1957-03-18

HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATES


[Stage Direction]
Monday, March 18, 1957


Mr. Speaker:: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received a message from His Excellency the Governor General, signed by his own hand, reading as follows:
Government House, Ottawa March 14, 1957 Members of the House of Commons:
I have received with great pleasure the address that you have voted in reply to my speech at the opening of parliament. I thank you sincerely for this address.
Vincent Massey COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE



RAILWAYS AND SHIPPING-CONCURRENCE IN FIRST REPORT OF SESSIONAL COMMITTEE

[Stage Direction]
Mr. H. P. Cavers (Lincoln) presented the first report of the sessional committee on railways and shipping owned, operated and controlled by the government, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.

Mr. J. H. Harrison (Meadow Lake) moved: that the first report of the standing committee on standing orders, presented on March 12, 1957, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform the house that negotiations with Poland for the purchase of Canadian wheat have just been concluded.
Hon. members will recall that, in the early months of 1956, Poland purchased from Canada 340,000 tons of wheat. The terms of payment were 15 per cent cash at time of shipment of each cargo and 85 per cent at the end of one year. Repayment of the 85 per cent balances was insured by the Export Credits Insurance Corporation.
Poland has met all her payments as they have fallen due up to the present time. As
a result, out of approximately $21 million owing between $9 million and $10 million have been repaid to the exporters of Canadian wheat.
A few weeks ago the Polish government asked for an extension of time for repayment of balances still owing. The Canadian government replied that it was sympathetic to such a request providing Poland demonstrated that it is a continuing customer for Canada's wheat by offering to buy substantial quantities during the present crop year and the next crop year.
Both governments have now approved the following arrangements: One, the Export Credits Insurance Corporation's outstanding policies of insurance relating to purchases during the 1955-56 crop year will be extended, on the understanding that payment of each outstanding draft is made as follows: 25 per cent on present scheduled due date; 25 per cent six months from present scheduled due date; 25 per cent 12 months from present scheduled due date; 25 per cent 18 months from present scheduled due date. Two, the Polish government will purchase additional quantities of wheat on the following basis: Quantity: 150,000 tons of wheat for shipment during the 1956-57 crop year; 150,000 tons of wheat for shipment during the 1957-58 crop year. Terms of payment: 10 per cent of the gross invoice value of each cargo at time of shipment and the balance of 90 per cent as follows: One-third payable two years from date of shipment; one-third payable 2| years from date of shipment; one-third payable three years from date of shipment. Three, the Export Credits Insurance Corporation will insure repayment of 90 per cent of the gross invoice value of each cargo.



IMMIGRATION


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a fairly extended statement about a question asked by the hon. member for Quebec West on March 13, and corrected by him in Hansard on March 14. I presume this is the proper time to do it.
I am informed that "Le Conseil Central des Oeuvres de Quebec" has allotted $2,000 to Le Bien-Etre des Immigrants de Quebec, a society composed of representatives of

Ministerial Statements
various churches and several voluntary organizations. The members of the Quebec Immigrant Welfare have always worked in close co-operation with the officials of the immigration branch in the reception, not only of Hungarian refugees, but of all immigrants passing through Quebec. Le Bien-Etre des Immigrants has agreed, at the request of the Archbishop of Quebec, to look after the welfare of Hungarian refugees who are in transit in Quebec city, as well as those who decide to establish themselves in that area. Le Bien-Etre des Immigrants de Quebec is one of the numerous voluntary organizations in Canada which have generously agreed to look after the welfare of the Hungarian refugees. They have assisted the immigration officials in establishing nearly 300 Hungarian families in Quebec city.
Since last Wednesday officials of my department have communicated with the officials of that organization and they have advised that they are aware of what the Canadian government has agreed to do for the Hungarian refugees and, so far, they have preferred to provide welfare to the Hungarian refugees without calling on financial assistance from the Canadian government. They have told the officials of my department that, if they were in need of financial assistance from the Canadian government, they would not hesitate to ask for it but, so far, they have preferred to look after the Hungarian refugees as a Christian charity without any financial assistance from the government.
I should like therefore to take advantage of this opportunity to thank the members of Le Bien-Etre des Immigrants de Quebec for their good work and their public-spirited attitude, and to thank them in the name of the immigrants for all they are doing to welcome our future Canadians whose first experience of Canada is the warm reception given to them at Quebec city, though most of the immigrants are just passing through on their way to other parts of the country.
If I may be permitted to add a postscript I would suggest that perhaps the hon. member for Quebec West (Mr. Dufresne) might find out the next time whether an organization really wants this kind of question raised in the house.



HEBRIDES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. In view of press Teports that some 2,500 Scotsmen wish to leave their island in the outer Hebrides to "the English and their
[Mr. Pickersgill.l
rockets", and move to one of the outer islands of Newfoundland, can the minister say what arrangements are being made to meet this request?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I must say that if this story is true, which I have not had the opportunity to find out, I commend their good judgment.



INCOME TAX


Hon. J. J. McCann (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, March 7, some hon. members raised questions regarding the taxation of payments which certain provincial governments have announced they will be making to citizens of their respective provinces. At that time I did not have before me the exact terms of these proposals but since then my officials in the taxation division have examined copies of the bills which are being introduced in these provincial legislatures.
Alberta
Bill No. 95 of the Alberta provincial legislature provides for the establishment of a citizens' dividend fund to be made up of one-third of all revenues derived by that province as oil and gas royalties from provincial lands. Out of this fund the provincial treasurer will annually declare a dividend to citizens of Alberta in an amount to be determined by the lieutenant governor in council.
Taxability: It is the opinion of officials of my department that these dividends are income and taxable as such under the Income Tax Act.
Tax credit: As the province of Alberta is not itself a taxpayer under the Income Tax Act, these dividends are not subject to the 20 per cent tax credit. That credit is only given in respect of dividends from Canadian corporations which pay income tax on corporate profits before paying dividends to shareholders.
Depletion allowance: It is also the opinion of my officials that these dividends will not be subject to a depletion allowance under the Income Tax Act and regulations.
British Columbia
In British Columbia, Bill No. 14 in the provincial legislature provides for assistance to residential home owners. The plan is that a rebate will be given against municipal taxes to home owners in respect of taxes on the homes occupied by them. The home owner

will claim the rebate, not exceeding $28, against the municipal tax, and then the province will reimburse the municipality for the rebate.
Taxability: As this plan affords relief to the home owner by way of reduction of the tax on his residence, it is not in the nature of an income payment.
Exception: Although this rebate is not generally given in respect of commercial property or rented property, there are two small exceptions. The rebate is payable in the case of two-housekeeping-unit homes and where business and residential premises are combined provided that the single residential housekeeping unit occupies not less than 50 per cent of the total floor space. In such cases the home owner will not be allowed to claim as an expense against his rental or commercial profits a larger amount than he has actually had to pay. For example, if his municipal tax was $35, which after the rebate would only be $7, then he could not claim more than $7 as an expense against his rental or commercial profits from the other half of the building.
These opinions, of course, are based on an examination of the respective provincial bills and might have to be reviewed if these bills are in any way changed before they are passed.



YUKON ACT


Hon. Jean Lesage (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources) moved: that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution, which has been recommended to the house by His Excellency:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Yukon Act to broaden the purposes for which the commissioner in council may make ordinances for the borrowing or lending of money and to authorize the commissioner in council to make ordinances for the making of investments; to authorize the appointment by the governor in council of deputy police magistrates and judicial officers; and to provide further for certain changes in connection with the administration of the act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 17-Mr. Simmons:
For a copy of all agreements and/or contracts entered into between the government of Canada or anyone on its behalf, and the government of British Columbia or anyone on its behalf, and of all correspondence, telegrams, and/or other communications exchanged between the aforesaid
82715-152J
Inquiries of the Ministry parties with reference to the financing of the construction of a road between Stewart, British Columbia, and Cassiar, British Columbia, including alternative routes, if any.
Jean Lesage: Mr. Speaker, I wish to agree with the motion, subject to the usual reservation.


Mr. Speaker:: 


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, with the reservation as stated.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Howard C. Green (Vancouver-Quadra):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Press dispatches over the week end indicate that the United Nations emergency force troops within the Gaza strip are being withdrawn from the towns in the strip and deployed along the demarcation line. Can the minister tell the house whether officials of the United Nations have agreed with Nasser that the United Nations emergency force will now be relegated to patrolling the Israeli border?


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I have seen the press reports referred to by my hon. friend. While in New York over the week end I ascertained from the Secretary General of the United Nations that there is no foundation for any suggestion that the United Nations emergency force is not operating inside the Gaza strip as it did when it first arrived. However, it is true that within the last two or three days some elements of the force have been taken from the strip itself and deployed along the demarcation line. That is what one would normally expect because in the first days of the occupation- although "occupation" is not quite the right word-of the Gaza strip by the United Nations force, all of the troops were inside the strip. Now some of them are being deployed on the line. But that does not represent a diminution of the functions of the force inside the Gaza strip.


Howard Charles Green: I should like to ask a supplementary question. What are the actual facts with regard to Egypt moving troops either into the Gaza strip or into the vicinity of the Gaza strip?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, our information is that there are no Egyptian troops at all inside the Gaza strip and that since last October, when the military intervention first began or since the withdrawal of Egyptian troops at that time, there has been no return of Egyptian troops to the Sinai peninsula except in the last week when some Egyptian troops have apparently been moved to El Arish, a town some miles from the Gaza

Inquiries of the Ministry strip itself but of course a town in Egyptian territory. There are no Egyptian forces to my knowledge inside the Gaza strip.


Howard Charles Green: Apart from the Egyptian general and the members of his staff?


Lester Bowles Pearson: The Egyptian general has entered the Gaza strip as an administrator on behalf of the Egyptian government.


Mr. G. R. Pearkes (Esquimall-Saanich):: Have the United Nations forces any responsibility in connection with aid to the civil power in the Gaza strip or the Sinai peninsula?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker. When the Israeli civil and military administration withdrew from the Gaza strip, the only civil power within the strip was the United Nations emergency force itself, and there are no arrangements that I know of by which that United Nations force has any obligation to assist the civil power there or anywhere else.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Carl O. Nickle (Calgary South):: should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs with reference to a story that appeared in the Toronto Star on the week end. Is it correct that Saudi Arabia and Egypt have joined forces to bar the gulf of Aqaba to the shipping of Israel? If so, what action is contemplated by the Canadian government in this connection?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I saw the story, Mr. Speaker, and I do not know whether or not it is accurate but our position on this matter is perfectly clear and has been announced both here and at the United Nations, namely that the gulf of Aqaba is an international waterway and there should be free passage through those waters and through the strait of Tiran for the ships of all states.



CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Has the minister's attention been directed to press reports in the Vancouver Province which reached here on Saturday that the conditions of the Indians in the Stewart Lake agency at Fort Ware are deplorable, and that the Indians


are existing in conditions of starvation owing to the almost complete collapse of their fur market; and if these reports have been directed to the minister, would the minister comment on their accuracy and on the measures which are being taken to improve the situation?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I can only say that the Vancouver Province has, latterly, not been my favourite reading. I did not, in fact, see any such story in the Vancouver Province, but I have heard the story of the deplorable condition in which these Indians in the Stewart Lake area were found by the Indian superintendent for this district when he made his visit there, and steps are being taken immediately to provide relief.



PUBLIC BUILDINGS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. K. Fraser (Peterborough):: I would like, Mr. Speaker, to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. Can the minister say when the old post office building in Peterborough is to be torn down to make way for a new office building to house the unemployment insurance offices?


Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister of Public Works):: I cannot say now, Mr. Speaker, but I will take the question as notice.



POTATOES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. W. Montgomery (Victoria-Carleton):: May I direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Has the minister received information from the United States indicating their attitude on the upward adjustment of tariffs on potatoes entering Canada? If so, can he add anything to the statement that was made in the budget?


Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Finance):: No, there is nothing further on that, and I do not think I ought to add anything at the moment. But I assure the house that as soon as I have information I will communicate it.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. R. Argue (Assiniboia):: I would like to ask a question of the Minister of Agriculture. Can the minister say whether legislation will be introduced this session as a result

of the supreme court decision regarding the constitutional position of provincial marketing boards, in order that such marketing boards may continue to make deductions from producers for the purpose of building up reserves?


Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture):: The Minister of Justice, the Minister of Finance and I met a delegation of about 40 people from the province of Ontario who presented the arguments to us, and they were told that the government is giving consideration to the matter.



PENSIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George C. Marler (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege, may I say that on reading Hansard for Wednesday last, March 13, I find that I misunderstood a question asked me that day by the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska (Mr. Van Horne). I understood that his question related to the health and welfare plan for C.N.R. employees which had been mentioned in the debate on the previous day, but I now find that his question related to the possibility of an increase in C.N.R. pensions.
With respect to that matter, I can add nothing to what I said on the subject on January 22 last.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Randolph Pearkes: May
I ask the Minister of National Defence if he is able to reply to the question I asked on Friday regarding the disciplinary status of the Canadian troops in the Middle East?


Hon. R. O. Campney (Minister of National Defence):: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The Canadian code of discipline will apply to our troops in the United Nations emergency force in the same way as do the respective codes of discipline of other nations to their components in that force. Our Canadian Criminal Code will also apply to our troops, as will our civil law in respect of any matters touching on the official duties of the troops. As a matter of fact, the general position in these matters is practically the same as it was in Korea.
Inquiries of the Ministry WATER RESOURCES



INQUIRY AS TO MEETING WITH UNITED STATES OFFICIALS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Howard Charles Green: May I direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. According to press reports this morning concerning the border river preliminary meetings which are to take place in Ottawa tomorrow, government officials have stated that the actual talks on the problem of developing international rivers likely will not start for a few months and will continue for probably less than a year. Is that report accurate? Of course the result would be that no decision would be reached for many months or even years.


Jean Lesage: I have not read the article mentioned by the hon. member. It would be easier for me to comment if I had the opportunity of reading the article in question.


Howard Charles Green: Perhaps the minister can tell us how long he expects it will be before the actual negotiating meetings commence.


Jean Lesage: How can I say that before the preliminary meeting has even started?



TRANS-CANADA AIR LINES INQUIRY AS TO GROUNDING OF VISCOUNT PLANES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. In asking the question I want to say that I have the greatest confidence in T.C.A. and its aircraft. In view of the grounding of Viscounts in Great Britain, what is the situation in Canada?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, I saw a statement by Mr. McGregor, president of Trans-Canada Air Lines, in the press which pointed out that the Viscounts in Canada are a different series from the Viscounts that have been grounded and that the Trans-Canada series were built under the supervision of Trans-Canada's engineers. Trans-Canada Air Lines has had absolutely no mechanical trouble of any kind since the airplanes were delivered except for a runaway engine, which, we think, caused damage largely through bad judgment on the part of the pilot. We think that a pilot error was the cause of the damage done on that occasion. Therefore T.C.A. finds no purpose in grounding their Viscount aircraft.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration SAINT PATRICK'S DAY



MR. MCIVOR    GREETINGS TO MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. Daniel Mclvor (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege, the celebration of St. Patrick's day is still on in memory of that great saint who drove the snakes and frogs into the bogs and bothered all the varmints. We bring you greetings, Mr. Speaker, and we wish you and the big family over whom you preside good success, true happiness and cheerio.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Immigration branch-
553. Field and inspectional service, Canada- further amount required, $194,177.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Before item 553 carries I wonder if I might be permitted to put a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, supplementary to the question I asked a few minutes ago when we were on orders of the day. Can he say whether there is any policy, so far as his department is concerned, either for or against such a proposal as that to which a press report referred, namely the possibility of a whole group of people wishing to transplant their entire setup, their entire way of life, from Scotland to one of the islands near Newfoundland? Can he say whether the department has any policy in this regard?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not think it would be quite right to say that there is anything that could be dignified by the word "policy". There have been a number of occasions upon which a considerable number of people from the same locality have arranged to move together to the same part of Canada. This happens much more rarely in these times than it did in times when most of the immigration was for land settlement. If the proposal is really a serious one, and I have not had any chance of finding that out yet, we would certainly look at it as sympathetically as possible, especially for people from Scotland.


Mr. Herridge:: A few days ago some of us in the house were very surprised when the minister announced what appeared to us to be a new policy for his department when he said that the government would pay the cost of maintaining all immigrants who came to Canada for the period of a year during which they were unable to obtain employment. Could the minister elaborate on that and tell us when this policy was first given effect?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think the second part of the question had better be answered by the Minister of Finance because that policy was in effect when he was minister.
I do not think my statement was quite as the hon. member set it out in the first part of his question, but what I was trying to say was that if an immigrant came to Canada- we try not to let immigrants in who are going to become indigents-and became an indigent we do provide subsistence for him during the first year until such time as he can get a job or some other way of supporting himself. We do not encourage them to regard this as the normal way of living, but it is to tide them over brief periods of unemployment when they have not been in the country long enough to qualify for local social benefits.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Has the minister given any consideration to the problem which was discussed here earlier in the session with regard to reception facility arrangements to be made in connection with the movement of Hungarian refugees? At that time it was perhaps a little early to say whether there would have to be the acceptance of greater responsibility by this government or whether the refugees would fit in fairly readily into the Canadian pattern of life. We on this side suggested we felt the federal government would have to take some further step for the establishment of reception and welfare centres pending the training of these people to take their place in the Canadian scheme. There have been some continuing controversies in the press, and I was wondering whether the minister was in a position to give us some further information about it in the light of the further experience that has been had?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Very briefly, sir, I might say that our experience has been that we have had no difficulty up until now in finding accommodation for the Hungarian refugees, thanks in very large part to the Canadian people who have come forward and offered them hospitality, either completely free or hospitality which was paid for in their homes. There are a number of quite large reception centres in various parts of the country. The Ontario government established two centres and recently closed one of them because they found there was no further necessity for it. It may be necessary in one or two places to improvise additional facilities in the next two or three months, not only for Hungarians but for other immigrants who may, for a day or two, need some kind of accommodation.
The most gratifying thing about the movement of Hungarians has been the speed with which most of them have found some place

in the community in which they could live and, in view of the season, the speed with which many of them have been able to get employment.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What is the situation with regard to the various provinces with whom discussions were proceeding with regard to sharing the cost of settlement? Is this question settled now, and if not what outstanding difficulties are there?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not know that we can say all the difficulties are over. We have been having some discussions, and some of the correspondence has been tabled, but there has been other correspondence since, with the government of Ontario. So far as the federal government is concerned, we have merely made an offer to Ontario to make payments on the same basis as we are making them to Saskatchewan. It is entirely within the jurisdiction of Ontario to decide whether or not they want to take our money. In the case of Saskatchewan, there have been a few minor problems, not all of which have been completely ironed out. I think we have completely satisfactory arrangements with Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Alberta, British Columbia, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island. I believe there are still some discussions going on with New Brunswick. None of these discussions has in any way interfered with the movement of the refugees.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am a bit concerned about one aspect of this question. I have had it brought to my attention from responsible sources inside the employment service in Toronto, for instance, that several veterans lost jobs, older veterans, to these refugees. For instance, there was a janitor who was working for $125 a month, and the owner of the building fired him and hired a Hungarian for $60 a month. Is the minister doing everything possible to make sure that that sort of thing is stopped?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Certainly, my department would be doing nothing, and neither would the national employment service, to encourage that sort of thing. We would do everything to discourage it. I have heard general suggestions of that kind on a number of occasions, and I do not say they are not correct; but to my knowledge no one has ever brought a specific case to the attention of our department and asked us to provide any remedy.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Will the minister have inquiries made, through the Minister of Labour, of the national employment service?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I shall be glad to do that.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Mr. Blair:: A while ago the minister was talking about indigent immigrants. Who pays their hospital bills when they become ill? Is it the municipality in which they reside, that is in the first year or in succeeding years before they establish citizenship?


John Whitney Pickersgill: In this question, I take it the hon. member is referring to immigrants generally. We have an agreement with nearly all the provinces, certainly with the province of Ontario, whereby the federal and provincial governments share the cost of hospital services on a fifty-fifty basis. Municipalities do not pay that at all in the first year. At the end of the first year it is assumed that immigrants, having established residence, should be treated like other residents of Canada, and that has always been the assumption.


William Gourlay Blair: Established residence but not
necessarily citizenship?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, no.


Mr. Dinsdale:: On that same point, can
the minister say whether the agreement applies to Manitoba? Would it cover emergency surgery, for example?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, I assume that would apply to anything that needed to be done, that an immigrant asked to have done. Of course, the province administers this service. We pay half the cost. That is not true in the case of Hungarians in one or two provinces. We have established an agreement with Saskatchewan, but Manitoba elected the alternative we offered; that is to say, that all people who were landed as immigrants would be treated under the federal-provincial scheme now in existence and all those who could not qualify as landed and were here, therefore, as non-immigrants, would be the exclusive responsibility of the federal government. I am speaking of Hungarians now.


Mr. Brooks:: Is it not a fact that some
of the Hungarians brought in were known to be indigent and helpless poor? What responsibility would fall on municipalities in that connection?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Up to the present none.
Actually I am afraid all of the Hungarians who were brought in were known to be indigent but happily nearly all of them were in very good health. It is true that some of them were not able to pass our medical requirements but we felt we should do-and I announced it last November-just what the United Kingdom did; that is to say, to take them as they came; those who wanted to come to Canada would be allowed to come and not leave all the difficult cases for the Austrians. Therefore, we have had a few cases
2404	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration that could not pass our immigration requirements. We have agreed to do either one of two things. We have made the same alternative offer to all the provinces. Either to have the landed immigrants come under the ordinary federal-provincial arrangement and the federal government take the exclusive responsibility for those who could not qualify or, alternatively, as in the agreement with Saskatchewan, to have the federal government pay the whole of the medical costs in the first year of all, both immigrants and non-immigrants alike, and the province take the whole responsibility thereafter.


Howard Charles Green: What is the status at the
present time of Christian George Hanna, the stowaway, who was on a Norwegian freighter and about whom there has been great concern generally on the west coast?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, X understand, sir,
that the case was heard before Mr. Justice Sullivan of the Supreme Court of British Columbia and that he reserved judgment and indicated he would probably give judgment sometime in the week of March 25.


Howard Charles Green: In the event of the judgment
being unfavourable to this young man, would any time be given for representations to be made to the minister in order that the minister might consider exercising his discretion under the act?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, sir, I really feel
that is a hypothetical question that it would be very improper for me to attempt to answer. When the learned judge gives his judgment I will consider with the officers of my department and, if necessary, with the law officers of the crown, what the appropriate steps should be after that. In the meantime, sir, I do not feel competent to give an opinion as to what should be done in this or that or the other circumstance.


Howard Charles Green: I raise the question today,
Mr. Chairman, only because of the fact that something may be done in a great hurry and also because I have never known a case in which the opinion of my city has been so thoroughly behind an applicant for permission to come into Canada. I believe this young man is now working in Vancouver and is carrying on as a good Canadian citizen would do; also, he had a splendid record on the ship from which he was taken.
I hope the minister will keep those facts in mind when the time comes that he has to exercise his discretion.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not expect I will
be allowed to forget.


Clarence Decatur Howe: In view
of the fact that there has been such an increase in immigrants from Hungary and Britain, is the government giving consideration to easing the regulations with regard to riext-of-kin from other countries who may want to come to Canada?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder, sir, whether
the hon. gentleman has any particular country in mind because in nearly all cases we have to be governed by three different considerations. One is whether we have any staff in that country to deal with applicants. That is the most obvious one. The second is whether the policy of the country concerned is such that people can in fact get out, even if we do have a certain policy, and a third is whether it is possible to obtain the kind of information which it is necessary to get in order to carry out the Immigration Act as it was enacted by this parliament. Therefore, it is much easier to answer this question if I have a specific country in mind.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I might
say that this case was brought to my attention. These people are Armenians living in Egypt at the present time. I might say that their friends in Toronto were refused even the right to make application for these people to come out to Canada, which I thought was rather unfair.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, sir, I do not think
anybody can be refused the right to make an application because the making of an application is surely not a matter of right but a matter of fact. If it is in fact impossible to deal with an applicant I have always thought it was rather dishonest to accept the application and to pretend we were going to deal with it. Now, we do lay down certain categories of persons from whom applications are considered, largely as a matter of getting some kind of administrative machinery that will work. In the case of Armenians, there is a great deal of sympathy for those people who have been pushed around. They have had their own country taken away from them and have been pushed about from pillar to post. I know we have endeavoured to make special arrangements wherever we could, and if the hon. gentleman can give me the details of this particular case I shall endeavour to see whether anything can properly be done.


Miss Aitken:: If a would-be immigrant
has a criminal record is he barred, or is it at the discretion of the minister?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, sir, there is not an
absolute bar under the present act. The minister can recommend, and I do from time to time recommend to the governor in council

that in my opinion so-and-so, though he had a criminal record, has been rehabilitated, and we do that occasionally, but not in the case of people with recent criminal records that have come to our notice. Of course, every so often somebody does get into the country who has a criminal record and we discover it afterwards. We sometimes try to deport them and sometimes we meet with great obstacles in doing that.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Sometimes you pass orders
in council to let them stay.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not think we have
to pass orders in council to let them stay, sir.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: With reference to the location of immigrants coming to Canada, what determines the province or the particular section of country in which they decide to live? Does the immigrant himself ask to go to that particular section or does the department act in a way to steer or direct them to certain parts?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, sir, in the case of
sponsored immigrants and in the case of British immigrants who do not have to be sponsored at all but who can come here freely, they pretty nearly always have a specific destination in mind and go there; but in the case of a lot of immigrants who are brought here for open placement, that is to say, to look for work, we do try to steer them to the places where there is work in the kind of occupation for which they are fitted, and that is really the only criterion. It has been argued that the extreme west of the country was rather discriminated against because of the extra cost of transportation.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: What about the extreme east?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, after all, the extreme east has the first "go" at them, and particularly the city that is very near the hon. gentleman's constituency where a large proportion of the immigrants have been coming in during these last few months. I am pleased to say that quite a number of them are staying in the hon. gentleman's province.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Despite the report?


John Whitney Pickersgill: But in the case of the western provinces it is quite an additional cost to the immigrant and we did feel when we were establishing this special air bridge to Canada this year that by establishing the same fare to Toronto, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Vancouver we were ensuring a somewhat better distribution than formerly. This was an executive act of the government for which I have to take the primary responsibility and I do hope hon. members on both sides of 82715-153
18, 1957	2405
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the house will approve of it, even the hon. gentleman who represents Malton!


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, the minister alluded a moment ago to the difficulty of permitting next of kin to come to Canada where there were no inspection facilities in the country from which it is sought to bring them. I am sure all hon. members will recognize that you cannot generalize too freely about such cases but there has been one in the press recently concerning the next of kin of some Hungarians who themselves were not admitted under the refugee movement and who have been here for some time but who now want to bring their daughter to this country.


John Whitney Pickersgill: They are not Hungarians.


Edmund Davie Fulton: They are Greek, are they not?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The daughter having fled
Greece is now in Hungary.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. gentleman will find all the details in the Globe and Mail.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Why is it not possible in cases such as this

there cannot be too many cases just like this-


John Whitney Pickersgill: I know of no other case like this; it is unique.


Edmund Davie Fulton: -where the circumstances are unique and there is an obvious hardship to permit a person whom it is desired to bring to Canada to come here for inspection without the normal clearances that are ordinarily required? Shipping companies would not normally be permitted to bring such a person without clearance from the department. The clearance cannot be given because there are no facilities in Hungary for the examination. Why would it not be possible to make a special exception in such a case giving an immunity to the shipping company if they bring a person to Canada so that she may be examined here where in all probability it will be found she will be a suitable immigrant and be permitted to land?


John Whitney Pickersgill: To the best of my knowledge this case is unique. There may be another case where two Greek parents are in Toronto and a daughter age 27 is in Hungary but it would surprise me if that set of circumstances happened to be duplicated.
The essential document that is required to get out of Hungary is a passport or some similiar document from the government of Hungary enabling the person to leave. We have never had any evidence whatsoever that this young woman had such a document or would be able to get it, and I have taken

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the view, on the advice of my experienced officials, that there was no probability that it would be any easier for this young woman to get such a document to come to Canada than it would be to obtain such a document to return to the country of which she is a citizen. If she did obtain a document from the government of Hungary and go to Greece as has been suggested we have facilities there and we would examine her at once.
My personal opinion, is of course, that she would not be able to get any document to leave Hungary at all, but at any rate she does not have one or at least, we have never been told that she had and I would be very surprised if she could get one to come to Canada any more easily than she could secure one to go to Greece.
There may be some reason why she would not want to go back to Greece but perhaps if there is some reason that very reason would be one for which we would not want her to come to Canada. I think the hon. gentleman is perfectly well aware of the fact that, following the civil war that took place in Greece at the end of the world war, a certain number of young Greeks were taken from their families and a certain number of other young Greeks did go into those countries behind the iron curtain and that some of those young people had been thoroughly indoctrinated by the communists and would be just the kind of people we would not want to have in this country. I am not saying that this is one of those cases because I do not know. But we have been charged with the responsibility of trying as far as possible to see that such persons do not get into Canada and it is a responsibility that in some circumstances in some countries it is extremely difficult to discharge.
This is one case where it does seem to me this girl would be as likely to get permission to return to the country of which she is a citizen as to Canada, and if she can get permission from the Hungarian authorities to return to Greece I can assure hon. members I would be only too happy to give instructions that priority should be given to the examination of her case.


Mr. Zapliiny:: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the minister could give us some information with respect to next of kin or sponsored prospective immigrants who happen to live within the Soviet union itself. Following the general questions concerning next of kin I wish to ask about people who are behind the iron curtain who want to come to Canada. Specifically I would like to know what procedure is followed by the department when an application is received from such a person and what facilities Canada has in that part
[Mr. Pickersgill.l
of the world for the examination of such prospective immigrants and whether the granting of a visa is absolutely dependent upon the possession of a passport or whether there may be some methods by which a visa may be granted before a passport is in the hands of the prospective immigrants.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The procedure, sir, is always the same as far as I know. We have always taken the view that there was some risk to people in the Soviet union in having their relatives in countries on this side of the iron curtain ask for them, and therefore we have always said that they must communicate with their own relatives and tell them what the situation is and advise them to get in touch with our embassy, and we give our embassy instructions that such a case would be approved if the person can satisfy the ordinary normal requirements, mainly medical of course. If the person then does communicate with our embassy we try to arrange as quickly as we can for medical examination and grant the visa but there again of course the essential document required to get out of the Soviet union legally is some kind of passport or exit permit or something of that sort. We have never thought it was a proper function of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration to attempt any clandestine operations.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: Mr. Chairman, the reason I raised that question is this. As the minister probably knows, these cases sometimes reach a sort of impasse where on the one hand the Canadian authorities tell the sponsoring applicant that the granting of a visa is dependent on the possession of a passport and on the other hand the Soviet authorities tell the person concerned that if they can be shown evidence that Canada is willing to accept the person as an immigrant they will grant a passport. In other words it is a sort of international passing of the buck.
I am not suggesting for a moment that it is done deliberately as far as Canada is concerned but it certainly reaches that stage. I have case after case in my files where such an impasse has been reached. It seems to me someone has to make a move to break the impasse and it strikes me that it would be quite possible for the Canadian government, having satisfied itself that that person was a desirable person to allow into the country, to grant a conditional visa saying that as soon as the passport is available this visa will be operative and then that person will have something with which to confront the officials in the iron curtain country to prove that Canada is in fact willing to accept him as an immigrant.

There are many dozens at least, and maybe hundreds of such cases now hanging fire in the files of the department. I would be very much surprised if that is not so. The minister shakes his head. However, I can inform him of several cases myself where it has been going on for anywhere up to 18 months and it has reached a stage where the next move is up to somebody. All I am seeking information on is whether it would not be possible for the department to make a clear undertaking in the form of either a conditional visa or a letter or some other document in order that the person concerned behind the iron curtain could prove to the satisfaction of the officials of his own country that, so far as Canada is concerned, there is no bar in his way and that all that is required is a passport.


John Whitney Pickersgill: If the committee will
allow me to do so, I can tell them about a personal circumstance. I have been trying hard to facilitate the entry from the Soviet union of the mother and father of a friend of mine in Newfoundland and in this case I have taken steps that it is not usual to take. I asked our ambassador, at the request of the applicant here in Canada, to mention the case to the foreign office of the Soviet union so that there could be no doubt in anyone's mind in Moscow that we were willing to grant this visa. Nothing whatever has happened. I do not believe that the Soviet authorities are in the slightest doubt about these cases where these applications are made.
I am quite willing to consider a procedure whereby we will have someone in the embassy staff write to these people in Russia and say that if they can produce a travel document their cases will be considered. But we have always been extremely hesitant to do that, because if it happened, by coincidence, that three months after such a letter was written, a person disappeared, as does unhappily very often happen in these countries, and it was then suggested that it was because of correspondence from the Canadian embassy that this was done, you can see what a new line of difficulty would be opened up. That may be less likely to happen than it was some years ago but I am not sure that it might not be more likely to happen now than it would have been six months ago. This is a very difficult problem. I know what kind of case the hon. gentleman is referring to, but I do not believe that the Soviet authorities are in the slightest doubt about what our intentions are. No doubt they say they are.


Mr. Lennard:: Even so, how could we do that before they are medically examined?
82715-153i
18, 1957	2407
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


John Whitney Pickersgill: Of course we say that if they can pass the medical examination. That is always a condition.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: Just one word on that point. I want to assure the hon. member who asked the question that I had the same thing in mind, namely that this would be after the government of Canada had satisfied itself on the medical score. But to go back to the question raised by the minister about having someone on the embassy staff that could correspond or communicate in some way with these prospective immigrants and the risk attached thereto, I am only expressing my own opinion but I think that the risk is not something to be too much afraid of. What has happened in many cases

and I know this from personal experience-is that people who have been living in Canada and who have been attempting for a period of a year or eighteen months to bring a wife, a daughter, a son or a near relative to Canada from the Soviet union, having failed to succeed in that attempt, have sought help elsewhere. I am not laying the blame on anyone; I am not saying that the immigration department is to blame. Because of this lack of facility and machinery having failed to do that, I find that a number of these people are writing letters to the Soviet embassy here in Ottawa asking their assistance in this matter. I certainly would feel much better if a Canadian citizen were to carry on his request through Canadian channels, through our embassy in Moscow, rather than the other way around. Certainly the Soviet embassy in this country is not here for the purpose of looking after the interests of Canadian citizens. In my opinion, that is the wrong place for them to request assistance. However, in their desperation and having reached a deadlock, they feel that here is one more channel they will try. If there is any risk that should be avoided, in my opinion that is the one, namely that of Canadian citizens having to lean upon the Soviet embassy in our own country to do for them or in the hope that they will do for them something, which they feel that the Canadian government cannot do. That is the important idea that I think should be avoided. If we have to choose between the two evils or the two risks, I would say that to have the Canadian representative in our embassy in Moscow communicating with prospective immigrants to Canada would be by far the more desirable situation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As I said before, I shall be very glad to give consideration to instructing our officers to tell applicants in Canada that, if they wish it done-and only if

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration they wish it done-we will ask the appropriate attache in Moscow to write to the relatives in Russia.


Frank Exton Lennard: We do not want too many.


Stanley Howard Knowles: As a matter oi fact, I have in my hand a letter that came to me today concerning one of these cases. It so happens that in this instance the person in Canada asked the minister's department to instruct our embassy at 23 Starokonyushny Pereulok, in Moscow, to write to the intended immigrant. But the officials in Moscow still wrote back and stated that they felt they should not do so and in fact would not do so until there had first been an approach to the embassy by the intended immigrant in the Soviet union.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is the policy at the present time. I would have to get the concurrence of my colleague the Secretary of State for External Affairs before I could change that policy. However, I am quite willing to consider the matter.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask whether the minister's department has any person at the embassy in Moscow or whether the department works through the Department of External Affairs?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No. We are not carrying on any immigration activities in the Soviet union and have no intention of doing so. All we do is deal, as best we can, with these cases of near relatives. I hope there is no member of the committee who thinks that we are not anxious to do everything we can to help these families to be re-united.


Mr. White (Middlesex East):: In what other countries of Europe besides Italy are there travelling teams of our immigration department interviewing potential immigrants?


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is not any in Italy at the present time. There was the recruitment of a small number of people for a specific purpose some time ago but there is no team in Italy at the present time. There is just the immigration office in Rome, to the best of my knowledge. There is a team in Austria going to the camps and interviewing Hungarian refugees. I believe we have a team in the United Kingdom selecting the 5,000 Hungarian refugees we undertook to take from the United Kingdom so that they could take 5,000 more. I believe there is also a team for a similar purpose in France. But it is not the normal procedure to use these teams. They are only used for refugee camps or for some specific purpose for a very limited time.


Harry Oliver White: What prompted my question was this. A citizen in London came to me asking for help to bring out a close relative.
This is only about three weeks ago, and I was told that there was a travelling team interviewing prospective immigrants in that area near Rome. I was also told that there was a backlog of intending immigrants- people who had made application-going back for 12 months. It seemed to me that if this type of work is 12 months ahead there was no great need for a team to be travelling in that area. I wondered whether this was the procedure in other European countries-


John Whitney Pickersgill: No.


Harry Oliver White: -and in the United Kingdom.


John Whitney Pickersgill: In the United Kingdom we have a lot of people going about giving lectures, and so on; we conduct a much mere active promotional campaign in the United Kingdom than anywhere else in the world.


Mr. Cardiff:: I would like to ask the minister a question. Is the immigration department making any special efforts to bring immigrants to Canada to help agriculture?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, for the number we get we probably spend four of five times as much effort in trying to bring agricultural immigrants as we do to bring any others, because they are unfortunately very hard to get. We have had some success this year in attracting some farmers and farmers' sons and even some farm labourers from the United Kingdom. I do not think we shall ever get very large numbers, because British agriculture still seems to be very prosperous. But there are some people who want to have a change of scene, and we are getting some. I wish we could get more, and I shall certainly look into the case of the islanders to which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre referred earlier today, to see whether any of them would be interested.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Has the minister any idea of the percentage of Hungarians who go on the land and work for farmers?


John Whitney Pickersgill: A very small percentage. These are nearly all urban people.


Mr. Leboe:: I would like to ask the minister a question in connection with agricultural immigrants. I have noticed press reports saying that the C.N.R. and the Canadian Pacific were sponsoring certain immigrants to do farm work along the railroad, and I was wondering whether there was any connection between that and putting gravel under the ties.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. gentleman was probably just as surprised as I was to read that dispatch. I think whoever wrote it got a little mixed up. What we were attempting to find for the railways, in co-operation with them, were men for maintenance of way work. We were not able to find them in some of the refugee camps in Italy, but we did manage to find a group of Italians who were ready to undertake this work. However, they were not farmers.


Carl Olof Nickle: Mr. Chairman, I would like to raise the case of an individual-one that I have discussed with the minister from time to time over the past two years. It is the case of a Hollander, now resident in Canada, who might properly be called a resident on sufferance; his length of tenure is unknown, and at the present time he is without any right to citizenship. I must say that the minister has given this case his sympathetic consideration on two or three occasions, and as a result the man is still in Canada along with his wife and, more recently, his daughter and son-in-law.
Inasmuch as this case has now dragged on for roughly two years, the individual concerned, now a resident in Calgary, has during that time established himself as an excellent citizen of that community and as the conductor of a very fine music organization. He has acquired a noteworthy reputation and has in fact a sufficiently good reputation musically in Canada to have been invited by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to conduct a series of concerts over the C.B.C. radio. This is a series which will be in progress all this winter.
My question to the minister is this. Can he give any indication to me, inasmuch as this man is in the latter part of a second "stay of execution", of how soon the Department of Immigration might consider that this man and his family have sufficiently proved themselves desirable citizens of our country as to earn the right to acquire citizenship in the country they wish to make permanently their home?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I presume the hon. gentleman does not really mean "citizenship" but "landing as immigrants" because you have to be landed as an immigrant for five years before you can become a citizen.
Well, of course, if I knew how soon I could say that any doubts that were entertained in this case would be resolved, then they would be resolved now. I have not had any notice of the hon. gentleman's question-I am not complaining about that; I am merely saying it to explain why I have not looked at
18, 1957	2409
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the file very recently. For that reason, however, I cannot say for sure how much progress has been made in the matter, but I will have a look at it right away.


Mr. Hamilton (York West):: I wonder, Mr. Chairman, if the minister could inform us what method was used in arriving at the names of the successful bidders for transporting the new immigrants by air? Was it on the basis of a "per head" passenger fare or was it on the basis of the charter of the aircraft?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The negotiations, as perhaps the hon. gentleman did not realize, were not conducted between the government of Canada and the airlines at all. We are members of the intergovernmental committee on European migration and after canvassing the Canadian air lines and discovering anew what we knew already, of course, that they could not begin to provide all the aircraft that would be required for an airlift of the magnitude we had in mind, we came to the conclusion that the best way would be to let this experienced organization see what it could do about arranging an airlift for us. They invited bids from all the airlines they could think of, and we stipulated that they must invite bids from every Canadian air line and every air line in the United Kingdom from which the greater part of the airlift was to come.
The bids, as I understand the position, were made on the basis of what each company thought it could do, and there were different bids. The rate we charge to the passengers is a uniform rate regardless of what the aircraft is because we are trying to provide something exclusively for immigrants; this is not a commercial venture in the ordinary sense, and if we set a rate that would cover the cost that was all the government was particularly interested in.
It so happened that we also felt it was necessary to continue the charter with the Maritime Central Air Line to Vienna because we do need that service and it is a somewhat better deal for them than they would likely have got in connection with this airlift, in any case; and we were unable at the outset to get any other Canadian company that had any aircraft and any experience that was interested in bidding. The Canadian Pacific did, and then decided that it was not really interested. Finally we did manage to reach a deal with C.P.A. to carry Hungarians, I am glad to say, because such transport is very badly needed.


John Borden Hamilton: The minister has still not answered my question. Does
2410	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the government pay on an individual basis for these air passages or does it pay for the complete plane?


John Whitney Pickersgill: We pay the intergovernmental committee on refugees, as I understand it, so much per seat whether it is occupied or not, and they have calculated that rate on the basis of all their charters and made the rate based on that. What they pay to the companies I suppose it would be possible for me to find out. But we do not pay the airlines. We pay the intergovernmental committee on refugees.


John Borden Hamilton: I think this is of some importance because at the time of the minister's original announcement there was some publicity that whatever bids were received from Canadian companies were certainly not lower. I see from the article in this morning's Globe and Mail that a DC-4 of Flying Tiger Airlines landed at Vancouver with 46 Hungarians and 29 Britons, making a total of 75 passengers. I think you will find that the ordinary seating configuration of a DC-4, certainly from the standpoint of what would be satisfactory to the licensing authorities in Canada, is somewhere between 64 and 68.
If these bids were received on a per plane basis and competitors are sticking 75 people in a plane, as I say, I do not think our licensing authorities would be very happy about it. Of course, Canadian companies making bids on the basis of the ordinary seating capacity of anywhere from 64 to 68 could not possibly come within the price range quoted by these other lines in making their bids. I hope this is not the prospect for the future. I have heard that even more people may be put in these planes. I heard a figure of 80 the other day as a possibility. If that is the case, then it would appear that as far as air transport is concerned we are getting back to the jammed steerages in which immigrants were brought to this country years ago.
From the safety standpoint I believe we might raise the same objection. I certainly do not think the government of Canada wants to become involved in an airlift where people are going to be stuffed into planes like cattle, no matter how anxious they may be to get them here. I would be most interested to learn from the minister what the actual details of the contracts were. They may be between an international agency and the carriers but I think we should know the details and whether the contracts were on a per passenger basis or on a charter of a plane basis.
[Mr. Hamilton (York West).)

I should also like to know from the minister if a check has been made with the Department of Transport with respect to whether the planes being used in the airlift and the seating capacity meet with the requirements of the department. I think we should have this information on both these points. If the circumstances in connection with the bidding are as I believe they are, I certainly think we should not leave any inference that Canadian companies are making much higher bids.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As to the two points the hon. gentleman raised, the carriers satisfied both the air transport board and the Department of Transport. Otherwise they would not have been allowed to land. So far as Canadian companies are concerned, it was the view both of my department and of the treasury that they should be utilized where possible. The government therefore authorized me to make an offer to any Canadian airline that could satisfy the requirements of the Department of Transport and the air transport board as to flying the Atlantic that we would take any planes they could provide for the transport of Hungarians from the United Kingdom and possibly from France if they would meet the rates that Canadian Pacific and Maritime Central respectively were quoting for the west and east coast. That seemed to me an eminently fair offer and I think it is probable that one or two Canadian lines are going to be able to meet the offer.
It is a more advantageous arrangement than the one we have made with these other people and it is one I would not offer to any but Canadian carriers. However, I did feel that we wanted to make use of any Canadian carriers there were. Perhaps I might say a word to the committee about the basis of the rates that Maritime Central and Canadian Pacific quote to us. The rate is almost the precise equivalent of the sea and rail rates to the respective places so that the taxpayer is losing nothing, and the airline companies feel that they can carry this kind of passenger, the Hungarians who have very little luggage, at that rate and do it profitably.
It seemed to me that this business, which was better business than the other airlift, should be given to the Canadian lines and that as to the other business we should get the immigrants moved here at the lowest rate consistent with safety and all these other considerations. In the case of Canadian Pacific and Maritime Central we are paying the fares for the carriage of Hungarians but in the case of the air bridge from the United Kingdom, although we may be lending the money, in the long run the

immigrant is paying; and we feel that the more reasonable the cost the more they will have when they get here to help them to get established. I quite agree with the hon. gentleman that we do not want to have any steerage conditions.


John Borden Hamilton: I welcome the word of the minister that other Canadian companies possibly may qualify for one part of this job. With respect to the companies now operating to Canada, I should like to know if the minister knows whether the actual seating arrangements, capacity of the aircraft and other items of that kind were approved. If he cannot tell me now, possibly he might arrange to find out and let me know.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would be very happy to find that out and let the hon. gentleman know. It is not something that is in my department and it is not something I would carry in my mind.


Gage Workman Montgomery: What are the regulations in relation to immigrants from China? Is anyone allowed in at all from the mainland of China? If so, is there a quota for the year or must they be sponsored by someone in Canada?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. gentleman will find that in the amended regulations passed on May 24 last year. In the section relating to other countries it is set out very clearly. I would not like to state it from memory because it is a little technical, but the only immigrants who are admitted are close relatives and the categories are set out there.


Mr. Holowach:: With respect to the special consideration we have been extending to Hungarian refugees in Austria, does the same consideration and priority apply to Hungarian refugees who fled into Yugoslavia?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The Secretary of State for External Affairs and I have been having some discussions in the last two or three days about the refugees in Yugoslavia. Up to the present we have dealt only with sponsored cases. If there was a relative there of someone in Canada we have admitted those relatives on the same basis as Hungarians from Austria, but otherwise we have had no facilities for arranging any movement. The other matter is under consideration at the present time.


Margaret Aitken: I am sure the minister has met a great many difficulties in connection with the Hungarian immigrants. Other members of the house are meeting these difficulties too because, after all, the Hungarian immigrants are coming from a communist country and they are not screened. We find
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration people waiting to come here from non-communist countries. I should like to know what proof the departmental officials have to have to bar a would-be immigrant who comes from a non-communist country and whom the officials claim has communist inclinations. What proof must they have to keep such a person from coming into the country?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, Mr. Chairman, I am sorry the hon. lady was not a member of the estimates committee a couple of years ago when we took two or three days on this extremely complicated question. It is the most complicated, and in my experience the most painful, aspect of the administration of my department when we, from time to time, reach the conclusion that relatives of very good people in Canada are people whom it would be unwise, in view of our spending billions on our national security, to allow into this country. In the nature of things, unfortunately we cannot prove these things. We cannot prove the allegation because most of the information, not all of it but most of the information, of such a character is obviously from sources that have to be protected or they cease to be sources. If you are going to have any kind of security screening at all there simply has to be an assumption that the people who do it, like our R.C.M.P.-I think all hon. members would agree with me that they are reliable-are reliable. If they make a report on such and such a person, from the sources to which they have access, in the ordinary circumstances it has to be treated with the greatest weight and the greatest respect. Really, that is the only basis upon which this can be done.
Of course, there are, at times, people who are quite notoriously and publicly known to be members of organizations whose aims and objects are those set out in the Immigration Act. In that case, there is probably no reason why they should not be told quite publicly. But it is very obvious also that if the department were to get into debates with the relatives of would-be immigrants about every individual case, we would spend far more time in that kind of activity than we would in what, after all, is the thing for which our taxpayers are paying our officials and that is the encouragement of immigration to Canada. It is an extremely difficult problem.


Carl Olof Nickle: Over the last two or three years the department of immigration, possibly in co-operation with the Department of Labour in Canada, undertook to bring in a rather limited number of female domestic servants from the British West Indies. Can the minister report on how successful or otherwise this particular program was, and more particularly if the program, which I believe involved about
2412	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration 200 domestics, was successful, could the minister indicate whether his department and the Department of Labour will now give consideration to considerably broadening this particular immigration program in order to relieve the continuing shortage of domestic help in Canada, and to relieve the problem of over-population in our commonwealth neighbour the British West Indies?


John Whitney Pickersgill: It would perhaps be more appropriate for my colleague the Minister of Labour, who has the responsibility for this program inside Canada, to attempt to give a judgment on it than it would be for me. I may say that my report is that most of the employers have been quite well satisfied with these young women. Of course, it is rather early to form any really satisfactory view because this immigration has only been going on for two years. These young women all know that unless they remain in domestic service for the first year, they will not remain in Canada; that is the basis of the agreement. I have heard that there has been some tendency for these people, after the year is up, to leave domestic employment for other kinds of employment which apparently young women consider more attractive.
In so far as the more general question the hon. gentleman asked is concerned, I doubt if I should go into it on the supplementary estimates. It relates to broad questions of policy. I would say this. I have felt that, since we all hope the Carribean confederation is going to be established quite soon, it would be more appropriate to discuss that policy when there was one authority established in the West Indies instead of a great number.


Mr. Hodgson:: Can the minister tell the committee just how far they have gone in the screening of these Hungarian immigrants? Is there any chance that some of them might be communists?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am afraid there is a chance some of them are communists. Indeed, I would be very surprised if one or two of them were not. After all, there are something over 15,000 Hungarians refugees here now. They are mostly young people. They were brought up and educated, as the hon. member for York-Humber said a moment ago, in a country which is not a communist country but has a communist government. It would be quite surprising if one or two communists amongst that number of refugees had not got through and got here. If they had not got here, they would probably have gone to some other country amongst our allies or remained in Austria. Once they got out of Hungary, wherever they were they would be almost equally dangerous to the cause of the free world.

We do not believe, from such experience as we have had, that there is any considerable number. These refugees were, if I may use a vulgar expression, fed to the teeth with communism. It was for this reason they had this rebellion and that is why most of them got out when the revolution was crushed. I do think there is quite a problem for us in the re-education, especially of the younger people-who have never known anything but communist rule-


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: All they have known is fascism and communism.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As the hon. gentleman has said, all they have known has been fascism and communism, except for a couple of years after the war when they had a relatively decent government. This is true of the younger people, but it is not quite true of some of the older ones. It is very difficult, apparently, to be brought up in that kind of atmosphere without setting a lot of notions that need to be corrected. I am sure all hon. members, and I do hope most of our fellow citizens, will feel we must be patient with these people and help them because I think most of them are going to turn out to be really good Canadians. However, many of them are going to have a hard time adjusting themselves to their new life.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian affairs branch-
554. Welfare of Indians-operation and maintenance-further amount required, $200,000.
Mr. Campbell:: I had intended, Mr. Chairman, to make some extended remarks when the minister's main estimates were before the house, but it appears now as if we will not have an opportunity to discuss those estimates in this session.


Walter Edward Harris: But you could leave your speech until the fall and make it on the main estimates then.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Then you will do your best to try and prevent him from returning to give it.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: So far as that is concerned, that would not influence me very much. I feel this problem is pressing and I see no reason why I should wait until fall to discuss it. This problem has grown to such proportions that it is up to all of us who are interested in the problem to get something done about it as rapidly as possible. I think members will agree, before I finish, that the problem does need a great deal of attention.
Last year, I spoke on this matter and said that some progress had been achieved during the previous two years. I gave the former

minister a pat on the back for having made a good start. I told the present minister I was prepared to co-operate with him in anyway I could to bring about a change in the condition of these people. This offer is still open, and I have not yet made up my mind whether or not the minister is a good minister.
I think he has had too much to do during the last few months to give as much attention to this department as it should have received. Before I am through I am going to make the suggestion that perhaps this department should be split again. For instance, we have the Minister of National Health and Welfare looking after the health and welfare of our Indians, and I am going to suggest later on that perhaps the Minister of Agriculture should be of some assistance as well.


John Whitney Pickersgill: He has been already.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: As I said, some progress
has been made during the last few years but I am not a bit satisfied with the kind of progress that has been made. While progress has been made in some directions, we have lost ground in others. This is the problem to which I want to address myself this afternoon.
I was simply amazed, Mr. Chairman, when I received an answer to a question which was in a series of some 18 questions that I asked early in January. The question was No. 9 and it asked what relief had been provided to the Indians in the Battleford agency in 1956. I knew that a lot of relief had been paid out but I was simply amazed when I received this figure because in the Battleford agency there are somewhere in the vicinity of 1,500 Indians. That is the approximate Indian population. These figures add up to $99,307 and that is the amount that was paid out in relief during the year 1956. I could hardly believe my eyes because most of these reserves have tremendous potential wealth right on them that is not being developed. Wherever you have people on relief you have a demoralizing effect. We had the experience during the hungry 1930's where the little relief that we were giving was simply demoralizing the young men and young women of this country. I say that if we cannot do better than just provide relief for our Indian population we are falling down and we have fallen down to such an extent that we ought to be ashamed of ourselves.
Of what do the relief rations consist? For one person, flour, 24 pounds; rolled oats, 6 pounds; baking powder, 1 pound; tea, 1 pound; sugar, 2 pounds; lard, 3 pounds; beans, 5 pounds; rice or potatoes, 2 pounds;
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration cheese, 1 pound; meat or fish, $2.50; salt, 10 cents per month; matches, 10 cents a month; tomatoes or tomato juice, 9 tins; milk 1 pound or the equivalent of milk in evaporated or powdered form for each child of the indigent family. That is the relief they get.
On one of my visits to the Indian agent at Battleford he complained that he had found work for some of these Indians on the railroad not very far away from home but they lasted only three or four days and then they quit. Perhaps I have done as much heavy work as anybody in the house, Mr. Chairman, and I am satisfied that if I had to go to work on a construction job on these kinds of rations I would not last more than two or three days either because those of us who have done manual work know that if you cannot get good food you cannot stand the work. Therefore, this idea of relief is abhorrent to me especially when, as I said a few moments ago, there is a tremendous potential of wealth on these reserves.
I am going to deal with one of the reserves, which is probably the most backward reserve in my constituency. It is called the Red Pheasant reserve. It has a population of 220 souls and a total acreage of 24,328 acres. Of that amount 8,502 acres are arable and consist of good soil. I have gone on that reserve a number of times. I was there with Canon Wickenden twice last summer, and the canon and I both took a good look around the reserve. We decided that it would be very easy for the department to start a work and wages program of development on the reserve which would provide work for the Indians. In that way we could get away from this handing out of rations.
I do not know how long the people of Canada are going to be willing to provide rations to Indians. We have been doing it now for over 100 years. As far as I can see, if we do not start to do something, and do it soon, many people will say, "Why should we pay a big income tax to buy food for our Indian population?" I know the problem is a big one. I know that from what I have learned by moving around amongst the reserves. In the first place, the Indian himself has a background and in that background he never used to work steadily at any job. In the early days they used to work hard for a matter of a few days during the buffalo hunt. They would kill many buffalo and they would smoke and cure the meat and cure the hides, -and that is about all they had to live on. They worked hard for a few days, or a few weeks in the year and the rest of the time they loafed. Therefore, their whole idea of living has to be changed. They have to be taught that in the modern

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration world today there is no more hunting, there is no easy life for them where they work hard for a little while and sit around for the rest of the time. We must make them see that the time has come when they themselves-and I tell them this every time I talk to them-have to get a little spark, show initiative and a desire to want something better.
One day when I was on this reserve last summer we had a woman councillor as well as the chief talk to us for two or three hours. The woman said, "I was up at the teacher's home about an hour ago at dinner time". She said, "My, I wish I could sit down to a meal like the teacher had". These people do not know what a good meal is. I said to her, "Now, look, if we can persuade the government to start a work-and-wages program and start to develop this Indian reserve will you people back us up? Do you want to have good meals? Do you want to have good homes? If you want these things, then you can get them. I am quite sure that the government of this country, no matter what government it is, will help you provided that you show you will help yourselves."
I said a few minutes ago that in some instances these reserves have gone backward. Twenty years ago there were 300 head of cattle on this reserve. Today there are around 100 head. This reserve could carry 2,000 or
3,000	head of cattle. There could be 1,000 to 2,000 acres put into cultivation and, with proper supervision, it would be a success.
If the government would consider a plan of development the first thing they should do is to get a top man, an agriculturist, perhaps a man from the Department of Agriculture, but a man with experience, a man with enthusiasm for a job like this and a man who would be able gradually to bring the Indians into a position where they would want to do something for themselves.
I could spend a lot of time on this question. I feel very strongly about it. I believe that the time for action has arrived. That is why I did not want to wait until next fall, because I think a start should be made this summer. A department of government such as the one the estimates of which we are now discussing or the Department of Agriculture or the two of them in consultation should start a development program on the reserve. This winter the Indians could be put to work fencing the reserve and digging stones out of the ground that is to be ploughed up. Next summer some equipment could be brought in to break the land up to provide the Indians with work. I am satisfied that if this program was led by a competent man it would not be very many

years until this reserve would be selfsupporting, the people would have a good standard of living and we would get away from long relief lists such as the one I hold in my hand.
Let me read the relief figures to you: January $3,068, February $3,049, March $3,145, April $2,962, May $1,988, June $1,450, and July $1,417.
The figures continue in the same way throughout the summer months when these people should have been earning their own living. Instead they did nothing except wait for someone to come around, as some of the church organizations do, with a bundle of clothing. If I visit with them they want me to wire the minister and ask if he will increase their rations. That is not the way of solving this problem. If the minister would get his department working on a scheme such as the one I propose on those reservations which have a potential I think the problem could be solved.
There are other reserves in my constituency that do not have the amount of arable land contained in this particular reserve. For instance while the Saulteaux reserve contains 9,621 acres of land only 900 are arable. In those cases where the reserves do not have sufficient land to provide for the people who live on them consideration should be given to providing them with more land.
Last year I brought to the minister's attention the large number of young people between the ages of 17 and 21 who are leaving the reserves daily to look for work. Because of the fact they do not know how to work and cannot operate the machinery that is involved in most available jobs today they cannot find work and they are fast becoming a generation of bums. I think it is time this government and hon. members of this house recognized that this is a tremendous problem. It is my earnest hope that something will be done soon. I hope a start will be made this summer on a program of development of the reserves to start to bring about changed conditions for these people.


Mr. Hansell:: Mr. Chairman, I am sure that we all join with the hon. member who has just spoken in attempting to help the government and the minister bring about a better deal for the Indians.
I rise on a particular point at this time because some of us from the province of Alberta are continuing to receive letters and many protests in respect to the subject matter which was of top drawer importance not so long ago. I know that the minister has already pronounced his delight concerning the decision made by the courts in respect of the

eviction of a number of Indians on the Hobbema reserve and I am sure we all greeted that decision with some degree of thankfulness, but the letters persist in coming because the people out there believe that this sort of thing should not happen again.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the hon. gentleman would permit me to interrupt at this point because I think we could dispose of this very briefly. I might point out that under the law enacted in 1951 this can never happen again because no protest can be made at any time after the end of the year 1952. The Hobbema reserve case was the last case of establishing a band list so that this is something which cannot happen again.


Ernest George Hansell: Does the decision of the court determine that it can never happen again because of the decision creating a precedent?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, the law itself makes that provision. Perhaps the hon. gentleman will let me remind him that parliament provided that within six months after the posting of the lists a protest could be made by a group of Indians or by the band council and that these protests all had to be settled. They have all been settled now, and it is not competent any longer for any one to make any further protests so that everyone whose name is now on the band list is perfectly secure. His name will continue to be on the band list unless he is voluntarily enfranchised or unless in the case of a woman she marries a nonIndian. There is one exception in the case of the amendment we made last year concerning an illegitimate child. There is a provision that there can be a protest within 12 months that the father was a white person and therefore the child is not an Indian; and there is also death, of course, which comes to all of us. With these exceptions everyone whose name is now on a band list is perfectly secure against any challenge so that this problem just cannot arise anywhere in the future.
To make the story complete perhaps the hon. gentleman will permit me to point out that there are four other cases still before the courts. I mentioned this the other day. Those cases involve-perhaps I had better not give the figures-but the majority are cases where the registrar decided those in question were Indians and the protest was taken to a judge. Once the protests are settled this cannot happen again under the law.


Ernest George Hansell: I am glad to hear that.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am glad to have had a chance to say it, too.
18, 1957	2415
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Ernest George Hansell: The letters we receive, you see, assume that since the court has decided in favour of the Indians therefore the act should be changed to conform with the decision of the court. My understanding of what the minister has said is that there is no need of changing the law now because it protects the Indians from eviction.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is quite right.


Mr. Harltness:: Mr. Chairman, I think the minister has given the house a totally wrong impression in regard to this matter from what he has just said. While it is correct that the time during which Indians in a particular band could protest the band list which was put up for the first time has now elapsed or should have-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, it has elapsed.


Douglas Scott Harkness: -nevertheless here was a case which should have elapsed long before the case came up.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That protest was made in 1952.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Although it was made in 1952 the department kept the thing dragging along for five years; but the main point is this. Under the Indian Act the registrar can post up the name of any Indian to be deleted from the band list if he has reason to believe or if he comes to the conclusion that an ancestor of that Indian took scrip or that he had a certain amount of white blood through his ancestors.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, no.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Oh, yes. I do not have the Indian Act with me or I could quote from it and make it clear to the house.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if the hon. gentleman and I should not continue our debate when his bill comes before the house and if perhaps what is taking place now is not out of order.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am quite willing and
anxious to debate the matter at that time, but I do not think I should sit here and allow the minister to make the statement that these deletions of names of Indians from band lists have now come to an end, because that is not the case. As the minister well knows, under the Indian Act the registrar can post the name of an Indian who in his judgment should not be a member of that band. Then, of course, there is the prescribed length of time within which that particular Indian or others can protest the deletion of the name. But under the act by no means do we now have the situation where all Indians who are now on the band lists are fully protected and can remain on them. We therefore still have the

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration situation in which an amendment to the Indian Act is necessary in order to prevent expulsion.


Ernest George Hansell: That was my point, as a matter of fact.


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. If the hon. member for Macleod will forgive me for interrupting, I should like to say this. When he started to speak I took a look at the main estimates, which contain a great deal more information than is to be found in the sup-plementaries. The supplementary item that we have before the committee is "Welfare of Indians-operation and maintenance". By looking at the details in the main estimates we find that this item deals with the chief of division, social workers, indigent Indians, juvenile delinquents and so. on, or what I think commonly comes under the heading of welfare services.
I do not wish unduly to curtail the discussion in the committee, knowing as I do that this is a very important item to some individuals. But technically I think discussion of an amendment to the act as to the method of setting up or revising band lists could hardly come under the heading of welfare services. Having allowed some members to express their views I am not saying that, as of now, this discussion must stop. However, I think I am within my rights in asking the committee to make such discussion as brief as possible and then to come back to the welfare administration that we are supposed to be discussing.


Ernest George Hansell: I do not want to extend the discussion, Mr. Chairman, and I certainly do not want to be out of order. I must confess that I did not look at the details. I saw "Welfare of Indians" and I thought I was speaking to their welfare. Having received these requests from reputable organizations who feel that the Indian Act should now be changed, I wanted to get on the record from the minister the statement that there is no need for a change in the Indian Act. I do not know that I agree with him. However, I wanted to have clearly from him a pronouncement that in his opinion there was no need for a change in the Indian Act to take care of any future situations which might arise similar to the one that caused all the disturbance in the past several months.
We may continue to get such letters. We want to know how to answer them. If the minister takes that responsibility I suppose we shall have to relay that information to the people who write us. As the hon. member for Calgary North has said, he does not agree with the minister; and when his bill comes up for consideration perhaps we shall be obliged to fight it out on this ground.


Bert Raymond Leboe: I do not intend to make any extended remarks at this time. I should like to say that I think we owe a debt of gratitude to the Province newspaper for focusing attention on the condition of the Indians in the northern part of British Columbia. As the minister will recall, I have had conversations with him and with his department concerning the Indians in that area. I think some progress is being made in getting a little bit more leniency having regard to attention to Indians who are invalided or sick or in bad health.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I am sure the hon. gentleman does not want to be out of order. My department has nothing to do with looking after sick Indians. We look after the healthy ones only. The other matter is dealt with by the department of my colleague in whose seat I am temporarily sitting.


Bert Raymond Leboe: Maybe I should have noticed that but I did not do so. I am like the hon. member for Macleod. The item says "Welfare of Indians-operation and maintenance". I was under the impression that this matter came under the minister's department. However, I will try to introduce it into the discussion when the other estimates are before the house.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Mr. Chairman, I just want to say a couple of words, and this is on the welfare of Indians. In Peterborough riding we have two reserves. But on one reserve, namely the Curve lake reserve as it is commonly called-the real name is Mud lake reserve-there are no horses or tractors. The men must go into Peterborough or go outside the reserve in order to make any money in order to live. They return home to the reserve at night. For the welfare of the people on that reserve I think the Indian affairs branch should see to it that some of these properties on the reserve are plowed and cultivated for the Indians in order to give them gardens of their own. At the present time they are obliged to do such work by hand. I think perhaps a tractor in there would help a great deal.
I have mentioned this matter before, and I do so again because I think they ought to have something like that so they would be able to grow many of their own farm products. The trapping is gone in that district because there are summer cottages all through where the trapping used to be done. On top of that, Peterborough has extended out that way, and there is no game in that section. They must go far north in order to get it.
For the welfare of these people I think something along that line should be done.

On top of that their road into Curve lake from the main road certainly should be improved, brushed out and oiled in the summer, because in the summer time it is just a cloud of dust.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I will take note of the hon. gentleman's remarks.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I just want to ask the
minister a question under this item of welfare of Indians. As he knows, the last survivor of the Arrow lake band Indians who remained on the reserve died about three years ago, and that Indian went to the Okanagan reserve during her latter years. But there is one old Indian woman who was a member of that band, who married many years ago and is now a widow. Would she retain her Indian rights and have any share in any money that is left in the band funds?


John Whitney Pickersgill: That would depend entirely on who she married, if she married an Indian.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: No; she married a white man.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Then she ceased to be an Indian upon her marriage.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Education-
555. Administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, $605,000.
Douglas Scott Harkness: This is quite a large
increase in the provision for Indian education. At the outset I should like to say that I am glad to see it. However, I wondered what was the explanation of the necessity for this considerable increase. Is it due to the fact that the estimating last year was very poor, or is it due to the fact that a considerable increase has taken place in the number of Indian students over what had been anticipated? I note particularly that as far as day schools are concerned, $237,000 more is provided for text books, materials and supplies and travel, the amount for travel being only $20,000 of the total.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As far as I know from the notes that have been given to me, Mr. Chairman, this is nearly entirely owing to an underestimate of the number who would be attending school. That has necessitated more teachers, more text books and more supplies. Then there were a few cases of extra drivers for vehicles where children are driven to school. We did not know there were quite as many Indian children as there turned out to be.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Under the item for residential schools in the per capita grant there is an additional amount of $267,000.
Supply-External Affairs


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is entirely because of the number. It could not be anything else.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I was wondering if there had been any increase in the amount of the grant, which I believe all the churches running these schools have held for a number of years to be insufficient, and I think it probably is insufficient. But has there been no increase in the amount of the grant? If there has not, the estimate as to the amount required for this item must have been very badly out, because the total number of Indian children at these residential schools is not so extraordinarily large.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It just was a very considerable underestimate, sir; whether that was bad or good I cannot say. I always think it is a good thing to find more Canadian children than we thought there were. But it was a wrong estimate.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I wonder if the minister is prepared to say what consideration has been given to this matter of the per capita grants for church schools?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would not desire to say in the presence of the Minister of Finance that I thought they were too small, but consideration is being given to the amount of the grant now.


Mr. Cameron (Nanaimo):: This item is not confined to the schools which are run by the denominations; it includes the ones run by your department?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, and also payments to provincial and local schools attended by Indians.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS B-General-
558. To provide for the Canadian government's assessment for membership in international (including commonwealth) organizations, as detailed in the estimates, including authority to pay the amounts specified in the currencies of the countries indicated, notwithstanding that the payments may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of February, 1957-further amount required, $2,504,336.
Howard Charles Green: Would the Minister of Finance explain this vote? In the original estimates there are votes which correspond, with some variation, to the items that are now being requested; for example, United Nations organization in the original vote was $1,433,034 and in this vote it is, according to the details on page 14, $1,108,904. All the other items contained in the supplementaries are approximately in the same amounts as the items contained in the regular estimates. In

Supply-External Affairs addition, of course, there were earlier supplementary estimates under the United Nations organization of $160,491. Will the minister please explain why this further vote is being requested?


Walter Edward Harris: We have been estimating, for the main estimates, on what we expect the requirements will be for the various organizations. That is, when we put in the main estimate, the blue book for 1956-1957, it was a guess as to what our assessment would be for the calendar year 1956. We received the appropriation bill with royal assent some time, I think, in August of this year, and that means we would be paying our assessment to these organizations seven, eight or nine months after they were due.
The organizations would like to have the money at the beginning of the year for the ensuing year, because they have to operate with the cash in hand and not on any reserve that has been built up. So this, in effect, has this result; that we shall be providing in these supplementary estimates in this fiscal year for the calendar year 1957, and if approval is given to this vote we shall pay this sum forthwith and thus we shall only be three months in arrears, so to speak, for this year.
The blue book which has been tabled for 1957-58 would ordinarily be passed and approved some time in July, and we would then have funds from which to pay the assessment for 1958 at the beginning of the year in January, 1958. In other words, by voting the sums twice this year, once in the blue book and once in the supplementary estimates, we are catching up and will be able to pay our assessment in advance of the calendar year in which it is required.
The variation in the amount of money involved is merely because this is the best estimate we can make now of what we will be expected to pay for this year, 1957.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Terminable services-
559. To provide for a gift of wheat as a contribution of flood relief for Pakistan, $1,475,834.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I presume that now the Minister of Finance is handling the estimates we can expect to have lucid but very brief answers. Has he ever considered making gifts of any other agricultural surpluses, such as apples, for instance?


Walter Edward Harris: In this particular case the request was that the aid should be given in the form of wheat. I do not know that we have ever had any request for apples, but I can assure the hon. member that if a request of that kind came forward we would certainly consider it.


Mr. Regier:: Would the minister say how this is handled at the other end? Is it the government of Pakistan that receives the wheat and hands it over to the municipal authorities? How is this wheat distributed in order to provide the relief intended?


Walter Edward Harris: I cannot say, Mr. Chairman. Pakistan is, of course, a wheat-growing country on its own, but by reason of the fact that there was a severe famine there the government said it would like to have this wheat, and that they were prepared on a temporary basis to have it financed out of our Colombo plan loan. We physically exported the wheat to Pakistan and they did what they thought was required to distribute it at that time to those who needed it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
561.	To authorize and provide for a special government contribution to reduce the unamortized portion of the civil service superannuation account liability, $50,000,000.
Howard Charles Green: This is a very large amount, and I wonder if it could stand over to be considered later?


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Item 561 stands by consent.
University grants

562.	To authorize payments to the national conference of Canadian universities for the purpose of making grants to institutions of higher learning- further amount required, $77,288.
(Translation):


Mr. Gagnon:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to take advantage of this item in the supplementary estimates to record my disagreement and express the opinions of those Canadians living in the kingdom of the Saguenay with regard to the intrusion of the federal government into the field of education.
It is inconceivable, Mr. Chairman, that the men responsible for the pact of 1867 had intended to bring about the disappearance of provinces or to put them in such a position that they would henceforth be unable to benefit fully from the advantages of the sovereignty which they already possessed and to exercise those rights which were vested in them according to the terms of the act itself.
Those who represented Lower Canada at the time would never have approved the treaty which would have deprived my compatriots of their essential rights and of those revenues indispensable to their existence and to their survival as a distinct and autonomous national group.
In 1867 it was known that to build schools, colleges and universities government help was needed. It was known that grants were

necessary to assure their maintenance and progress. Nevertheless, it was decided to leave to the provinces absolute authority in all matters relating to education.
The province of Quebec, which is in law and in fact the legal and political environment of French Canadians, must jealously preserve those rights, granted to it by the British North America Act, to administer its property and exercise those privileges which have been guaranteed to us by our national charter.
Any infringement of the autonomy of the province of Quebec is a breach of the contract made between the two great races in this country at the time of confederation.
If in the British North America Act, section 92, subsection 13 we may read the words "property and civil rights" ... in the province, it was because the only object in view was to safeguard the institutions and the peculiar customs of Quebec which is not and cannot be a province just like the others.
On page 35 of volume I of the report of the royal commission on dominion-provincial relations, the following words may be found:
The ease of Quebec In our federation is in fact peculiar. In every province, Quebec excepted, English civil law is in effect. Every province, save Quebec and Newfoundland, has divorce courts. Every province, except Quebec and Newfoundland has a non-denominational system of public schools. Every province with the exception of Quebec has one single official language, English. Quebec alone has a legislative council. Finally, Quebec alone has a non English-speaking majority, the French-Canadian group.
On the 24th of November 1871, Sir Wilfrid Laurier stated:
It is a historical fact that the federative form of government was adopted only to conserve to Quebec the exceptional and unique position which she occupied upon the American continent.
Lord Carnarvon, who has been called the sponsor of the British North America Act, stated in the House of Lords:
Lower Canada, too, is jealous, as she is deservedly proud, of her ancestral customs and traditions; she is wedded to her peculiar institutions, and will enter this union only upon the distinct understanding that she retains them.
Another great Liberal chief, Honore Merrier, in a speech at the legislative assembly on April 7, 1884, stated:
The frequent Intrusions of the federal parliament upon provincial prerogatives constitute a permanent threat to the provinces.
Mr. Chairman, centralization, whether administrative or political, interferes with the normal development of a state, and is contrary to the very interests of that state and of the people within it. For instance, the
Supply-Finance
problem of education must be settled at the level where it occurs, and at which it can be solved in the best interests of the people.
Because our religious, cultural and national traditions differ from those of other provinces, because the Canadian constitution, which is above the central power, clearly recognizes that fact, the Ottawa government is duty bound to respect those traditions and to let the Quebec provincal government safeguard them in their integrity.
Now then, such traditions, customs and way of life are preserved to a great extent by our universities and our teaching institutions.
We must therefore see to it that the revenue required for carrying out functions so vitally important to our race be so distributed that the provinces be able to carry out their duty and that there be no substitution to them in the exercise of some of their functions.
The central government has no right to do indirectly what the constitution clearly prohibits.
There should be no disruption nor weakening of the political structure on which the French-Canadian culture is based.
If Ottawa has money to give away, if every year it accumulates enormous surpluses, it is because federal taxes are too high.
Let the provinces and municipalities resume the fields of taxation which belong to them, and the problem of assistance to universities will be solved by the authorities properly constituted for that purpose.
Ottawa has no right to collect taxes for purposes which are not a responsibility of the federal government.
When Ottawa levies taxes for the purpose of making grants to universities, it violates the constitution because it interferes in a field which is under provincal jurisdiction and therefore outside its own jurisdiction.
It was chiefly on the occasion of the last war that the central government consolidated its control over sources of revenue. It did so in an unfair and dishonest way. It deliberately misled the provinces when, in 1942, it promised that tax agreements would be temporary and would be revoked as soon as the war ended. In 1947, under direct threat, provincial governments were forced by Ottawa to renew tax agreements for another five years. The same thing happened again in 1952.
The then minister of finance, in high-sounding and solemn statements, declared that the provinces were absolutely free to accept or refuse federal proposals. He was lying shamelessly.

Supply-Finance
The same blackmail continues today. The provinces have no alternative but to submit to the dictates of the Prime Minister or to be starved out. The only freedom that is left to them is the freedom to starve or to live prostrate at the feet of the federal ogre. "Being the lion entitles me to the biggest share," says the Prime Minister. Let the others share what is left.
With the exception of the maritime provinces, whose economy is on the downgrade because of the neglect and carelessness of this government, there are no more poor provinces in Canada, and it is a falsehood, a lie, to say that the purpose of tax agreements is to achieve a better distribution of the national wealth.
Are New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island better off since Ottawa took them under its wing?
What is wanted, what bureaucrats are seeking, the purpose they want to achieve, is the monolithic state; it is to make Ottawa the financial, economic, political, intellectual and cultural navel of all Canada.
The trouble with these centralizers and the obstacle which prevents them from reaching their full goal is that the province of Quebec, and their great enemy Duplessis, whom they would like to subdue and force into line with the others under a single command, are standing in their way.
Upstanding French Canadians are firm in their resolve to remain what they always have been, citizens proud of their origins and their heroic past. They are a real hindrance to those dreamers who would like to cast the whole Canadian population in the same mould.
I contend that the Union Nationale, since it has been in power, has made marvels for everyone to see and verify; I contend too that the consistent success of premier Duplessis at the polls can largely be explained by his achievements in the field of education at all levels, primary, secondary and university.
I wish to quote from page 276 of the brief submitted to the royal commission on constitutional problems by the Federation des colleges classiques:
Every system of grants contains at least the germs of a subordination of the beneficiary toward the givers; this is inconsistent with the equality of right which must exist between the federal and the provincial governments.
I take pleasure here in congratulating the distinguished dean of Laval University, Mgr Alphonse-Marie Parent who said that his university would refuse federal grants.

Commenting this statement in an editorial, Le Soleil, mouthpiece of the Liberal party, said on December 21, 1956:
Such a decision could easily be expected since it is consistent with the traditions of that institution, the first French university in Canada which, for more than a century, has been the guardian of French civilization on Canadian soil.
In spite of its limited financial resources, the university could not betray those who have waged political battles, who have won the constitutional liberties which we en.ioy today and among the greatest of which is that exclusive jurisdiction granted to the provinces in matters of education, a privilege which the present government, as did all its predecessors, is jealously defending against any attempt of encroachment.
The surpluses of the central government, at a time when municipalities are faced with deficits, and some provinces are in financial difficulties, is nothing less than scandalous and unfair.
These surpluses are made possible by the central government's fiscal centralization and by its consistent encroachments upon the sources of revenue of the provinces.
It is rich with the money of others. Its favours, its liberalities and its gifts are paid for by taxes drawn off the provinces and particularly the province of Quebec.
Here is an abstract from the Tremblay commission's report:
Our surveys lead us to the conclusion that, for refusing to compromise on the rights granted to her by the constitution, the province of Quebec, through the policy followed by the federal government particularly since 1947, has sustained losses which may be assessed at more than $300 million.
French Canadians, Mr. Chairman, are too proud to be the servants of the central government; their glass is small but it is the glass in which they wish to drink, and begging is not much to their liking. They have too much backbone. We don't want charity, we want justice. This is why I say that the central government should return to Quebec the amount of which the province was deprived because she refused to sell her sacred and inalienable rights, because she is not willing to trade for gold the history, traditions, customs and privileges which her sons conquered in America at the price of heroic fighting and sometimes with their own blood.
Politicians of all political trends have fought and battled, not once but a hundred thousand times, to preserve for their descendants the catholic and cultural inheritance handed down by their forefathers. They spared nothing to make us what we are today. We may neither betray our past nor deprive our children and grandchildren of the merits and of the victories won by our forebears.
He who . . .

said Louis Veuillot, and I want to conclude with this thought:
He who . . . allows himself to be despoiled of the rights awarded him by his country's constitution is a coward, and he who fails to live up to the responsibilities conferred to him by this constitution is a bad citizen.


Mr. Habel:: Is this written by Robert
Rumilly?


Paul-Edmond Gagnon: No, by Louis Veuillot. You cannot know of it, of course, and, even if you had read it, you would not have understood it.
(Text):


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
565. To recoup the lobster trap indemnity account, established under vote 540 of the Appropriation Act No. 5, 1955, to cover the net loss incurred in the operation of the account during the fiscal year 1956-57, $27,400.
George Randolph Pearkes: May I ask the minister why it is necessary to recoup the lobster indemnity account by this amount? I am anxious to know whether the scheme has proven a success on the Atlantic coast, because representations have been made to me asking that a similar scheme be introduced for the crab fishery on the west coast.


Walter Edward Harris: There were losses totalling $27,400 incurred during the fiscal year 1956-57, and that is the sum we are depositing in the lobster indemnity account. The plan has been a success. I am quite sure that all the lobster fishermen in the east would agree. So far as the Minister of Finance is concerned it has, of course, cost money, but it has not cost very much compared with the results and the advantages which have accrued to the lobster fishermen. I am not familiar with the future because we are dealing with the past in this particular item. I am sure the Minister of Fisheries will be interested in the crab fishing industry in British Columbia.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
567. Fair wages, conciliation, industrial relations, industrial disputes investigations, including the administration of legislation relating thereto, and for activities re promotion of co-operation in industry between labour and management-further amount required, $20,000.
Mrs. Fairclough:: Perhaps the minister
would explain what occasioned the additional expenditure of this amount?


Walter Edward Harris: This is the result of the appointment of the royal commission in the early days of this session, sir, with respect to the claims and counterclaims of the railways and the unions concerning the firemen on diesel-operated engines.
Supply-Labour


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Does the minister mean the sittings which have already begun? Will there be more in the next year?


Walter Edward Harris: This amount is required to cover the cost from the beginning of the hearings until the end of the fiscal year, that is March 31.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: There will be more next year.


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
568. Canada labour relations board-further amount required, $2,000.
Ellen Louks Fairclough: Does this cover the same subject? Does the Canada labour relations board have extra work in connection with the rail dispute?


Walter Edward Harris: This is due to an increased number of hearings under the Canada labour relations board and is a comparatively small amount, as a matter of fact, due to an underestimate at the beginning, particularly for reporting fees that were required for some of the hearings.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
571. To provide for purchases of air photography and the expenses of the interdepartmental committee on air surveys, including purchases of equipment-further amount required, $800,000.
Howard Charles Green: Will the minister explain this vote? There is a vote in the main estimates of $1,500,000, and this $800,000 seems to be for the same type of work?


Walter Edward Harris: We always provided, Mr. Chairman, a figure of, I think, a million and a half, and in some cases of $1,800,000, for air photography of the northern regions. The department lays out a plan of the areas they want surveyed, and the aerial photography companies who do the work also find it convenient, if weather conditions permit, to do other flying and take photographs of other areas that are not included in the agreement. Sometimes they can fly in certain regions when they cannot fly in the areas we have asked them to do. So at the end of the year they submit those photographs taken of the areas not specified, and if they are, as a matter of fact, of areas that we expect to use and want to have in any event, we pay them the commercial rate for what they have done, though it is not included in the million and a half in the first place.


Howard Charles Green: That is all for extra work?


Walter Edward Harris: It is additional work, yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Health and Welfare
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE Health services-
574.	Administration of the Opium and Narcotic Drugs Act-further amount required, $18,150.
William Gourlay Blair: I simply want to ask the minister if there has been a necessity for increased prosecutions under this act, or has there been an additional demand for prosecutions?


Walter Edward Harris: This is due to an increase in the number of narcotics prosecutions and the development of several complicated and therefore costly cases, amounting to $17,000; consultations with the provincial authorities regarding the revision of the Opium and Narcotics Drugs Act, $150; increased storage charges on motor cars seized under the act, and other costs of $1,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
575.	Indians and Eskimos health services-operation and maintenance-further amount required, $700,000.
William Gourlay Blair: Would the minister explain this additional $700,000? Is that for additional hospital services, or how is the amount broken down?


Walter Edward Harris: There is $550,000 for hospitals, doctors and other professional special services, and an additional amount for travelling in remote areas to make up the balance.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
576.	To authorize and provide for general health grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $1,000,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister indicate whether this item involves any extension of the health grants program?


Walter Edward Harris: No, it is just that construction has been successfully completed and we have done more work than we expected, to the extent of about a million dollars.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Does this item include the pleasure trip of the C. D. Howe every year for the has-been Liberals to look at the Eskimos?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Welfare branch-
577.	To provide for a reduction in the amount owing by the old age security fund pursuant to section 11 of the Old Age Security Act, representing the amount of temporary loans made by the Minister of Finance to the fund during the fiscal year 1956-57 estimated at, $6,000,000.
Howard Charles Green: Will the minister explain item 577?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes. In the blue book, as hon. members know, we try to estimate the deficit, and in the past I have asked the house, and they have kindly agreed, to vote the deficit in this fund from the time I became
Minister of Finance. This is our estimate of the amount required to March 31 to complete the payment into the fund of the deficit incurred in excess of payments over receipts. It is the smallest amount we have ever had and indicates that the fund is almost selfsustaining and would be self-sustaining, as I indicated in the budget address the other night, this coming fiscal year if we had made no change in it. This will bring us right up to date.


Howard Charles Green: Is any consideration at all being given to changing the regulations with regard to residential qualifications? For example, is any thought being given to reducing the length of time a recipient must live in Canada, or any change in order to make it possible to make these payments outside Canada? As the minister knows, this question has been raised on different occasions in the house and we have been led to believe the department is considering some changes. Perhaps the Minister of Finance could tell us today just what are the prospects for having a revision of these regulations.
I do not think it can be questioned that the regulations are much too severe at the present time. For example, take a person who is retired and wishes to go to the United Kingdom to live. He cannot draw this old age security, though he has been contributing toward it over the years. As the minister knows, the Old Age Security Act is in the nature of a contributory act, and people are entitled to the payments as of right. Surely at some time we shall reach the point where a person can live outside of Canada and still draw those payments. What is the situation at the present time?
I know of some cases which are very unfair not only in the way I have suggested but also in other respects. For example, one man had been a correspondent in the United Kingdom of one of our newspaper chains for quite a number of years. When he retired and came back to Canada the time he had spent in the United Kingdom working for a Canadian company disqualified him for the old age security payments. There are many features of that type which should be removed.
What I am wondering about is whether any steps are being taken to see that they are removed, or is the department simply coasting along and making no attempt whatever to improve the regulations?


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Chairman, I know the Minister of National Health and Welfare is not coasting along on this subject, because he is considering the problems which have arisen in what, after all, is about five years' experience with this plan.

One might suppose there had been sufficient experience on which to base a recommendation for changes. On the other hand, I would think that five years is not so very long that one would feel the government was quite justified in saying what the complaints were before they did choose to make recommendations. However, I am quite certain that in a great many minds the two questions raised by my hon. friend are present; that is, the question of the residence rule and the question of the rule applying to people who qualify in Canada for the old age security payments and then leave Canada for one reason or another and find that at a certain period of time they may not be able to draw the payments. But as this is an item for the current fiscal year and does not pretend to project itself beyond March 31 I suggest that I would not be in a position to make any statement about policy. Rather I would leave that to the minister if he chooses to do so at any future time.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, may I say just a word. I certainly hope it will not be long before the consideration that has often been promised on these two points will result in something being done. I remind the Minister of Finance that this year both these questions have been raised and to both of them the answer given, in one instance by the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Health and Welfare and in the other instance by the Prime Minister, was that the matters are under consideration. It is something about which there is considerable feeling in the country, particularly in view of reciprocal arrangements in some other parts of the world. I hope the day will soon come when people who have come to this country and who have become citizens may be able to qualify in something less than 20 years. I also hope the day will come when Canadians who have qualified for the pension and are required to move elsewhere, sometimes because of health, or who simply wish to move elsewhere because their families have done so, might be able to continue to draw the pension. It seems to me this is one of the little improvements, along with some of the major ones, that need to be made in our old age pension legislation.
However, as the minister pointed out, the item before us deals simply with a bookkeeping deficit in the current year, and he has suggested that we leave matters of policy to another occasion which I hope soon will be with us. But I would like to say a word about this matter of an apparent bookkeeping deficit. On two or three occasions, by means of questions on the order paper, I have tried to get information which I think ought to be available, and I urge the minister to give some thought to it.
Supply-Health and Welfare
As he knows, the only items of revenue that are credited in the books to the old age security fund are the three 2 per cent taxes.
1	refer to the 2 per cent tax on personal incomes up to a maximum of $3,000; the 2 per cent tax on corporation income, and the
2	per cent tax that is built into the sales tax. But I suggest that there is another source of income which should be credited to the old age security fund. I refer to the amount of income tax that is paid by people whose taxable income is increased by virtue of the receipt of old age security.
I have no way of knowing or even guessing at how much of the money paid out in old age security becomes taxable income, but I will draw this to the minister's attention. I shall use the round figure of $400 million. We have not reached that yet but we are close to it as the amount we pay out under the Old Age Security Act. If only 10 per cent of that amount became taxable income in the hands of the recipients, and if it were taxable only at the lowest rate of 15 per cent, you would have the $6 million right there. If more than 10 per cent of this money becomes taxable income-and some of it certainly gets into the hands of persons who pay at a much higher rate-it becomes obvious, I think, that the government is receiving back out of old age security payments a sum of money which certainly would be equal to this deficit.
I said a moment ago I did not feel competent even to guess at the amount, but I will go out on a limb and make the guess that the figure that is received back in terms of extra income tax is much greater than the amount of the deficit this year, and is probably greater than the deficits that have been incurred in the years gone by. I know the minister will not be in a position to answer my question now as to how much money is received in that way, because the Minister of National Revenue has already told me, in answer to questions on the order paper, that there is no separate bookkeeping of that kind. But it does seem to me that if the Minister of Finance is going to report from year to year on the bookkeeping deficit in the old age security fund he should get a complete picture, even if this other item has to be something of an estimate. I am suggesting that if this fourth item were estimated and added to the other three we would find that there is not even a bookkeeping deficit so far as old age security is concerned.
The moral I would draw from that is obvious. If it is not, I will state it on another occasion.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Very briefly I want to support all that has been said in this respect
2424	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs by the hon. member tor Yancouver-Quadra and the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre; but as a first step I would ask the minister this question. Has any consideration been given to reciprocal arrangements within the commonwealth in respect of the payment of old age security?


Walter Edward Harris: I would not be able to answer that; I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. I suggest the hon. member ask the Minister of National Health and Welfare.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OP NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES Northern administration and lands branch-
Yukon Territory-
579. Grant to the government of the Yukon Territory to finance the balance of construction costs, in excess of $1,700,000 already advanced as a loan by the government of Canada for this purpose, for the consolidated water and sewer system for the city of Whitehorse and the new residential area; such grant to be paid in the current fiscal year and any portion thereof that is not used for the purpose stated herein to be repaid, $600,000.
Mr. Simmons:: The original estimate for the water and sewer system in Whitehorse, prepared by competent engineers, was in the neighbourhood of $1,700,000, $700,000 of the cost of these installations to be borne by the territorial government and $1 million by the corporation of the city of Whitehorse. The additional cost of $600,000 cannot be blamed on anyone in particular, as one must realize that the costs of construction in the Yukon territories are exceptionally high as compared with other more thickly populated areas. In the Yukon the construction season is short, and if one tries to buck the elements he generally finds it to be an expensive venture.
In view of existing circumstances the local authorities in Whitehorse are not in a position to assume the additional financial burden of $600,000. Government departments and agencies as well as the civilian population of the Whitehorse area would derive much benefit from a sewer and water system. Therefore this assistance from the federal government is very welcome and will be appreciated by all.
1 wish to sincerely thank the minister for providing the necessary funds to properly complete the project to the advantage of all concerned, as it would be an utter impossibility for the local government and the city of Whitehorse to assume full financial obligation for this utility. It would place an entirely too heavy financial burden on them to assume the full responsibility for this project; therefore this will serve to indicate


to all hon. members that the federal government is fully aware of its responsibilities in assisting in the development of our northern communities.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the hon. member for the Yukon for giving us this detailed explanation in the absence of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. We thank him very much and congratulate him.
I would like to ask the minister this question. How does the Yukon government repay loans to the federal government? What are the sources of income available to them from which they repay loans?


Walter Edward Harris: My recollection of the income of the Yukon territory is rather sketchy, because I have not considered it for something over approximately two years. I am sure the detailed information could be obtained from the hon. member for the Yukon.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
581. Transportation-movement of mail by land, air and water, including administration-further amount required and to authorize and provide for the adjustment, as of October 1, 1956, of rural mail delivery contracts in effect on that date or entered into by way of renewal after that date, under the provisions of subsection (2) of section 33 of the Post Office Act, notwithstanding paragraphs (b) and (c) thereof, $3,962,000.
Lewis Elston Cardiff: Mr. Chairman, when the post office estimates were up the other day it was indicated, if I remember correctly, that there was a reserve of approximately $30 million. Why is it necessary for the minister to pay back the sum of $3 million.


Walter Edward Harris: Well, Mr. Chairman, the estimates we considered the other day were the estimates for the fiscal year beginning April 1. That would cover only those rural mail contracts which were adjusted in that year. This is for the purpose of adjusting contracts as of October 1, 1956, and represents the estimated cost of these contracts from October 1 to March 31. This also includes the increased costs for transportation by railway pursuant to the increased rates that were permitted by the board of transport commissioners. I think my hon. friend is referring to rural mail contracts, in all probability.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: If the surplus of the post office was $30 million, why is it necessary for the Post Office Department to pay them back; or does that $30 million go into the general fund?


Walter Edward Harris: The surplus of the Post Office Department was approximately $6 million, not $30 million, Mr. Chairman, and this vote is not only to provide money for the purposes set out but it is to authorize the minister to do

that very thing. We do not have the practice in Canada of leaving the minister free to spend money from whatever surplus there may be. He must seek authority from parliament to do that, and this is what he is doing.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: I may be wrong, but I understand that the Post Office Department is considering giving the mail carriers an increase on a percentage basis, where some are lower than others for the same area and with the same number of boxes, etc. Perhaps there is some provision in this item for that; is that right?


Walter Edward Harris: That is correct.


Harry Oliver White: Do I understand from the minister that some of these funds will be used to readjust contracts let last fall; say September, October and November?


Walter Edward Harris: That is right.


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Mr. Chairman, I want a little information from the Minister of Finance. I cannot find the exact reference in Hansard, but several days ago on the discussion of his estimates the Postmaster General gave us to understand that according to the estimates for 1957-58 as presented to the house originally, the anticipated surplus of his department would be some $8,200,000. He then drew to our attention certain anticipated expenditures which he felt would reduce that surplus to some $6 million. That was his estimate as it stood at that time. Actually we have an item of $3,900,000 odd here, and am I to understand in the light of this information that this would be a deduction from the first estimate of $8,200,000?


Walter Edward Harris: No, Mr. Chairman. The
$8,200,000 which later became $6 million is the situation with respect to this year, without regard to the payment being provided for here, which stands by itself. So with this payment, which represents our best estimate of what we are going to spend on these things, it goes in one side and out the other, leaving the net result the same.


William McLean Hamilton: Even if it goes in one side and out the other, $8,200,000 minus roughly $4 million leaves a net of $4,200,000, does it not, Mr. Chairman; and is that not the situation here?


Walter Edward Harris: The money is not in the hands of the Postmaster General yet, and will not be until this vote is approved. If it is approved it will then be paid out to the various persons indicated here-rural mail carriers and railway companies and the like
Supply-Post Office
-so it is not taken into account at all in the figures given the other day.


William McLean Hamilton: Well, that is my point. At the point where this money is paid to the Postmaster General and he pays it out to the transportation companies, his expenditures would be increased by the amount of shall we say $4 million?


Walter Edward Harris: That is right.


William McLean Hamilton: And his revenue would be reduced from $8,200,000, which was his estimate before these supplementary estimates were introduced, to some $4,200,000, which would be his estimate after the supplementary estimate was introduced?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, if my hon. friend is
referring to the revenues of the office irrespective of the vote the government gives.


William McLean Hamilton: Do we understand that this entire sum would be paid out in the current fiscal year?


Walter Edward Harris: With the additional bookkeeping which is done by the government in the month of April, I should think a considerable part, if not all, would be paid out.


John Borden Hamilton: I
have just one further question to confirm the fact. In the light of the information before him does the minister agree that the net surplus of the post office would now be expected to be about $4 million or slightly over?


Walter Edward Harris: No, Mr. Chairman, I do not. I find it difficult to understand the point that is being made. As I understand it the revenues are the revenues from the sale of stamps and sundry other services. If the Postmaster General the other day gave the figure of about $6 million as his net surplus of revenue over expenditures, and if he excluded this item from it in his computations, then it seems to me when it is all over and done the $6 million still stands.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
583. To provide for reimbursement of the Queen's printers advance account for the value of stores which have become obsolete, unserviceable, lost or destroyed, $116,050.
Mr. Nesbitt:: This would seem to be a rather large amount and one which you would think probably should have been looked after in the original estimates. Can the minister tell us whether the $116,050 was an unexpected account which has arisen because of some unusual contingency?

Supply-Public Works


Walter Edward Harris: There were two fires, one in Edmonton and one in Ottawa, which destroyed goods to the value of $116,050, and this is the account.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: That apparently answers what I have in mind. There are four headings in this item, namely "obsolete", "unserviceable", "lost" or "destroyed". I wonder whether the minister has any sort of breakdown?


Walter Edward Harris: Just the two; $1,049.58 for the one and $115,000 for the other. Both were fires.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Then I take it that actually this amount is just to cover the two losses or the two fires?


Walter Edward Harris: That is correct.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: And a word such as "obsolete" particularly is actually unnecessary?


Walter Edward Harris: No.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: What is the explanation for its presence?


Walter Edward Harris: It is necessary because this is the wording of the vote to which it refers.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Harbours and rivers engineering branch- Acquisition, construction and improvements of harbour and river works-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, harbour and river works listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects- further amounts required-
590.	British Columbia and Yukon, $1.
Howard Charles Green: Will the minister explain this item?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, Mr. Chairman. The vote has to do with dredging in the Vancouver narrows, $236,229. However, we found an item of $236,228 available from savings in other listed projects, so the vote is now $1, indicating that we do not need the money but are seeking authority to do the particular work involved.


Howard Charles Green: What I wanted to know is this. Does this complete the project in the first narrows?


Walter Edward Harris: There is nothing to indicate whether or not this will complete it, but down at the bottom of the page I see that this work was requested by Mr. H. Green, M.P., so perhaps he could tell me.


Howard Charles Green: Thank you very much. Some years ago one of the departments, I am not sure which one it was, had a model constructed of the first narrows in order that

proper planning might be done for completing the whole job of improving the entrance to Vancouver harbour. There was also an investigation made, as a result of which it was recommended that a causeway should be placed at the second narrows.
Has the minister any information about those two projects? I asked the Minister of Transport about this matter last summer but he was unable to give me any details. Both are extremely important in so far as the development of the harbour is concerned. I should like to know whether all this work has been dropped, or just what is being done at the present time. The model was at the University of British Columbia, and I think it was built at a cost of about $200,000. This was in 1954. It was built by the research council.


Walter Edward Harris: I see I did not turn the page. At any rate the work has been requested by Mr. Campney, a man by the name of Arthur Laing, the greater Vancouver metropolitan industrial development commission, and sundry merchants and chambers of commerce in the city of Vancouver. I also find that, as my hon. friend has said, there was a committee to study this matter and a statement was made by the Minister of Trade and Commerce in 1953. This apparently is the completion of the work, but there is no note of the model at the University of British Columbia. However, I see that on the committee there were a number of persons representing the university as well as various other public bodies. I must say that I am not in a position to say whether or not that completes the work, but I will make inquiries and let my hon. friend know.


Howard Charles Green: I am afraid it is just the completion of the first stage.


Walter Edward Harris: That may be so.


George Randolph Pearkes: I should like to know what projects were not completed in order to make available this money to which the minister refers.


Walter Edward Harris: All the projects on which contracting work was completed have been paid off. There is none incomplete. But up till this date we have not paid out all the money we had voted, and we found this amount; but next year we may very well have to pick up the sum of $236,000 to cover work now being done and then completed.


George Randolph Pearkes: Were there not some projects on which the work was not completed in order that money might be saved, on which the original contract had not been completed so that money might be transferred to this particular work?


Walter Edward Harris: I would doubt that. There may be, but I would doubt it.


George Randolph Pearkes: I would not doubt it.


Walter Edward Harris: I would think those jobs which could be done have been done.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Headquarters administration, national police services and training establishments-
591.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $185,000.
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Can the minister tell us what buildings were constructed and where?


Walter Edward Harris: This has to do with a so-called "B" block in Regina, Saskatchewan. I understand the original contract was for $1,321,445 and work began May 1, 1956. Work went forward at a much faster pace than we expected, and this is the additional amount required to complete it.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Can the minister tell us how far these buildings are from completion?


Walter Edward Harris: I see a note which says there will be a request for a further vote in the coming year, as it is anticipated to finish the building some time late in the coming fiscal year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Land and air services-
592.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $240,000.
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Perhaps the minister could answer the same questions that I asked with respect to item 591. Would he explain the item and tell us where the buildings are, what type they are and the reason for the vote?


Walter Edward Harris: There are several buildings. These are just sums to add to the amounts to be paid on existing contracts: In Nova Scotia, Inverness, $1,000; New Glasgow, $21,000; Pictou, $6,000. In Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, $7,000. In New Brunswick, Edmundston, $8,000; Moncton, $12,500; another one for Moncton, $10,500. In Ontario, Sudbury, $4,800. In Manitoba, Roblin, $5,000. In Saskatchewan, Estevan, $10,000; lie a la Crosse, $10,000; Kelvington, $14,500; Blaine Lake, $13,000; Swift Current, $5,000; another one for Swift Current, $10,000. In Alberta, Camrose, $11,200; Edmonton, $50,000. In the Northwest Territories, Providence, $20,500. In the Yukon Territory, Whitehorse $10,000; and in British Columbia, Massett, $10,000.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I have just one more question. While items 592 and 591 are separate items, there might possibly be overlapping. In
Supply-Transport
either of those items is there anything for R.C.M.P. land or building at London, Ontario, as has been recently suggested in the press?


Walter Edward Harris: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE Patent and copyright office-
593.	Patent division-further amount required, $300,000.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Can the minister say when the Ilsley report will be ready on this matter?


Walter Edward Harris: I am sorry, but I cannot say. I have no up to date information on that matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT Canal services-
595. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, including payments to provinces or municipalities as contributions towards construction done by those bodies-further amount required, $216,000.
Howard Charles Green: Would the minister give us some details of this vote?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes. This is a lease, Mr. Chairman, which had been granted to the St. Lawrence Power Company of a parcel of land on the Cornwall canal reserve at Sheek Hill. The Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario required the land in connection with its electricity development project, and we had to cancel the lease and pay these damages to the lessee for taking possession.


Howard Charles Green: Was the dominion government compensated by the Ontario government?


Walter Edward Harris: There is an agreement covering compensation, but there seems to be some question whether or not this comes within its terms. We are looking into that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Railway and steamship services-
Payments to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the company) upon applications approved by the Minister of Transport, made by the company to the Minister of Finance, to be applied by the company in payment of the deficits, certified by the auditors of the company, arising in the operations in the calendar year 1956 -further amounts required-
598. Prince Edward Island car ferry and terminals, $303,287.
Mr. Malheson:: The original estimate was $1,501,000, and this increase of $303,287 would indicate that the total deficit was $1,804,000. Is that right?


Walter Edward Harris: Correct, Mr. Chairman.

Supply-Transport


Neil Alexander Matheson: Can the minister say
whether that includes the depreciation, or whether it is just the operating deficit?


Walter Edward Harris: It appears to be the difference between revenues and expenses. I do not see any reference to depreciation at all.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
599. Newfoundland ferry and terminals, $811,668.
Howard Charles Green: Would the minister explain this vote? I cannot find a corresponding vote in the main estimates.


Walter Edward Harris: Well, there is a main vote, Mr. Chairman, of $3 million-


Howard Charles Green: What is the page?


Walter Edward Harris: I regret to say that I have not the number. I will look it up for you in a moment. This has to do with three items, the North Sydney-Argentia service, the North Sydney-Port aux Basques service and the North Sydney-other Newfoundland ports service. Taking these in turn, the North Sydney-Port aux Basques service comes to $400,727; the North Sydney-Argentia service comes to $247,103; and the North Sydney-other Newfoundland ports service to $163,838. These are just additional deficits for which we are now budgeting.


Howard Charles Green: Apparently the good ship
William Carson comes into this picture somewhere. What was the amount of the deficit for the Sydney-Argentia service in the main estimates?


Walter Edward Harris: It was $747,103. That was the actual deficit, and the amount provided was $500,000.


Howard Charles Green: The total for the present fiscal year would be about $750,000?


Walter Edward Harris: It would be $747,000.


Howard Charles Green: That deficit arises entirely from the operation of the William Carson during the present fiscal year? Is that correct?


Walter Edward Harris: That is correct.


Howard Charles Green: What about the deficit in the service from Sydney to Port aux Basques? How much was that in the main estimates?


Walter Edward Harris: It was $2,925,000.


Howard Charles Green: Then in addition to that there is this $400,000.


Walter Edward Harris: Correct.


Howard Charles Green: That would be about $3,300,000 all together?


Walter Edward Harris: Just $3,325,727.


Howard Charles Green: What vessels is that in connection with?


Walter Edward Harris: I cannot say. I have no record of them. I don't know.


Howard Charles Green: Has that deficit anything to do with the William Carson?


Walter Edward Harris: I have no information here about that.


Howard Charles Green: Perhaps the minister could find out about that?


Walter Edward Harris: I presume I could.


Howard Charles Green: What about the third item of $163,833?


Walter Edward Harris: The total deficit was $235,088 and we had provided $71,250. This is a total of a great many other services.


Howard Charles Green: You mean the North Sydney-other islands?


Walter Edward Harris: A lot of small ones.


Howard Charles Green: What is the estimate for the deficit on the William Carson for the next fiscal year on the run from Sydney to Argentia?


Walter Edward Harris: I have those estimates here, but I have not looked it up. I will let the hon. member know.


Howard Charles Green: Could the minister tell me
how much it is estimated the deficit will be for the next fiscal year?


Walter Edward Harris: I see an item Newfoundland ferry and terminals, $3,423,000. This is probably the item covered by the Port aux Basques service.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
601. Maritime Freight Rates Act-for the payment to the railway companies operating in the select territory designated by the act, of the difference occurring on account of the application of the act, between the tariff tolls and normal tolls under approved tariffs (estimated and certified to the Minister of Transport by the Canadian National Railway Company and approved by auditors of the said company respecting the eastern lines of the Canadian National Railways and in the case of the other railways by the board of transport commissioners for Canada) on all traffic moved during the calendar year 1956 (chap. 174, R.S.)-further amount required, $1,068,777.
Alfred Johnson Brooks: I would like to ask the
minister a question relating to the Maritime Freight Rates Act. It is not difficult to understand this item; it is simply the amount due to the railways over and above the freight carried. But in his statement the other day the minister said there would be an immediate review of the Maritime Freight Rates Act, and I would like to ask what is meant by "an immediate review", when he would expect it to begin, and how long he would expect it to continue?

I would like to ask him why the year 1947 was selected as the year from which to make the review. His statement indicated there will be a study of the average increase in freight rates since 1947. It is well known that from 1927, when the freight rates act came into force, the situation as far as rates in the maritimes are concerned has deteriorated, and I think if a study is to be made of the Maritime Freight Rates Act it should start in 1927 and not in 1947. As a matter of fact in 1946-I think it was 1946 or 1948-a 21 per cent increase in freight rates was made across Canada, and at that time the maritime boards of trade and others doing business in the maritime provinces felt that the 21 per cent increase had practically wiped out all the benefit we had received under the Maritime Freight Rates Act.
Then again I would like to ask the minister to tell us where he obtained his figure of $2 million as assistance to the maritime provinces in the matter of the freight rates act. He says this represents an increase from 20 per cent to 30 per cent, not in the total benefits under the act but, I suppose, under the act as it applies to freight rates from the western boundaries of the special area to freight going west. I would like to ask the minister why the increase is not applied to the total of the benefits under the freight rates act, including all the eastern maritime provinces?
In the item for the Maritime Freight Rates Act in the 1957-58 estimates there is an amount of $13,175,000, and with the addition of the $2 million the amount will be $15,175,000. That is the estimated amount to be paid next year under the act. The amount of $2 million is hardly 12 per cent of the benefit we have been receiving under the Maritime Freight Rates Act.
Tailing into consideration the deterioration there has been over all the years from 1927 up to the present time, I should like the minister to explain how he estimates that $2 million is a satisfactory payment by way of benefit and why, instead of going back to 1927 when the Maritime Freight Rates Act came into force, the year 1947 was selected.
I might point out that when the 21 per cent horizontal increase was made throughout Canada in 1948 it was estimated that the maritime provinces would lose $8 million a year just from that one increase. There have been several increases since that time, so that today the loss in the maritime provinces as far as freight rates are concerned must be reaching anywhere from $15 million to $20 million. I want to say to the minister that I consider it very unfair at this time to offer only $2 million by way of additional benefit
Sup p ly-Transport
to the maritime provinces. If the government really wants to help the maritime provinces the increase has to be much larger than that.
Any study of the freight rate situation in the maritime provinces today and the conditions under which the industries there are operating will indicate that an increase of $2 million will not benefit the maritimes in the way they should be helped. I hope this matter will be reconsidered by the minister and the department. Incidentally, the survey that is to be made should have been made years ago, but until it is completed I hope the minister's department and the government will give consideration to making a payment that will be a little more satisfactory and will treat the maritime provinces a little more fairly.


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Chairman, I begin by
pointing out that this is out of order, that this speech should be made in the budget debate which I began last Thursday.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: A lot of speeches have been made today which should have been made at other times.


Walter Edward Harris: That may well be, but if we start on this I am sure we will merely be repeating what we can say in the budget debate. However, if my hon. friend wishes I will answer what he has said very briefly by pointing out that the study I referred to was a study I had made since 1947. It was not that the study to be made of the transportation system would be confined only to the years back to 1947. If the hon. member will look at the bottom of page 2219 of Hansard of March 14 he will find that my words were:
A study of the average increase in freight rates since 1947 . .	. shows that an increase in the
subvention ... is justified.
That does not mean that the study to be made will be confined to 1947 and later.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Pardon me, but at page 2220 the minister said:
Before making further proposals, however, we must first of all determine the most essential transportation needs of the region in the light of developments over the last decade or more.


Walter Edward Harris: That is right.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: It is 30 years.


Walter Edward Harris: That was only a general phrase, and was not intended to limit it to 10 or 15 years or whatever it may be.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I take it there is no limit.


Walter Edward Harris: There is no limit so far as I know. The nature of the precise study and the persons who will be making it will be annonuced in due course, I believe, and I need not deal with that. So far as the $2

Supply-Transport
million is concerned, it appears to be about another 10 per cent of the cost at the present time.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Not under the Maritime Freight Rates Act generally, but only the section of it dealing with transportation from the western boundary.


Walter Edward Harris: That is quite right, but the total amount being paid at the present time under the Maritime Freight Rates Act is approximately $11 million to $12 million, my hon. friend has said, and in order to be on the safe side in estimating I put it at about $2 million. However, I can go into that in detail in the budget debate rather than at the present time, as I would like to get this passed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
603. To provide for reimbursement of the Department of Transport stores account for the value of stores which have become obsolete, unserviceable, lost or destroyed, $58,787.
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Did they have a fire in the transport stores, as they did in the case of the queen's printer?


Walter Edward Harris: This is in nearly every case for loss of stores by obsolescence or through the usual shortages which occur to some extent in any stores account of the size of transport. It represents $58,000 this year compared with an average of $13,000 to $15,000 over the preceding four years, but I notice that five years ago we had an item of $148,-
000.	This is the result of a study made by a board which surveys the stores accounts of transport and discards those which are completely useless or where the bookkeeping is there but the item is not.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: There is no one large specific item?


Walter Edward Harris: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Radio aids to air and marine navigation-
605. Administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, $600,000.
Howard Charles Green: I notice in the details that this includes a vote of $289,000 for professional and special services. Could the minister tell us how those are made up.


Walter Edward Harris: The detail is for the purpose of breaking down the money into the standard items shown at the back of the blue book, but the real vote is for the purpose of making payments to various air lines for radio services maintained by them. The $289,000 is merely a guess as to how much

of those services happens to be in the professional class and how much in other categories. The items are a payment of $87,000 to Pacific Western Air Lines in connection with an agreement as to Bathurst, Northwest Territories, a payment of $30,000 to Canadian Pacific Air Lines for the Norman Wells aeradio station, $59,000 for other northern stations and $113,000 for preappointment training expenses of student radio operators.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Can the minister tell the house if the employees in the department who less than a month ago were six weeks in arrears on overtime pay have now been paid?


Walter Edward Harris: No, I could not, but the voting of this money will help.


Stanley Howard Knowles: At least it will not hinder it.


George Randolph Pearkes: Can the minister say whether any of this money is being spent either on marking or investigating the manner of marking overhead cables in the vicinity of the approaches to landing places, particularly on the seaplane routes? There is a great hazard arising from power cables which stretch across fairly wide reaches of water and are directly on the approaches to seaplane bases.


Walter Edward Harris: No, these are not payments in that group. They are, as I have indicated, payments to air lines for maintaining radio stations, making weather reports, I presume, and the like; certain travelling expenses in connection with the examination of student pilots and costs in connection with freight, express and cartage of goods to northern points.
Then there is a final payment to the Marconi company in settlement of accounts taken over by the department from former Marconi-operated stations. However, the problem my hon. friend mentioned is a real one, and I am sure the Minister of Transport is concerned with it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Edward Turney Applewhaite: It being six o'clock, I do now leave the chair.


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Chairman, before you do, I do not know whether there is much to be said on the remaining items but if there is not I should like to have them carried. Of course we intend to leave agriculture until eight o'clock.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Is it the pleasure of the committee that we continue?


Howard Charles Green: I think there is quite a bit to be said on some of these items.


Walter Edward Harris: All right.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Production Service-Health of animals-
546. To provide for payment of compensation to owners of animals affected with diseases coming under the Animal Contagious Diseases Act, which have died or have been slaughtered in circumstances not covered by the above act and regulations made thereunder, all as detailed in the estimates, $1,215.
Mr. McCullough (Moose Mountain):: Would the Minister of Agriculture care to make a statement on this first item?


James Garfield Gardiner: Well, it is as stated in the supplementary estimates:
To provide for payment of compensation to owners of animals affected with diseases coming under the Animal Contagious Diseases Act, which have died or have been slaughtered in circumstances not covered by the above act and regulations made thereunder, all as detailed in the estimates.
As is understood, there is usually about $6 million spent under this item, and the total amount here is just for some instances where animals died under circumstances not provided for; that is, died prior to the time they had been properly inspected under the act, but it was afterwards found that they should be paid for in accordance with the principle of the act and therefore payments were made.


Edward George McCullough: Have any payments been made since last year for the destruction of sheep which might have had scrapie? I think the committee will recall that last year quite a considerable payment was made out under a similar item of the minister's estimates, and I wonder whether the minister can tell the committee if any further outbreaks have taken place?


James Garfield Gardiner: No, Mr. Chairman, there have been no further outbreaks.


Edward George McCullough: There have been certain rumours-I cannot say offhand how well-founded they are

in respect to the sheep which were destroyed last year. Can the minister tell the committee some of the facts in relation to the destruction of those sheep last year? Can the minister inform the committee as to the date when the department first became aware that there was scrapie in the flock of P. J. Rock, which was subsequently destroyed under the supervision of his department? Can the minister give the committee that information?
82715-154J
S upply-A gricu Iture


James Garfield Gardiner: I am sorry. In view of the fact that there have been no outbreaks and no payments made this year I have not any information with regard to scrapie beyond what I gave last year and that, of course, is on the record. I do not remember the exact date, but it was some considerable time before the action finally had to be taken. The first news we received-and I am now speaking entirely from memory; I would have to go back and check to be entirely certain- was from somewhere down in Massachusetts where some breeder had bought an animal which came from the flock of Mr. Rock, and the animal did develop the disease. It was not known just whether or not it had been carried from that flock, but the necessary investigations were made and it was finally determined that it probably had come from that flock, and then action was taken which resulted in the slaughtering of a considerable number of the animals.


Edward George McCullough: Some of us who showed interest in this matter last year would like to get some further information from the minister if he is prepared to see whether he can get it for the committee. I wanted to try to get the minister to say when his departmental officials first investigated prior to the destruction of the P. J. Rock flock. Can the minister give us the date?


James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Chairman, I would say again that the proper place to bring up that question is on my general estimates, when we shall have all the information here with regard to matters of that kind. This is not the place to bring it up, and I do not think it is the place to properly discuss this particular matter.


Edward George McCullough: Throughout Canada there has been an increased interest in this matter. Last year I know I felt that the government had certainly used a lot of public money in the destruction of this flock and had paid Mr. Rock, who had a very valuable flock of sheep, over $100,000. At this time I am not trying to argue whether or not the amount was excessive, but I do think there are some matters in connection with it that should be cleared up in this house and throughout the country. Last year certain information was given to the committee. In order to have a proper discussion of it, as the minister says, we should have detailed information. Before the minister should come to this committee and ask that further moneys be appropriated by this committee for him to spend under this section of the act we should have further information. I should like to know the date

Supply-Agriculture
on which his officials went to the farm of Mr. Rock and examined this flock-


James Garfield Gardiner: On a point of order-


Edward George McCullough: -prior to the destruction.


James Garfield Gardiner: On a point of order, if the chairman rules that my hon. friend is in order we shall get the information here. It cannot of course be produced on this item. It would not be thought that such a discussion would take place on this item; therefore I have not the information here, but I can get it in a very short time.


Edward George McCullough: Mr. Chairman, I suggest that unless the minister is prepared to get his officials before the committee, and give us the information, these estimates should stand.


James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Chairman, I should like to have your ruling on the point of order. Are we discussing the general estimates?


The Chairman:: As I understand it the hon. gentleman is attempting to discuss a particular case and, as I also understand it, the minister has indicated that this vote has nothing to do with that particular case. If that is correct, if there are no moneys in this vote with regard to the case which the hon. gentleman is attempting to discuss, I must of course rule the discussion out of order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Before you rule, may I inquire whether what we have before us is a vote that stands on its own feet or is it a vote appropriating more money for the same purpose for which money was appropriated earlier in this fiscal year. I appreciate the suggestion of the Minister of Agriculture that my colleague might wait until we get to the main estimates. My fear is that when we get to the main estimates they will be for the year 1957-58, and my colleague will be told that he is talking about something that was in last year's estimates. If this vote is supplementary-


John Whitney Pickersgill: If there is no money in this vote for that purpose it is out of order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is either out of order or in order.


John Whitney Pickersgill: If there is no money in this vote for it, then it is out of order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If this vote is for additional money for expenditures with regard to the health of animals in this fiscal year, and if my colleague is endeavouring to talk about an expenditure having to do with health of animals in this fiscal year, is this not the place he has to do it?


William Alfred Robinson: Order. The hon. gentleman will find the details of this vote on page 11 of the supplementary estimates. As I understood it the hon. gentleman was trying to discuss the particular case of a person whose name I do not find on this list. Therefore, in these circumstances I do not think the hon. gentleman can argue that the particular discussion is in order.


Edward George McCullough: Mr. Chairman, I might just say that if you so rule, then of course I am out of order; but I should like to point out, sir, that here is an expenditure under the health of animals branch of the Department of Agriculture, and I presume the expenditure that has been made already has been made by the departmental officials in connection with this specific item in this fiscal year. All I am trying to do is to clear up some of the rumours and some of the things that some of us have not been satisfied with.


William Alfred Robinson: Order. May I point out that the details appearing on page 11 read as follows:
To provide for the payment of compensation to owners of diseased animals, from herds under official supervision, which died or were slaughtered in circumstances not covered by the Animal Contagious Diseases Act and regulations as follows:
There follow the particulars, names and addresses of the persons, together with particular amounts to be paid which in the aggregate total $1,215, the amount mentioned in resolution No. 546. Now, unless the hon. gentleman is prepared to discuss one of these items I can do nothing but rule that the discussion is out of order.


Edward George McCullough: I would just ask this question, Mr. Chairman. Is it not true that expenditures having been made under this item, it is now necessary for the minister to bring in supplementary estimates in order to carry on and make further expenditures in connection with this item? It seems to me it is all part and parcel of the same department, and is under the health of animals branch.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the resolution carry?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: No, Mr. Chairman. May I ask one question. This item covers cases that were not covered by the Animal Contagious Diseases Act. I want to ask the minister if there were any cases of chronic catarrh in this list. A few years ago in the Peterborough district we had an outbreak of chronic catarrh which killed off a whole herd valued at some $5,000 or more. Those animals were not covered; why were these covered?


James Garfield Gardiner: As the chairman has said, the payments are fairly well outlined. The item provides for the payment of compensation to owners of cattle under official supervision which were slaughtered for beef and condemned for tuberculosis on post mortem examination. That is, it was not known that the animals had tuberculosis until they were taken to the packing plant and killed. It lists six different persons who had one animal each in that classification, and the total amount for the cattle was $521.
In the case of each of the above-mentioned owners his animal was slaughtered for beef and the carcass was condemned for tuberculosis detected upon post mortem examination. The item provided for payment of compensation to owners of cattle affected with diseases coming under the operation of the Animal Contagious Diseases Act and which died before the slaughter order could be carried out, as follows. Then there is a list of five individuals. The first two had one animal each, the third had six animals and the other two had one animal each. The total amount there was $694, and the two amounts total $1,215.
In the case of each of the above-mentioned owners, his herd was under official supervision. The animals designated above had reacted to the tuberculin test and had been ordered slaughtered under the authority of the Animal Contagious Diseases Act but died before slaughter was carried out; therefore they were paid for as though they had been slaughtered.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: May I ask another question, Mr. Chairman. Is there any chance of having chronic catarrh brought under this act?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not sure whether there is any chance of it being brought under the act, but it is not under the act at the moment.


Mr. Charlton:: The minister has brought up a rather interesting point. Is he saying that if tuberculosis is not diagnosed until after the animal is slaughtered, the payment does not come under the act?


James Garfield Gardiner: In these cases it did not. I would not like to say it is not at any time.


John Alpheus Charlton: It would seem rather strange. Let us suppose that a person had an animal which died on his farm, and afterwards it was proven that it died of tuberculosis. Would he receive compensation then?


James Garfield Gardiner: That is what happened in the second group. In the first group the herd was under official supervision. An animal out of that herd was taken to the slaughterhouse and killed. It was not thought to
Supply-Agriculture
have tuberculosis, but when it was killed it was found to have it; therefore at least part of the animal was condemned and payment was made then as though the tuberculosis had been found previously. For that reason we have to have a special vote. If it had not been for that we would not require this vote at all.
This is something that cannot go through automatically without bringing it back here. We had to bring it back to the house.
With regard to the other animals, they are of the other classification that has been referred to this evening. In each of these cases the owner's herd was under official supervision. The animals designated had reacted to the tuberculin tests and had been ordered slaughtered under the act, but died before slaughter and therefore the payment was carried out.


Mr. Johnson (Kindersley):: Do I understand that those animals in the first category were marketable animals that had tuberculosis, but that the owner was not aware of it?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, I would take it that was the case. They definitely were not declared to have tuberculosis before he took them to the plant and it was found after they got there that they had it.


Willis Merwyn (Merv) Johnson: Would they be steers or cows? There is no indication of that.


James Garfield Gardiner: It does not say here whether they were steers or cows, but there is only one in each case.


Willis Merwyn (Merv) Johnson: I was looking at the particulars. I notice that one amount is $83, another is $86, another is $94 and another $72. Is that an indication of what livestock were bringing on the market at the time of year these amounts were paid?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not sure whether you are reading the same list I am, unless you have started at the bottom and read up. The top figure on the list I have here is $119, then $94, $40, $100, $85 and $83. The payments are made on the basis of whether they are grades or purebreds. The grades are only paid on a certain percentage, and the limit of the price is stated; but the purebreds are paid on a higher basis.


Mr. Robinson (Bruce):: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the minister will explain what he means by "under official supervision"? I am sorry to display my ignorance on this point.


James Garfield Gardiner: It means that the herd has been tested. The municipality may have been conducting tests or perhaps the county conducted tests, and all the herds in that county

Supply-Agriculture
would be under official supervision. Also it may be that it is just a herd that has been under official supervision because the owner has brought it under the act by making it a herd that is reported upon.


John Alpheus Charlton: Mr. Chairman, obviously those cattle which died before they were taken to the slaughterhouse subsequent to the tests, must have been tested for the first time if they were sufficiently far advanced to die in the meantime, or else there is something queer about it. Can the minister tell us if this herd or that area generally had ever been tested before.


James Garfield Gardiner: Well, I do not have any information about that, but the herd was certainly subject to tests and I would take it that as a matter of fact the herd had been tested.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Marketing service-
549.	To provide for grants and other assistance in accordance with the Cheese and Cheese Factory Improvement Act-further amount required, $14,753.
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, I was wondering if the minister could give us a brief statement regarding where the amount of $14,753 is to be distributed.


James Garfield Gardiner: At pages 11 and 12 the items are reported. Prince Edward Island, Summerside, $833; Granby Co-operative, $1,344-


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, but I think the minister has the wrong item. It is item 549.


James Garfield Gardiner: Oh, yes; to provide for grants and other assistance in accordance with the Cheese and Cheese Factory Improvement Act.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Yes.


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes; I was taking the other item. This is for construction and reconstruction of cheese factories. I am not sure that I have that information. I will see whether I have the places. It does not indicate that in the details.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: If the minister has not the figures with him, perhaps one of his officials could send them to me at another time. On this particular item, Mr. Chairman, I should just like to say that I am glad there is going to be some assistance to the cheese producers, or at least some further assistance through the supplementary items, because apparently the government has not been doing very much to meet the requests of the cheese producers in this country.
I am rather sorry this item is not larger, for the following reasons. The cheese producers of this country are certainly entitled

to some more assistance than they have been getting. I have no doubt that the minister has had numerous representations made to him by the federation of agriculture and other organizations. In this regard I should like to bring to his attention the fact that he is not the only one who has been having representations made to him by cheese producers for assistance. I myself, as a member representing a dairy farming part of the country, have received a number of telegrams just recently. I am not going to read them all but I should like to read one or two very briefly. There is one under date of March 9, which is addressed to me and which reads as follows:
Dear Sir: We the Beachville concentrated milk producers association representing 400 farmers producers of milk products wish to ask you for your support of the federation of agriculture brief asking for a 4-cent tariff protection on skim milk powder and a 6-cent tariff on cheese.
It is signed by Ralph Kent, president.
There is a similar one from the Hickson concentrated milk producers signed by John E. King, secretary treasurer, also asking for a 6-cent tariff on cheese and a 4-cent tariff on skim milk powder. Then there is another from a different association, also asking for tariff adjustments on cheese and milk powder, dated March 8 and signed by Howard N. Patience, president of the Ingersoll concentrated milk producers association. To show the minister that it is more than the concentrated milk people who are asking for this assistance I read briefly from an item in the Woodstock daily Sentinel Review of December 21 last, as follows:
Oxford county dairy farmers yesterday strongly demanded action by the federal and provincial governments to raise farm income.
A meeting in Woodstock of representatives of all dairy organizations in the county passed a resolution asking the governments for safeguards against competition of overseas producers.
As I say, I have no doubt that the minister has had plenty of representations along those lines. It was a great disappointment, I think, to a great many members of this house, and I am sure is a great disappointment to the dairy farmers generally-and I am only making passing reference to this matter; we shall deal with it at another time, of course-that nothing was done in the budget to help the cheese producers. As I said, I would be out of order in discussing that sort of thing at this time. We shall deal with it later, but under this particular item I think reference may certainly be made to it.
Since nothing has been done in the budget to help the dairy farmers and the cheese producers in particular, there is another matter which I should like to get cleared up at this point. It directly concerns this question of

cheese and assistance to cheese. What I have reference to all started back in the late fall of 1954, when a large quantity of Cheddar cheese was imported into Canada from New Zealand and, as hon. members may recall, there was, in the press, in this house and elsewhere, quite a bit of fuss about the importation of New Zealand cheddar cheese. At that time, on January 10, 1955, as reported at page 20 of Hansard of that year, the hon. member for Middlesex East asked a question which reads as follows:
I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Does the minister plan to make any change in the regulations that now permit the importation of New Zealand cheese when there is a surplus of cheese and other dairy products in Canada?
The Minister of Trade and Commerce replied as follows:
Mr. Speaker, there is no prohibition on the importing of cheese. There is a duty on cheese, and technically anyone can ship cheese into Canada who can do so over the duty. A verbal arrangement was made with New Zealand at a time when we were having difficulty exporting to the British market. New Zealand was asked not to ship cheese to this market. The circumstances under which the request was made have changed. New Zealand was pressing to be relieved from that verbal arrangement and there seemed to be no very good ground for insisting that it be continued. The shipment of cheese has been made in the ordinary course of business in the same way that anything else is exported to Canada. I suggest it is a mistake to say that we allowed the import. The normal laws of the land were allowed to function in this matter.


William Alfred Robinson: Order. In fairness to the hon. member whom I interrupted a few minutes ago on another item and, of course, to other hon. members, may I say this. I think I should agree with the hon. member for Oxford that these remarks might better be made on the budget. Might I draw his attention to the wording of this item on page 12 of the supplementary estimates. It deals with subsidies for construction and reconstruction of cheese factories, improving cheese maturing facilities in cheese factories, and the standardization of cheese pressing equipment. I am sure the hon. member will agree with me that these are technical subjects, and that our discussion should be limited to the reconstruction of cheese factories and so on as mentioned in the item rather than a general discussion of the cheese problem.


James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Chairman, might I be permitted to intervene just for a minute. I think my hon. friend will get much nearer to what he desires to discuss on the last item, namely item No. 551. He is really discussing what has to do with price control or price support. Maybe not all of what he is talking about would come under that item, but I think much of it would do so. So far as this item is concerned, as the chairman has just pointed out, it will be noted that the main
Supp ly-A griculture
item is $1,050,000 and there was no supplementary item in between. Now there is a further supplementary estimate of $14,753, making a total of $1,064,753.
The reason I could not answer the first question that was asked, why I had difficulty in finding the answer to it here, is borne out by what I am just going to read. According to the Cheese and Cheese Factory Improvement Act, contracts may be entered into for one-half of the proven costs of constructing and equipping cheese factories or insulating refrigerated curing rooms in cheese factories. I think it will be obvious to anyone who understands these matters that many of these individual cases would cost more than $14,753. It is just because the number of them that have to be paid requires that much more money that we must add another $14,753, but that may only be divided into quite a number of small parts, and therefore they are not listed here. It is just that the total sum was too small, and we put another $14,753 to it to have enough.
I would think some of these other matters might quite properly be discussed on item 551.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: On the point of order, Mr. Chairman, I would agree that discussion of this item must, of course, be very limited; but I think I pointed out in my opening remarks that I was endeavouring to explain to the minister why I thought, possibly, even further assistance should be granted to cheese producers, and the point I was mentioning had to do specifically with that.


James Garfield Gardiner: I think you could discuss that quite properly under the last item.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: If the minister is agreeable to discussing what I have in mind on that item, and provided I shall not be called to order, then I shall be content to let the matter rest at this time.


Harry Oliver White: Far be it from me to suggest that this item is too large. As the hon. member for Oxford suggested, it should probably be increased. But the peculiarity of the situation is this; that on one hand the government is voting money to improve the cheese factories, and consequently the product of those factories, while at the same time it is cutting the ground from beneath the feet of the producers and of those who operate these factories by bringing in large quantities of cheese from other countries. We have demonstrated over the years that such imports could quite well be reduced, in which case we would not have the huge butter surplus we now have at times, while the employment opportunities for our people would be increased. It seems to me that it is a shortsighted policy to

Supply-Agriculture
spend money in this way on one hand and then partly destroy the benefit by bringing in foreign products.


William Gourlay Blair: Could the minister say what qualifications exist with regard to the building of new factories before a grant will be made? How big would the factory have to be, and what installation would be required in the way of equipment and storage before anyone could qualify?


James Garfield Gardiner: No particular sum is set. This started with the idea that there were quite a number of plants that did not have proper refrigeration facilities. The amount of cheese being produced in some of these plants was not sufficient at the price then ruling-it was at that time down to around 10 or 12 cents a pound-to make it worth while for either individuals or co-operatives, such as the hon. member is familiar with in his section of the country, to purchase and instal these facilities. So, the government inaugurated a plan to encourage this development by paying 50 per cent of the cost. It did not make any difference whether it was a large refrigeration plant or a small one; it was whatever was required to serve the purpose of the particular plant.
Then, too, we had in mind at that time that where there were two plants in a community and one would probably do better than the two could, we might bring the two together and have a larger plant which would be more in the interest of the people of that area. Accordingly, we offered to pay half the cost of bringing this about, and this act was set up for the purpose of assisting in that way.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
550.	Assiniboine river-diking and cut-off-further amount required, $95,000.
Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Could the minister give some details on this particular item? What section of the Assiniboine does it concern?


James Garfield Gardiner: This expenditure was made necessary by flooding in the neighbourhood of Portage la Prairie. We had a vote of $200,000, I think it was, last year to take care of diking on the Assiniboine river in the vicinity of Portage la Prairie. At the point when we have floods the water breaks through and flows down the country to the south of Portage, destroying the crops.
A year ago most of that work had been done but it had not been completed, and when the floods came down in the spring and began to flow over the dikes, P.F.R.A. put an outfit there. We had no time to enter into any discussions with anyone; we decided that the flooding should be prevented if possible. We went at the diking without being

too particular what the costs were, with the result that the additional cost is represented in this additional vote which we are asking now.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
551.	Estimated amount required to recoup the agricultural prices support account to cover the net operating loss of the agricultural prices support board during the fiscal year 1956-57, $5,019,100.
Gage Workman Montgomery: I would like the minister to give us a breakdown, if he would, showing us how much was paid for each product- potatoes, eggs, and so forth-for last year.


James Garfield Gardiner: The board's operations during the year have involved the use of from $50 million to $60 million of working or revolving capital. At various times important programs have been approved for eggs, butter and hogs. There has been no cost in respect to hogs, since the price has been above the support price throughout the year, although in the spring of 1956 it approached the support level very closely.
In the case of eggs, the board has been purchasing outright in recent months but no estimate of loss is included in the current fiscal year, since this program is still in process. Hon. members will remember that there were questions asked two or three weeks ago regarding the position of egg producers, and I indicated then to the house that we were buying eggs and putting them in storage, and that we were not certain whether or not we would take a loss on these. We are still in that position, but I am just indicating that we have purchased those eggs. Possibly we shall take a loss, but we could make a little profit.
The amount of approximately $66,000 was returned to the consolidated revenue fund as profit under the estimates dated March 31, 1955. With respect to 1954, butter is included in the total amount of $237,547. For the purpose of calculating an estimate of losses, the following near or estimated amounts of loss have been included. This, of course, takes into consideration what I have just mentioned, namely that we are not yet in a position to say how much it might be with regard to eggs; moreover this may be the case with regard to certain other products. For 1954, butter, it was $237,547, but that butter had been carried into the succeeding year. In 1955, butter, it was $4,094,461; in 1956, $500,017; in 1954, eggs, $506; in 1955, potatoes, $4,831; in 1955, apples, $181,738, making a total of $5,019,100.


Gage Workman Montgomery: I did not get the figure for potatoes.


James Garfield Gardiner: It was $4,831.


Gage Workman Montgomery: Would that be on the starch program?


James Garfield Gardiner: That was on the starch program.


Gage Workman Montgomery: The minister said 1954. They wound that up last year.


James Garfield Gardiner: It was 1955 potatoes but it would be wound up in 1956.


Gage Workman Montgomery: You mentioned 1954.


James Garfield Gardiner: 1954 for eggs but 1955 for potatoes. Maybe I said 1954. It is 1955.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I want to raise just for five minutes the question of price support for apples, which I am very sorry is not the cause for some of this supplementary estimate. I have raised the matter before, but I am raising it again tonight.


James Garfield Gardiner: Part of this $185,738 is for apples.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Pardon me, not the apples I am talking about. I have raised the matter and I am raising it again at the request of a good number of members of the British Columbia fruit growers' association. If anyone wants to understand the position of the fruit grower throughout the years, all he has got to do is attend a fruit growers convention and a cattle growers' convention. When you go to the cattle grower's convention you find they are all well fed, paunchy and, on the whole, stocky people; but when you go to a fruit growers' convention you find that 90 per cent of them are long, lean and hungry looking like myself. That is the result of the economic circumstances of the fruit growers throughout the years.
The minister knows that quite recently representatives of the British Columbia fruit growers' association came to Ottawa and presented a brief to the agricultural prices support board asking for assistance to the extent of a minimum of 25 cents a box for the 1955 crop. I had the opportunity, with members of the other opposition parties and members of the government party, I think, to meet these gentlemen and listen to the whole story. I think anyone who is fair will say that their proposals were very modest, and I can say from personal experience that they were modest. They presented a very well drafted brief to the agricultural prices support board, and I am going to quote one paragraph. After going into the question of the need for price support they said:
And whereas returns for the 1955 crop paid to the packing houses averaged only $2.0165 per box, which after deducting the existing packing, storage and growing costs, estimated to be $2.50, represents a loss to growers of .4835 cents per box, or a loss substantially greater than that sustained in 1950, the British Columbia fruit growers' association 82715-155
Supply

Agriculture
therefore, begs to submit the following statement in support of a request that the federal government consider and approve a minimum payment to the industry of 25 cents per box on the 1955 apple crop, calculated to offset at least partially the substantial losses suffered by the growers.
Their brief gave very sound arguments in support of their application. They also asked the various members of the house representing horticultural districts in which fruit is grown to correspond with the prices support board and extend their support for the proposals of the association, and I did so along with other members who met the representatives of the British Columbia fruit growers' association. This is the sort of letter I got back, addressed to myself:
February 21, 1957.
Dear Mr. Herridge,
This will acknowledge your letter of February 14 with respect to your support of the application of the British Columbia fruit growers' association.
This application has been carefully studied and after considering the various angles, including the fact that British Columbia growers received an average return for all apples of 72 cents per box-
They cost over $2 a box to produce.
-as compared to 40 cents in Nova Scotia, 39 cents in Quebec and 66 cents in Ontario for the 1955 crop, the board has decided that their application cannot be recommended.
Yours very truly,
A. M. Shaw,
Chairman.
I want to say, Mr. Chairman, that in 1909 I played polo at Guelph with the gentleman who sent that letter, and I never dreamed that I would live to see the day when I would receive a letter of such an unsympathetic nature so far as horticulturists are concerned. The amazing argument that is found in the letter, Mr. Chairman, is that because we are not as poverty-stricken as the rest there is no reason to assist anyone. That is the argument in that letter.
I know the minister is a wheat and stock man, and his life history has been such that the cockles of his heart do not warm very quickly to the pleas of the fruit growers. However, I understand that on the average it costs about $1.25 to produce a bushel of wheat on the prairies, and I support all efforts in the house on behalf of wheat growers. On the average the wheat producer receives something more than that amount. Here we have the fruit growers of British Columbia receiving the price I have mentioned for fruit that costs over $2 a box to produce, involving a loss to the growers, according to their figures, of nearly 50 cents a box, and a greater loss to the growers according to the figures mentioned in this letter.
While we have these circumstances I notice that people in Ottawa, Toronto

Supply-Agriculture
and Montreal are paying up to $6 a box for fancy and extra fancy packed apples on which the grower loses an average of close to 50 cents a box. I know it is a complicated question. I am not one to get up here and ask for everything under the sun or under the moon, but in view of the consideration other sections of agriculture receive from the federal government I do think a little more consideration should be extended to the fruit grower, whether he is in British Columbia, Ontario or Nova Scotia. I cannot see any relationship between the government's consideration of the problems of one section of agriculture compared with their consideration of the problems of the tree fruit growers in particular.
In British Columbia a royal commission established by the provincial government is studying the whole question of costs and other problems of the fruit industry. I welcome it. I was very glad to see that a delegation has gone to New Zealand to investigate the packing of fruit, and I was very glad to see that the minister's department has sent a representative with that delegation and to note that to that extent there is some co-operation.
But in view of the investigation by the royal commission and the circumstances of the fruit growers as related to agriculture as a whole-and again I want to see them all receive justice-I have been asked to urge the minister once more to see if the board cannot give further consideration to this very modest application for assistance of about 25 cents per box on the 1955 crop.


James Garfield Gardiner: I should like to make a few remarks with regard to apples. In the first place I should like to say to the hon. member that when Dean Shaw noticed the hon. member the other day he said to me, "I went to agricultural college with that fellow, and I am very proud of the fact that he is here as a member." I just want the hon. member to know that Mr. Shaw has very kindly feelings toward him because of their old college days together.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: So have I for him.


James Garfield Gardiner: Of course the letter of Mr. Shaw which he has just read does not carry with it any personal feelings, either with regard to the apple industry or to my hon. friend.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I presume it reflects the minister's feelings.


James Garfield Gardiner: On the other hand, my hon. friend thought I knew something about wheat and something about cattle but maybe I did not know much about apples. As a matter of

fact one of the reasons I am out west now and not in the east is that I knew too much about apples in the east. I might tell him about my last experience, which I think was even a little more difficult than the one he is having now in British Columbia. Not mentioning the town at the moment, I thought I should like to go to the fair; and as I did not have any other way of getting there I picked up some apples, put them in bags and loaded a double box wagon.
I took them to the place where I thought I was most likely to sell them, which was not the town where the fair was held. I spent quite a bit of the day trying to sell them, and I could not. So I drove to the town where the fair was, and I could not sell them there either. I took them over to the cider mill, dumped them off there and told the man to do what he liked with them. I did not even get a drink of cider for them.
There have been difficulties down in the western part of Ontario. There were some of the finest apple orchards in that locality that one would find anywhere. If you go down and look for them today you will have difficulty in finding them. The farmers have done away with them, or the orchards have disappeared as a result of the lack of proper care. So we have not an apple industry there. There are a great many people in eastern Canada who have had a rather long experience growing apples and successfully marketing them, so they will have some ideas with regard to it.
It was thinking back to some of these memories that caused some of us, including Dean Shaw, myself and others, to evolve a policy which brought about the payment of this amount for apples. The policy was set out in these words:
In the fall of 1955 Nova Scotia apple growers approached the board-
That is the agricultural prices support board.
-for assistance, and after discussions in which certain proposed plans were rejected, the government on January 5, 1956, with amendments on March 29, 1956, authorized the board to make up the difference between the average price for apples of fancy grade or better, delivered warehouse in Nova Scotia, and one cent per pound to producers in Nova Scotia, on the basis of six varieties named as follows:	Gravenstein, McIntosh, Cortland,
Wagener, Spy and King. It was indicated in the press announcement that if any other province-
This included British Columbia.
-could show that their growers received an average price for a number of dessert varieties of fancy grade or better below one cent per pound delivered warehouse, similar to Nova Scotia, the government would consider a further authorization for such provinces. Actual costs in connection with the 1955 apple production program were not incurred by the board in the fiscal year ending March 31, 1956.

The principle underlying the system that was put into effect was that there are always the poor grades. In the days I was speaking of in Ontario we picked our apples, piled them in heaps under the trees, and the packers came along and picked out the best. The rest were left there and we were not able to sell them at all. There has been a tendency in recent years to want to sell all the apples that grow. This tendency may not apply so much to British Columbia as it does to some other parts of the country, because British Columbia growers have been noted for the careful way in which they pack their apples. Nevertheless there has been a tendency in that direction, both with regard to apples and with regard to potatoes.
The indication in this is that there should be a market provided for the grades of apples for human consumption as fresh fruit or fruit to be used for cooking purposes and otherwise, and that some of the other grades should be eliminated from that class. The inclination here is to support the higher grades rather than try to support everything that grows in a particular season. I think the plan could be improved upon and could probably be put into a position where it would provide better assistance than it did during the last year. Nevertheless it cost us $181,738 to put it into effect this last year.


John Alpheus Charlton: Mr. Chairman, I am not
following up the question of apples but rather the general matter of support prices. It is not my intention to delay the passing of this item, but I feel something should be said regarding certain aspects of this legislation. The fact that we let this amount go through is not to be taken as suggesting in any way that we are all in favour of the government's action under this legislation.
I do want to bring one matter to the minister's attention, and I think probably the government will be doing something about it this session. I refer to the amendments to the Agriculture Products Marketing Act which have been requested by the Ontario government and the producer organizations. I am sure the government will have time during this session to introduce these amendments. If they do, I can assure them that if they are the amendments requested they will have no difficulty getting them through so far as this part of the house is concerned.
I feel the producer organizations are to be commended for their attitude toward this self-help program they are trying to adopt. I think they are to be commended for all the work they have done along these lines. I feel they deserve all the support and cooperation this government can give by seeing 82715-155J
Supply-Agriculture
that the legislation requested is introduced. We are not taking the time of the house to discuss this matter now because we assume the agriculture estimates will be before us at a later time. We hope this item will go through so the government will have time to bring forward that marketing legislation that we think is so important to the farmers of this country.


Mr. Jones:: I wish to add my voice to that of my colleague the hon. member for Kootenay West on behalf of the British Columbia tree fruit growers. I believe the difficulties these people are facing have been brought up here several times, especially in the last few years. The growers themselves have requested the department for some assistance to overcome the losses as a result of the recent frosts. The statement made by my colleague was that the fruit growers did not get equal or nearly equal treatment as compared to the other sections of our agricultural economy. I agree with him. I believe the fruit growers are entitled to just as good a deal as the wheat growers of the prairies. I do not begrudge the wheat farmers the help they are receiving, but I think the fruit growers of British Columbia should get equal treatment.
At the present time the fruit growers of British Columbia are making a very modest request; that is, for assistance to the extent of 25 cents a box. I know quite well that the price the minister mentioned just now of 1 cent a pound or roughly 40 cents a box for apples is not a price upon which the growers could grow rich. It is not realistic so far as British Columbia is concerned, because our highest grade apples cost up to $2 to produce.
Last year a lot of our apples were diverted to the cider plant or the fruit juice plant. As the minister knows, the apples turned over to these plants bring very little return to the growers. It is not a profitable venture so far as the growers are concerned because they have to take the fruit to these plants and usually have to wait some time before receiving any return at all. I feel that this year particularly, as a result of the small crop and the high cost of processing that crop, the high cost of the facilities that are there for 10 million boxes while this year we had roughly 4 million, increasing the cost per box immeasurably, should suggest to the minister that the growers are very modest in their request. They are only asking for 25 cents a box.
I hope he will see his way clear to implementing that request this year. I can see that the amount cannot be included in the present estimates, but I hope he will bring in a supplementary estimate to cover aid to British

Supply-Agriculture
Columbia fruit growers this year. I would not confine it to British Columbia growers. If Nova Scotia, Ontario, or some other province is in the same sort of fix, it should be extended to them.
All I ask is that all agricultural sections of our country be treated alike and be given access to some funds under this particular act.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, I was very
interested in the fact that the minister suggested that the subject I had in mind, namely cheese, should be dealt with under this particular item of the estimates which has to do with agricultural prices support. I could not help wondering whether perhaps there was a hint from the minister that maybe we were going to have a higher floor price under cheese, or something of that nature.


James Garfield Gardiner: There is now.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: A higher floor price for
cheese?


James Garfield Gardiner: There is a floor price.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: What I had in mind was
the saving of the time of the committee in the passing of the estimates. I thought I might avoid repeating what I had already said. To refer back briefly to get the context of what I have in mind, on January 10, 1955, in reply to a question asked by the hon. member for Middlesex East, the Minister of Trade and Commerce referred to the fact that there had been a verbal agreement with New Zealand in regard to the importation of cheese, but this had been discontinued; it was no longer in effect. I realize, of course, Mr. Chairman, I cannot refer specifically to a previous verbatim discussion during this session, but on February 7, 1956, a question was asked by myself concerning cheese. The question will be found at page 915 of Hansard of 1956. It reads as follows:
I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. It has to do with a question I asked the minister about 10 days ago. Has the minister any information yet with respect to whether there are likely to be any imports of New Zealand Cheddar cheese into Canada within the next six months?
The minister of Trade and Commerce replied:
I made inquiries at the office. of the high commissioner of the government of New Zealand, and he knows of no shipments coming this way.
Some other remarks were added by the minister which have no particular relevance. Later on, as the result of a supplementary

question by the hon. member for Hastings-Frontenac, the Minister of Trade and Commerce replied:
There is no permit required, but there is a customs duty on cheese, and the port record would show if there were an importation of cheese by ship. No permit is required. Anyone can import cheese who cares to pay the duty.
Then on March 8 last, as the result of a question asked by the hon. member for Brandon-Souris, the Minister of Agriculture informed us, as reported at page 2008 of Hansard of this year, that there was a general understanding with regard to the importation of cheese either from New Zealand or from Australia which has been lived up to. He also said this agreement continues. Farther along on the same page the Minister of Agriculture replied to a question of mine and said that this verbal agreement-I think it was referred to as a gentleman's agreement-had been going on for some time.
This question of bringing cheese into Canada from New Zealand or elsewhere has been obscured by a lot of information, rumour and suggestion. I know that on one occasion the hon. member for Hastings-Frontenac made a speech pointing out how imports of cheese could come under the Export and Import Permits Act. The Minister of Trade and Commerce has informed us on two occasions in the last two years that there was no restriction whatsoever on cheese coming into the country from Australia and New Zealand. He said there was a verbal agreement with New Zealand in the past, but it had been discarded that year. The Minister of Agriculture tells us that there is an agreement with New Zealand with respect to the importation of cheese, and as a result I for one am very confused as to just what is the situation.
I was wondering whether the minister could clear it up now once and for all. Just what is the situation regarding the importation of cheese from New Zealand, Australia or elsewhere? In other words, Mr. Chairman, can the minister tell us just who is right? The Minister of Trade and Commerce has told us on two different occasions that nothing would prevent cheese from coming into the country and that the verbal agreement had been discontinued. Was the Minister of Agriculture correct when he told us only a few days ago that there is a gentleman's agreement with the government of New Zealand that had been in effect for some years? To get this cleared up I think a great many members in this house and the people who are producing cheese and other dairy products would like to get the matter straight. Can the minister tell us what is the situation?


James Garfield Gardiner: Well, Mr. Chairman, there are two dairy products which come in from New Zealand and Australia about which there has been considerable discussion for many years. One is butter and the other is cheese. In so far as butter is concerned, there was a very high duty put on butter, as members of the official opposition at least know, some years ago, back in 1930; the duty was 14 cents a pound on butter. That, I think, has resulted in preventing butter from coming into the country.
But after some little time-I do not think the change was made right at the beginning- New Zealand and Australia succeeded in getting the duty reduced to 5 cents a pound on butter that came in from those countries, because of the preference; they were part of the commonwealth. Immediately that was done some butter started to move this way. I think what Mr. Bennett did about it back at that time was to put it in bond when it arrived in Vancouver and declare that he was going to leave it there until some arrangement was made with Australia and New Zealand as to the conditions under which it was to be brought in.
There was one of those general understandings which are sometimes called gentlemen's agreements, that butter would not come in here except on permit. Well, the way it was dealt with was to put it in bond and keep it there until an arrangement was entered into. That arrangement was put in writing. The matter of shipping butter here has been pretty well under control, and I do not think any great difficulty has arisen in connection with it.
In so far as cheese is concerned, the duty on cheese coming in has always been low. I have never been able to understand why those who put the duty on butter up to 14 cents did not put it up above 1 cent on cheese. Eventually we did run into difficulties in connection with cheese, and cheese was shipped here under conditions which were not helpful. So we had discussions again with our friends in New Zealand and Australia, with New Zealand in particular, with regard to shipping cheese here.
There was a gentleman's agreement. We had that gentleman's agreement at the end of the war for a time, and the period ran out. There was some cheese shipped in before it was renewed, and it is that cheese that is usually talked about when we are wondering whether or not the agreement is still in existence. There is an understanding between New Zealand and our people here that cheese will only come here if there is a permit issued for it to come. I think it was two
Supply-Agriculture
years ago there was a permit issued for a limited amount to come and that limited amount did come.
Some people are inclined to think that is not secure enough, and that perhaps there should be a duty or some other restriction. To be absolutely fair to the Minister of Finance and his budget brought down a few days ago, I would suggest that if you read it carefully you will find he indicated that Australia and New Zealand-


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Australia.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: And you will find there is absolutely nothing definite in it.


James Garfield Gardiner: There is nothing more definite in it than the fact that it indicates there will be negotiations carried on with those two countries.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: No, just Australia.


James Garfield Gardiner: You will find there will pretty well have to be negotiations carried on with New Zealand too, if negotiations are carried on with Australia. That has always been our experience.


Hazen Robert Argue: Now you see it, now you don't.


James Garfield Gardiner: Negotiations with regard to the whole matter will be carried on-


Lewis Elston Cardiff: Until after the election.


James Garfield Gardiner: -and in the meantime the provisions do exist in connection with both cheese and butter. In connection with butter it is in writing, and so far as cheese is concerned it is an understanding with which we have not experienced any real difficulties. I do not know whether or not that answers my hon. friend's question. Of course there are also other dairy products which will require to be given some attention, and we may have something more to say about them before too long.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Well, Mr. Chairman, that pretty well answers what I have in mind, but there is just one other thing I am not sure about. The Minister of Agriculture told us that after the war there was a gentleman's agreement with New Zealand concerning the importation of cheese. Then it was discontinued, as I understand it, and since then it has been "recontinued", if I may coin a word.
The gentleman's agreement was apparently discontinued shortly after the war, and then it was renewed fairly recently. Could the minister give us an idea concerning when the new agreement was announced regarding New Zealand cheese? I was not sure from what the minister said when it started.

Supply-Agriculture


James Garfield Gardiner: It was not very long ago that it was discontinued. I hope I did not give the impression that it was very soon after the ward. I am not sure of the year, but I think it was about three years ago. It was at the time I went to Regina and addressed the dairy association there. We discussed the whole question there at that time. The cheese had come in just prior to that. The old understanding had been discontinued, and then right after that experience discussions took place again between our people and the people in New Zealand and an understanding was reached, and it has been continued down to the present.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: That just about pins it down. The reason I asked the question about the time is that, it was in January, 1955, and again in 1956 that the Minister of Trade and Commerce informed us there was no agreement, so I presume it has come up since that time.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, I wish to agree with those who have remarked that they are hopeful the government at this session will bring in an amendment to the Agricultural Products Co-operative Marketing Act or any other appropriate acts in order to strengthen the position of producer marketing boards across this country. Action by the government is required because of the important and far-reaching decision made recently by the Supreme Court of Canada to the effect that producer marketing boards may not in the future deduct from producers' prices for their products money for the purpose of setting up reserves or for the purpose of equalizing payments among producers.
I think it is fair to say that hon. members of this house in all parties are sympathetic to the idea of producer marketing boards, and I believe the proper functioning of such boards is extremely important to the operation of the Agricultural Prices Support Act. The minister should impress on his colleagues the great necessity of satisfying the legitimate requests of the producers of this country that such necessary amendments be presented to parliament at this session, or that appropriate action be taken in order that producer marketing boards may continue to function in the interests of producers themselves and in the interests of orderly marketing.
If the minister is in a position to add to the remarks he made at the opening of today's sitting I would appreciate any comment he might offer. However, I am not endeavouring to put him on a spot if a decision has not been reached. Certainly we in this group are hopeful that such action will be taken,

and I think I can give the minister the assurance that even though this session may not have many days to run we shall expedite whatever amendment or amendments to any act may be brought forward by the government in order to meet the decision of the supreme court, or such amendments as the producer organizations may suggest.


John Alpheus Charlton: Mr. Chairman, did I hear the minister correctly when he said there was a floor price under cheese?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, you are correct; in Ontario.


John Alpheus Charlton: Ah, yes. Cheese has never been under the Agricultural Prices Support Act; is that not right?


James Garfield Gardiner: I will look and make sure.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


James Garfield Gardiner: Cheddar cheese; $155,348.82 under that act.


John Alpheus Charlton: What year was that?


James Garfield Gardiner: It existed from 1949 to 1953.


John Alpheus Charlton: If that is the case, Mr. Chairman, why should the Minister of Trade and Commerce have implied there was no import permit necessary? Is it not true that any product which is under the Agricultural Prices Support Act automatically comes under the Export and Import Permits Act?


James Garfield Gardiner: Not automatically.


John Alpheus Charlton: Is the minister sure of
that?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes.


John Alpheus Charlton: My understanding is that any product supported under the Agricultural Prices Support Act is automatically under the Export and Import Permits Act.


James Garfield Gardiner: It may come under it.


John Alpheus Charlton: Well, now, let us get this straight. Is it or is it not a fact that any product supported under the Agricultural Prices Support Act automatically comes under the Export and Import Permits Act?


James Garfield Gardiner: I do not think so, but I am not a lawyer and I might be wrong.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Lawyers are never wrong.


John Alpheus Charlton: I was under the impression that it was so. I may be wrong, but I would like to have that matter cleared up.


James Garfield Gardiner: I just found out this morning that it was not.


Mr. Fleming:: Under what circumstances did you find out?


John Alpheus Charlton: We are not too many hours apart, Mr. Chairman. What is required to put a product under the Export and Import Permits Act; an order in council?


James Garfield Gardiner: Oh, something along that line.


Hazen Robert Argue: Something along that line?


John Alpheus Charlton: Why do the government refuse to put cheese under the Export and Import Permits Act, in view of the trouble they have had?


James Garfield Gardiner: If you will allow me to explain it will probably save time. You will note I stated that cheese did come under this act from 1949 to 1953. We are four years away from 1953, and cheese is not under this act at present. But that does not mean that there is no floor price under cheese. Under the Agricultural Products Co-operative Marketing Act we put a price of 24 cents under cheese for, I think, two years. That is, we supported the price with the cheese board at the bank up to 24 cents. Then last year it became 22| cents, I think. But during all that period the Ontario government, put 6 cents on top of that which, when it was first put on, made a floor price of 30 cents a pound on cheese. That is one of the reasons cheese has been staying at around 30 cents and over 30 cents for the last two or three years.


John Alpheus Charlton: It is to the credit of the Ontario cheese board.


James Garfield Gardiner: The cheese board; and we support the cheese board to get the funds with which to meet the initial payment, and the Ontario government supports the cheese board in order to see to it that the price is 6 cents above what we have supported it at. So there is a floor price under cheese in the province of Ontario right through. That would not bring it under the Export and Import Permits Act, as has been suggested, even if the fact was that a floor price had been set up to support it. It has been suggested that this would automatically bring it under the act, but I do not think even that automatically brings it under the act. In the last day or two I have had some discussions, the results of which I may be in a position to announce tomorrow or the next day, which do not affect cheese but which have taught me a few things. I should not say they do not affect cheese, but they do not affect it directly. They have given me some ideas as to what the act really does provide for.


Mr. White (Haslings-Fronlenac):: I should like to ask the minister a question about this much talked about cheese. I think it is quite clear that no permit is required to import cheese. But if I understood the minister correctly a few minutes ago, he said that under
Supply-Agriculture
this so-called agreement you could import cheese only by obtaining a permit. That hardly sounds consistent. I should like to ask the minister if it is not true that if any cheese company in Canada wishes to import cheese from New Zealand there is no legal obstacle in the way of that company importing cheese in any quantity simply on paying the duty. Is that not correct?


James Garfield Gardiner: There is no legal obstacle in the sense in which my hon. friend is speaking of it, and there is no permit required in the sense that somebody writes out a permit and presents it. But the government of New Zealand will not ship cheese here unless the government here gives consent to it coming.


George Stanley White: When the minister speaks of a permit, does he mean under the Export and Import Permits Act?


James Garfield Gardiner: It does not mean under any act. It means there is a gentleman's agreement; and our experience is that New Zealand keeps its gentleman's agreements.


George Stanley White: There is really no such thing as a permit? There is no permit required, in effect?


James Garfield Gardiner: There must be consent. You can call it a permit or anything you like.


George Stanley White: Why not
stop all that camouflage and put cheese under the Export and Import Permits Act?


James Garfield Gardiner: I think what you are suggesting and what most people have been suggesting is to put a tariff on it and be through with it.


George Stanley White: Do both.


Hazen Robert Argue: Under this item I wonder whether the minister could say what formula, if any, is used in paying a support price for eggs. I know it is supposed to be 38 cents for grade A large, and that is cut to 32 cents a dozen. But is there a formula by which the support prices are paid? Does the formula cover grade A medium eggs or grade B eggs, or is it set only on grade A large eggs? Can the minister say what action has been taken as a result of the very strong representations made to the cabinet by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture on February 15 of this year with regard to this subject? I might quote briefly from their brief:
We strongly urge that a system be set up for egg price supports that will guarantee to producers a floor price of 32 cents per dozen on grade A large eggs at all times.
And the words "at all times" are underlined. When the minister is answering that

Supply*-Agriculture
question I wonder whether he could comment on the suggestion we hear that a large or substantial part of inflation at this time is being caused by higher food prices to the producer. It seems to me that a wrong impression is going out to the effect that agricultural prices to producers are going up so rapidly that it is the cause of the inflationary spiral, or one of the main or certainly one of the substantial causes of an increase in the consumer price index. As I read the statistics, it seems to me that the prices of agricultural products to the producers over the last year or so have been relatively stable and have been very little different from those of the year before.


James Garfield Gardiner: I do not recall that I have heard anyone say that the price paid to the producer has resulted in inflation. I have heard persons say that the price paid by the consumer has resulted in inflation, but that is quite a different thing. I therefore do not know that it is necessary to do any refuting of it. It is simply the fact as it is existing in so far as criticisms are concerned.
In so far as the method is concerned by which we try to support eggs, may I say this. We simply say that if eggs are delivered at storage, we will pay 38 cents for them if no one else will pay 38 cents. Recently we have said that if they are oil-dipped we will pay 39 cents for them. If we have to oil-dip them it costs us 1 cent a dozen to do so, and we have said that we will pay them that 38 cents and have them oil-dipped so we can keep them and put them back on the market at some later date.
It is impossible to say that such procedure will result in 32 cents or 33 cents or 34 cents at all the points. If you are close enough to the storage plant and are able to take them there with little expense, you will get one return. If on the other hand you are a considerable distance away and the eggs have to be handled by a person in between or a number of persons in between, the return may be something different. It ranges from about 29 cents up to some 32 cents in most of the areas that are removed any considerable distance from where the storage is.
We check that matter before we agree that we will take delivery of the eggs at 38 cents from the person who takes them to the storage plant. If we are not satisfied that the producer is getting a reasonable price as compared with where he is located, then we do not take delivery of the eggs from that individual at all, and he has no support as far as we are concerned. Any support we give is based on what the producer gets for the eggs. When you ask me what the price is on grade A large eggs, may I say

that it is grade A large eggs about which I am talking when I say the price is 38 cents at the plant.
For some considerable time the margin between grade A and medium eggs was very wide, but for the last while-I notice a cutting in my desk which indicated they were only 2 cents apart some two weeks ago-and in recent days there has been only a 2-cent spread between medium and grade A large eggs. I would say that is a narrow spread, and that 8 to 10 cents is a wide spread. The value is probably half way between, probably around 5 cents; that is the value in weight of the eggs if they are both fresh and are put on the market on weight.
The reason for the difference at the moment is that the supply of medium eggs is large as compared with the others; and the reason it is a little more difficult to get much more than 38 cents for eggs is the fact that the supply of these eggs is high as compared with medium eggs. But there is another difficulty in addition to that. There are B eggs, and there is no sale for B eggs, as I understand it, except to break them and process them. You have to break the eggs and process them in some way to be able to sell B eggs at all. When eggs which are not properly graded are delivered, they get into the B class. It may be possible to sort some of them and put them in the A class, but if you deliver B eggs you get your price down to that particular level.
There are some provinces where they have been very careful about that, and where they have insisted on the very careful grading of eggs. I have not been following the situation closely enough to know if this is still true of Ontario, but some years ago it was the case, and I think it still is, that you had to be very careful about the grading of your eggs in order to be able to get them into the A class. There are other places where not much attention is paid to that, I imagine largely because there is not much of a market within the province for the eggs, and they do not pay so much attention to the marketing back in those areas. There may have been other reasons in addition to that.
So there might have to be something done in addition to what has been done with grade A eggs in order to make the producers of eggs more secure. But I think if something is done making them more secure there will have to be more attention paid to seeing that they are properly graded in order to be able to say what B eggs are worth, and in order to induce people to produce more grade A eggs and not so many B eggs; because when you average up the price of 20 cents a dozen, which if the eggs have to be broken may be

a price that is about as high as can be offered, with 32 or 34 cents for grade A eggs and take the average, one can go round saying that eggs are selling at a certain price.
I repeat that in order to overcome that difficulty and get the matter handled as it should be handled, we require an awful lot of co-operation from the hatchers who can determine now what the old hen could not determine. She just sat in the spring and produced the eggs, but today the hatcheries can produce the eggs at any time. When we say we will take eggs on December 31, then we will have so many eggs on December 31. If we have difficulty in handling them we will have to do something else.
We have to have co-operation from the hatcheries, the provincial governments and from the merchants who handle the eggs with regard to grading and all that kind of thing, and some of that requires legislation. That brings me to the point raised by the hon. member for Assiniboia, with regard to the legislation that might be necessary to make it possible for boards to operate successfully. I don't think we have yet had in any western province an egg board set up that could operate successfully, and there may be more reasons than one for that, too.
If we are going to have boards of any kind set up we are told by those who are members of co-operative organizations handling the farmers' products that we must have some amendments not only in provincial but also in federal legislation, and that matter has been brought to our attention through the decision of the court. As a matter of fact we took the matter to the court and the court made the decision. It has been brought to our attention by the government of the one province apart from British Columbia that has been very active in forming these marketing boards. They have suggested to us, I think about ten days or two weeks ago, in a communication to the Minister of Justice that they were prepared to make certain amendments, and they have suggested that we should make certain amendments.
Discussions have been passing back and forth on this matter, and the deputy minister of justice is in Toronto today discussing that and other matters with the government of Ontario. As soon as these discussions have been completed we shall be in a position to say whether or not legislation can be brought in this session to meet the situation which exists.


Edward George McCullough: Mr. Chairman, I was very happy to hear the minister's remarks, because I think he is
Supply-Agriculture
aware that some of us have been very concerned about the price the producer has received over the years for his eggs.
The minister comes to this house year after year and says there is a federal agricultural support act through which egg prices are supported in this country, and I believe the impression is that the producer has been benefited to the extent that he gets a fair and just price for his product. I think the minister now is admitting at least that some of us who have been urging over the past four or five years that some steps should be taken to change the legislation so the prices paid to producers would be more in line with retail prices of eggs throughout the country were not entirely wrong.
I have here some of the figures taken from the poultry market report which showed as of November of last year the prices ruling at such centres as Vancouver, Winnipeg, Montreal, Toronto and Calgary. The average price for grade A large eggs on August 28 was 53 cents a dozen. By November it was 36 cents a dozen, a difference of 17 cents. I think the minister has admitted that there has been a tremendous spread between grades of eggs, that is to say between grade A large and grade A medium. But there is also a very great discrepancy in the prices of grade A large eggs over a very short period of time during the year.
I would like to point out to the committee that the price spread to the producer has varied a great deal throughout the various points in the country, and I think this will certainly show that the minister was not justified in stating in this chamber in reply to a question of mine some time ago that all difficulty about egg prices is in the province of Saskatchewan. The fact is that right across the country producers of eggs have been suffering a great deal from the fluctuations in price.
I have here figures showing that there was a difference of 4 cents between grade A large and grade A medium eggs last fall. In Toronto one day there was a difference between A large and A medium of 17 cents; at Calgary there was a difference between A medium and B eggs of 20 cents a dozen; and at Montreal at the same time a difference between A medium and B of 2 cents a dozen.
So, Mr. Chairman, I think it is quite apparent that at the present time, certainly, egg prices have varied a great deal from point to point, without much stabilization being apparent; and I am very happy to note that the minister has given hon. members of this chamber at least some assurance that on the urging of different farm organizations and hon. members of this house the

Supply-Agriculture
government is prepared to undertake to change the act so the producer might be assured of a better price.
I would very much like the minister to explain the present situation. He says "We are prepared"-and I suppose he is speaking of his departmental officials-"to take eggs at the plant at certain prices".
I should like to ask the minister just how that takes place. Eggs come from various sources. They may be shipped directly or shipped through co-operatives. At the present time how is the producer guaranteed that he will get the price which would normally be guaranteed, namely 38 cents a dozen less handling charges or freight to that point?
I am trying to indicate a situation which often exists. Producers bring in eggs, and they are shipped from local merchants to the packing plants and there is no further payment. The producers take the price paid for the eggs on the basis of the grading at that point, and there is no subsequent payment. I understand it would be tremendously difficult for the officials to be able to say, after these eggs go into storage, whether or not the producer has received a fair price or a price in line with the support price.
I should like the minister to explain to the committee if he can how he has been able to try to maintain over past years that this act has operated for the benefit of the producer. It seems to me that it has provided a guarantee for the processor, but it certainly has failed miserably to protect the producer.


James Garfield Gardiner: I think I can best answer that by giving the prices. These are egg prices on March 12, 1957, to the producer: At Victoria, 38 cents for grade A large; at Vancouver, 38 cents; at Kelowna, 38 cents; at Regina, 30 cents; at Saskatoon, 30 cents; at Moose Jaw, 30 cents; at Melville, 30 cents; at Prince Albert, 30 cents; at Winnipeg, 30 cents; at Brandon, 29 cents; at Fort William, 39 cents-


Hazen Robert Argue: Have you Calgary or Edmonton?


James Garfield Gardiner: They would be about the same. That is the prairie price of eggs. The price	at	Fort William	was	39	cents,	atToronto on that particular day 32 to 34 cents. I had not noticed it before, but at Exeter where I used to live the price was 31 cents. At Stratford it was 31 cents, at Ottawa 34 to 35 cents,	at Montreal	34 to	36	cents,	atQuebec 34 to 35 cents, at Chicoutimi 38 to 40 cents,	at	Three Rivers	34 cents,	at SaintJohn	39	cents, at Moncton	36	cents,	at
Fredericton 37 cents and at Halifax 36 cents.
I think it will be noted from these prices that the low prices are on the prairies, and

there are reasons for that. As was stated the other day, there are more reasons than one, but I think it does indicate that more help is required there from somebody than is being provided.


Edward George McCullough: May I
ask the minister a question. Can he explain why the hon. member for Victoria, Ontario, said on February 6, as found at page 1020 of Hansard:
Some ol my constituents are delivering eggs to the graders at a price of 26 cents.
He indicated that the price to the producer in Ontario was down to about 26 cents at Ontario points. Can the minister explain that?


James Garfield Gardiner: Of course there are eggs and eggs, and I am not going to try to explain everything about them. If you take the next column, A medium, those are the prices, and if you take A small the prices are lower still. If you go down into the B's the prices are 26 cents at Victoria and 19 cents at Moose Jaw, Saskatoon and Regina. If you go into Ontario the prices are 26 cents, 25 cents, 28 cents, 29 cents. If you go farther east the prices are 30 cents, 29 to 34, 25 to 29, 29 to 30 and so on, and at Halifax 25 to 27 for B eggs. I am just trying to tell my hon. friend that what I said the other day is based on the facts. The worst conditions are in the area of which his constituency is the centre.


Hazen Robert Argue: You said Brandon a minute ago.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: The hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra.


Edward George McCullough: I
should like to ask the minister one other question before he sits down. Would the minister-


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order. I do not want to be officious, but I gave the floor to the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra. With his consent, of course, the hon. member for Moose Mountain can continue.


Edward George McCullough: I was
going to ask the minister whether or not he considers the low prices he has mentioned for Brandon and other points to be fair and in line with the support prices.


James Garfield Gardiner: The prices are pretty much in line with what the conditions under which delivery has to be made make necessary. The government that has been in power in Saskatchewan for 13 years has never built a storage for eggs and they were going to build everything. Those eggs have to be shipped to Winnipeg for storage, or shipped to Calgary in the other direction. If

my hon. friend believes that does not make any difference, all I can say is it costs 2 or 3 cents a dozen to move them.


Hazen Robert Argue: Why are they so low at Brandon, then?


James Garfield Gardiner: Brandon is where you sell your eggs.


Hazen Robert Argue: Not at all.


James Garfield Gardiner: Your constituency does.


Howard Charles Green: May I bring the minister back to potatoes for a moment. A day or two ago I had a letter from a friend on the west coast with which he enclosed the bottom of a bag in which potatoes were sold. Apparently his wife had gone to a store there and asked for Canadian potatoes. She was shown this bag and the words "Canada No. 1" were pointed out to her and also the words "Packed by Terminal Fruit and Produce Limited, Vancouver, B.C." When she got home she saw that on the other side just to the right were these words, "Produce of U.S.A." Apparently the potatoes were not of the quality of Canada No. 1.
Is it a fact that United States potatoes can be brought in, given the benefit of this national trade-mark, Canada No. 1, and sold to the Canadian public under those conditions? If the regulations permit that sort of transaction I suggest to the minister that some steps should be taken to change them, because it certainly is no help to our own potato producers or to Canadian consumers to be placed in a position where they can be deceived in that way.


James Garfield Gardiner: Of course I am not familiar with just what has happened in connection with potatoes, but in reporting the other day regarding the so-called colouring of potatoes to make them look as though they are new the information came to me that in connection with all our regulations, products can be packed in other countries from which the product comes but they must be packed up to standards, and some official in that area must make a report to us that that is the case. The same is true when we ship anything in the opposite direction. We do not ship it in a manner which makes it necessary for somebody to unpack it and repack it, because that takes away some of the profit of the producer or adds to the cost to the consumer. Therefore we do accept one another's passing of these things.
I should like to have the facts in connection with the matter so I can have it looked into, but I would be surprised if we did not find that these potatoes passed through an inspection system of that kind between the two countries.
Supply-Agriculture


Howard Charles Green: On the back there are the words "Packed by Terminal Fruit and Produce Limited, Vancouver, B.C.", and also the words "Canada No. 1". It seems to me that the use of this brand, "Canada No. 1", is what is wrong.
These are United States potatoes and it should not be possible, under the regulations, to have them sold under the national trade mark. Is that contrary to the regulations, or do the regulations permit that sort of transaction?


James Garfield Gardiner: I would think they did not. If it said, "Equal to Canada No. 1", I think it would be all right, because as long as they are graded they would be equal. Any product that comes in here is graded up to our grades and sold under our regulations, and that is acceptable. However, to say they are Canada No. 1 if they are grown somewhere else I do not think is proper.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: I should like to get back to this question of eggs, because my name was brought into the debate during the last few minutes. I want to refer to egg prices in my part of the country and also in Toronto. I have slips since early in February and right through for every month showing egg prices running from 26 cents to 28 cents per dozen for grade A large. I checked the retail prices, and I sent the slips over to the minister for four or five days. On those days neither the minister nor his parliamentary assistant was here, but the acting minister accepted them. None of the slips showed prices over 28 cents, and they were priced from there down according to grade.
This went on for some time, and if you look at Hansard you will see where I asked questions about the situation. Then the minister would get up and quote prices at Toronto for that day, but he was quoting retail prices. After all, I checked on the prices, and never once from February 5 until early in March were eggs selling for less than 40 cents a dozen retail in any of the places from which I sent the slips.
There is something wrong with an act when it permits such a situation. This is the objection I have to it. If we are going to buy eggs from the producer cheaply, then they should be sold to the consumer cheaply. Otherwise some teeth should be put into this act to prevent such a situation.


James Garfield Gardiner: I agree with my hon. friend, but may I tell him this. Those eggs about which he was speaking were sold at those prices by farmers to the persons who were collecting eggs and taking them into Lindsay.
I can give my hon. friend the name of the company that gathered them. They were

Supply-Agriculture
taken directly from Lindsay to Toronto and sold in Toronto. There is not any law we can make that will stop that, but the person taking them there could have taken them to the storage and got the support price from the board. However, he did not take them there. We do not go around compelling every person to bring eggs to us.
If the producers had set up an organization of their own, a co-operative or something like that, and then seen to it that those eggs went to a storage plant in Toronto or Lindsay or some place else, the price that is guaranteed by us would be paid for them.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: In reference to that situation, I sent over some slips showing that eggs were delivered in Toronto by express. The farmer did not know what he would get.


James Garfield Gardiner: But he did not deliver them to the storage. He delivered them right into the trade.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Your government was not buying eggs then; you were not taking eggs at the support price.


James Garfield Gardiner: We were buying them.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: And you did not for some time afterwards, either.


John Alpheus Charlton: This egg business is rather confusing, and I think we should look back at the minister's statement. He said it was possible for the producer, and he stated it definitely, to get 32, 33 or 34 cents a dozen. It is my understanding that until just recently the board was permitting 6 cents a dozen for the handling of eggs. The minister shakes his head; is that not true?


James Garfield Gardiner: It may be 8 cents in some places.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: But the minister said so in this house.


John Alpheus Charlton: I think somebody had better get some facts.


James Garfield Gardiner: I just read you the facts. These are the prices.


Hazen Robert Argue: It proves your act does not work.


James Garfield Gardiner: It proves that the provincial governments do not pass the laws which are necessary to get the prices for the producers.


John Alpheus Charlton: The government is now taking the credit for the fact that some producers are getting as high as 38 cents a dozen, principally in Victoria.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not taking credit for that; it is a fact.


John Alpheus Charlton: The minister is certainly implying it is the support price under eggs that is bringing about these prices. I can assure him it is not, because any dealer who wants to take advantage of the floor price under eggs would not pay any more than 30 cents a dozen. He is only guaranteed 38 cents, and he is allowed 8 cents for handling them. Therefore, would he pay more than 30 cents a dozen? If he does not want to put them through the board, sell to the government, he can pay 40 cents a dozen if he so desires. However, I suggest if any dealer wants to sell his eggs to the board and have a guaranteed price of 38 cents per dozen or, if they are oiled, 39 cents a dozen, then he will not pay more than 30 cents a dozen for grade A large to the producer. How can the minister say producers can get 32 cents?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not saying he can, I am saying he does. There is the price list as it is published for March 12, showing that he did.


John Alpheus Charlton: But that is not under the government price support act.


James Garfield Gardiner: Well, we do not pay 30 cents a pound for hogs, either. We guarantee 23 cents, and they are selling at 30 cents. We set a floor price, and if the price goes above that we do not stop it.


John Alpheus Charlton: I am saying that any dealer who wants to take advantage of the support price of 38 cents, or 1 cent more if they are oiled, does not pay more than 30 cents a dozen. I will come back to cheese. The minister finally admitted that no permit is necessary. It is just a gentleman's agreement.


James Garfield Gardiner: I did not agree to any such thing. You put that word out into the country that no permit is required and everybody will think they can ship it in here as they like. You have to get the consent of the government here, and you can call it a permit if you like.


John Alpheus Charlton: Well, one minister has said that no permit is required, and the other has said a permit is required. Then we have it from the Minister of Agriculture that if we say no permit is required everybody will be sending in cheese. If any cheese comes in within the next five years he will blame us for allowing the cheese to come in.


James Garfield Gardiner: Oh, sure.


John Alpheus Charlton: I hope we can accept responsibility for any cheese that comes in next year.


An hon. Member:: You do not need to worry about it.


John Alpheus Charlton: It is a gentleman's agreement, of course, between the two governments. You have to have the consent of this government to bring in cheese. The minister said cheese was under the support act. Here we have the support act report, and there was a total of $155,000 spent in support of cheese. I suggest that now the minister has hardly anything to do with any floor that might be under cheese. It is the Ontario government.


James Garfield Gardiner: You go and suggest to the cheese board that we take it off and see what they say to you.


John Alpheus Charlton: I suggest that if any credit is due to anyone for cheese prices it is due to
Supply-Agriculture
the Ontario cheese board in co-operation with the Ontario government, and not this federal government.


Hazen Robert Argue: Ten o'clock.
Progress reported.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, as indicated on Friday night, tomorrow we shall resume the budget debate.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Items Passed ANSWER TO QUESTION
The following answer, deposited with the Clerk of the house, is printed in the official report of debates pursuant to standing order 39:

Mr. Buchanan: What was the final cost of the federal public building erected in Baddeck, Nova Scotia, in 1956?
Answer by:	Mr. Bourgei, Parliamentary
Assistant, for the Minister of Public Works:
$107,168.01, including the cost of the site.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

[Stage Direction]
Production service-
Health of animals-
546.	To provide for payment of compensation to owners of animals affected with diseases coming under the Animal Contagious Diseases Act, which have died or have been slaughtered in circumstances not covered by the above act and regulations made thereunder, all as detailed in the estimates, $1,215.
547.	Livestock and poultry-further amount required, $35,510.
Marketing service-
548.	Subsidies for cold storage warehouses under the Cold Storage Act, and grants, in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $1.
549.	To provide for grants and other assistance in accordance with the Cheese and Cheese Factory Improvement Act-further amount required, $14,753. Special-
550.	Assiniboine river-diking and cut-off-further amount required, $95,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Citizenship-
552.	Citizenship branch-further amount required, $75,725.
Immigration branch-
553.	Field and inspectional service, Canada- further amount required, $194,177.
Indian affairs branch-
Welfare of Indians-
554.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $200,000.
Education-
555.	Administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, $605,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department and missions abroad-
556.	To provide for official hospitality-further amount required, $20,000.
557.	Canadian representation at international conferences-further amount required, $79,000.
B-General-
558.	To provide for the Canadian government's assessment for membership in international (including commonwealth) organizations, as detailed in the estimates, including authority to pay the amounts
specified in the currencies of the countries indicated, notwithstanding that the payments may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of February, 1957-further amount required, $2,504,336.
Terminable services-
559.	To provide for a gift of wheat as a contribution to flood relief for Pakistan, $1,475,834.
[Stage Direction]
Special-
560.	Contribution to the Springhill mine disaster relief fund, $25,000.
University grants-
562.	To authorize payments to the national conference of Canadian universities for the purpose of making grants to institutions of higher learning- further amount required, $77,288.
Miscellaneous grants-
563.	Grant to assist the Stratford Shakespearean Festival Foundation of Canada in the construction of a permanent theatre at Stratford, Ontario, $250,000.
[Stage Direction]
Special-
564.	To provide for assistance in the construction of vessels of the dr agger and long liner type, subject to such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council-further amount required, $190,000.
565.	To recoup the lobster trap indemnity account, established under vote 540 of the Appropriation Act No. 5, 1955, to cover the net loss incurred in the operation of the account during the fiscal year 1956-57, $27,400.
[Stage Direction]
Governor General and Lieutenant-Governors-
566.	Office of the Secretary of the Governor General-further amount required, $4,000.
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
General administration-
567.	Fair wages, conciliation, industrial relations, industrial disputes investigations, including the administration of legislation relating thereto, and for activities re promotion of co-operation in industry between labour and management-further amount required, $20,000.
568. Canada labour relations	board-further amount required, $2,000.
[Stage Direction]
The Senate-
569.	General administration-further amount required, $72,000.
House of Commons-
570.	General administration-estimates of the clerk-further amount required, $115,500.
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
General-
571.	To provide for purchases of air photography and the expenses of the interdepartmental committee on air surveys, including purchases of equipment-further amount required, $800,000.
[Stage Direction]
Pensions and other benefits-
Defence Services Pension Act-
572.	To authorize payment in this and subsequent fiscal years from the permanent services pension

account to Ellen Mary White, an annual pension at the rate of $1,244.61 with effect from June 28, 1955, $1.
[Stage Direction]
573.	To provide for the dismantling, conversion and installation of existing equipment, acquisition of new equipment, removal expenses and other costs related to the transfer of the national film board to new building-further amount required, $155,710.
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
National health branch-
Health services-
574.	Administration of the Opium and Narcotic Drugs Act-further amount required, $18,150.
575.	Indians and Eskimos health services-operation and maintenance-further amount required, $700,000.
General health grants-
576.	To authorize and provide for general health grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $1,000,000.
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Welfare branch-
577.	To provide for a reduction in the amount owing by the old age security fund pursuant to section 11 of the Old Age Security Act, representing the amount of temporary loans made by the Minister of Finance to the fund during the fiscal year 1956-57 estimated at, $6,000,000.
578.	To authorize payment to the government of the province of Newfoundland for the month of December, 1955, in an amount not exceeding $26,000, and to the government of the province of Prince Edward Island for the months of February and March, 1956, in an amount not exceeding $16,000, in respect of reimbursement claims in accordance with agreements entered into under the Unemployment Assistance Act, notwithstanding that the claims were not made within the time required by paragraph 14 of the agreements, $42,000.
[Stage Direction]
Northern administration and lands branch-
Yukon Territory-
579.	Grant to the government of the Yukon Territory to finance the balance of construction costs, in excess of $1,700,000 already advanced as a loan by the government of Canada for this purpose, for the consolidated water and sewer system for the city of Whitehorse and the new residential area; such grant to be paid in the current fiscal year and any portion thereof that is not used for the purpose stated herein to be repaid, $600,000. Northwest Territories and other field services-
580.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $446,280.
[Stage Direction]
581.	Transportation-movement of mail by land, air and water, including administration-further amount required and to authorize and provide for the adjustment, as of October 1, 1956, of rural mail delivery contracts in effect on that date or entered into by way of renewal after that date, under the provisions of subsection (2) of section 33 of the Post Office Act, notwithstanding paragraphs (b) and (c) thereof, $3,962,000.
Supply-Items Passed
[Stage Direction]
Federal district commission-
582.	To provide for the payment, notwithstanding section 8 of the Federal District Commission Act, of an honorarium of $7,500 to Major-General Howard Kennedy in respect of his services as chairman of the federal district commission, $7,500.
[Stage Direction]
583.	To provide for reimbursement of the Queen's printers advance account for the value of stores which have become obsolete, unserviceable, lost or destroyed, $116,050.
[Stage Direction]
Building construction branch-
Acquisition, construction and improvements of public buildings-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, public buildings listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-further amount required-
584.	Ontario (other than Ottawa), $1.
Harbours and rivers engineering branch- Acquisition, construction and improvements of
harbour and river works-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, harbour and river works listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects- further amounts required-
585.	Nova Scotia, $440,000.
586.	New Brunswick, $260,000
587.	Quebec, $1.
588.	Ontario, $188,500.
589.	Manitoba and Saskatchewan, $60,000.
590.	British Columbia and Yukon, $1.
[Stage Direction]
Headquarters administration, national police services and training establishments-
591.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $185,000.
Land and air services-
592.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $240,000.
[Stage Direction]
Patent and copyright office-
593.	Patent division-further amount required, $300,000.
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Canal services-
594.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $97,621.
595.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, including payments to provinces or municipalities as contributions towards construction done by those bodies-further amount required, $216,000.
Marine services-
Aids to Navigation-
596.	Administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, including authority to make payments in the current and subsequent fiscal years to the widow of the late George E. Gatza,
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Items Passed
former assistant lightkeeper at St. Paul's island, North Point, Nova Scotia, who was accidentally killed in the performance of his duties, of compensation in such amount as would have been paid to the said widow and her child under the Government Employees Compensation Act had that act applied to the said George E. Gatza, $119,692.
Pilotage service-
597.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $2,000.
Railway and steamship services-
Payments to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the company) upon applications approved by the Minister of Transport, made by the company to the Minister of Finance, to be applied by the company in payment of the deficits, certified by the auditors of the company, arising in the operations in the calendar year 1956 -further amounts required-
598.	Prince Edward Island car ferry and terminals, $303,287.
599.	Newfoundland ferry and terminals, $811,668.
600.	Reconditioning and refit of ferry vessel Scotia II for the Prince Edward Island car ferry service-further amount required; $130,000.
601.	Maritime Freight Rates Act-for the payment to the railway companies operating in the select territory designated by the act, of the difference occurring on account of the application of the act, between the tariff tolls and normal tolls under
approved tariffs (estimated and certified to the Minister of Transport by the Canadian National Railway Company and approved by auditors of the said company respecting the eastern lines of the Canadian National Railways and in the case of the other railways by the board of transport commissioners for Canada) on all traffic moved during the calendar year 1956 (chap. 174, R.S.)-further amount required, $1,068,777.
Pensions and other benefits-
602.	Supplemental pension allowances to former employees of Newfoundland railways, steamships and telecommunication services transferred to Canadian National Railways-further amount required, $1,458.
General-
603.	To provide for reimbursement of the Department of Transport stores account for the value of stores which have become obsolete, unserviceable, lost or destroyed, $58,787.
604.	Payment to the St. Lawrence seaway authority of an amount equal to the net proceeds realized from the sale of property under the administration or control of the authority and paid into the consolidated revenue fund during the current fiscal year, $19,960.
Air services-
Telecommunications Division-
Radio aids to air and marine navigation-
605.	Administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, $600,000.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, March 19, 1957