township of Sarnia, we have taken in the Sarnia Indian reserve. I have made some representations in the past in the hope that the situation there could be remedied to the extent that for any services that are rendered by the city to the reserve, there would be a return to the city. The land

Municipal Grants Act
is not subject to taxation. I have previously urged that a reserve such as this should be subject to taxation, especially when it receives such services from the municipality.
Incidentally, Mr. Chairman, I may say that this reserve is not like many others that we have in Canada. It is, I think, in the process of being sold. If the sale goes through it is going to involve in the neighbourhood of $9 million; which will be the largest real estate transaction Canada has ever had. I am sure many will agree with me when I say that when a reserve obtains all the services this one is given-it gets the same services as any other part of the city in connection with police protection, health services and everything else that goes to make up the cost of servicing a municipality-the municipality should be compensated.
I think the parliamentary assistant has in his office a resolution and a statement from the city of Sarnia to the effect that last year the services to that particular reserve were worth in the neighbourhood of $27,000. While these reserves have not been subject to taxation, I have always contended that they should be. If not, at least the municipality in which they are situated should be compensated for the expense it incurred.
There is an astounding factor about this particular situation. I had from the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration a return to a question asking what was paid to the city last year for services. In the return I think he mentioned the amount of $2,630.59, of which $375 was for fire halls.


William Moore Benidickson: For what?


Joseph Warner Murphy: Fire halls. The day after I referred to this matter in the house last January I had from the city manager a telegram to the effect that $375 was the total amount paid by the government for services. There may be some confusion about what services are included. However, my contention is that Indian reservations should be included so they come within the purview of the act, to the extent that they too would be subject to taxation.
Naturally we would not expect the reserve to be assessed on the basis of the amount for which the property could be sold. Sections of this reserve have been sold in the past for $2,000 an acre, so it is not a poor reserve. In fact I would say it is the second wealthiest reserve in the Dominion of Canada. There are only about 80 families on the whole reserve. I hope before this a bill is finally passed consideration can be given to this particular set of circumstances, and we can at least see that the city is reimbursed for its outlay. That is my first objection. The second one is,

of course, that the property should be assessed the same as other property within the city limits.
The second item I wish to mention briefly is this. We have a crown company in Sarnia in the Polymer Corporation. Homes were built there and taxes were fixed at a nominal amount because the homes were occupied by crown employees. I would suggest that where a special assessment or a special tax was fixed on an annual basis over a term of years, that arrangement should be abrogated and the property assessed the same as other property. I hope the department will seriously consider this situation, as well as the situation with respect to the Indian reserve.


Mr. Patterson:: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I have not been in the house because I have been in attendance at the committee on marine and fisheries. I understand that the hon. member for New Westminster posed some questions, and I was wondering if they had been answered.


William Moore Benidickson: No, but I was just about to do that. The hon. member for New Westminster asked about the eligibility of a communication station for a grant. I confessed my difficulty in the banking and commerce committee which has not been resolved. What was the type of unit he had in mind? I could think offhand that it could be a communication station at an airport. I could think it might be something that was part of the activities of the C.B.C. It could very well be something that belonged to the Department of Transport. Normally, anything in the nature of a technical engineering structure is not something that would be assessed, but if he could give me the details I could make inquiries and within a day or two let him know.


Frederick George Hahn: It is a telecommunications station, one erected for the purpose of carrying this new transmission line we have to Australia and New Zealand. I believe it comes under the Department of Transport.


William Moore Benidickson: It may come under the Department of Transport, in which case I am sure the land it occupies would be eligible for assessment. On the other hand, it may be something that is operated by the overseas telecommunications corporation, which is a crown company, and at the present time that would involve negotiation between the corporation and the municipality.
The other question related to an experimental station, and I take it that was a reference to what is sometimes described also as an experimental farm. An experimental farm as such would qualify for assessment, with this exception; that if it involves as part

of its operation something that might be called a public park, as does the farm in Ottawa, that section of the farm that is a park would not be subject to assessment.


Alexander Bell Patterson: I wonder if the minister has a list of defence establishments that qualify under this legislation. I was thinking especially of the large camp in the municipality of Chilliwack, and the Abbotsford airport, which is an R.C.A.F. airport.


William Moore Benidickson: I do not seem to have it at hand, but I do recall that during the hearings in committee a list was put on the Hansard record of the committee of the 14 or 18 large military establishments that would doubtless be considered as establishments such as described here in the bill, in clause 1, subsection 1 (c) 4.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I did not ask the parliamentary assistant regarding Gagetown, but I assumed there would be no doubt Gagetown would be one of those self-contained military establishments.


Clarence Gillis: I would ask the parliamentary assistant if there would be any doubt about a radar station operated by national defence?


William Moore Benidickson: Would not this be an engineering project and I would imagine that the machinery itself would not be subject to assessment. If it were within an organized municipality, and in conjunction with it there were a number of dwellings for operating personnel, then those dwellings would be subject to assessment, I am sure.


Clarence Gillis: The station itself would not, despite the fact it is operated by the services?


William Moore Benidickson: The land occupied by this technical military apparatus would be subject to assessment, but I repeat not such values of your federal government as runways at airports. The land under the runway is assessed, but not the pavement and not the hangars. Then, of course, if located on a self-contained military establishment it would not be subject to the normal assessment. We have special provisions in this amending bill. If a number of the personnel were occupying dwellings on the land the federal government would be assessed, and the land on which the apparatus was situated would be subject to assessment.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The same thing would apply to a television station?


Mr. Jones:: Would the assessment be carried out by the municipality involved, or would the government carry out its own assessment?


William Moore Benidickson: The government retains the right to review the assessment. It does not submit itself to an arbitrary assessment
Municipal Grants Act
valuation by the municipality. What is normally done by our department is to look at the assessment, and then some federal civil servant will look into it and have a look at the assessment on other properties in that municipality, with a view to determining that the valuations and assessments of federal government properties are in line with those of any other taxpayer. It is just a question of being treated fairly and equally within the municipality, and the minister retains discretion to argue over the assessment.


Mr. Weir:: If the parliamentary assistant does not mind I wonder if he would expand a little further his reference to the taxable part of an experimental farm. For instance, would that not only apply to the land? These properties are considerably enhanced in value by government expenditures on buildings for research and things of that nature. Would these farms not be in the same position as military establishments in so far as the basis of taxation is concerned? Would he also make reference, if he has information here, to the position of Indian agencies in the application of this act?


William Moore Benidickson: With respect to the normal experimental farm, it will be subject to assessment and a grant in lieu of taxes will be paid in the ordinary way.


William Gilbert Weir: That is on the land?


William Moore Benidickson: On the whole property. The only exception that comes to my mind is a certain portion of the Ottawa experimental farm which is more in the nature of a public park. A certain portion of the Ottawa farm land is not used for farm work. In so far as tax arrangements are concerned between the federal government and Ottawa, a large portion of the farm has been considered for the assessment in connection with the grant in lieu of taxes.
As to the matter of Indian agencies, that would depend entirely on whether the Indian agency was on an Indian reserve or normally on land within a municipality. If it was off the reserve the building occupied to carry on the business of the agency would be subject to assessment.


Mr. Matheson:: I have a question which concerns the recognizable taxing authority as well as perhaps the buildings and installations. I am thinking of Wood islands, the Prince Edward Island terminal of the Wood Islands-Caribou ferry. There we have a building which is used by the inspection service of the fruit and vegetable department and the seed potato certification branch of the Department of Agriculture. There is also under construction right now a dock or berthing facilities for the new ferry, the cost of which

Supply-Post Office
will probably run close to $500,000. There the only taxing authority would be the rural school board. I wonder whether the parliamentary assistant can enlighten me on that?


William Moore Benidickson: Wharves as such are specifically excluded from assessment in this bill. We have a new feature with which I am sure the hon. member is familiar. Certain school districts in the province of Prince Edward Island have independent rights to tax, and for the first time we shall be able to make grants to these independently authorized school district taxing authorities.


Alexander Bell Patterson: Am I right in assuming that in the past no taxes or grants in lieu of taxes have been paid on experimental farms?


William Moore Benidickson: I do not think that is so. I think it is simply a matter that the original 4 per cent floor excluded most of the experimental farms throughout our rural municipalities across the country. That 4 per cent average as a floor exclusion was, of course, reduced to 2 per cent later. That must have made those farms ineligible, but now that there is no floor of elimination I think the principle would help in what you have in mind.


Alexander Bell Patterson: They have been excluded in assessments?


William Moore Benidickson: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 2 to 9, inclusive, agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Applewhaite in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
333. Departmental administration, including an amount of $250,000 to defray the expenses of the 1957 congress of the universal postal union to be held in Ottawa, $2,091,516.
Mr. Bell:: Mr. Chairman, I had intended to say a few words about the design and engraving of our postage stamps. This is a subject in which I have been interested for some time, and I spoke on one other occasion about it. Many hon. members have already referred to their commemorative suggestions for stamps, and I have criticized in some detail the various designs we now have.
I want to go back and trace the history of our stamps for a moment. In our early postage stamps, we started off in fine fashion and had some commendable stamps, not only from the philatelists' points of view but

also from the strictly art appreciation point of view. I refer particularly to the bicoloured map stamp which made Canada famous, and I also think of the early queen stamps which perhaps today do not appear to be so beautiful in the sense that we recognize, but at that time they were very good in comparison with stamps of other countries. Then we came to the stamps that were inaugurated in the 1920's, and they received very favourable comment in the postage stamp collections and from critics of those collections.
The stamp that is recognized as one of the best by collectors is the 50-cent bluenose, a blue stamp which depicted the famous Bluenose sailing ship. This stamp is in extreme demand and has been well thought of; but recently, Mr. Chairman, there has been a serious deterioration in our stamps. I do not want to dwell on the specific criticisms that have already been made here, but we know that the Canadian coronation stamp was one of the worst stamps to be issued in 1953. I perhaps am not as critical as some are about that stamp, but I feel it left much to be desired.
Then we come to the present-day situation, and the stamps are not improving. I want to make my point clear here, Mr. Chairman. I have read over the discussion in committee last year, when we had our experts from this branch of the department. I feel they are excellent men; I feel they know their job, but my criticism is that we are taking the wrong approach in our design. I think the new type of offset engraving, or whatever the method that is used, is desirable; but it is this abstract art that is creeping into our postage stamps that I object to. I feel that it is a sign again of the immaturity of Canada to try to branch out into an art field for which we are not ready. It reminds me a bit of the ballet dancers on the C.B.C. and those other related examples of new art, new-fangled art, ideas that we have.
I think the principle of giving a prize to a young Canadian artist to come up with a design is commendable; it is worth while; it should be done, but I do not think we should follow this method of abstract art in all our postage stamps. I wish to refer specifically to only one or two of the stamps that were issued. For example, our new animal stamp series is in this abstract design, and it is almost impossible to pick out the animals. In many other instances the athletes are difficult to connect with any sport. I feel that we have to get back to a simple, ordinary Canadian scene, or Canadian

animals depicted in a scene, if we want to do the best we can in this show the nations make.
Another thing that comes to my mind, Mr. Chairman, is the stamp that was issued in 1955 with respect to the boy scout jamboree.
It was a beautiful, bi-coloured, well engraved stamp, but it did not depict the activities of the boy scouts. It bore nothing of a boy scout indication. Why would it not have been possible for us to have a stamp like the one designed in New Zealand that would show our boy scouts in a camping scene, as was the case with theirs, something that would arouse the interest of the young stamp collectors in the country and at the same time be much more appreciated, I think, than abstract art on stamps? I throw that out only as a suggestion, Mr. Chairman, but it has been on my mind for some time.
If I could sum up in a brief way the points I have endeavoured to make, I might repeat that I feel Canada started off with some very commendable stamps but lately there has been a serious deterioration. We have experts in the department who are well qualified, but this matter of abstract art in our stamp designs which I think was inaugurated about 1952 is all wet. It is another indication of the immaturity of Canada.
Why would it not be possible for us to turn out a simple series of stamps depicting Canadian scenes? We could have a series of stamps running up to $1 in value each of which could depict one of the Canadian national parks or a Canadian capital city. We have splendid Canadian artists who could design stamps bearing typical Canadian scenes such as those I have mentioned. If this were done we could avoid these rather weird art expressions on stamps which no one is able to understand, explain, or appreciate. It is my hope that we can get away from the weird approach to art we have been following, so that Canada will once more be appreciated throughout the stamp world and from a collector's point of view as it once used to be.


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Is
the minister not going to deal with any of the questions which have been raised and which probably come under the first item?


Mr. Lapointe:: That is what I intend to do, Mr. Chairman. I thought at this stage I might touch upon some of the points raised by hon. members during the course of this discussion.
At the outset may I say that I was pleased to hear so many hon. members on both sides of the house commend the officials and employees of the Post Office Department. I think we all agree that as a group postal
Supply-Post Office
employees are very good civil servants indeed, dedicated to the task of giving the best possible service to the Canadian people. I am sure that the words of appreciation expressed by hon. members in this house will be a source of great satisfaction to the employees and officials of this department, and will encourage them to continue their efforts in that direction.
I was also pleased to hear some hon. members express their satisfaction at the decentralization program which was embarked upon a few years ago and which appears to be working out very well indeed. I might say it is intended that this program be developed further with a view to bringing decision and action as close as possible to the local public.
Finally I might say that in looking over the remarks made by hon. members on Friday last, yesterday evening and this afternoon, I find a great majority of them are highly constructive and will certainly be of assistance in effecting improvements in the service.
Before I deal specifically with some of the points raised by hon. members I would like to dispel an erroneous impression which I seem to have given during the course of my remarks the other day and which resulted in the Canadian Press publishing in various newspapers across the country a news item to the effect that I had indicated the Post Office Department would have a surplus of $30 million at the end of this fiscal year. I might comment that I would like such a situation to be true, and I can think of many of the demands that have been made by hon. members that could be easily met if this were the case, but I am afraid the newspaperman who wrote that report did not analyse correctly the figures which were given.
As a matter of fact perhaps I am the one who is responsible for that. At that time, as an indication of the increased volume of business of the Post Office Department, I announced that the estimated revenue for the fiscal year ending March 31 was $169,658,000, which was an increase of approximately $11 million or 7 per cent over the previous year. I understand that in order to arrive at the figure of $30 million surplus the newspaperman who wrote this article picked up the blue book and saw that the appropriation voted by this house for the same year was $139 million, and he simply subtracted that figure from what I had indicated to be the revenue.
However, as some hon. members know, the costs of some of the activities of the Post Office Department are paid directly from the revenue of the department. If hon. members will look at section 5 and section 20 of the

Supply-Post Office
Post Office Act they will find listed the various operations which are paid under statutory authority from the revenue received. The biggest item is the remuneration of all postmasters in revenue post offices, and this alone represents an amount of $18,866,000 for the current year.
Other disbursements made from revenue receipts include expenditures for the installation of stamp vending machines, compensation to special delivery messengers, losses by fire, theft and forgery, commissions paid to foreign countries on money orders drawn on those countries, charges on parcels mailed in Canada for delivery in foreign countries, charges for the transit of Canadian mail forwarded through foreign countries and on Canadian air mail to or through foreign countries, and indemnities paid for lost insured Canadian parcels and registered letters. Disbursements for these items for the current year are estimated to be $21,500,000.
The revenue surplus would be more in the nature of $8 million, or perhaps slightly less. From that would have to be deducted an amount of $750,000 covering the increase in contracts for rural mail carriers, and an increase in rates paid to the railway companies for the transportation of mail estimated at between $850,000 and $875,000. I think by the time March 31 is reached and all bookkeeping has been completed, the net surplus of the Post Office Department will be more in the nature of $6 million.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: How does that surplus compare with surpluses of previous years? Is it the largest we have had?


Hugues Lapointe: It was slightly over $10 million last year, so there will be a decrease of about $4 million.


William McLean Hamilton: Are
the two items of expenditure to which the minister just referred contained in the estimates currently before the house?


Hugues Lapointe: No. These items do not appear in the estimates, because they are made under the authority of the Post Office Act. They are met out of post office revenue. For instance, compensation to postmasters in revenue post offices is made by way of "warrants". In other words the postmaster retains his remuneration from the revenue of the post office. The estimates contain only appropriations to be voted by the house.


William McLean Hamilton: I am
aware of that. The Postmaster General referred to an item of freight rates which I would think should appear in the estimates.


Hugues Lapointe: That will be in the supplementary estimates to be tabled by the Minister of Finance.


William McLean Hamilton: According to the current estimates the surplus is approximately $8,125,000.


Hugues Lapointe: That will be a supplementary item. In order that hon. members may understand what would result from some of the changes they have asked for, and which may have merit, I should like to state that these things must be considered in the light of the true financial position of the department.
This brings me to a point raised by a number of hon. members, the resumption of the two deliveries a day by letter carrier service. Like many hon. members in this house I represent a constituency which is completely rural, and I do find some merit in representations that have been made that before the government returns to the two deliveries a day in the large centres it should provide a mail delivery service to those sections of the population which do not have it at the present time. I am not saying there is no merit in the representations being made for a return to two deliveries a day in certain centres, but I do believe that the present service should be extended. I consider it is the duty of the Post Office Department to expand the services to cover as large a proportion of the population as possible.
To return to the two deliveries a day would mean an increase of expenditure. When the committee on estimates was considering the estimates of the department last year two suggestions were made. One was that there should be two deliveries a day five days a week with no delivery on Saturday. The other was that there should be two deliveries a day five days a week and one delivery on Saturday. My officials believe, and I must say I share their opinion, that if two deliveries a day were instituted it would not be practical to follow the first suggestion. There are many people who remain in town on Saturday and who would like to have their mail. The accumulation of mail in the post office over the week end would be such that in many areas the delivery on Monday by letter carrier would be delayed, as there would be a much larger volume than would normally be handled.	.
For the purpose of informing the committee I may say that to implement the first suggestion it is estimated would mean an increased expenditure of $3,233,000 at the start when all the new men would be on minimum salary, and eventually the increase would amount to $3,723,000 when they had reached their maximum. In the case of two deliveries a day for five days in the week with one delivery on Saturday, it is estimated that the

increase initially would be $4,150,000, working up to $5,142,000. In addition there would be the cost of uniforms, equipment and so on.
These estimates are based on the number of calls made by the letter carriers under the old two deliveries a day system, but since that time it is well known that second class mail such as newspapers and publications has greatly increased in volume. It is problematical whether the same coverage could be given today by the letter carrier as was given in the days when two deliveries were in effect. It is practically impossible for the officials of the department to figure just what the increase would be on that score.
Now, Mr. Chairman, a certain number of members have expressed the thought that the conditions of service, the conditions of work, of postal employees are not as good as they should be, and that the salaries of postal workers generally are inadequate. Well, I can only say what was said to this committee and to the estimates committee, Mr. Chairman, and that is that these salaries, like the salaries of any other civil servants in any other government department, are determined by the civil service commission, which has the responsibility for examining salary rates in relation to rates for comparable types of work in private business and in relation to salaries paid in other government departments. They are continuously doing that work. When the department feels that adjustments should be made the commission is requested to make special surveys, but the decision is made by the civil service commission and postal employees on that score are on the same footing, shall I say, as other civil servants.
It was suggested that possibly a return to two deliveries a day would provide better working conditions and, particularly as regards letter carriers, that the volume of mail with which they are called upon to deal would be lessened if this were done. I have discussed this matter with the officers of the postal employees' association, and I have pointed out to them that if there are conditions which are beyond what should be reasonably expected, then certainly changes and improvements should be made; but that the mere act of changing over from a one delivery system to a two delivery system would not be a solution of those difficulties, and that they should be looked into and a solution found on the basis of individual cases. We have discussed a possible formula which would seem to be acceptable, and it is my intention to have the officers of the department carry on with this work.
Mr. Chairman, many hon. members have made comments regarding our postage stamps and, like the hon. member for Kootenay
Supply-Post Office
West, the hon. member for Lambton West and the hon. member for Saint John-Albert, have expressed views either in regard to our present postage stamp design or on the policy of the department respecting future issues of postage stamps. Hon. members will recall that during the sittings of the parliamentary committee on estimates and again during the discussion of the estimates of this department in the house last August, the policy of the department was outlined, and I explained that we felt that the only way to obtain good designs was to commission competent artists, particularly those interested in the subjects to be depicted on the postage stamps, and then have those designs criticized by experts; and that is precisely the policy we are following.
In connection with the recent issue of the outdoor recreation series, the hon. member for Kootenay West requested me to provide him with definite answers to the following four questions. The first was, had I ever seen anyone in Canada paddling a canoe and fishing in the manner shown on the stamp indicating a fishing expedition. I am afraid, Mr. Chairman, I must say that I have. I have myself fished in that manner, and if the hon. gentleman wants to accompany me when this session is over I will take him fishing on some of our good eastern rivers and lakes where he will sit in the bow of a canoe, with the guide in the stern paddling, so he can throw his fly or cast all over the lake.


An hon. Member:: That is right.


Hugues Lapointe: The hon. member asked me, next, if I had seen any female swimming in Canada in the attitude indicated on this stamp, and in water with waves of this regular nature. Well, I am afraid I cannot pose as an authority on the attitudes of female Canadian swimmers but I noticed, on examining this stamp closely, that the person shown on the stamp was performing the crawl in the most orthodox fashion, breathing through her mouth and under her left elbow. I think it is a true form of good swimming, although it does not permit the swimmer to appear at her best.
Next the hon. member asked me if I had ever seen anyone shoot a bird in the fashion portrayed on the stamp, with a bird dog pointing as indicated. I am sorry to have to say that any dog I have owned has always been gun-shy, and I am therefore no authority on this point. The last question asked was whether I had ever seen anyone skiing on a hill with a 45 degree slope holding one pole on the snow and the other one in the air. I may say that the degree of the slope

Supply-Post Office
shown on the stamp is only 29 degrees-I checked that-but I would draw to the attention of my hon. friend a photograph cut out of the sports page of the Montreal Star of Monday, March 4, depicting Miss Josephine Frandl of Austria. The text below the picture reads:
Austrian Shows the Ladies How It's Done. Josephine Frandl of Austria was the class of the ladies' field in the Quebec Kandahar at Mt. Trem-blant. She is shown skimming down the slopes to win the slalom. She also grabbed the downhill to take the combined honours and give the Austrians a sweep of the races.
Hon. members will see that this young lady has one pole in the air and the other pole on the slope.


An hon. Member:: You are learning something.


Hugues Lapointe: Mr. Chairman, can we report progress?
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: Tomorrow we will take any third readings on the order paper and then proceed with these estimates. It might be, however, that some time later in the day we will take the committee stage of the Merchant Seamen Compensation Act.


Howard Charles Green: What will follow the post office estimates?


Walter Edward Harris: Northern affairs.


[Stage Direction]
At six 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:

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 21
Mr. Thatcher:: 1.	What is the present population of Indians in Canada, by provinces?
2.	How many Indians were in receipt of relief rations or the equivalent from the federal government as at January 1, 1955 and January 1, 1956 (a) by provinces: (b) by Indian agencies?
3.	Has the department a tangible program to remove Indians from federal relief rolls and place them on the Canadian labour market?
4.	If so, how many Indians across Canada were so placed during the calendar year 1956?
Answer by : Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):
1. Indian population by provinces as shown
in the 1954 census of Indians:		
Alberta 			
British Columbia ....		. . 31,086
Manitoba 			
New Brunswick 			. . 2,629
Northwest Territories		. . 4,023
Nova Scotia 			
Ontario 			
Prince Edward Island 			. . 272
Quebec 			
Saskatchewan 			
Yukon 			
2. (a) January 1,		January 1,
	1955	1956
Prince Edward Island	40	20New Brunswick 	624	459Nova Scotia 	452	451Quebec 	2,690	2,282Ontario 	2,923	3,178Manitoba 	2,047	2,009Saskatchewan 	2,624	2,911Alberta 	872	861Northwest Territories .	201	275British Columbia 	3,254	3,139Yukon 	414	367(b) Agency January 1,	January 1,1955	1956Maritime region	Miramichi 	246	274Kingsclear 	90	99Tobique 	288	86Eskasoni 	252	259Shubenacadie 	200	192Prince Edward Island	40	20Quebec region	Abitibi 	1,273	958Bersimis 	39	30Caughnawaga 	239	202
Questions
Jeune Lorette 	5	4Maniwaki 	10	14Pierreville 	88	62Pointe-Bleue 	101	84Restigouche 	178	179Seven Islands 	300	300St. Augustin 	418	430Timiskaming 	39	19Southern Ontario region	Cape Croker 	-	-Caradoc	174	138Christian Island ....	47	64Golden Lake 	152	154Moravian 	2	2Parry Sound 	39	31Simcoe 	-	-Rice and Mud Lakes	-	-Sarnia 	-	-Six Nations 	21	13St. Regis 	265	200Tyendinaga 	76	90Walpole Island ....	13	17Saugeen 	4	6Northern Ontario region	Chapleau 	43	40Fort Frances 	111	124James Bay 	284	305Kenora 	70	75Manitoulin Island ..	425	640Nakina 	700	886Nipissing 	10	7Port Arthur 	63	67Sault Ste. Marie ....	127	103Sioux Lookout ....	297	216Manitoba region	Clandeboye 	380	349Dauphin 	282	279Fisher River 	153	265Nelson River 	190	108Norway House 	777	717Portage la Prairie ..	78	93The Pas 	187	198
Saskatchewan region
Battleford 	841	711Carlton 	146	145Crooked Lake 	166	163Duck Lake 	374	563File Hills-Qu'Appelle	688	660Touchwood 	105	120Meadow Lake 	112	118Pelly 	154	418
Miscellaneous
Includes Wood Mountain reserve No, 160, Maple Creek reserve No. 160A and Moose Woods (White Cap) reserve No. 94, administered directly by Saskatchewan regional headquarters		38	13

Questions		
Alberta and N.W.T. region		
Athabaska 	103	118Blackfoot 	6	3Blood 	41	2Edmonton 	76	43Fort St. John	12	8Fort Vermilion 	348	510Hobbema 	6	4Lesser Slave Lake ..	135	76Peigan 	5	7Saddle Lake 	77	33Stony-iSarcee 	63	57Fort Norman 	77	122Yellowknife 	124	153British Columbia region	Babine 	372	298Bella Coola 	49	85Cowichan 	865	1,004Kamloops 	71	62Kootenay 	94	91Kwawkewlth 	52	50Lytton 	261	225New Westminster ...	75	154Nicola 	75	81Okanagan 	90	77Queen Charlotte ....	137	-Skeena River	106	112Stuart Lake 	463	451Vancouver 	15	55West Coast	464	335Williams Lake	65	59Yukon 	414	3673. Yes. Indians are	given assistance to	prepare them to take their place in the labour	market. Training in	academic,	technical,commercial and trade	subjects is	available
and Indians are encouraged to take advantage of these opportunities.
In co-operation with industry, the national employment service and other federal, provincial and municipal government agencies, Indians are assisted in obtaining employment.
In addition, a labour placement program for Indians in urban areas is being developed.
4. 2,940. In addition employment was found for many other Indians who were not receiving relief assistance at the time of placement.


SUBSIDIZED HOUSING
Mr. Nicholson: 1.	How much financial assistance has the federal government provided Toronto and Ontario in connection with subsidizing housing projects?
2.	What other provinces and cities have received assistance for subsidized housing from the federal government, and how much has been paid in each case?
Answer by: Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister
of Public Works):
1. As at December 31, 1956, the federal government had paid $1,269,467.87 for projects in
the city of Toronto and another $5,125,872.50 for projects elsewhere in the province of Ontario as its share of the capital cost of subsidized projects undertaken jointly with the province of Ontario under section 36 of the N.H.A.
2. Assistance in other provinces and cities as of December 31, 1956 was:
Federal Share of Capital Costs on Section 36 Projects.
Newfoundland
St. John's 			$ 1,912,694.73
Nova Scotia Halifax 			 1,267,022.28
New Brunswick Oromocto 			 4,178.22
Saint John 			 1,932,794.01
Saskatchewan Moose Jaw 			 552,591.84
Prince Albert 			 239,120.95
British Columbia Vancouver 			 1,537,328.48


FILM PRODUCTION
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	How many films of dominion government departments were handled (a) by or through the national film board; (b) by private Canadian firms, each year since 1945?
2.	How many films for provincial government departments were handled (a) by or through the national film board; (b) by private Canadian firms, each year since 1945?
Answer by: Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):
1. From 1944 to 1951, available records do not give a breakdown between the national film board and private firms.
1944-45, ments.	109	films	for	government	depart-1945-46, ments.	100	films	for	government	depart-1946-47, ments.	31	films	for	government	depart-1947-48, ments.	47	films	for	government	depart-1948-49, ments.	59	films	for	government	depart-1949-50, ments.	21	films	for	government	depart-1950-51, ments.	25	films	for	government	depart-
1951-52, 38 of which 35 were done by N.F.B., 3 given out to private firms on contract.
1952-53, 36 of which 29 were done by N.F.B., 7 given out to private firms on contract.

1953-	54,	33 of	which	21 were	done	byN.F.B., 12	given	out to	private	firms	on
contract.
1954-	55,	23 of	which	18 were	done	by
N.F.B., 5 given out to private firms on contract.
1955-	56,	52 of	which	42 were	done	byN.F.B., 10	given	out to	private	firms	on
contract.
2. (a) No films have been produced by the national film board for provincial government departments; though 7 films have been sponsored jointly by the federal and provincial authorities.
Questions
1946-	47, 1 (joint sponsorship with the Saskatchewan government).
1947-	48, 3 (one of which was joint sponsorship with British Columbia and 2 joint sponsorship with Nova Scotia).
1948-	49, 2 (one joint sponsorship with Saskatchewan and one joint sponsorship with 3 maritime provinces).
1949-	50, 1 (joint sponsorship with Alberta).
Since the 1950 film act came into effect, the
national film board has not been able to accept sponsorship from anyone other than federal government departments.
(b) No information.

Commonwealth of Nations-Ghana APPENDIX
Letter from the Prime Minister of Canada to the Prime Minister of Ghana:
Ottawa, February 11, 1957
My dear Prime Minister,
On the approach of the momentous day when the state of Ghana is to attain its independence, it gives me very great pleasure to convey to you the sentiments of cordial esteem which I entertain for you personally, and my desire to foster relations of friendship and good understanding between Ghana and Canada as free and equal members of the commonwealth. You may rest assured that Canada, as a senior member of the commonwealth, is particularly pleased to welcome its newest member.
I greatly regret that it is not possible for me to attend personally the important ceremonies marking the occasion when the Gold Coast joins the community of free and
independent nations; however, in order to mark this important occasion, Canada has appointed as special envoy one of our outstanding citizens, the Honourable George Prudham, member of the Queen's privy council for Canada and Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys, who, with his wife, will have the honour of representing Canada at the ceremonies of the inauguration of independence.
I know that you will give entire credence to all that Mr. Prudham may say to you, especially when he shall assure you of the sincere wish of all the people of Canada for the continuing welfare and prosperity of Ghana.
With warmest regards,
Yours sincerely,


LOUIS S. ST. LAURENT
[Stage Direction]
Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, B.A., M.A., LL.D.,
Prime Minister of Ghana.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, March 7, 1957