1958-01-30

LEAD AND ZINC


Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, on January 18, as recorded at page 3455 of Hansard, I reported to the house the submission of a formal note on July 23, 1957, to the United States Department of State concerning the possibility of the imposition of barriers by the United States against importations of lead and zinc from Canada, and I indicated at that time that the consent of the United States administration would be sought to the tabling of the Canadian note and also the United States reply in this house.
That consent has now been obtained, and I should like, Mr. Speaker, to table now the Canadian note, No. 409, dated July 23, to which I have referred, and also a copy of the reply dated August 2 from the United States.



BRIDGES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Alexis Caron (Hull):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. We have learned from the newspapers that Premier Duplessis-


Donald Methuen Fleming: Order.


Mr. Bell (Saint John-Alberi):: What newspaper?


Alexis Pierre Caron: I have to explain to the minister if I want him to understand my question. I understand that Premier Duplessis in answer to a question asked by the provincial member of parliament for Hull said he was now ready to share in the cost of building a new bridge. The Ottawa Journal called Mr. Dunbar, who said that the provincial government of Ontario is also ready. Here is my question-


Thomas Miller Bell: Where is Hull?


An hon. Member:: You should know.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Will the minister now take the lead so we may have this bridge as soon as possible?


Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, I read this dispatch myself but there has been no further information given to the department. However, I will look into the situation right away.


Mr. Hugh Proudfoot (Ponliac-Timiskaming):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a supplementary question. Will the Minister of Public Works take the initiative in this instance as the former prime minister did with regard to the Allumette Island bridge?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, we look into all these questions.


Mr. Sinclair:: Looking into and doing are quite different.


Mr. Lesage:: It is doing that counts.


Howard Charles Green: And I might add that we take action a whole lot faster than the former government did.



COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS


Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could have permission to make a statement which I intended to make earlier. I was inattentive a few moments ago when we were dealing with motions.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that the house revert to motions for the purpose of the minister making his statement?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Sidney Earle Smith: Mr. Speaker, I desire to inform the house that arrangements are now going forward on an interim basis to provide some Canadian technical assistance to Ghana and the West Indies. Hon. members may have noticed that an item providing sums for this purpose has been included in the final supplementary estimates.
It will be recalled that on January 23 the Prime Minister, in reply to a question asked by the hon. member for Assiniboia, stated that the government hoped to be able to announce what steps it was proposed to take to give immediate evidence of Canada's willingness to help the West Indies. The Prime Minister also stated that consideration had been given to longer term measures of assistance as well. This item in the estimates

Inquiries of the Ministry is intended as a first step in giving help to the new federation in the Caribbean. It also indicates our readiness to give technical assistance to the new commonwealth country of Ghana.
I emphasize, Mr. Speaker, that this item, by which we will be seeking authority for the expenditure of $150,000 for technical assistance for these two territories, is intended entirely as an interim measure. In due course, as the Prime Minister indicated, we shall place before the house proposals for more substantial and long-term assistance from Canada.
Meetings have taken place between our officials and federal officials from the West Indies as to ways in which Canada could be of assistance to this new country. While a number of decisions as to the amount and kind of aid which it would be appropriate and useful for Canada to offer to the West Indies have yet to be taken, one point has emerged very clearly; that is, that in this early stage of federation expert personnel from outside the area are urgently required. We accept their view, and it seems obvious that we should not hold up decisions on such requests for assistance until the larger questions of a longer term aid program have been considered. It has been decided that it would be appropriate to ask parliament to vote a limited amount of money which would make it possible to send possibly half a dozen experts to the West Indies in the near future.
I would now like to inform the house that the first of these experts-a housing adviser who will serve the West Indies for a year- will leave for the West Indies on Saturday. We are also giving immediate consideration to meeting the requests of the West Indies authorities for a statistician, a forestry expert, a fisheries expert and a technical education expert.
I also desire to mention briefly the question of technical assistance to the new state of Ghana. As hon. members will recall, Mr. Gill, the first Canadian high commissioner to Ghana, was appointed a few months ago. He has now had an opportunity to consider the possibility of technical assistance from Canada and to discuss this with the officials in Ghana and give us the benefit of his advice on these matters. He has suggested to us that the most effective way in which Canada could give an indication of its encouragement and support for this new state would be to stand ready to make available the services of Canadian experts, or to accept some Ghanaian personnel for training programs in Canada.
We have lumped these two sums together because it is difficult, and indeed I think it


would be unwise at this time, to try to budget too closely for these two territories on a separate basis. I trust this measure of assistance, which I reiterate will be no more than a limited and interim provision for the help of these countries, will be taken as an indication that the government stands ready to consider what appropriate measure of assistance can be given by Canada to our commonwealth friends.



TABLING OF CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN CANADIAN AND NEWFOUNDLAND GOVERNMENTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, in reply to a request by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate that I table the correspondence with the province of Newfoundland regarding federal legislation to provide assistance in respect of electric power development in the Atlantic provinces, I would like to table this correspondence at this time and move that it be printed as an appendix to Hansard for the information of hon. members.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house that the documents which are now being tabled by the government be printed as an appendix to Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[For text of documents referred to above, see appendix, page 4083.]



&quot;HANSARD&quot;


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Koolenay Wesi):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the Secretary of State, and knowing of her interest in education I am very hopeful of receiving a favourable reply at this time.
In view of the fact that there is growing evidence that Hansard is replacing other less informing literature in the homes of the farmers of Canada, and in view of the fact it is desirable to promote a greater and more exact knowledge of happenings in parliament, would the minister give consideration to a reduction in the price of Hansard as a federal government contribution to this end?


Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Secretary of State):: The price of Hansard, as all hon. members know, is 5 cents per copy or on a subscription basis $3 per session. I do not know where else one could get so much information and amusement for so little money.



WELCOME TO UNITED STATES VISITORS IN GALLERY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Sidney Earle Smith: Mr. Speaker, may I direct your attention to the presence in the diplomatic gallery of two good friends of Canada. They are distinguished members of the House of Representatives of the United States of America, Mr. Coffin of Maine and Mr. Hays of Arkansas.



ANNOUNCEMENT OF MEETING OF NATO PARLIAMENTARY ASSOCIATION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. A. Cannon (Iles-de-la-Madeleine):: Mr. Speaker, with your permission and with the indulgence of the house may I make an uncontroversial announcement. It is that the annual meeting of the NATO parliamentary association which was called for ten o'clock this morning has been adjourned until 3.30 this afternoon, in room 368 of the Senate.



CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre asked if I had received a reply from the Canadian Pacific Railway Company to my letter asking that they do everything possible to maintain winter employment. I should like now to advise the house that I have received a reply to my letter to the Canadian Pacific Railway requesting that every endeavour be made to maintain its working force and do everything possible to avoid further reductions in staff this winter.
Mr. N. R. Crump, the president, has given assurance of the full co-operation of his company to the extent that traffic and weather conditions permit. In view of the unemployment situation the Canadian Pacific has made arrangements to continue with certain items of work that ordinarily would have been deferred, and thus avoid certain immediate layoffs which otherwise would have resulted.
In carrying out its capital program, as distinct from maintenance work, the company has arranged for the continuance of major construction projects which can be carried on during the winter months, such as additions to the Royal York hotel in Toronto and to its diesel shops at Montreal and Calgary, and a new office building at Winnipeg. The company also placed some time ago substantial
Inquiries of the Ministry orders for rolling stock to be delivered in 1958 in order that this work too might proceed throughout the winter months.
I am sure the house will appreciate, as the government does, this evidence of the desire of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company to do all it can to help the employment situation.
I might also add that I have had a reply from Premier Frost of Ontario advising me that the Ontario Northland Railway will also do everything in its power to maintain employment at a high peak during the winter months.


Mr. Louis Lewry (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: May I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Transport. In view of the minister's statement today that the Canadian Pacific Railway Company is interested in maintaining full employment, would he inquire into the number of agents taken out of service by that company in recent months as a result of orders of the board of transport commissioners, especially in Saskatchewan, where such agents have been replaced by part-time caretakers? The most recent occurrence of this nature has been at Stalwart, Saskatchewan. Does this not tend to add to unemployment?


George Harris Hees: I think the statement I made was very clear. The management of the Canadian Pacific Railway have assured me that they will do everything possible to maintain employment on a high level during winter months.


Mr. H. R. Argue (Assiniboia):: May I ask a
supplementary question. Could the minister say, in the light of this answer, whether this applies to the maintenance of railway station operators and agents?


George Harris Hees: I cannot elaborate any further. I have already said that the Canadian Pacific Railway Company say they will do everything possible to maintain employment at a high level. I think that is very clear.


Hazen Robert Argue: Does the minister think the continuing applications of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company to close stations is in keeping with their statement to him?


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member heard the minister say he could not elaborate further.



CANADIAN NATIONAL STEAMSHIPS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. A. Byrne (Kooienay East):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Can the minister give the house

Inquiries of the Ministry any information as to the progress of the negotiations respecting resumption of the Canadian National Steamships service to the West Indies?


George Harris Hees: No, Mr. Speaker.


James Sinclair: That would be a real help to the West Indies federation.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: I should like to direct a supplementary question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. My question to the Minister of Transport was prompted by the statement the minister had made regarding assistance to the West Indies. Does the Secretary of State for External Affairs not feel that one way in which we could be of the greatest assistance to the West Indies would be to get this very important steamship line back into operation?


Sidney Earle Smith: Mr. Speaker, as I remarked in my statement, the request of the West Indian authorities at this time was for expert personnel.


James Sinclair: That is not the question.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: My question was not answered by the Secretary of State for External Affairs.


Some hon. Members:: Sit down.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: May I ask a supplementary question of the Secretary of State for External Affairs?


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry, but I have recognized another hon. member.
[Later:!


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The Secretary of State for External Affairs gave me an answer that bore no relationship to the question I asked. I should like to ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs if he will endeavour to get the co-operation of the Minister of Transport in attempting to get the Canadian National Steamships back into operation. I understand that European ships are beginning to ply this route.


Sidney Earle Smith: I gave the answer that I had in mind. I shall let the Minister of Transport speak for himself.
I understand that the purpose of the question period is to ascertain facts, and I gave them.



TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucester):: May I
direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Is the minister in a position to state when we may expect a report on the progress

which has been made in the last three months regarding the particular study of transportation problems in the Atlantic region which, as he announced in the house on October 18 last, is being carried out under the bureau of transportation economics within his department?


George Harris Hees: No, Mr. Speaker. Very satisfactory progress is being made with that study, however.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Erhart Regier (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: should like to ask the Minister of Justice a question. Has the minister any comment to make on the report in the Gazette of January 29 stating that Louis Bercovitch had been released after serving over 11 years in St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary, and that upon his release was in need of both medical and dental care? Do inmates of penitentiaries receive all necessary medical and dental care?


Hon. E. D. Fulfon (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for giving notice of his question. To deal with the second part first, I can inform him that inmates of penitentiaries receive all necessary medical and dental care. I have an interim report from the commissioner of penitentiaries on the case of Mr. Bercovitch, and it appears that he was receiving dental care at the time of his release. He had been fitted with dentures and apparently there was some complaint at the time that they did not fit him very well. I gather that the time of his release intervened before that complaint could be satisfactorily resolved.
There is no evidence whatsoever that he was receiving or in need of medical care or that he had applied for such care. At least that is my preliminary information. I am expecting a full report, and if it varies from what I have already said I will make a further answer tomorrow.



ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY CORNWALL    INQUIRY AS TO OPENING OF BUILDING

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. P. Lavigne (Stormont):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport, and I am sorry I was unable to give notice. Will the minister advise the

house as to the approximate date of the opening of the St. Lawrence seaway building in Cornwall?


George Harris Hees: I do not know the exact date, Mr. Speaker, but I shall check up with the seaway authorities and let the hon. member know.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. C. Christian (Okanagan Boundary):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance, of which I have given him notice. Would the minister indicate to the house the budgetary surplus or deficit as of the most recently compiled date this year compared with May 31 of last year?


Donald Methuen Fleming: It is not customary to answer questions of that kind or to make interim statements during the course of the fiscal year as to what the expected end result may be of the government's financing for the year. There is not any statement as of May 31, as the question seems to assume. I did give the house a statement on December 6 as to the expected surplus at the end of the current fiscal year. I have no reason to depart appreciably from that estimate, and I think at March 31 government operations for the year, thanks to prudent management, will show a respectable surplus.


James Sinclair: We have no reason to have any confidence in your calculations after last Saturday.


Donald Methuen Fleming: You have no reason; period. [Later:]


Mr. Stanley Haidasz (Trinity):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the benevolent Minister of Finance what portion of the $500 million surplus that he inherited from the previous Liberal administration will be allotted to the metropolitan council of Toronto to start building without delay the east-west subway, a proposal that was passed at the city council meeting two days ago under Mr. Gardiner and intended as a federal measure to ease the unemployment situation in Toronto.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker-


James Sinclair: Smile. That is better.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Speaking, Mr. Speaker, in the benevolent role assigned to me by the hon. gentleman, let me first of all remind him that he has based his question initially on a completely false premise.


Some hon. Members:: Oh?
Inquiries of the Ministry


Donald Methuen Fleming: We did not inherit from the previous government any $500 million surplus.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Donald Methuen Fleming: We came into office, Mr. Speaker, on the 21st day of June in the fiscal year 1957-58. The previous government through my predecessor, the minister of finance, had introduced in this house for the fiscal year 1957-58 a budget which contemplated a surplus which is only a fraction of the amount stated erroneously by the hon. member.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I had grave doubts about this question when it was asked, and I can see that it is not going to fulfil the function of this question time of eliciting information on a subject of urgent importance. Furthermore, it infringes the rule in dealing with the matter of fiscal arrangements between the dominion and the provinces, which was dealt with yesterday by the house.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, there is a great deal of information on that subject-


James Sinclair: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Finance based only on his answer to the question asked by my hon. friend.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, if there is to be a supplementary question asked I think I should be permitted to finish my answer to the first question in order to make it complete.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. If the house will permit me to close the debate here I think it would be more satisfactory. If the hon. member for Trinity is rising on the same point, I am sorry I cannot see him.


Stanley Haidasz: It is not on the same point, sir. In view of the stormy response last night in Toronto at a union trade conference meeting discussing the grave unemployment situation in Toronto, will the minister tell us whether one of the measures the federal government will propose in order to ease the situation will be financial aid for the construction of the east-west subway in Toronto?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, it would not be proper for the dominion government in dealing with the subject of unconditional fiscal payments to the provinces to undertake to designate specific projects to which that money should be applied. We have taken steps, and the house has approved them this week, to make substantial further sums available to the provinces and unquestionably much of that benefit will flow to the municipalities. I have no doubt that the city of

Inquiries of the Ministry Toronto will derive an ample share of the Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State
benefit of that measure. What particular use for External Affairs): I am unable to give it chooses to make of it obviously will be a that assurance, Mr. Speaker. I know the matter for the provincial and municipal gov- agreement is being carefully worked out and ernments to decide. We do not attempt to that there have been exchanges; that is all interfere with these levels of government in I can say at the moment. As the hon. mem-the exercise of their proper constitutional ber knows, it takes considerable time to functions.	draft an agreement of this kind.


Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a supplementary question. In view of the assistance given by the government to the Britannia mine does my hon. friend not think the request put forward by the hon. .member for Trinity is one that deserves careful consideration and action on the part of this government?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, it was well known-and if the hon. member is not fully informed on this subject he can apply to his seatmate-that the Britannia mine situation was quite unique.


Paul Joseph James Martin: So is this.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The assistance that was asked for and given was on the basis of two things, first of all a local situation which presented very serious problems from the point of view of housing the workers concerned, and in the second place the restoration to the federal treasury of financial benefits equivalent to or greater than those represented by the aid the government was asked to give.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: The people in Toronto pay taxes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: No one knows that better than the citizens of Toronto.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I would ask the Minister of Finance not to reply to questions which have not been properly put to him.


James Sinclair: He cannot resist rising to the bait.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, it was a supplementary question from the same honourable and not too well informed member. I tried to answer his supplementary question.


Mr. Sluarl (Charloiie):: He is smiling at last.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of Ihe Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs whether he can give the house any assurance that the intergovernmental agreement between Canada and the United States covering North American defence will be completed and tabled before the end of the session?



REDUCTION IN PERIOD OF MILITIA TRAINING

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Louis Denisel (Si. Boniface):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. Could the minister state how the militia can be expected to effectively continue its strictly military training and also step up its training for civil defence when its days of training are reduced from 60 days to 40 days a year?


Hon. G. R. Pearkes (Minisler of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, experience has shown that by far the greater majority of the men training in the militia find it impossible to put in 60 days training during the year, so the over-all training period was reduced to 40 days.



SOCIAL SECURITY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. G. Hansell (Macleod):: May I direct a question to the Minister of Finance, or perhaps the Minister of National Health and Welfare would care to answer. Since reciprocal agreements were signed yesterday between the United Kingdom and Australia with respect to pensions and other social security benefits paid to their citizens living in the other country, will the government initiate a move to have similar agreements completed between Canada and the United Kingdom? Agreements are in existence between the United Kingdom and Malta, Cyprus and New Zealand.


Hon. J. W. Monfeifh (Minisier of Naiional Health and Welfare):: I shall be glad to look into this and report to the house.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. M. Nicholson (Mackenzie):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. If I heard the minister correctly yesterday when he spoke to the Canadian Federation of Agriculture in Montreal, he intimated that during the present year he hoped

to introduce legislation to provide for an improved credit system, crop insurance and a national soil and water conservation program. My question is, does the minister intend to introduce this legislation during the present session of parliament?


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agriculture):: No, Mr. Speaker; there is no intention to bring in legislation along those lines at the present session of parliament.


James Sinclair: It was just election talk.



ABITIBI AREA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. N. Barbes (Chapleau):: May I direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Can we expect a favourable decision in the matter of a request made by farmers' organizations in the Abitibi area asking the Department of Agriculture to take over and operate the large St. Marc de Figuery farm, a federal government property, as a district experimental farm which is really needed for the benefit of the northwestern Quebec farming area?


Douglas Scott Harkness: I have no recollection of any requests along those lines. Possibly they may have come in, but in any event the matter of experimental stations or farms is one which I am always glad to look into and review at any time.



REPORTED STATEMENT BY MINISTER ON PRICE STABILIZATION LEGISLATION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. G. McCullough (Moose Mountain):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture arising out of a press report yesterday appearing in the Montreal Gazette, wherein it is stated that the minister, in speaking to the Canadian Federation of Agriculture in Montreal, explained the agricultural stabilization bill in such a manner as to indicate that it was a form of unemployment insurance for farmers. Has the minister's explanation been correctly reported? Does the government consider the agricultural price stabilization bill to be legislation mainly intended to provide a type of unemployment insurance for farmers?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, I have not seen the report to which the hon. member refers, but I certainly made no statement along the line that the government considers this legislation a form of unemployment insurance for farmers, or any other such statement.
96698-254J
Inquiries of the Ministry



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Haidasz: I should
like to ask the Minister of Transport a question. In view of the fact that last week he promised to give very active consideration to the matter of more adequate commuter train service into Toronto from the adjoining suburban municipalities, is he in a position this week to give the House of Commons a report on that consideration?


George Harris Hees: No, Mr. Speaker. I told the hon.
member who asked the question a few days ago that the management of the Canadian National Railways had this matter under consideration.



PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Peter Stefura (Vegreville):: I should
like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Owing to the physical features of the land in the northern part of the prairie provinces and also to the climatic conditions that prevail in this region, has the minister or this government given consideration to reducing the size of the qualifying block, in order that a more equitable distribution of the benefits under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act be made available?
The present Prairie Farm Assistance Act, as administered, debars any farmer from qualifying for benefits if such farmer is forced to seek employment in other fields in order to augment his income. Will the minister assure the house that this discriminatory practice against young men wishing to become established on farms will be discontinued?


Douglas Scott Harkness: I should like to thank the hon.
member for giving me notice of these two questions. The answer to the first one is this. At present payments are made to farmers in a township, or any rectangular shaped block of at least 18 sections, where the average yield of wheat in the township or block is 8 bushels or less. Payments are also made in any block of at least six contiguous sections having a yield of 8 bushels or less, if a side of the block lies alongside an eligible township. The government is always giving careful consideration to amending the act to make it as equitable as possible to the farmers.
4022	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry
The answer to the second question is as follows. Farmers are not disqualified or denied assistance under the act or regulations when they take part-time outside employment to supplement their farm income. Only those who have full-time or year-round jobs are ineligible for award.


Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture arising out of his reply to the question asked by the hon. member for Vegreville. Will the minister take a more careful look at the definition of "farmer" as it appears in the Prairie Farm Assistance Act, and also at the way in which that definition is interpreted in the administration of the act, to see if it might not be made a more reasonable definition and a more reasonable interpretation so that realistic consideration could be given to many people who are forced to seek employment off the farms during the coming year?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, the definition of "farmer" contained in the act has been given very serious consideration by the law officers of the crown, and the interpretation placed upon it at the present time is the result of their advice. Complaints which arise in regard to this matter are chiefly from merchants, teachers and various other people who own farms but who, because they have year-round employment or year-round businesses from which they derive the main portion of their income, are not eligible to receive awards under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act.
As I stated earlier, anyone who takes parttime employment to supplement his income from the farm is eligible. It is those people who have full-time jobs outside farming, or who maintain businesses from which they derive the larger part of their income, who are not eligible for P.F.A.A. payments.


Edward George McCullough: May I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Agriculture. Will the minister look into this matter again and check whether his statement that only those farmers who undertake year-round employment off the farms are not eligible for P.F.A.A. assistance is correct, because it seems to be at variance with the facts?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, I have received a considerable number of complaints with regard to this matter. In every case I have examined I have found that the person complaining did have a full-time job other than farming or a full-time business from which he derived the major portion of his income. I can only repeat once more that those farmers


who take part-time jobs in order to supplement their incomes are qualified and do get prairie farm assistance payments.



CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North
Centre): Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Can the minister say whether there will be introduced at this session an amendment to the Canadian Citizenship Act to remove the discrimination which now exists as between natural-born citizens and naturalized citizens in connection with the loss of such citizenship, as was indicated by the Prime Minister on December 2?
Edmund Davie Fulton: The target date for the end of the session was set at January 31, by which time we had hoped to be finished with all the business. I think it will be obvious to the hon. member as well as to the house that if we had gone on introducing legislation it would have made it fairly impossible to meet that target date. Therefore the question as to introducing that amendment to the citizenship act would, I think, be fairly well taken care of by what I have said. I doubt whether we shall be able to introduce it at this session. However, I have given instructions that in the meantime all questions of loss of citizenship under this section of the act be held in abeyance until such time as we are able to deal with the matter by legislation.



BROADCASTING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. E. Johnston (Bow River):: May I
direct a question to the Minister of National Revenue. I have not given him notice of the question, so he may desire to take this as notice. Can he tell the house whether or not the application of the Dinosaur radio station at Drumheller, Alberta, has been received, and whether it will be given favourable consideration?


Douglas Scott Harkness: I will draw this question to the attention of the Minister of National Revenue, Mr. Speaker.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Charles-Noël Barbès: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of

Public Works. I should like to know what steps have been taken lately, if any, to start the construction of the new diesel repair shops planned for Senneterre, Quebec, by Canadian National Railways, in view of the fact that this would correct in part a serious unemployment situation as well as bring about an important development in the area?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, I think this question should be passed to the Minister of Transport.


Charles-Noël Barbès: Mr. Speaker, may I repeat the same question and direct it to the hon. Minister of Transport.


George Harris Hees: Would the hon. member mind repeating his question, because I was not paying my usual attention.


Charles-Noël Barbès: I should like to know what steps have been taken, if any, to start the construction of the new diesel repair shops planned for Senneterre, Quebec, in the Chapleau riding, by Canadian National Railways, in view of the fact that this would correct in part a serious unemployment situation as well as bring about an important development in the area.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I will be very glad to make inquiries of the management of the C.N.R. with regard to this.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[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 Finance. Will the government honour, without fail, the commitment made by the Minister of Finance when he promised the house that all of this year's estimates will be dealt with by the committee of supply, and that our right to discuss the items will not be curtailed in any way?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, that statement was made in the usual course when the motion for interim supply was up for consideration, but I cannot control the course of destiny. If the house is in session the procedure of the house with regard to estimates will, of course, be followed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. My point of privilege is that the Minister of Finance, a responsible minister of the crown,
Inquiries of the Ministry said on December 4, as recorded on page 1849 of Hansard, that all the estimates will be dealt with in committee, that the ministers will be before the committee of supply and that our rights would not be curtailed in any way. My point of privilege is that the minister cannot now repudiate that promise.


Mr. Speaker:: I am not sure that this is a question of privilege. It seems to me the matter is within the control of the house itself, and any person who undertakes to speak for the house speaks for it in the sense that the house may decide to do something different.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I may remind the hon. gentleman, Mr. Speaker, that such undertakings have always been given in connection with motions for interim supply. One was given by my predecessor, Mr. Harris, in March last when he asked for supply for the month of April, yet there was a dissolution in April.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May
I ask the minister if he did not go further than Mr. Harris. Is it not true that Mr. Harris said "when the estimates come before the committee of supply"-and I stress the word "when"-there would be full discussion. But the present minister said they would come before the committee.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The undertaking was given in the usual terms.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I do not feel that this matter should be pursued. The record is there. It may be a matter for argument, and that is what hon. members are proceeding to do. but that is not the function of the question period as I understand it.


Mr. W. A. Tucker (Rosthern):: May I direct a question to the house leader. Does he not think that in bringing business before the house he should give consideration to the solemn undertaking made on behalf of the government that all estimates would be laid before the house before the session ends?


Howard Charles Green: We are doing our best to get these estimates considered.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I
should like to address a question to the Postmaster General in an effort to assist in restoring the emotional equilibrium of the house. I apologize for not having given him notice, but my question is occasioned by my observation of the minister since he came into the chamber. In view of the colour of his present haberdashery, would the minister

Inquiries of the Ministry admit the influence of the representations of this group upon decisions of cabinet
ministers?


Hon. W. M. Hamilton (Postmaster General):: I do not know what relationship there is between the colour of my haberdashery and the business of the house, but if hon. members will cast their minds back to my previous explanation, this is the hide of a Liberal whom we skinned at the last election. I might say we have a great deal more such material in mind and in prospect at this time.


Mr. Maurice Breton (Jolieffe-L'Assompfion-Montcalm):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. Having endorsed in the preface of the book called "Freedom Wears a Crown" the opinion of the late John Farthing that it is unconstitutional for a prime minister to ask within a few months of dissolution of the parliament for a second dissolution without having been defeated in the house, what will he say if the present Prime Minister intends to act in the same way Mr. King did in 1926?


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry, but the hon. member's question relates to matters which are not the proper subject of questions in the house.



IRRIGATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Melville):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Agriculture based on the speech which he is reported to have made yesterday in Montreal. The question is this. Has the government now decided to proceed with the construction of the South Saskatchewan river dam and, if so, when?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, as has been indicated several times in the house we are anxious to proceed with the construction of the South Saskatchewan river dam just as soon as we can get a satisfactory agreement with the Saskatchewan government with regard to the terms of construction.


Hazen Robert Argue: That sounds like the old
minister.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister
[Mr. Herridge.l

of Labour if he will bring down the latest unemployment figures before the end of this session.


Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: As soon as the dominion bureau of statistics releases the figures I will be glad to advise the house.


Paul Joseph James Martin: May I ask
the Minister of Labour a supplementary question. When will that be? Will it be before February 10?


Michael Starr: In answer to that question, as I said to the Leader of the Opposition I will be glad to bring the dominion bureau of statistics figure to the attention of the house when it appears. It is usually released some time between the 17th and 20th of each month.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a supplementary question. In view of that fact, will the minister not give immediate consideration, in collaboration with the leader of the house, to bringing down his estimates certainly before the prorogation or adjournment of this house, so we may have an opportunity of examining what undoubtedly the minister will recognize as the most important domestic question before the Canadian people at the present time?


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, the leader of the house sets out the program, and I am prepared at any time to come before the house with my estimates.


Lester Bowles Pearson: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the leader of the house take into consideration the request of my friend the hon. member for Essex East?
Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public
Works): Mr. Speaker, I will be very glad to take it into consideration. The situation still is that the government has the responsibility for deciding what business is to be taken.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the leader of the house a supplementary question regarding the business of the house. Since the legislation on the order paper may be disposed of today or tomorrow, leaving only estimates, is it the intention to have the estimates taken on Monday, or in other words to call a motion to go into supply as a means of provoking the official opposition to move another of its want of confidence motions?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will notice if he looks over the order paper that there is on it other government business which I did not announce last night.



BLIND RIVER AREA-REQUEST FOR BOARD OF INQUIRY INTO MINE ACCIDENTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
James Allen (Jim) Byrne: I should like to address a question to the Minister of Labour. Yesterday, in answer to my inquiry as to whether the minister would consider setting up a board of inquiry into the appalling accident rate in the Blind River area, he said he would look into the matter. Since that time has it been drawn to the minister's attention that there have been two more fatalities in that area? I ask this question because having had 23 years' experience in mining I feel there is a serious lack of regulation.


Michael Starr: No, Mr. Speaker, that had not been brought to my attention.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS INQUIRY AS TO REPLY FROM PREMIER OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Erhart Regier: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Has the minister received from the premier of British Columbia a reply to the telegram that he sent on Friday last? I notice in the newspapers that Premier Bennett is now claiming that British Columbia will not receive anything as the result of the amendments to increase the grants.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. It seems to me that we spent some days dealing with this matter and that it would be irregular to introduce it now by way of question in the house.



PACIFIC GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. G. J. Hahn (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Public Works. In view of the statement made by the minister as recorded in volume IV of Hansard for the year 1955, at page 4390, to the effect that the federal government should assist the British Columbia government in the building of the P.G.E., would the minister indicate what success he has had in persuading this government to contribute toward its construction cost?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, fortunately I usually have very good success with my colleagues on questions of this kind.
Inquiries of the Ministry NATURAL RESOURCES



NEW BRUNSWICK


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Victoria-Carleton asked if the government had considered extending the assistance under the program presently carried on by the federal government in connection with the spruce budworm infestation in New Brunswick.
I would like to announce at this time that the government of Canada had agreed to contribute to the government of New Brunswick one-third of the cost of the aerial spraying operation against the spruce budworm in that province up to a maximum of $3,250,000 until March 31, 1959. This maximum contribution is now almost completely expended and it is expected that it will be fully utilized by the end of this fiscal year.
In view of the need for a further spraying program in the summer of 1958, and at the request of the New Brunswick government, it has now been agreed, subject to the necessary funds being voted by parliament, that a further federal contribution not exceeding $600,000 will be made available for this purpose in the fiscal year 1958-59. This sum represents one-third of the estimated cost of the 1958 spraying program.
Through the forest biology division of the science service, Department of Agriculture, the government of Canada is continuing to provide technical advice and assistance to the aerial spraying program.


Jean Lesage: May I ask the minister if the infested area has increased during the last
year?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: The information I have from the biological people is that the menace of the budworm in New Brunswick is ending.


Jean Lesage: Ended or ending?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: That the
menace is ending. I think this will be the last year they will have to go forward with the program, and I feel that the country should know the program of the last five or six years has probably saved not only the forests of New Brunswick but also a good deal of the forests of Quebec.


Some hon. Members:: Good Liberal policy.
Mr. G. R. McWilliam (Northumberland-
Miramichi): May I ask a supplementary question. How many groups are involved in contributing toward the expense of spraying

Inquiries of the Ministry the forests in New Brunswick? As I understand it, several pulp and paper companies also contribute.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: It is a threeway deal between the federal government, the province of New Brunswick and the pulp and paper companies in that area, each paying one-third.


James Sinclair: May
I direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries on the same problem. Have the courts yet reached a decision on the suit of the Department of Fisheries against the people who sprayed not only the forests but the fish hatcheries in New Brunswick?


Hon. J. A. MacLean (Minister of Fisheries):: No, Mr. Speaker.



PUBLIC BUILDINGS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Howard Charles Green: Yesterday the hon. member for Hull (Mr. Caron) asked me this question:
According to information received, tenders were requested for the disposal of the old post office in Hull, which tenders were to be opened on February 28 next. I have been told that pressure is being exerted to put back that date. Is it the intention of the department to accede to such demands?
The answer is that Crown Assets Disposal Corporation has called for tenders which are to be closed on February 21, not February 28. No representations have been received from anyone asking for a postponement of this date.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. A. Olson (Medicine Haf):: I should like to address a question to the Minister of Agriculture. According to this morning's Gazette, when the minister was in Montreal he reiterated the government's support of a world food bank. Have any steps been taken by the government toward establishing such a food bank?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member is aware that on several occasions the Prime Minister has indicated that the government supports the general principle of the establishment of a food bank. Efforts to establish something along that line under the food and agriculture organization of the United Nations have been unsuccessful so far.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Secretary of State. I wonder whether the hon. lady is in a position yet to make a statement concerning the case of Mr. J. George Neuspiel on the basis of the review which, on January 8, she said would be undertaken?
Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Secretary of
State): Mr. Speaker, I am not yet in a position to make a statement.



NEW BRUNSWICK


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Comlois (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday last the hon. member for Inverness-Richmond referred to a statement purported to have been made by the executive board of the united mine workers, district No. 26, that the New Brunswick Power Commission had reduced its orders for coal owing to the Beech-wood hydro development. The member then asked the following question:
Can the minister assure the house that steps are being taken to preserve coal markets against government supported hydro projects?
In answer I would say that the government has received no notification of a reduction in coal orders because of the Beechwood project. I would further point out that the recent legislation sponsored by the government for the development of thermal power plants in the maritime provinces will in future not only stabilize but should greatly develop the demand for coal in those provinces.



NORTHWEST TERRITORIES ACT


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: the second reading of Bill No. 249, to amend the Northwest Territories Act.


Jean Lesage: Is the minister going to make a statement?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to present to the house at this time two small amendments to the Northwest Territories Act which will, indirectly at least, aid in the orderly development of the Northwest Territories, an area that holds

rich promise for the future and that even now has a significance to Canada out of all proportion to the numbers of its population.
I am happy to note that hon. members seem united in their desire to see the greatest possible encouragement given to the development of Canada's far north. I think it is only fair to acknowledge the special interest shown over the years by my predecessors in office, the hon. member for Calgary North (Mr. Harkness) and the hon. member for Montmagny-L'Islet (Mr. Lesage).
The object of the present bill, Mr. Speaker, is to add two new sections to the Northwest Territories Act, one section to improve the financial administration of the territories and the other to facilitate the administration of justice. The first is new section 19A. The purpose of this new section is to empower the commissioner in council to make ordinances (a) for the borrowing of money by the commissioner for territorial, municipal or local purposes on behalf of the territories and with the approval of the governor in council and (b) for the lending of money by the commissioner to municipalities and school districts in the territories.
The Northwest Territories Act as it now stands does not permit the territorial government to borrow or to lend money. In the past necessary capital expenditures have been provided out of revenues, which are now running at about $2 million a year and which are derived from the various revenue sources open to the provinces including, of course, grants from the federal government.
The time has now come, however, when capital expenditures will be too great to be met in this way. For example, the territorial government is faced with the necessity of providing a sewer and water service for the people of Fort Smith, and also a safe water supply for Hay River. The new section grants borrowing powers, but makes them subject to approval of the governor in council to ensure that territorial indebtedness will be kept within safe and reasonable limits.
The second part of the new section 19A will permit the commissioner, pursuant to ordinances passed by the commissioner in council, to lend money to municipalities and school districts. The territorial government is frequently faced with requests for loans for such purposes as the capital cost of fire protection and road maintenance equipment in municipalities, and to help meet the school districts' share of the capital cost of new school buildings in school districts. Since any moneys made available on loan would be either territorial revenues or funds borrowed with the approval of the governor 96698-255
Northwest Territories Act in council, there is, of course, no need for the governor in council to approve such loans.
Let me turn to the second object of the present amendment. The new subsection 3 which is being added to section 32 will permit the governor in council to appoint deputy police magistrates for the territories. This additional provision has been inserted on the recommendation of my colleague the Minister of Justice, who has responsibility for administration of justice in the territories. Subsection 1 of section 32 now provides for the appointment of police magistrates and subsection 2 requires such magistrates to reside in the territories and to refrain from practising as barristers and solicitors.
I hope no hon. member will conclude that the proposal here advanced indicates that lawlessness on a large scale has broken out in the territories requiring the appointment of deputy police magistrates. In actual fact there is at present only one police magistrate in the entire territory, and he resides at Yellowknife where the territorial court is located. When he goes on circuit throughout the vast area of the territory, or is absent or on leave, there is no one to carry out the work that he should be doing. It is inevitable, therefore, that a backlog of court work will accumulate in the Mackenzie area.
The government considers that in the interests of the prompt and efficient administration of justice it would be much more economical and practical, when the services of a magistrate are required in the eastern Arctic, to appoint a qualified lawyer from one of the provinces and send him into the territory as a deputy magistrate on a temporary basis, rather than to arrange for the attendance of the magistrate from Yellowknife.
Legislation covering the administration of the present Northwest Territories was first enacted in 1905. In the years that have followed this house has been ready to keep pace with the development of the territories by approving necessary amendments from time to time. I am sure all hon. members will agree that the two small but very important amendments which I have the honour to present to the house at this time represent an essential forward step in providing the territories with orderly and effective administration.
In concluding this statement on second reading, I should like to point out that the hon. member for Montmagny-L'Islet last night asked about several matters which were not covered by these amendments. I should like to inform the house that the department had a list of six amendments ready last spring for presentation at some

Northwest Territories Act session of this parliament. As hon. members are aware, the session commencing on October 14 was viewed as an emergency session to deal with such matters as pensions for the aged and disabled, aid to agriculture, and other things.


Jean Lesage: The South Saskatchewan dam?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Precisely. We asked the department if they would consider naming the amendments which were most important, and we would consider introducing the others at some future date. I hope this explanation will make it clear to the house that these changes are important and necessary, particularly the one advancing the right of the territorial council to borrow money. This puts this territory on an equal footing with the other territory and, as I pointed out in my remarks last night, is one step further toward self government.


Mr. M. A. Hardie (Mackenzie River):: Mr. Speaker, last night when I was speaking on the resolution I mentioned that I thought this bill would provide for the territorial council borrowing money from the federal government. I find today, on reading the bill, that the council is authorized to borrow money from any source. The minister is well aware of the fact that the federal government has control of the natural resources of the Northwest Territories, and as a result the Northwest Territories are in a very weak position when it comes to borrowing money.
I should like the minister to clear up one point. Will government policy be to continue, as in the past, to lend money to the territorial governments at the low interest rates at which the federal government can borrow? My point is that if the territorial council is expected to borrow money on the open market at interest rates of up to 6.5 per cent, when the federal government has control of the natural resources, the federal government may find ways of escaping its responsibility toward the Northwest Territories.
We all agree, as the minister stated, that the Northwest Territories and the Yukon have a rich potential for the development of natural resources. I do feel that the territorial council should have the privilege, as in the past, of borrowing from the federal government. Why should we in the Northwest Territories allow the federal government of Canada to escape the responsibilities it owes us as a result of the control the federal government exercises over our natural resources? I think all of us from the territories are interested in a greater degree of self government, but our interest is not so great
[Mr. Hamilton (Qu'Appelle) .1

that we would allow the federal government to escape its responsibilities in any way.


Jean Lesage: Mr. Speaker, I should like to repeat what I said last night, that this legislation had been prepared and approved in principle by the previous administration. I am happy to say that this is another step forward toward the accomplishment of our aim, which is full provincial status for both the Northwest Territories and the Yukon in the years to come.
By the way, sir, I might say I am happy to notice that the new member for Yukon has been appointed already as unofficial parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: If the minister speaks now he will close the debate.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: A question has been asked by the hon. member for Mackenzie River, and I think I can assure him that the federal government will continue to follow the practice followed in connection with the Yukon territorial government. For some time they have had the right to borrow money, but in practice it is very difficult for them to borrow in the ordinary money markets. They do have to come to the federal government, and they do get special consideration. If the hon. member inquires into the interest rates they pay I think he will appreciate the significance of what I have just said.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Courtemanche in the chair.
On clause 1-Further legislative powers of commissioner in council.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Could the minister explain this system? From whom would the commissioner normally borrow? Would it be from the government of Canada or from one of the lending companies? What is the procedure with respect to the commissioner lending money to the municipalities and school districts in the territory; how are those loans made, and how are they secured?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: The Yukon government have had the power to borrow money for some time, and they have found it difficult, as a territory, to borrow money. If you substitute the words "provincial government" you will understand the section. They borrow money the same as a provincial government, except that we have control of the natural resources. In so far as the Yukon

is concerned, the federal government has usually been the source of their funds for borrowing. In other words, they have not been able to get funds successfully from other sources. Legally they can go out in the money markets and float provincial bonds if they so desire, but in practice they tend to come to the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources to see what financial arrangements we can make.
In so far as the Northwest Territories are concerned, they have not had the power to borrow, so we have had to work out an arrangement by which money was advanced for schools. A large proportion of the cost of schools has been borne by the federal government by reason of the fact the federal government has full responsibility in the Northwest Territories for the education of Eskimos and Indians, and the territorial government pays us back a certain proportion as a result of their responsibility for the proportion of white children in the territory. We have come to the stage where we give them the right to borrow and run their educational function as a province would run it. Does that answer the hon. member's question?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Yes.


The Chairman:: Shall clause 1 carry?
Mr. Hardier In reply to the last question asked by the hon. member for Kootenay West the minister said the practice in the Yukon has been to borrow money. But in actual fact is it not true that the Northwest Territories have been borrowing money from the federal * treasury to the same extent as the Yukon, but that this bill will make simpler the mechanics of the administration of such loans from the Department of Finance? Is that not all this bill is for, namely just to simplify the method of borrowing money from the federal government?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Not quite. This is to set up the system. At the present time when they borrow money they do so by ordinance. This is to give them the right, in the same way a provincial legislature would have the right, so they are able-in this case the commissioner in council-to go ahead and borrow money as an organization just as a province may borrow money; it is to make it part of governmental technique. I think you might call it simplification, but actually it goes much further in giving them the constitutional power to borrow as an institution of government.


Solon Earl Low: I wonder whether I might ask the minister what kind of instrument is used as security for those loans. Is it a treasury bill of some sort? If so, just how is it issued?
96698-255J
Northwest Territories Act


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I tnink the usual technique is that they issue debentures, the same as a province would issue them. They also issue promissory notes, which I think is a provincial technique. Those are backed by the pledge of territorial revenues, or in the case of a school district they would be backed up by the pledge of school district revenues. It is the usual type of security.


Jean Lesage: Of course the minister will agree that the borrowing will be from the federal government as in the case of the Yukon. The guarantee is very simple. Each year the government of Canada pays hundreds of thousands of dollars to both territories under the fiscal arrangements. The security is there all right.


Solon Earl Low: What was of interest to me was the type of instrument that is deposited rather than the security or in other words whether it is a treasury bill or whether it is a sort of debenture that is agreed upon, or what not?


Jean Lesage: In the case of the Yukon last year or two years ago, it was an ordinance of the Yukon territorial council approved by an order in council of the federal government. Those were the instruments.


Solon Earl Low: What I should like to find out is this. When an advance is made under the authority of an ordinance of the territorial council, what sort of instrument is deposited with the federal treasury in recognition of the fact that the advance has been made?


Jean Lesage: The order in council.


Solon Earl Low: What visible evidence is there that it has been made?


Jean Lesage: The ordinance and the order in council are both the evidence and the instrument.


Solon Earl Low: But in all cases of such arrangements with the provinces, treasury bills are deposited by the provincial government with the federal treasury.


Jean Lesage: That is so.


Solon Earl Low: And they are the instruments that are the visible evidence of the advance.


Mervyn Arthur Hardie: I think the guarantee should be that the federal government have control of our natural resources and they are backing the loan.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
On clause 2-Appointment of deputy police magistrates.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Clause 2 reads in part as follows:
(3) The governor in council may appoint one or more persons who are barristers or advocates of
4030	HOUSE OF
Northwest Territories Act at least three years' standing at the bar of any province to be deputy police magistrates,-
My question is this. Why is there in the Northwest Territories Act a requirement that in order to act as deputy police magistrates persons must have been barristers or advocates with at least three years' standing, in view of the fact that such a requirement is not found with respect to the appointment of magistrates and deputy police magistrates in the provinces?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: The only answer I can give to the hon. member is that this requirement is the same as it is for the Yukon. I suppose they want to make sure they are familiar with the laws in the Yukon and in the Territory, as the case may be. If you send a man that distance into the territories you want to make certain he has some knowledge on which he is basing his judgment.


Solon Earl Low: I should like to ask the minister also what happens in the case of a re-loan of any moneys that have been borrowed from the federal government by the council or the commissioner in council. Does the council take debentures? Does it buy debentures from school districts, or does it merely make the loan to the school district on the security of the note?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I think this really comes under the other section.


Jean Lesage: Yes; that section has been passed.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: However, I think the answer is the same as the one I gave the committee previously. We have been accepting debentures of the territorial government or promissory notes of the district where they are small things, in the case of small operations of a school district. These are the instruments that I presume the hon. member is trying to find out about.


Solon Earl Low: Yes.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: That is what has been done in the past, and I suppose it will continue to be done in the future.


Solon Earl Low: Do local authorities like school districts and so on have power under the act to go into the money markets of the world and borrow, as by selling their debentures?


Jean Lesage: No; not without approval.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I am informed that the municipal authorities have power to borrow under the ordinances under this act, that is the ordinances of the territorial government. The municipality is still the creature of the territorial government. In this


case the matter is a little confusing because we play such a large part in it. However, the situation is the same as in the provincial set-up.


Henri Courtemanche: Shall clause 2 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported.
Mr. Speaker:: When shall the bill be read a third time?


Jean Lesage: By leave, now.


Stanley Howard Knowles: By
leave.


Mr. Speaker:: By leave, now.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: the third reading of the bill.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.



ALBERTA-NORTHWEST TERRITORIES APPROVAL OF BOUNDARY AS SURVEYED AND MARKED

Paul Comtois: the second reading of Bill No. 26, respecting the boundary between the province of Alberta and the Northwest Territories.
He said: Mr. Speaker, to explain the reason for the presentation of this bill to the house at this time it is necessary to refer to the Alberta act, which declares the northern boundary of the province of Alberta to be the parallel of the sixtieth degree of north latitude. Further, the Northwest Territories Act declares the same parallel to be the southern boundary of the Northwest Territories.
It is obvious that although the common boundary between the province and the territory is clearly described in these acts, the boundary could not be seen or recognized by a person walking on the ground or flying over it, since no mark existed on the ground.
With respect to the northern boundary of Alberta, the need for marking the boundary on the ground was first felt about 1921, when problems of administration of game, timber and mining regulations and of granting lands in the vicinity of the boundary made it necessary to survey a portion of it near Slave river. About 36 miles were surveyed in 1924 and 1925, under the direction of the surveyor general of dominion lands.
The need for further survey did not arise until 1949. It was then that the intensive search for petroleum extended to the boundary vicinity, and it was agreed between the provincial and federal governments to establish a boundary commission for the purpose

of proceeding with the survey and monumen-tation of the remainder of the boundary. Accordingly the privy council, with the concurrence of the province of Alberta, established a commission consisting of the surveyor general of dominion lands and the director of surveys of Alberta and charged it with the completion of the survey. The commission was required to report on the survey to the parliament of Canada and the government of the province of Alberta.
The commission thus established has now completed its task. The survey was begun in 1950 and completed in 1954. Following completion of the survey the commission prepared its report dated September 1, 1956, which includes an atlas showing the position of the surveyed boundary and the monuments which have been placed on the ground to mark it. This document has been tabled very recently in this house. The commission has included the work done in 1924 and 1925 in its report, and it therefore contains the history and technical data concerning the survey of the entire northern boundary of the province.
The problem now facing us is that of declaring finally and definitely that the survey monuments placed on the ground by the department of the interior and the commission to mark the boundary shall henceforth in fact mark the boundary. Under the authority of the British North America Act of 1871, and following the procedure established in the cases of other boundaries in Canada, it is now considered necessary and proper to introduce legislation in the parliament of Canada to confirm the boundary between Alberta and the Northwest Territories as surveyed and marked on the ground, as I have already explained.
A bill of consent respecting the adoption of the Alberta-Northwest Territories boundary as surveyed by the Canadian department of interior in 1924 and 1925 and by the Alberta-Northwest Territories boundary commission between 1950 and 1954 has already been passed and assented to by the legislature of the province of Alberta. All that remains is for this house to enact the bill now before us.


Mr. Armand Dumas (Villeneuve):: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill, as the minister has stated, is to approve the boundary between the province of Alberta and the Northwest Territories as surveyed and marked on the ground.
The bill presents no difficulty, because I think one of the interested parties, the province of Alberta, has already passed an act, as was mentioned by the minister, to approve this boundary. It is left for us to do the same thing.
Alberta-Northwest Territories
This work was done not very long ago, and maybe this would be a good opportunity for us to pay a tribute to the surveyors who travelled far inland to survey the boundaries and who have been responsible for the successful completion of this task. I see on reading the report that two surveyors were appointed to do this work, one for the first part in 1924 and 1925, and one for the second part between 1950 and 1955. Each of them did a good job, and it is appropriate that they should be mentioned here in this house.
As I said, the bill presents no difficulty and we do not intend to delay its passage. However, I would ask one question of the minister. Maybe he could tell us what was the total cost of establishing this boundary, and how that cost is apportioned between the federal government and the provincial government.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member
for Villeneuve has indicated, this bill seems to present no difficulty and I am sure the house is ready to pass it in a very brief space of time. We should like to join with the hon. member for Villeneuve in paying tribute to the work of the engineers and surveyors who go into the distant parts of Canada and carry out this work for us.
The question I should like to ask the minister is this. Can he tell us the status of the boundary between the Northwest Territories and the province of Saskatchewan and the province of Manitoba? I note that in the Northwest Territories Act the boundary line is stipulated as the sixtieth parallel of north latitude, and I gather this is now being defined more clearly in terms of markings on the ground between Alberta and the Northwest Territories. My question is, what is the status of the boundary on the ground between Saskatchewan and the Northwest Territories and between Manitoba and the Northwest Territories?


Paul Comtois: I will answer that when
we are in committee.


Armand Dumas: I should like to have an answer to my question, if possible.


Paul Comtois: Mr. Speaker, I can answer
the hon. gentleman's question right away. The total cost was $210,000, shared by the dominion government and the province on a 50-50 basis. The amount paid by the federal government is, in fact, $110,000, which is $5,000 more than half the sum I mentioned, but at the start of the operation there was no agreement between the province and the dominion government with regard to the cost and the dominion government absorbed the

Alberta-Northwest Territories whole amount incurred at that time. Later, when the complete survey was made, both governments shared the cost equally.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Courtemanche in the chair.
On clause 1-Short Title.
Stanley Howard Knowles: I wonder if the minister is going to answer my question.


Paul Comtois: I will answer it in a moment. In the meantime, Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for Villeneuve for his words of appreciation for the survey that has been made. I have read the whole report of the expedition, and it was more than a hunting trip. Our officers had a great deal of trouble and many mishaps were encountered. These were finally overcome and after several years they finally completed their work. I certainly appreciate the kind words of the hon. member.
I am informed that the survey between Saskatchewan and the Northwest Territories will be finished this winter.


Solon Earl Low: With the ground markers as well?


Paul Comtois: Yes.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What about the boundary line between Manitoba and the Northwest Territories?


Paul Comtois: The survey is under way now, and will be in operation next summer and next winter.


Mr. Barnett:: Perhaps the minister could
also tell us about the situation on the northern boundary of British Columbia, and then we will have the whole story.


Paul Comtois: I understand that the work will be finished next summer.
Clause 1 agreed to.
On clause 2-Boundary declared.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, clause 2 says in part:
-in so far as the boundary so described increases, diminishes or otherwise alters the limits of the province of Alberta or the Northwest Territories, their limits are increased, diminished or otherwise altered accordingly.
Does this do anything or is this just legal gobbledegook?


Paul Comtois: That is the customary legal phrasing. We just followed the usual form in this matter.


Jean Lesage: But it does have an effect in this instance. Was there not a difference of about 15 feet at Fort Smith?


Paul Comtois: There was a very small
difference.


Jean Lesage: Yes, a difference of 15 feet. It was a small difference, but it should be noted.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is
that why the change is being made just before the election?


Mr. Pickersgill:: It might affect the vote.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Bill reported.


Mr. Speaker:: When shall the bill be read a third time?


Some hon. Members:: Now.


Some hon. Members:: By leave.


Paul Comtois: the third reading of the bill.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.



INDIAN ACT


Edmund Davie Fulton: the second reading of Bill No. 246, to amend the Indian Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I should make a short statement as to the circumstances leading to the introduction of the bill and its nature and purpose. The purpose of the proposed legislation is to revoke thi authority which the registrar of Indians has under section 7 of the Indian Act to delete the name of a person from the Indian register and thereby deprive that person of his Indian status on the ground that he has received halfbreed lands or money scrip, or is a descendant of such a recipient.
During the years 1871 to 1910 the government of Canada through the medium of various treaties arranged for the surrender by Indians residing in what are now the prairie provinces of any Indian claim over vast tracts of land in the area. Among other things the treaties provided for the setting apart of reservations for the Indians and the making of annual payments to them of what is commonly known as treaty money.
At the time the treaties were being negotiated persons of mixed blood, usually referred to as halfbreeds, also claimed an interest in the lands being surrendered, and they were given the choice of becoming treaty Indians or receiving an allotment of crown lands or money scrip. The lands so allotted were labelled halfbreed lands and the money scrip was merely a transferrable credit note which could be applied on the purchase of dominion

lands. A person who took halfbreed lands or money scrip relinquished on behalf of himself and his descendants any right to be recognized as a treaty Indian in the future.
The unfortunate fact is that many recipients of halfbreed lands and money scrip never settled on the land as intended but sold their land or transferred their scrip. These sales or transfers were often made to nonIndian speculators who took unfair advantage of the halfbreeds. One historian reports that:
Scrip for 160 acres was sold in many cases for a few dollars or even a few bottles of whiskey.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Sometimes just one.


Edmund Davie Fulton: After having disposed of their land or scrip and the proceeds therefrom, many of these halfbreeds found themselves in dire poverty and unable to provide for themselves in the white community. Consequently they drifted back to Indian reserves where they were allowed to remain, although not legally entitled to do so. Over the years they and their families came to be recognized and treated as de facto treaty Indians.
Section 7 of the Indian Act provides that the registrar may at any time delete from a band list or general list, which together make up the Indian register, the name of any person who is not entitled to have his name included in that list. The section is quite short, Mr. Speaker, and I think it would be advisable to read it so it may be on the record in this context:
7. (1) The registrar may at any time add to or delete from a band list or a general list the name of any person who, in accordance with the provisions of this act, is entitled or not entitled, as the case may be, to have his name included in that list.
(2) The Indian register shall indicate the date on which each name was added thereto or deleted therefrom.
The persons who are not entitled to be registered as Indians are designated in section 12 of the act, and include a person who has received or has been allotted halfbreed lands or money scrip and his descendants. We are today asking the approval of parliament to amend section 12 on the ground that a person who is today registered as an Indian should not be subject to deprivation of his Indian status because of the fact he received or was allotted halfbreed lands or money scrip or is a descendant of such a person. Those recipients of halfbreed lands and money scrip and their descendants who are now registered as Indians are for all practical purposes in the same category as other Indians. They have lived as Indians on reserves for all or a major part of their lives, and it is our feeling that they should not now be subject to being removed from the
Indian Act
list, as has been the case frequently in the past, on the ground of a protest being made alleging that they are not entitled to be on the band register.
It will be appreciated, of course, that this is of particular interest to Indians on the prairies, and the house will recall the incident, if I may describe it as that, in connection with the Hobbema reserve a year or two ago. That incident particularly, along with others, raised very grave misgivings on the part of Indians as to whether or not any one of them might at any time be challenged and subject to removal from the band list.
I do not think it is necessary at this time to go into the question of whether or not those affairs would be justified in the light of administrative policy, but the fact is that so long as the act remains in its present form an Indian could be challenged and his right to be registered as an Indian, though the name of that individual might have been on the list since the time of his birth to date, could be brought into question.
This I believe will greatly facilitate their acceptance of the general policy with regard to Indians, and I believe, in order to gain their confidence, it will be a most useful and important amendment to the Indian Act. In addition I believe it is something to which the Indians are entitled.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the acting minister on this amendment, and to congratulate him even more warmly on the way in which he has produced it.
I have no desire whatsoever to revive any of the controversies which I hope are now over with respect to some incidents which I think perhaps pained me even more than they did the persons concerned. I must say I do not think this amendment could have any practical effect but I do admit, as the minister has said, that there is a theoretical possibility that the registrar might, acting on his own, remove one of these people from the list. It seems to me that the effect of other clauses which provide for protest is now spent, and therefore no one except the registrar could initiate such action under the law.
I would hope that any minister we could ever contemplate holding this position would dismiss any registrar who would so act, but there is a theoretical possibility there and it ought to be removed. I am very glad to see it is being removed, and, as I say, I want to congratulate the government on doing so and doing it in this non-controversial way.

Indian Act
I am sure the house will give me its Indulgence tor a few moments, since the minister himself raised the question, to say something about these incidents which took place a year ago; and 1 hope I can say this also in a non-controversial way. Perhaps I would not have been inclined to do so if I had not read something which was sent to me for my edification, namely an article which appeared in the Albertan of Calgary on January 24. This article is by the associate editor, and revives these controversies.
I think perhaps the minister will not think I am trespassing on the time of the house if I recall very briefly just what was the problem. The problem was that I was faced with an act which I had no share whatsoever in enacting; in fact it was enacted before I became a minister or a member of parliament. This legislation imposed upon the registrar and the minister certain powers of a quasi-judicial nature, very similar to the particular case raised by the hon. member for Kootenay West the other day in another context, where the minister explained his position and where, he will remember, I took the view that he was adopting absolutely the right attitude.
It may have been politically wrong on my part, in fact I am quite willing to admit that I probably acted with political ineptitude in this matter. I probably could have got away with an action which was not provided for under the law. It might have been possible for me to do so and indeed perhaps I should just remind the house what was provided by the law. The law provided for protests and for a certain type of appeal to the courts in the case of one of the parties being dissatisfied, but the appeal was not to be made by the minister or the registrar; the appeal was to be made by the parties.
I rose in this chamber over and over again under protests from the hon. gentlemen who were then on this side of the house, some of whom I think are still on this side, and who suggested I was not doing my duty because I was strictly adhering to the law. I said over and over again that if only a party would appeal I felt there was no doubt that the law, as parliament had enacted it, would be carried out; and it seems to me that was the proper attitude for a minister to take, not to attempt to put himself above the law.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is no doubt that there are a good many things I did, when I occupied the position as minister which the hon. member now occupies as acting minister, which were the subject of controversy in this country, but there was no controversy more bitter than this. Perhaps I should not say bitter, because I refused to enter into

any controversy; I simply "took it", because it seemed to me it was the only proper thing to do, and that ultimately I was going to have to act on this matter so meantime I should not prejudice the case by any premature statement.
I am happy to say, Mr. Speaker, that I did finally, through a friend, prevail upon one of the parties to make an appeal, and as soon as it came before the courts it turned out in the way I expected all the time it would have turned out. But it might have turned out differently, and I am going to take the house into my confidence and say what the minister probably knows, that if the case had turned out differently it was the intention of the previous government to ask parliament to correct by means of legislation the effect of the act.
I think it would have been quite unfair, however, for me-though I was pressed very hard to do so-to say so while the case was under review and the matter was before the house. I may have been quite wrong. I know my political friends in the province of Alberta thought I was very wrong, and they thought I had done a great injury to them in taking the attitude which I took.
I am not going to bore the house by reading this article but I see it is said here that "one man by his arrogance perpetrated this thing", and maybe it looked like arrogance because I was silent, but I thought I was doing precisely what the law required me to do and that I was doing my duty.
I think the minister will now realize that with respect to the portfolio he holds, where human matters are so much involved, situations such as this do arise from time to time, and they do make the discharge of the duties under that portfolio at times a little painful.
At one o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at 2.30 p.m.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, when we adjourned for lunch I was making one or two very brief references to the incident in connection with the dispute among the Hobbema Indians a year ago. I was attempting to explain the attitude I took at that time, and I said before lunch and will repeat now, perhaps because there are other hon. members who will think that at times penitence is good for the soul, that I am not at all proud of my record as a politician in that regard. I do think as a politician that, with hindsight, I could have handled the matter rather differently and perhaps had less protest, less fuss about this incident.


Mr. Cardiff:: Do you think you have improved any since?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I leave that to the people who have to judge me every so often, and the hon. gentleman's friends apparently are going to provide another opportunity fairly soon, if we can believe the rumours.


Mr. Small:: Confession is good for the soul.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was trying to explain that I find it easier to admit that I did something which possibly was not expedient than I would find it to admit that I did something that was morally wrong. I took the stand I did because it did seem to me that under the law-and this was the way I looked at the matter at that time-it was not proper for the minister to intervene in the legal process between two sets of people which was provided under a statute of parliament. As I say, I took the punishment and I did not complain and am not complaining now. However, it is not one of those things that are among my pleasantest recollections of my period as minister.
I think that, with the hindsight we now have, all of us could have made a better provision than was made in the statute before I was in parliament in 1951, the provision for establishing proper band lists, something which had never existed before at any time, and making sure that those band lists were accurate. But I have no real criticism to offer of the parliament before the last one which enacted this statute, nor of any of the hon. members who served on the committee which considered the matter; because, although some of the incidents like the Hobbema one and several others perhaps might have been handled better, I do think the results achieved by putting section 9 into the act and by getting proper band lists established for all time to come have been a very great achievement that is a credit to parliament, the department and everyone concerned with the matter.
The minister was kind enough to answer a couple of questions I put on the order paper during the course of the session because I could not lay my hands on my own records of what had happened under section 9, and in view of the fact that this process is now coming to an end I think it might be useful to have these figures on the record. I asked this question:
How many names have been definitely removed from Indian band lists as a result of action taken under section 9 of the Indian Act, since its coming into force?
The answer as of November 26, 1957, was that up to that time the number taken off was 21. The figure may be slightly different since. I also asked this question:
Indian Act
How many names have been definitely added to the band lists in the same circumstances?
The answer was 244. That is more than ten times as many.
How many cases are still in dispute under section 9, subsection 3 of the Indian Act?
The number was 5.
Are there any other questions as to the Indian status of an individual still in dispute and, if so, how many?
The answer was 14. If the minister has the information available, perhaps when he replies, or later on the estimates-I do not want to hold up the bill at all-he would explain what has happened to those cases in dispute. I would hope that before this legislation is actually proclaimed those disputed cases might be cleared up so the whole thing would be over and done with once and for all.
A little later I asked another question, when I realized that I had not got all the information I was seeking by my first question. I asked how many names were added to the Indian band lists by the registrar pursuant to section 7 of the present act since it came into force,	and	the number given	in	theanswer was 1,025. Therefore it would appear that as a result of this process of getting good band	lists	that will	be good	for	alltime, that	will	establish	certainty	in	the
minds of the Indians as to whether or not their status is protected, as a result of what was done by parliament in 1951 we have added nearly 1,300 names to the lists and removed 21.
It is true that in the process some unfortunate things happened that perhaps would have happened	anyway,	because when a
situation of long standing comes to be resolved and there are disputes between the individuals involved it is often very hard to settle them to everybody's satisfaction and in complete harmony. But I think those people who served in the parliament before the last one and who took the responsibility for enacting the present Indian Act, also my friend Mr. Harris who administered the act for the greater part of the period when this was done, and perhaps even myself to some very small degree, did a useful piece of work in getting these band lists into a form in which the minister now feels they can be guaranteed for the future.
I want to say, sir, I do think that not only this step but any other step by which we can reassure the Indians, to whom in my opinion we have a special moral obligation that we do not have to any other inhabitants of this country, that their rights will be protected should be taken.

Indian Act
The minister recalls perhaps, as I do, that there is another section of the act which causes some concern and some anxiety to the Indians. I believe that, as is the case with this section, there is no intrinsic reason for this anxiety. I refer to section 112, under which parliament provided for compulsory enfranchisement of Indians. I am not going to suggest to the minister at this late stage in the session that he should amend this bill to do anything about that. But I do suggest to the minister or to whoever may be his successor that the next time any amendments to the Indian Act are under consideration we ought to consider carefully whether that section should not be taken out of the act. I stated publicly in this house that so long as I was minister it would never be used. I would hope the minister might feel inclined to make a similar statement, because I think it would be helpful.
There is one other point I might raise, and that is this. When the Indian Act was last under review in the house there was a great deal of argument about appeals to the courts.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps the minister was going to remind the hon. member that we are about to deal with the estimates of his department. Have the estimates relating to Indian matters been considered?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, Mr. Speaker, I am quite out of order, and I shall desist at once. I might make an observation on this point on the estimates. It is not a point about which there would be any controversy.
All I want to say in conclusion, sir, is that I think this is good legislation. I welcome it, and I hope my friends will support it.


Mr. A. R. Smith (Calgary South):: Mr. Speaker, I have very little to add to what has been said, but I should like to commend the government for introducing this amendment. This incident to which reference has been made is one upon which we look back with perhaps not quite the same concern we had at that time. I believe most of us will agree that the circumstances surrounding the purchase and sale of scrip had many unfortunate aspects in the early history of our country. This incident received more than a little notoriety. I do not intend to enter into a controversy about it but I thought I detected rather a note of apology, graciously offered, by the former minister. I think he fairly stated the position in which he was and about which those of us who were concerned about the matter took rather serious exception.

My reason for rising was to pay special tribute to the many men and women who rallied to the support of the Hobbema Indians, as is the privilege of any citizen. They brought this matter to the attention of their respective members, who in turn pressed the case before the government. I feel that perhaps we have lost sight of the fact that there was a special significance in the Hobbema incident by reason of the fact that the lands on which these Indians reside are becoming of greater value because of their mineral wealth. Hobbema was only one of a series of events which, while not numerous, nevertheless contained an element of moral risk which must be corrected, as was pointed out by both the present minister and the hon. gentleman he succeeded.
I would have liked to make several suggestions for other amendments to this act, but rather than take the time of this house I have made those suggestions personally to the minister. I believe this is perhaps the most important amendment that has to be made at this point to bring to a close a rather regrettable chapter in our relations with the Indians.
I believe we will have to go some distance yet in improving the Indian Act of 1951. There are three amendments which at some future session of the house I would be happy to recommend to the minister.
As I resume my seat, may I again congratulate the government upon fulfilling what was really another one of their pledges. This is a good piece of legislation, and it is unquestionably going to receive the wholehearted support of the members of this house.


Frederick George Hahn: Mr. Speaker, I would feel somewhat remiss in my duty at this time if I were not to say a word with respect to this amendment. I make these observations on behalf of the hon. member for Wetaskiwin (Mr. Thomas) who, as hon. members are aware, is unable to be with us because of illness in his family. Hon. members who were here last session will recall that the hon. member for Westaskiwin did raise this question in the house on more than one occasion last year. I am sure if he were with us today he would be one of the first to commend the government upon the action it has taken.
I am very happy to see that the former minister of citizenship and immigration has indicated that the measure has his wholehearted support. As I recall, at the time the incident occurred the hon. member was rather slow in giving the same measure of sympathy with respect to this matter that he has now indicated. As he said earlier, hindsight is often much better, and often

one can look about and see for himself that there is a need for action. I congratulate him upon this new viewpoint with respect to this matter.
Having said that, I wish to conclude by saying to the minister that I thank him for seeing to it that legislation has been introduced correcting the situation which existed before, and I trust that other matters with respect to the Indians will receive the same consideration this one has been given.


Mr. H. A. Bryson (Humboldi-Melforl):: May
I,	on behalf of this group, say to the minister that we whole-heartedly welcome the short statement he made when introducing this bill. We commend the government for the step they have taken. I have always been one of those who believe that ultimately we will help solve our Indian problems by making a real attempt at integration. Integration will only come about if we make a greater effort to restore the confidence and understanding that our Indian people have lost. In the past our record has been rather deplorable, because we have exploited the Indians of this country.
We welcome this measure as a step toward restoring the confidence in us which the Indians have lost. I believe that the restoration of this confidence will be the keystone in the development of a positive program aimed at eventual integration. In this way we will solve the very vexing and embarrassing problems which have been a blot on our concept of morality.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker,-


Mr. Speaker:: I must inform the house that when the minister speaks, he will close the debate.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a word or two in reply to some of the comments that have been made. First of all I should like to express to hon. gentlemen who have spoken appreciation for the support they have indicated for the legislation, and to express my gratification that it still appears that there is complete agreement on the basic approach to the problem of bringing the Indians into full and equal status as citizens along with the rest of the people of the country. There may be differences as to the methods to be followed, but I take it that it is safe to say there is complete unanimity as to the basic objective.
If this bill serves its purpose as one step in re-establishing the confidence of the Indians in the attitude and intent of the Canadian people and their government, it will do a great service in realizing that objective.
Indian Act
It is, of course, not the only measure we have in mind to amend the Indian Act. There are others which are under consideration. There is the matter of the right to appeal mentioned by the hon. member for Calgary South, the question of section 12, and other matters which I will not specify. There are quite a number of them. It is not our suggestion that this is the only bill that is required to improve or to amend the Indian Act. However, there are a number of problems in connection with such amendments as to the method to be followed, the consultation beforehand, and so on; and it becomes- and indeed it should be-a major undertaking to make any substantial change in the act because of what I believe to be the fundamental requirement, namely to obtain the understanding and the approval of the Indians as to what is being done.
We felt that with respect to this amendment there was already an indication of such complete unanimity on the part of the Indians that it could be proceeded with at this session without further delay. But the changes I have mentioned and others will require lengthier study and more time to deal with them. I just wanted to make it clear, however, that we do not say this is all that needs to be done. I thank hon. gentlemen for their support.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Courtemanche in the chair.
On clause 1-Exception.
John Whitney Pickersgill: I just have one brief
observation to make. I should like to commend the minister for what he said just now about consulting the Indians before making any substantial amendments to the act. I think one of the most useful things Mr. Harris did when he undertook the major reformation that will always, I hope, be associated with his name was to establish what was virtually an Indian parliament in this country. Before any amendments of any substantial character whatsoever are made, I think it is desirable to get the views of the Indians all across Canada.


Mr. Zapliiny:: I have a question to ask the minister at this point. It is possible that by a careful reading of the regulations under the act this matter might become clear, but I do not have the regulations before me at the present time. Perhaps it would be useful if the minister would explain what is considered to be a descendant. This amendment refers to persons who are now registered and to their descendants. I know that in the past there has been at times some difficulty;

Indian Act
there has not been unanimity in the interpretation of "descendant". It might be useful if the minister now could put on the record what is the correct interpretation with regard to the term "descendant". In other words, to what point can a person be considered to be a descendant of an Indian within the meaning of the Indian Act?


Henri Courtemanche: Shall clause 1 carry?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The officials are just arriving. I should like to be certain of my answer before I give it.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I commend the minister for that.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think the word "descendant" is capable of a fairly wide meaning and applies to descendants through either the male of the female branch of the family. That is why the word "descendant" is used rather than the word "child" or some word capable of a narrower meaning.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: That is exactly the reason I asked that question. In the interpretation section of the act there is to be found a definition of the word "child" which reads: " 'child' includes a legally adopted Indian child". Then it goes on with other descriptions. What I am thinking of in particular is this. From time to time Indians within the meaning of this act will marry persons of other racial origins. Then, of course, this process goes on until the descendants become-for want of a better description perhaps I can put it in this way-less and less Indian in the full meaning of the term "Indian". Is there a point at which a descendant of an Indian can cease to be an Indian within the meaning of this act, or does that process go on without limit so long as the child is registered as the child of an Indian?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I now see the hon. member's point. For the purposes of the act in general -and if the hon. member looks at section 11 he will see that the matter is dealt with-the guiding principle is that descendancy is traced through the male line, through the father. In the case of legitimate children, descendancy is traced through the father, but in the case of illegitimate children descendancy may be traced through the mother. If the father was an Indian then the child is an Indian, and so on down through the generations. In the case of an illegitimate child, if the mother was an Indian then the child is entitled to be registered as an Indian. That point is made clear by section 11, subsections (c), (d) and (e).


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister, of course, realizes that in the case of illegitimate children there may be a protest within a year 
after the birth of the child to the effect that the father is a white person. If that protest is sustained the child is not an Indian. But if the father is unknown or is an Indian, the child is an Indian. That was the amendment that was made in 1956.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: In order to clear this up, do I understand then that in the case of descendants of a male Indian there is no limit to the process that could go on, with the descendants still remaining Indian, but that descendants of a female Indian cease to be Indians if their father is a non-Indian?


Edmund Davie Fulton: That is, generally speaking, correct. When the mother marries a nonIndian she is enfranchised, so her child is not entitled to be registered.


Mr. Cameron:: Perhaps I might have
further clarification of that point. The minister says if an Indian woman marries a white man she ceases to be an Indian. But suppose she does not marry the white man, yet has a child by him. What is her status then, and that of the child?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The revised statute in section 11, subparagraph (e) provides that an illegitimate child of a female Indian may in effect be protested at any time within 11 months. So the illegitimate child of an Indian woman and a white father may be registered as an Indian, but if the band or anybody in the band protested the situation would have to be investigated, and if it was established that the father of the child was a white man the child would not be entitled to be registered.


Donald Cameron: And in the case of an Indian man marrying a white woman, there would be no objection to his child?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No, he is an Indian by birth and entitled to be added to the list.


Donald Cameron: Is that not making fish of one and flesh of the other?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The point is that if an Indian woman has an illegitimate child by a white man it becomes a question of fact whether or not the child is on the reserve, and whether his addition to the Indian list is protested by the members of the band. This provision was made, as I understand it, so that if the child were to live off the reserve as a white child it could not be claimed later that the child was entitled to be registered.


Mr. Mclvor:: Mr. Chairman, we have a reserve in our constituency. I can remember our chief criticizing the white leaders, and as I was an Indian chief myself I agreed with him. The one thing they do want is

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
for their views to be taken into consideration. Not everything the Indians do is good, but the curse of our reserves are the white man and the liquor business, and I commend the minister very much, as others have done, for giving the Indians the opportunity of having their say when new legislation is brought in.


Mr. Fisher:: Mr. Chairman, I should just like to raise one small point with regard to definitions. There is at present a campaign to secure the adoption of more Indian orphans by white families. What is the ruling about Indian children who are adopted by white parents, and vice versa?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I do not like to raise a point of order affecting anyone on this side of the house, but since the estimates are coming up immediately after this, and since this question lies completely outside the ambit of the bill, perhaps the hon. member would not mind waiting.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Bill reported.
Mr. Speaker:: When shall the bill be read the third time?


Some hon. Members:: Now.


Stanley Howard Knowles: By
leave.


Edmund Davie Fulton: the third reading of the bill.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Courtemanche in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

[Stage Direction]
61. Departmental administration, $604,729.
Mr. Winch:: Mr. Chairman, there is one matter of policy with regard to which I should appreciate hearing some comment from the Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, and I hope when he comes to make his statement he will do so bearing in mind his position as Minister of Justice. I have in mind a question of policy which was raised with the previous minister of citizenship and immigration and even with the minister who held that office before him. I may say that in my opinion, at least, no satisfactory reply was ever given with regard to it.
The question I should like to direct to the minister's attention is this. As Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, does he believe that a person who makes application under our immigration laws to enter Canada,
or a person who is an immigrant landed in Canada in due conformity with all our laws, should be denied his application for permission to land, or for a certificate of citizenship, without explanation after such an application has been properly made?
We have been told time after time and year after year that it is not the policy of the department to make known the reasons why applications are turned down, or the issue of a certificate of citizenship is denied. It has always been my understanding of British justice or Canadian justice that no individual can be charged without knowing the charge, that no individual can be tried without being heard, and that no individual in Canada can be found guilty without knowing the charge, without being heard or without knowing anything about it.
This situation as it relates to immigration first came to my notice about four years ago. A large family in Italy consisting of a mother, father and numerous sons and daughters most of whom were married made application for landing rights in Canada, and each was granted a visa. A day or so before the boat sailed the youngest son was advised that he was rejected, and no reason was given for his rejection. The family left for Canada leaving the one son behind. Upon arrival in British Columbia they settled in my constituency.
I was approached and asked if I could find out why one son out of such a large family was refused the right to come to Canada. The previous minister of citizenship and immigration had an investigation made, and I thank him for it. What was the result? It was learned that the young man in question was denied the right to come to Canada because some unnamed person had told the Canadian department of immigration in Rome something against him, but it was discovered that the charge was completely groundless and without basis in fact and had been made out of spite.
That young man is now in Canada. Under the policy of the department he had a charge made against him, was found guilty and sentenced without having had the opportunity of defending himself, and in addition he and his family were unable to ascertain why he had been denied the right to come to Canada. That is only one instance of which I have knowledge, and I could cite others.
I wish now to speak about landed immigrants who have been in this country for some period of time, and by reason of residence qualifications are eligible for citizenship but are denied it when they make application. There must be a reason for their being turned down, but I am convinced that

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the reason is similar to that in the instance I just cited; because in those cases I have personally taken up the people have been granted their citizenship papers.
I want to thank the present Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration for his action on a certain case I have been handling in the past few weeks. The individual involved has now been granted his citizenship papers, but neither he nor I know why he was denied them in the first place.
Surely it is wrong that this situation should be allowed to continue. I could certainly understand that such information should not be public knowledge, but when an individual is denied the right to land in Canada or when he is denied citizenship he, his lawyer or his member of parliament should be given an explanation upon request. They should be entitled to know what charge has been made against the individual so he can enter his defence before he is tried, found guilty and sentenced without knowing the basis of the charge.
Since I have been a member of this house I have had a number of cases of both kinds, and in every case but one the charges were unfounded. As I say, the reason for their rejection should not be a matter of public knowledge, but I maintain that if the individual concerned requests the information he is entitled to receive it. I would go even further and say that if the information is requested on a confidential basis by the individual's lawyer, agent or member of parliament it should be given.
In the recent case I handled to which I have already made reference citizenship has been granted, but when I return home I know the individual concerned will ask me why he was refused citizenship when he first made application some time ago. When I was home during the Christmas recess he told me that he felt he had worked for and earned citizenship and hoped he would have it as a Christmas present. I know I must tell him that both he and I have been unsuccessful in trying to find out why his application was rejected.
I appeal to the minister in his dual capacity as Minister of Justice and Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Does he not agree that no man or woman either residing in Canada or desirous of so doing should be charged, found guilty and sentenced without having an opportunity of entering a defence and being informed of the charge?
I could speak at length on this subject, but I believe I have said enough to illustrate the situation to the minister. As the present minister has taken a greater interest this

session in certain matters than did the previous hon. gentlemen who occupied his position, I dare to hope that he will announce a change in policy in this regard in the interests of justice.


Frank Claus Christian: I last spoke on this matter on Saturday, January 25 and I wish at this time to make some further remarks. I would appreciate it very much if the Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration would enunciate to the house the policy of the government in respect of the matter of immigration generally, and further if there have been any changes in that immigration policy.
I noticed that in 1956 some 51,319 people came to Canada from the British Isles, and in the period from January 1 to September 30 the figure was 29,330 from the same British Isles. There has been, of course, a substantial drop in the figure. Furthermore I am aware of the fact that during the year 1956 some
4,000	Hungarians came to Canada, and from the period January 1 to September 30, 1957 the number was 29,330 making a total as of September 30, 1957 of 33,330 Hungarians. My information is that on the basis of an estimate only from October or November, 1956 up to the present about 36,000 Hungarians have come to this country.
I would particularly like to know what is the policy of the present government with respect to Hungarian immigration to Canada. I am not personally taking a critical position as to what has happened in the past, because my understanding and information is that the immigration of these people was based purely on humanitarian principles. However, in view of the Immigration Act, and particularly in view of section 5 of that act, certain persons are prohibited from entering this country. One such class of persons would be those who suffer from physical or mental defects; other classes would include diseased persons and persons who are members of subversive organizations. I do think perhaps in regard to the Hungarian immigration situation the lessons we have learned should necessitate officials of the government taking great care in seeing exactly what types of immigrants do come into this country, and that the tests or requirements set out in the act are strictly followed.
I would now like to comment on the matter of Indian affairs. I have noted the good that is being done by the department in so far as housing is concerned, including the building of new homes and the repairing of old ones, the matter of scholarships as an inducement to Indian people to improve their educational standards, and also the improvements which are being made by the construction of new schools.

I would now like to refer the acting minister to one matter which is referred to on page 63 of the annual report of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. This report deals with the fiscal year ending March 31, 1957, and under "land leases" the following statement is made:
New leases completed during the year numbered 552 and of 716 leases which expired, 438 were renewed.
That year, I take it, would be the year 1956, and I would like some particulars with regard to these 716 leases which expired. I would like to know whether they were all taken up either by new leases or renewed leases. In any event, what is the situation? Do some of those same leases still remain expired?
Following up this matter of leases, I would also like to comment on my understanding with respect to the Indian Act. A certain section of that act deals with the provision for provincial governments and local authorities to obtain title to Indian land. I know of points throughout-British Columbia where leases are given on Indian lands for say 30 or 40 years, and many private individuals acquire such properties and spend considerable money in making capital improvements on them. I think of course that the Indian should be sovereign in so far as title to or ownership of his land is concerned.
However, there is a development taking place in the country today in that people are obtaining leases on Indian lands and, as I have stated, spending considerable money on the capital improvement of the properties. The situation today is becoming such that, close to the cities and municipalities, something should be done in order to give private individuals the opportunity of purchasing Indian lands. The time may be premature; enough time may not have elapsed to put the Indian on the same business basis as the white person, but I do think the time will come when something must be done along the lines I have suggested.
I do, however, make this qualification; that if anything is done in this regard the Indian people should be treated fairly, and should be paid a proper and reasonable price for their lands. I think, however, the whole policy with respect to the leasing of such lands should be gone into by this government. It may be that we might have to wait another 40 or 50 years, at which time the Indian people may no longer be wards of the government. In any event, with respect to the very valuable Indian lands close to cities and municipalities I would suggest to the government that consideration be given to the matter of whether or not title to such lands may pass to various individuals.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
Another question I would like to ask the minister is with respect to Indian forest reserves. I would like to know the position in regard to this matter as far as the province of British Columbia is concerned, and I would particularly like to know whether anything is being done at the present time to see that Indian forest reserves are kept on a sustained yield forest management basis. That, I know, is the general policy today in British Columbia with respect to timber reserves, but specifically what is being done at this time to help the Indian people in so far as the matter of Indian forest reserves is concerned?


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: In following up the important question raised by my hon. friend the member for Vancouver East, I would like to make one suggestion. That is, that when any man offers his services in giving information against a prospective citizen, if that man so offering his services to our immigration officials or even to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is not willing to use his name then he is proving himself a coward, and his information should not be accepted.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Shaw:: May I first make reference to the observations of the hon. member for Vancouver East. Over the years I too have had a number of cases where individuals who have made applications for admission to Canada have been barred on what are generally referred to as security grounds. In all cases, as far as I am aware, there has been a refusal to give any indication of the nature of the charge, and I believe the reason given for this policy is that if the information is given then it will be the responsibility of the department to give the source of the information. If this were to happen then it is expected that the source of information would dry up.
Quite franky I think that is a pretty weak argument. I know of eases where relatives of Canadian citizens have made applications for admission to Canada and have been refused on security grounds. The Canadian relatives have said to me, "This is a reflection upon us. We cannot find out what the reasons were although we have made every effort." I certainly have made efforts myself in many of these cases. These relatives have said that it is a reflection upon them. They cannot find out what the reasons are although they have made every effort, and ip many of these cases I have made efforts myself. I think of one case in particular involving a Greek national who has at least one brother in this country. He made an application and was refused on security grounds.
4042	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Yet I have had in my possession no fewer than a dozen of the finest personal testimonials you could lay your hands on, even one signed by an ambassador from the United States. The application was not only refused but the individual and his relatives were unable to get one single solitary clue as to the reason for rejection.
I think it might not be a bad idea for me to suggest to the minister and his officials that first of all they go back and review every one of these cases. Certainly I think the time has come when we should give consideration to a change in policy. I for one have always said that this is our country and we have a perfect right to say who shall come here. I think we should maintain that right. But certainly I think we should be fair to those who make application for admission, more particularly when at times because of humanitarian or other reasons we drop all barriers and permit people to come here in large numbers, even without adequate medical examination. I am not objecting to that at all. Someone has already referred to the Hungarian situation. It was substantially a humanitarian question and I supported what was done at that time. But I do believe we should change the procedure with respect to the matter I have been discussing.
I wish to refer to a second point, and I am not certain that it falls under the jurisdiction of the Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Not very long ago I read a report in a newspaper and when I tried to find it later I could not locate it. That is not an uncommon thing. Sometimes you can search the pages of a newspaper a dozen times and all the time what you want is right in front of your eyes. The essence of the report was that a certain west European government, not a communist government, had declared that their nationals residing in Canada were subject to military service in their home country. Possibly there is not much one can say against that-


An hon. Member:: Switzerland.


Frederick Davis Shaw: -but the report went further and said that even though these former nationals were Canadian citizens they were still subject to military service within that country. In the case of those who are Canadian citizens, regardless of the country from which they came, I think it is the duty of the Canadian government to object vigorously when a man has become a citizen of this country and is still hounded by the government of his former country on the ground that he is subject to military service


in that country. The inference is that if he dares to go back to that country he will pay the penalty as a consequence of not having answered the call.
As I say, I am not too familiar with the situation in the case of those who have not become citizens of Canada but even if their status here is only that of landed immigrants I still think that the Canadian government should raise strenuous objection. Of course, if they come from communist countries I presume any objection would do no good. Nevertheless I think there should be objection in that as well as in all other cases. After all, we do owe some protection to those who have come to our country as landed immigrants and more particularly in the case of those who have acquired Canadian citizenship.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, several members have joined in the discussion of the point raised by the hon. member for Vancouver East and I should like to take a few moments to express my agreement with the remarks of those who have supported the point of view he put forward. I imagine that most hon. members who have talked to people whose applications for citizenship have been rejected have had the experience of realizing that the thing which seems to hurt most is the fact that they do not know why. That question is thrown at one again and again. "Why should this have happened to me?"
I have in mind the case of a married woman who came to Canada in the 1930's, whose husband is a Canadian citizen by naturalization, whose children are all Canadian citizens, whose grandchildren are Canadian citizens, and yet she has twice been denied the right to become a Canadian citizen after having assumed over quite a period of years that she was a Canadian citizen because her husband had become a naturalized Canadian. This is the question she has thrown at me on a number of occasions. "Why? If I knew why perhaps I would not feel so badly about it."
This woman has lived more than half her life in Canada and even on a second application has been denied the right to become a Canadian citizen. No explanation of any kind has been given to her. No explanation can even be secured on a confidential basis by her member of parliament when she approaches him about it.
I know that this matter has been raised a good many times on the floor of the house. I have listened to some of the answers given by previous occupants of the post now held by the minister. I am sure that the attempts made to explain the position were honestly

made but like the hon. member for Vancouver East I still must say that I am not satisfied that the position that has been taken is a necessary and desirable one, particularly with reference to those who are in the country legally as landed immigrants and who have made application for citizenship.
I can understand that there are reasons for avoiding automatic publication of the grounds of refusal, inasmuch as they might become public knowledge and be spread widely, but when a bona fide request is made by the person involved for some explanation as to the reasons for refusing his application I think that information should be available to him as a matter of right. I think the question of whether it is to be publicized could be left quite properly to the individual concerned to determine. I hope the present minister will be able to give us a more satisfactory explanation than we have had heretofore as to the whys and the wherefores of this admittedly difficult and delicate situation.


Mr. Peters:: I should like to say something about the experience in northern Ontario with immigration over a number of years. I do not think there is any objection to the immigration program that has been generally carried on in Canada. I think everybody agrees that immigration is necessary and will have to be increased as facilities to handle immigrants are made available. But I strongly object to certain methods that have been used in northern Ontario. Private industries have been permitted to go to other countries to seek workers. Specific promises have been made and these people have been improperly informed. People from various countries have been brought into northern Ontario, starting in the 1920's, but in recent years more have come. In the Kirkland Lake area we had the sad experience of the government granting leave of absence to the head of the unemployment insurance commission office so that he could go abroad on behalf of the mining industry. He was paid by them to go to certain countries in Europe to try to secure immigrants to work in the mines.
Now, the stories vary as to what these people were told. It is my opinion, after having talked with hundreds of these boys who came from other countries, that they were not given a true picture of the situation, and that this improper picture was not corrected by the immigration officials of this country. This official of the unemployment insurance commission travelled throughout Europe, and some of the promises that he made were fabulous. The common method of recruiting for the gold mining industry, which is a very low paid mining industry, is to cite the highest rates paid in any of the mines in
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Canada giving the impression that these rates are applicable to the mine for which these people are being recruited.
When these men came here, there was a great deal of resentment, so much resentment in fact that within three or five years only about 10 per cent of the number of original immigrants remained in the same employment. They were quite angry that Canadian authorities allowed such procedures to take place, and many of these men were not satisfactory in the jobs for which they were brought here. Certainly, we need immigration, but if immigrants are to be brought here to work in the mining industry they should be thoroughly screened. They have to be of top physical calibre; they have to be of a certain age; and they have to have special attention paid to the condition of their lungs. We realize that this must be done. However, we do not believe that it can be done effectively by private enterprise. We do not believe it has been good for the country to allow this type of procedure in seeking immigrants. I would strongly suggest that a different approach be made to this matter in order to make sure such things do not happen again.
It may be recalled that the Hollinger mine sent its representative to Europe to recruit workers, and he made many promises that could not be fulfilled. At a later date many of the immigrants who came in under that particular scheme even reneged on the repayment of the amount that had been advanced for their transportation. They, also, were very unhappy in this situation.
The other matter I should like to mention is connected with Chinese immigration. A brief was presented to the government, which I have read, concerning the immigration laws as they affect Chinese. It was presented by the Chinese benevolent association last October. I have in my area a gentleman of Chinese origin who has been in Canada much longer than I have. He came here long before I was born, settled in Kirkland Lake and was closely connected with the development of that town. In the early days one of the prospectors ran out of money, as most prospectors did and still do, and he was grubstaked by this particular gentleman. The man to whom I refer is well known in Kirkland Lake. He was one of those who helped to finance Sir Harry Oakes, and he now has a considerable amount of money. This gentleman, who is getting on in years, had one brother who at one time lived in Canada but subsequently went back to China. This man now wants to bring his brother's children to Canada. He has received letters from the high schools in the town, and they are willing to take these students into the high schools. These young

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration nephews are now in a location from which they could emigrate to Canada. He is willing to adopt tljem and is willing to set up far more than the department would require as a guarantee. He informed me the last time I spoke to him that he is willing to give them one of the largest hotels in Kirkland Lake. Incidentally, he has a sum of well over $1 million himself and will guarantee that these young people will never be a charge upon the Canadian people.
My friend says that he may even have voted Conservative-and that is probably true-for the first time. A reading of this brief to which I have referred clearly indicates this problem, therefore I should like to read a short section from it. It says:
Another problem which is the aftermath or effect of the harsh laws enacted in the past and which confronts us now is the plight of grandchildren of Chinese Canadians. We would seek relaxation of immigration regulations to permit these grandchildren to come, in cases where the parents of these children are deceased in China. We feel that on purely compassionate grounds the little ones should be brought into Canada and placed under the care of their grandparents, provided the grandparents are financially able to receive and care for them.
If left in China their future is rather obscure and we feel it is not the intention of your department to inflict any unnecessary suffering on a Chinese child whose parents are dead. We feel very strongly on this matter because of the untold suffering and hardships which are prevalent in the world in general and in China in particular.
Another problem confronting us is the question of admission of adopted children of Chinese Canadians.
The brief goes on to mention some of the religious beliefs of these people, and gives the reason for their anxiety to adopt children. I continue to quote:
We, therefore, plead for the granting of this request for the admission of adopted children of Chinese Canadians who have no sons of their own blood, either here or in China.
When the application was originally made in 1952 these children were living in an area of China from which it was difficult to get any information. They are now living in Hong Kong, and certainly the financial requirements of the department can be met. Our restrictions against Chinese immigration could be lifted to give consideration to people in this category because, in my experience, I have found the Chinese people to be very good citizens. I have never known a Chinese immigrant who has been a burden on any municipality in my part of the country. I think there is considerable that could be said in favour of certain categories of Chinese immigrants if one section of the act were changed. When the act mentions children we could extend the meaning to include adopted children, and I think in this particular case that could be arranged. I do

not believe that the adoption of this suggestion would lead to unlimited immigration and I think that special consideration should be given to some of these cases.


Mr. Wrailen:: I should like to bring a problem to the attention of this committee which has been causing quite a lot of trouble in our county and city as far back as 1875. I am not bringing this to the attention of the committee to be in any way critical of the present minister or his parliamentary assistant, because since coming to this house I have had nothing but the very best of co-operation from these two gentlemen. In fact, today the parliamentary assistant very kindly gave me and the warden of our county an interview. I have great hopes that he will get this knotty problem straightened out so that at least we will be reimbursed to some extent for the cost of the administration of justice in so far as the Six Nations Indian reserve near Brantford is concerned.
I also want to point out that this is in no way to the prejudice of the Six Nations Indians. As I understand it, the department of Indian affairs administer the funds of the Six Nations Indians and they have the money down there. It is going to be a case of agreement between the two municipalities and the department of Indian affairs to pay for the cost of the administration of justice on the reserve.
I should like to point out that under the terms of the territorial divisions act the county of Brant, which is the smallest county in the province of Ontario and also has the largest reserve in the dominion of Canada as far as population is concerned, consists of the city of Brantford, the town of Paris and the townships of Brantford, Burford, Oakland, Onondaga, South Dumfries and Tusca-rora except'

and this is where we have all the trouble-that the township of Tuscarora shall be withdrawn from the county of Brant for municipal purposes only. That means that as far as the township of Tuscarora is concerned, which has the Six Nations Indian reserve or the largest portion of it, they pay absolutely no tax in any way, shape or form to the county of Brant for the administration of justice, for magistrate's court costs to the city of Brantford or for looking after the prisoners who are brought in by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police from the reserve to the county of Brant.
The population of the county of Brant is approximately 77,000 and the population of that portion of the reserve that is in Brant county is approximately 3,500. That means that having regard to county population it is approximately 1 in 25. But our jail figures

for one year are around 8,000 prison days in our county jail. Of that 8,000 days in one year, the reserve has approximately 1,000 days, so that you can see that we have 1 in 8 as far as jail population is concerned. But as far as population in the county is concerned, they are 1 in 25. So this situation presents a considerable problem in connection with the financial difficulty of paying for the jails and the magistrate's court in the city of Brantford in the county of Brant.
The cost of maintaining one prisoner, as far as food is concerned, in our county jail amounts to $1.10 per day. If we add the costs of the governor and the staff, that brings it up to $5.10. If we add the cost of renovation of the jail, something which we had to do within the last two years, and the upkeep of the whole building, it runs to $8.10 per day. Thus, you can readily see that the costs of these prisoners in the jail amount to some considerable sum at the end of each year. Up until the beginning of 1957, the province of Ontario paid the county a certain sum of money for people who were confined to jail under certain indictable offences but, as of January 1, 1957, they inaugurated a new system of subsidy in Ontario and each municipality is paid a dollar per capita for the administration of justice purposes. But the township of Tuscarora, not being a municipality within the county of Brant, does not receive this one dollar per day from the provincial government. Therefore we do not get any money from them for the administration of justice and jail service.
I should like to give one set of figures that I have here for a magistrate's court for one year. In the period from May 1, 1956 to May 31, 1957, the magistrate's court collected some $3,390 in fines from Indians from the reserve. I want to point out this fact. Since the Indian reserve is a considerable distance from the county jail, when these people are picked up and put in the county jail, they are usually there for a week end or two or three days because the Indians do not come in and bail out their friends as quickly as do white people who live in the city and do not leave their friends and relatives in jail overnight. Hence we have more people from the reserve who, when they are picked up, are confined to jail until their trial comes up. That means that we have more costs as far as jail is concerned than the amount received from Indians who pay fines in the magistrate's court.
In this period $3,390 was paid in fines and the biggest part of this money-and this is the irony of the whole deal-namely $2,200 went to the dominion government and $689 went back to the Six Nations Indians for the
Supply-Citizenship and, Immigration upkeep of roads under highway traffic expenses. We therefore pay the magistrate's court costs.
The city put up a new building and is paying for the magistrate there. Yet the fines that he is taking in in this court are going back to the dominion government and to the Six Nations Indians. Another big factor in this cost to the county is that every time a criminal case comes up, the city and the county,-and we have an agreement whereby we pay for the upkeep of the court,-must pay the complete costs of these criminal cases. I should like to quote one set of figures for the last case that we had that came up in the county court. Fortunately for us, this man who was on trial for murder, pleaded guilty to manslaughter and his trial was considerably reduced. But even then it cost the county and the city of Brantford some $1,590 for the trial of this man before he was sent to Kingston penitentiary. I maintain that it is utterly unfair that the city of Brantford and the county of Brant should pay for the costs of the county jail and the magistrate's court for Indians who live on the reserve and who do not pay one cent toward the upkeep of these facilities.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Chairman. I wonder how the hon. gentleman now can relate all these experiences having to do with the administration of justice in the province of Ontario to the estimates of a federal department.


Jack Wratten: We have tried to bring this matter before the dominion government.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am serious about my point of order, Mr. Chairman.


Jack Wratten: We have tried to bring this matter before the dominion government time and time again. I was not going to mention this but I will do so. We have tried to get our other members, who were Liberals, to bring the matter up and they did not or would not bring this matter up on the floor of the house.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is a provincial matter.


Jack Wratten: It is not a provincial matter. These people are wards of the dominion government, and the money is kept down here by the dominion government. They administer the money. We have been to the provincial government in the past and they tell us to come to the dominion government and get our money from them because they are wards of the dominion government.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: What do you want to do? Do you want to move the reserve?

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Jack Wratten: No. You would make a good one for the reserve, though.


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: Make the quarters more comfortable and I will take the offer.


Jack Wratten: We have better ones than you down there. The point I am trying to make is this, Mr. Chairman. For a period since 1875 we have been trying to get an equitable distribution of these costs.


James Sinclair: What did Sir John A. Macdonald do about it?


John Whitney Pickersgill: What did Sir James Whitney do about it?


Jack Wratten: May I say this to the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. I could tell him one or two things but I will not.
We also have another problem, Mr. Chairman. My friend the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate signed not too long ago an agreement under the child welfare act. If he had been as busy looking after his job then as he is now in trying to interrupt me, we might not be in the position we are right now. This is a case where an agreement was entered into with the Children's Aid Society to give the people on the reserve the benefit of children's aid. When the man from the government came around and we discussed this proposal with him, I asked him what he was going to do about the people on the reserve who were not Indians. They were very careful-and I include my friend over there-to make an agreement which provided that only band Indians would be eligible for this service. He very politely told me that the county would be responsible for those who were band Indians on these reserves. I maintain that the county should not be responsible for those who are on the reserve and who are there under lease which the minister or somebody from this department has signed.
They could not, as I understand it, lease land from the Indian reserve unless the minister or the superintendent of the Indian affairs approved the lease. I was politely told there would be no trouble about that, and that I was only anticipating it. But what happened? The first case which the children's aid had to take into its care was just such a case as I had envisaged, and the cost to the county might run as high as $20,000 or $25,000 before this family is able to take care of itself.
This is just one of the things I want to bring up whether it is in order or not. I want this to be on record so that the people will know the injustice which has been done to the county of Brant for this long period of years.


Mr. Howard:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to discuss a couple of questions relating to the operations of the Indian affairs branch and to the attitude of that branch and of the department in the past and, probably today, too, toward our native Indians.
First, I should like to say that in the past I have exchanged a certain amount of correspondence on behalf of native Indians in various reserves on the west coast of British Columbia with the Indian affairs branch and with the Vancouver office of that branch, and I came to the conclusion some time ago that this office must manufacture all the red tape for all the other branches in the department.
One of the most serious complaints made by the native Indians and by anyone who has attempted to speak for native Indians, is the great delay in answering correspondence and in taking up grievances and related subjects. I will cite just three particular instances. In the Hazelton band about 10 years ago, or maybe a little longer, a locatee on the reserve sold part of his land to the school board for a new school. The land was sold and the transfer was agreed to. A survey was carried out, the school was built, and the children began going to school. But it was three years before the individual who owned the land got his money from the Indian affairs branch in regard to the transaction.
Then there is the case of another Indian who leased some of his land to the British Columbia power commission. I may say that the actual amount of land on which he was located could not be determined. The lease was in effect for two years, and two years rent had been paid by the power commission into the Indian affairs branch before it finally got to this locatee. Upon enquiry of a gentleman employed in this branch I was told that because the matter was being dealt with in three separate files, or something of that nature, they could not get them together until I approached them about it.
There is another instance of land that was acquired from the reserve for a new highway project. A number of locatees were involved. When I was in the provincial legislature some three years ago I saw a copy of the document setting out the names of the locatees, the surveyed amount of land that had been used, and an indication that a cheque had gone to the Indian affairs branch to cover each locatee's portion of the land that had been used by the department of highways. That was three years ago. Some of this money has now, I understand, been paid to some of the locatees within the last few months. Some of it has not.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
When the Prime Minister sat on this side of the house as leader of the opposition he made a number of speeches relating to Indian affairs and one of the suggestions he made then was that a royal commission should be established to deal with Indian affairs. At first I looked upon that suggestion as not having too much value. I thought: what is the sense in having another royal commission? We have had investigations and house committee studies and parliamentary committee sittings with regard to Indian affairs, and all sorts of ideas and suggestions have been made to the Indian affairs branch. Surely we do not need to waste time again by setting up another royal commission. But on further reflection, and after discussing again some of the problems involved, I am inclined to revise my original impression and to think that the Prime Minister had an excellent idea when he was leader of the opposition.
I hope he will carry it out and establish this royal commission, but I hope that such a royal commission, if it is established, will not be confined to dealing with the general problems of native Indians on the reserves and in the field, such as those which have accumulated over many years'. I hope that if such a royal commission is established it will also have authority to study the inside and intricate operations of the administration of the Indian affairs branch so that we may eliminate in the future some of the delays which have been going on.
In October of last year the native brotherhood of British Columbia presented a brief to the cabinet dealing with a number of items concerning native Indians. One of these items was, and I quote:
We believe that a royal commission should be appointed so that the Indian point of view might be placed before the Canadian people as a whole rather than through the narrow conduit pipe of the administrative services within the department itself.
I would point out that this phrase "narrow conduit pipe" is a direct quotation from one of the speeches the present Prime Minister made when he was speaking on Indian affairs from this side of the house.
However, there are problems which are far more serious than simply the administration of the Indian affairs branch. We have to consider the whole general attitude taken by the government in past years and by the government now toward this question, the general attitude of the provincial governments and the general attitude of non-Indians toward native Indians. Over the years it has been one of disgraceful and direct paternalism toward our native Indian people, and because it has been of this nature we
have driven our native Indians into the state of being a depressed race of people. Just because our official attitude toward them has been of this character, their morale is shattered, their self confidence has been lost and they consider less of themselves as a race of people, than do most people in this country. This is not their fault. It is the fault of legislators in the past and of legislators now. It is the fault of our general attitude toward native Indians, and I hope that a breath of fresh air will blow into the cabinet through the ability of the present minister so that this approach will be reversed, and so that we may have a definite and concrete attitude toward Indian problems. I hope, also, that we will take steps to amend the Indian Act to a point where, eventually, we may be able to repeal it altogether. That can be done, I think, within the space of one generation, if we do something about it. We have wasted many years already waiting for time and the evolutionary process to correct the situation so the native Indian people will, as we are prone to express it, get up to the same level we are. No real advance has been made since the Indian Act was first enacted.
One of the fundamental difficulties lies in the field of education. There are two approaches to the question of educating our native Indian children which I think are entirely wrong. The first approach is through the department which has established day schools and residential schools on the reserves, and the other is a combined effort in some school districts where native Indian children have been integrated in schools attended by non-Indian children. I feel that no real advance will be made in this field until the education of Indian children is turned over by the department to the provinces, with the federal government paying a certain amount of money to the provinces to meet the costs. This will lead to a higher educational standard for our native Indian children. I do not know what attitude the minister has toward this suggestion, and I would very much appreciate it if, when he participates in this discussion, he would indicate the official attitude of the department and that of himself to the suggestion of placing the teaching of Indian children within the jurisdiction of the provinces, having the Indian affairs branch relinquish its activity in this field and having the federal government accept responsibility for contributing to the cost of an integrated system of education.
I would now like to deal with the attitude toward our native Indian people on the part of some elements in our society. Generally we say that there is no racial discrimination
4048	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration in existence in Canada, and we pride ourselves on that, particularly when we consider the events at Little Rock and the situation that obtains in South Africa and similar incidents. However, there is a degree of racial discrimination in our society against our native Indian people. In some instances it is expressed subtly, or is under the surface, but in other instances it is blatant and in the open. I know of some cafes and hotels where Indians are not permitted to enter and are refused service. This is an illustration of outright discrimination. In practically every fish cannery on the coast of British Columbia there are two lavatories, one for Indians and one for so-called whites or non-Indians and you do not dare enter the one that was not constructed for use by the particular race to which you belong. Trivial as the latter example may appear to some, it serves to underline the fact that discrimination does exist against our native Indian people simply because they are Indians. This situation will deteriorate and worsen unless a definite effort is made to eradicate it through an enlightened approach in one generation. In effect we must encourage the Indian people to help themselves, raise themselves by their own bootstraps, by giving them every possible help in so doing, but if we continue to rely on evolution and time to correct the situation, 60 or 70 years more will pass by and conditions will not have improved.
Another complaint I wish to lodge on behalf of many Indians concerns the rations of foodstuff given to native Indian people when they become unemployed and indigent. I propose to read into the record a list of rations of foodstuff provided to indigent Indians as direct food relief. I do not know how widespread is the knowledge of such lists but I am sure many people will be shocked. We should be ashamed of ourselves that such ration lists exist and that such meagre amounts of food are provided to these people to attempt to live on. Perhaps I could more properly say to let them starve on. The following is a ration list for one adult for the period of one full month. I will also indicate the value of each commodity in terms of dollars, the price at which each commodity sells in the area where I compiled these figures. Under this list an adult is given 24 pounds of flour, vitamin B enriched, valued at $1.92. I remind hon. gentlemen that this ration is for a month. He is given six pounds of rolled oats valued at 72 cents; one pound of baking powder valued at 44 cents a pound; one pound of tea valued at $1.32; two pounds of sugar valued at 30 cents; three pounds of lard valued at 96 cents; five pounds of beans valued at 95 cents; two pounds of rice


valued at 38 cents or potatoes up to an equivalent value; one pound of cheese valued at 65 cents; meat or fish to the value of $2.50; salt to the value of 23 cents and matches to the value of ten cents. Thank goodness they are given something with which to light a fire. Hon. gentlemen will observe that there is no mention of fresh fruit or vegetables and no mention of butter. One pint of milk or its equivalent in evaporated or powder form is allowed each day for every child of an Indian family who is 12 years of age or under.
As a Canadian and as a member of this house I am deeply ashamed of this list. This is all that is given to unfortunate native Indian people in the hope that they will be able to exist on these rations. But that is not all. This is a guide, and substitutes can be made on location by the Indian superintendent, depending on what supplies he is able to obtain. Here is another item of interest. Where the Indian family or individual can provide items of country food or farm products the scale of relief is adjusted accordingly. If an Indian catches a salmon presumably he will not receive fish or meat to the value of $2.50 for the period of a month. If he runs out of salmon I imagine he must rely on his ability to catch rabbits, moose, deer or something else.
I sincerely hope that some definite action will be taken in this regard. Many Indians, even if they were able to find employment, are denied the employment that is available to non-Indians. Because of the fact that in many places the Indians have made their livelihood fishing and hunting, they are confined to working in the fishing or lumbering industry, on farms, fruit picking, apple or hop picking or work of a similar nature. Their employment opportunities are severely limited.
This is what we say we will give these Indians. When they get hard up and cannot find any work we will give them $10.47 cents worth of food per adult per month. What would $10.47 do in your household or in my household? Perhaps I should get my wife here and she would be able to tell you more about it, probably in unparliamentary terms, which was the way in which she expressed herself when I told her about the existence of this particular situation.
I would like to hear the opinion and the attitude of the minister as to extensively revising this paltry list of foodstuffs for indigent Indians. I have some other matters in my mind, Mr. Chairman, and probably when we deal in detail with the estimates of the Indian affairs branch we could properly deal with specific points. I just bring these two matters to the attention of the minister and I hope he will undertake to

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
give us his present attitude and the opinions of himself and his department with respect to them.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before this item is passed, it will be recalled that the last time the estimates were before us I had begun to make a few general observations about Indian affairs. There are one or two things I would like to add and I believe I was in the middle of a sentence about the franchise. I would like to complete that sentence. I think the time has come, in fact I thought the time had come from the date when I became minister, when the Indians should have the franchise and it would certainly have been my intention, had I remained in the department, to press my colleagues as strongly as possible to make the proper arrangements, without any delay.
I know, however, that there is a big problem with respect to the exemption from income tax for Indians on reserves. This is an awkward problem which has to be solved. It is not a right of the Indians; it just happens to be a provision of the Income Tax Act. I am not going to suggest any solution at this time but I do agree it is a problem. My experience of three years in the department was that the attitude toward the Indians in those provinces where a provincial franchise existed was quite different from the attitude in those provinces where it did not exist, and it was very much better. I feel the same would be true if they had the federal franchise.


Mr. Fraser:: Why did you not do something about it then?


John Whitney Pickersgill: If the hon. gentleman had listened to me from the beginning of my remarks perhaps he would know what I have in mind. This is a real problem-just as there was a problem which in fact ended the first British empire. Members will understand that I refer to the cry of "no taxation without representation". There is a problem here of representation without taxation, and there must be an element of fairness on both sides. In respect of what the hon. member for Skeena said in his speech, with which perhaps some hon. members will be surprised to hear I agree-at least I agreed with about half-


Charles Benjamin Howard: You are progressing, anyway!


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a matter of fact, I agreed with most of these things before the hon. gentleman came to this house.


Some hon. Members:: What did you do
about it?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I did quite a little bit about these things although I did not, I confess, do
nearly as much as my predecessor, Mr. Harris, had done. However, it is one of those things about which I do want to make some observations.
I could not agree more completely with what the hon. member for Skeena had to say about the matter of education. There is no question whatsoever that the faster we can get the Indians into the same schools as the non-Indian children, the better. There is no doubt that even when Indian children spend three or four years in a segregated school they do tend to go to the non-segregated school with an inferiority complex which is very hard to overcome. This problem is by no means easy to solve; it requires adult education on both sides. I know from my experience in the department that on the several occasions when we tried to encourage the integration of schools it was not always the Indians who resisted and I do not believe that anything is going to be accomplished-


Harold Edward Winch: You might as well name the people who showed resistance.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think the hon. gentleman can draw the inference from what I have said. He can subtract just as well as I can. The difficulty is, as the hon. member for Skeena so rightly said, there is still a good deal of prejudice and desire for segregation in the communities, there is a feeling in favour of or in support of segregation on both sides. This is not something which can be legislated out of existence and I am sure the hon. member will agree with me on that point. It is a matter of changing people's attitudes and I do not think it is possible to force the pace in these matters. I think the department should go just as fast as it can carry public opinion with it and should do everything it can to educate the Indians and to educate those in other communities in this direction.


Charles Benjamin Howard: But should provide no leadership.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a matter of fact ever since the passing of the Indian Act of 1951 that is precisely what the department has been doing and, of course, you would expect me to say this, Mr. Chairman; but I dissent from what the hon. gentleman said about red tape. I know there were a lot of very complicated matters before officials, and I could not agree more about the fact that some were unnecessarily complicated. I am not one of those people who are very patient about delays, and I used to be impatient about some of these delays. I have now, however, become a student of the law and it is my experience that when you get into legal disputes it is often not really very fair to blame civil servants.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Douglas Mason Fisher: Should you blame the lawyers?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would not have dared to say that a year ago, and the acting minister is also the Minister of Justice and he will no doubt rebuke me later on for having said it, but I do believe that some of these matters are intrinsically difficult. However, I do not think, taken by and large, there are any more devoted people in this country than the people engaged in the education of the Indians. No doubt, as in any other group of teachers, there are some poor ones amongst them, but for the most part they are good and devoted teachers.
I think most of them, furthermore, would agree that even if it meant disturbing the tenor of their own lives it would be better to have these Indian children educated and brought up with other children wherever it is physically possible and wherever the environment can be made satisfactory.
I think it is also terribly important, particularly in the case of children in residential schools, many of whom come from broken homes and have no one to look after them on the reserve to whom they might return, to consider this aspect of the matter. One of the most tragic things about this matter is that these children are educated to the age of 15 or 16 years and then they go back to the reserve where there is no future for them. That is one gap of which we were very conscious in the department and which we were seeking to do something about.
This brings me to another subject about which I would like to say a few words. Several years ago a gentleman who was formerly private secretary to the leader of the opposition was given a post in the Indian affairs branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration at the time when my predecessor was the minister. This gentleman was given the special responsibility of doing exactly what the hon. member for Skeena said ought to be done, namely the responsibility of seeking to place Indians in a position where they could live as other people, where they could earn as other people and where they would be accepted in ordinary employment. He did a wonderful job and I have nothing but praise for what he did. He had a great deal of initiative and whenever he heard of any new development anywhere adjacent to Indian reserves or in the north country he was there, on the spot, trying to interest employers in giving the Indians the first preference and giving them a start. A number of most useful developments were started, although I am not going to take the time of the committee to describe them now.
It so happens that, because of a change in the wheel of political fortune, that gentleman is now otherwise occupied. I do not know that I would say he is as well occupied

now as he was when he was in the department. But even though he is not occupied at the present time in seeking to advance my political fortunes, I am perfectly certain that he is doing a good job wherever he is.
I want to say, sir, that I do hope sincerely the minister will see to it, now that Mr. Jack-I might just as well mention his name -is no longer with the department, the work he was doing is being followed up by someone else and that the best person possible will be secured for that job.
Next to education the most important task of the department is to help the Indians to get into the stream of employment, to help them to live as other people in an ordinary way and gradually to get rid of segregation.
I could not agree more heartily with anything that has been said in the house this session than with what the hon. member for Skeena said about that. I think it is the moral duty of all Canadians to do everything they can, while respecting the rights of these people to their reserves and every other right they have and while doing nothing to force this development, to give the Indians the feeling that they are going to have a better life in the ordinary world with the rest of us.
This is something that a government cannot do alone but it is something with respect to which a government can give a lead. It is something with respect to which every member of parliament can give a lead. The hon. member for Skeena is a new member of the house and I do not suppose he and I would agree about everything. Perhaps there are many things we would not agree about but there are some things on which I think we do agree and certainly believe he made a very valuable contribution to the debate this afternoon. Although some of the things he said may have been a reflection upon my administration of the department, I will leave the defence of the department to my successor and with a good deal of confidence, too.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words in support of the very fine arguments and recommendations put before the house a few moments ago by the hon. member for Skeena. First of all may I say that I do not think there is much to be gained by indulging in recriminations, or in attempting to assess the blame on any group of individuals, any individual or even any government. Rather, I think that every citizen must accept responsibility for the very deplorable situation and attempt to find some solution to this most vexing problem. Certainly the former government was not blameless, but unfortunately governments do not move as rapidly as they should unless there is an aroused public opinion. Therefore, I think that we in this parliament must

approach the problem from a moral, social and scientific point of view, free from political bickering and at all costs we should avoid making the problem a political football if we are to get the support of every socially minded person in the country in an effort to convince the government that they will have the support of every citizen in finding a'solution to the problem.
It is estimated that when the white man first came to this country there were about
200,000	Indians. Their population decreased to approximately 90,000. However, at the present time, because of increased medical services and so forth, their population has risen to approximately 160,000. If there ever was any thought at any time that the Indian problem would solve itself by some sort of dying out process that certainly has not materialized and the problem has become more acute as the population has increased.
Certainly integration seems to be the solution to the whole problem. Yet we cannot bring about integration by trying to force these people to accept the philosophy of the dominant group. We have to use some other method and bring it about by some other approach. But I believe that by wise leadership, tolerance, understanding and rebuilding the confidence they have lost we can persuade them to integrate into the general society.
One thing I am sure of is that public morality will not permit for very much longer the deplorable situation facing us today so far as the Indian problem is concerned. I think it is a disgrace to force Indians to live in segragation on reservations which in effect are only islands of isolation. We know that every day outraged citizens throughout the country are bringing this situation to the attention of socially minded organizations and governments everywhere. Certain things have been done, but we still maintain the reserve system. As a matter of fact, I believe it was only a year or two ago that there was some attempt in the department to establish another reserve in the northern part of Saskatchewan.
In my part of the country we have three reserves. In 1940 there were 720 people living on those reservations but by 1954 the population had increased to 1,143. The projected figure for 1965 is 1,700. In 1954 the department divided the acreage on these three reserves among the 1,143 existing Indians and came up with a figure of 29 acres per Indian. Anyone who has attempted to carry on a farming operation in western Canada knows that it is absolutely impossible to expect anyone to try to earn a livelihood from 29 acres.
4051
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
It is not the case that some of these reserves have a shortage of land. As a matter of fact, on the Fort a la Come Indian reserve bordering my constituency many thousands of acres were rented to white settlers. It seemed a very strange thing to me that the Indian department would see fit to lease that land, badly needed by the Indians, to white settlers on a share the crop basis. This resulted in the Indians sitting around and watching the white men work their lands and receiving a small pittance as their share. I hope the minister will see that that situation comes to an end.
So far as education is concerned, I am going to say quite frankly that in the main, up until recently, the church organizations have taken the lead in providing the basic academic education in this field. Certainly, they have done a marvellous job up to a point. However, the educational facilities needed in this modern world cannot be provided by these so-called voluntary organizations. We must do something more in that line. I agree wholeheartedly with what has been said regarding residential schools. They are just a means of continuing segregation. Between 80 per cent and 85 per cent of the inmates of the women's jail in Prince Albert are Indian women, and this is a direct result of the policy of segregation. These girls are raised on a reserve segregated from white children. Then, they go to these residential schools and that is a continuation of segregation in their formative years. They get such an inferiority complex that later on it is almost impossible for them to integrate with the white population. After school they come back to the reserve and are dissatisfied with conditions there. They drift into the towns and cities and end up in an institution of one kind or another. We must institute a program of technical training in the public schools which will enable the Indian to cope with the problems of integration.
I must agree with what has been said by the hon. member for Skeena when he suggested that there must be a new and positive approach. First of all, I would suggest that the administration of Indian affairs be turned over to the provinces. I do not mean to suggest that the federal government should be relieved of its responsibilities, but I do believe the provinces are in a much better position to administer Indian problems than is the federal department. I think it is important that we start immediately to develop some comprehensive research program in order to ascertain how we should go about this problem of integration. The research program should take the form of

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration finding out what alternative lines of development are open to the Indians in the different provinces in order that integration may be defined and a realistic program produced. Secondly, I believe such a research program will provide us with a source of factual information so necessary for the successful achievement of this objective.
The information to which I refer might fall into two categories: first, legal and administrative to improve the existing service both federal and provincial; second, and possibly much more important, would be sociological data concerning Indian life. We must get to know the Indian better if we are to lay a basis for his acceptance of an integration program. We must gain his confidence. It was for this reason I said I was so happy this afternoon to welcome the bill which was passed today. This will be one way in which the confidence of the Indian population will be built up. We must consult them and we must gain their confidence if we expect them to accept the necessary changes in their present status to achieve integration.
In spite of the assurances given under the British North America Act, the Indian has been exploited in a most disgraceful manner. One of the best examples of how we have destroyed the confidence of the Indian is contained in a directive from the Department of National Health and Welfare issued on January 31, 1957, and which was sent, I presume, to all the bands on the reservations, certainly in the province of Saskatchewan and I imagine in other provinces as well. 1 should like to read from this directive:
Since the funds at the disposal of the Indian and northern health services are limited, the Indian people who can pay should pay for their transportation, medical care, hospitalization, drugs, glasses and dental care. Those who cannot pay the full amount should contribute at least a part of the cost of these services.
When an individual is not able to pay for these services, he should contact the representative of Indian and northern health services so that appropriate arrangements can be made to assist him.
This applies also to those living of! the reserves. Then, the directive goes on:
Those people who have disassociated themselves from the Indian way of life should cease to be a charge against Indian and northern health services. In other words, those Indians who have lived off the reserve for a period of over 12 months are considered to be making an adequate income, and thus should be responsible for providing for their own medical care.
If he is a taxpayer in the community for a 12-month period, the individual becomes the responsibility of the municipality in which he resides, if he is not able to provide for himself for some reason. People who have lived off the reserve for this period should take out Saskatchewan hospital services plan insurance for themselves and their families. Eventually all those who are able to pay, and/or those who live off the reserve will receive
[Mr. Bryson.J
notification that acceptability for medical attention through Indian and northern health services has ceased and that they will be responsible for all their medical care.
I suggest, Mr. Chairman, we are not going to build up the confidence of our Indians by reneging on some of the commitments and promises that have been made in the past. Our northern Indians present, of course, a special problem. We have not got the problem of reservations, and possibly the problem of the northern Indian will not be as difficult to solve as the problem of the Indian farther south. Again, however, it is a question of education. If we are going to solve this problem we shall have to initiate the type of educational system that is going to enable these Indians to fit themselves for the many job opportunities that resources development in that area provides.
Let me reiterate what I have been saying. First, I think we should undertake a comprehensive research program. It must be undertaken in order that we may lay the groundwork for a realistic program aimed towards integration, and the administration of that integration program must be in the hands of the provinces rather than federal authorities working at a remote distance from the problem. I believe that such a positive approach will result in a solution to these very vexing problems.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I have noticed that hon. members seem to be dealing now exclusively with Indian affairs. If the general remarks about departmental administration have been completed, perhaps I might reply to the general suggestions that have been made. Then we could raise further matters of specific interest under the different branches, the items for which follow later. If there are no further general comments to be made, perhaps I might do that.


Mr. Campbell (The Baillefords):: I wonder whether the minister would reply to some of the suggestions I made a couple of weeks ago?


Mervyn Arthur Hardie: I imagine there are many hon. members who want to speak generally on Indian affairs and who could speak generally on vote No. 72. Would that suggestion be in agreement with the minister's suggestion?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes. That was my point. Provided the general remarks covering the whole field are concluded, I might reply now. Then remarks dealing with one specific branch of the department could be made when we reach the appropriate item.
I appreciate very much indeed the generous things which have been said about me by hon. members who have spoken since the

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
estimates first came under consideration on January 15. Of course, I do not take those compliments as directed to me personally but rather as directed toward the government of which I am a member. I assure hon. members that they are appreciated by all those on this side of the house.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I cannot concur in the hon. gentleman's amendment.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I shall deal with the comments that have been made in the order in which they were made. Some hon. members spoke first on January 15, which is some days ago now. I shall deal first with the remarks of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. The first point I should like to deal with is his statement that we have increased the estimates this year over those of last year by some 20 per cent to 25 per cent. If he will examine the figures and compare the total asked for this year with the total asked for last year, he will find that the increase is 13.9 per cent, not the percentage figures that he suggested as reported at page 3368 of Hansard. What the hon. gentleman has apparently done is to take the main estimates of 1957-58, the supplementary estimates and the further supplementary estimates 1 and 2, add those all together and then compare them with the main estimates of the previous year.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think perhaps I could clear that matter up in a second. I think the hon. gentleman misunderstood what I said. All I said was that the increase the hon. gentleman had proposed in the estimates over those that were proposed by Mr. Harris was either 20 per cent or 25 per cent. I was not comparing them with last year's at all. The comparison I was making was between the figure that was put in the main estimates this year and the figure that the hon. gentleman added in his supplementaries that he brought down in October, and I think the figure is either 20 per cent or 25 per cent, or somewhere in that area.


Edmund Davie Fulton: If it is 20 per cent or 25 per cent this year, the hon. gentleman will be interested to know that the total supplementary estimates last year as compared with the main estimates represented an increase of 40 per cent over the main estimates. That is his record, a 40 per cent increase as against a 20 per cent to 25 per cent increase.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was not criticizing.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I know. The hon. gentleman was merely pointing out the facts and I thought the full facts should be laid before the committee for their information.
96698-256J
The hon. gentleman had suggested that there had been no changes in the policy or procedure of the citizenship and immigration department since this government took over. I am quite prepared to admit that there have not been as many changes as we should like to have been able to make and as we intend to make. However, there have been substantial changes in the procedure and in the approach to the problems at the ministerial level. I might point out that with regard to immigration as it affects East Indians and Chinese, the decision was taken on December 20 to which reference has already been made in the house and which allows landed immigrants from those countries to apply for the admission of their relatives before they become citizens. With respect to both these groups the advantages were outlined the other day but with respect particularly to the East Indians it should be pointed out that this change will have the effect of taking those who can now be applied for as of right by landed immigrants off the quota and therefore releasing, we hope, a considerable group of quota numbers to be used in taking care of cases in which arrears have accumulated over the past years.
Then with regard to citizenship, the hon. gentleman referred-and with justifiable gratification, I think-to the setting up of two citizenship courts in Toronto and Montreal during the time when he was minister. I might say that we have decided to extend efforts to make impressive citizenship ceremonies in smaller centres. One of the difficulties in smaller centres is, of course, that the number of applicants receiving their grants of Canadian citizenship at any one time is not sufficiently large to make an impressive ceremony if you try to have a ceremony at the time of their presentation. Our thought is that in such centres an experiment might be tried of attempting to get those who receive their Canadian citizenship to come together on a day or days to be specified-perhaps quarterly or perhaps twice a year, as the case might be-in order to take part in an official ceremony of the award of citizenship. By that method, if you have a sufficient number-say 100 or so at any time -you can make an impressive ceremony. I think every hon. gentleman will agree that when you have, say, a group of ten, it is difficult to build up a really impressive ceremony with all those things that properly accompany it and the presence of all the dignitaries who should be there.
As to some of the ones that I have attended in various centres throughout Canada I have found that, by reason of the lack of numbers, the ceremony becomes rather embarrassing rather than impressive for those who

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration take part in it. But I feel that if you build up the numbers and have 100 or 150, you can make a large ceremony and a much more impressive ceremony; and if you do it once or twice a year in a civic park or the civic hall, then, with the attendant publicity and all the effort that can be concentrated on it, you can make a really impressive and valuable ceremony on those occasions when all those who have qualified for citizenship would be admitted or be put through a formal ceremony at which their certificates would be presented. We intend to experiment with such a formal ceremony in one of the smaller centres to be selected in Canada in order to see whether we can work something out on that basis.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Will the minister permit a question on this point of ceremonies?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Would the minister consider this point in connection with the ceremonies? I have had complaints from people who have attended the ceremonies. They have complained that they have had the feeling, because of the emphasis upon the symbol of the crown and upon the picture of the Queen and the association of certain groups with the ceremony, that they were becoming British subjects more than Canadian citizens. I know there is an extremely delicate point there, but would the minister keep that complaint or view in mind, namely that we keep to the fore Canadian citizenship even though we cannot forget the question of British subjects?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes. Those points are being kept in mind. We have had several suggestions with regard to the form of oath from the point of view which the hon. gentleman has just mentioned, and those are receiving study. We intend to try out some of these forms of ceremony and to see what improvements can be made as to the representation and as to the symbolism which surrounds the granting of citizenship.
Other changes that are proposed are, for instance, the change which the house made today by way of amendment to the Indian Act and the change in the citizenship act which was mentioned also this morning.
We are concerned about the fact that at the present time there is a difference in the attributes of citizenship required by the naturalized citizen compared with the natural born, and that arises out of section 19 of the citizenship act. We are concerned about this difference and would like to follow the principle of removing it but, as I explained this morning, the time factor has made it difficult to introduce legislation of this type which

must be very carefully considered. Because we appreciate that no Canadian citizen should suffer because we have not been able to move as quickly as we would like in this matter, instructions have been given that no case of revocation of citizenship will be disposed of until we have had a chance to survey the matter and draft the legislation which we believe will be 'appropriate and present it to parliament. Thus, no one will be prejudiced by the fact that we have been unable to bring in a bill this session.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Is the minister at all troubled by the fact that the citizenship of Mr. Fred Rose could not have been revoked if this action had been taken earlier?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The minister is aware of the situation in this respect, and in anything that is done it will be necessary to take such a situation into account and to ensure that those guilty of such actions as Mr. Fred Rose could not continue to claim the rights and privileges of Canadian citizens. We have said that our intention is to amend section 19; I did not say that our intention was to repeal it.
The hon. gentleman mentioned the situation which had arisen respecting the payment of fees because some registrars and others concerned had extracted more than the statutory amounts provided. We have had conversations and correspondence with the attorney general of New Brunswick, the province in which most of the difficulties seem to have arisen, and no further difficulties have been reported since the last exchange of correspondence I had with Mr. West.
Then the hon. gentleman asked for the figures of movement and distribution in Canada of the immigrants who entered the country during the year 1957. I will not read the figures for immigration to Canada by provinces of destination, but it would perhaps meet the convenience of the house if I placed the whole table on record in Hansard. But so that we have some of the information available-


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder whether it would not save the time of the committee if the minister were allowed to identify these tables and then place them on record in Hansard. We all realize the government wants to get on.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The document to which I have just referred deals with immigration to Canada by province of destination. The next table, table 2, deals with immigration to Canada by ethnic origin and shows that a total of 282,164 immigrants entered Canada in 1957. The tables follow:



IMMIGRATION TO CANADA BY PROVINCE OF DESTINATION

[Stage Direction]
Calendar
December	Year
1956	1957	1956	1957Newfoundland 	
Prince Edward	36	34	426	495Island 	3	7	112	134Nova Scotia 	144	103	1,639	2,790New Brunswick ..	68	48	852	1,673Quebec 	2,823	1,939	31,396	55,073Ontario 	8,704	4,709	90,662	147,097Manitoba 	485	339	5,796	11,614Saskatchewan 	169	172	2,202	4,427Alberta 	690	595	9,959	21,131British Columbia . Yukon and North-	1,558	909	17,812	37,528west Territories .	6	4	118	202Not Specified 	3,717	3,883	Total 	18,403	8,859	164,857	282,164

[Stage Direction]
December		Calendar Year	
1956	1957	1956	1957Albanian 	1	5	22Arabian 	4	7	86	87Armenian 	16	29	181	272Austrian 	133	69	2,948	2,293Belgian 	119	27	2,127	2,786British 	3,805	1,920	51,319	112,828English 	2,333	1,180	32,389	72,476Irish 	475	230	6,962	14,336Scottish 	919	477	10,939	23,514Welsh 	78	33	1,029	2,502Bulgarian 	3	1	30	59Chinese 	77	206	2,093	1,669Czech and Slovak .	19	13	297	307Danish 	187	79	3,642	7,790East Indian 	23	32	330	317Egyptian 	2	10	52Estonian 	10	3	162	221Finnish 	78	90	1,094	2,829French 	262	170	3,106	5,471German 	2,369	1,242	26,457	29,564Greek 	817	610	5,236	5,631Hungarian 	3,639	270	4,274	29,825Icelandic 	7	4	41	56Iranian 	1	10	24Italian 	4,595	1,900	29,806	29,443Japanese 	5	4	120	178Jewish 	258	144	1,632	5,472Latvian 	14	10	334	415Lebanese 	49	29	408	348Lithuanian 	8	3	190	168Luxemburger 	12	153	124Maltese 	36	22	378	654Mexican 	4	2	23	15Negro 	44	48	504	634Netherlander 	338	176	7,956	12,310Norwegian 	33	27	842	1,337Polish 	229	146	2,269	2,909Portuguese 	139	173	1,971	4,748Roumanian 	22	7	137	206Russian 	24	23	234	375Spanish 	60	73	532	1,182Swedish 	9	10	387	763Swiss 	34	25	1,044	1,294Syrian 	9	1	67	76Turkish 	6	5	48	91Ukrainian 	58	6	540	494Yugoslavian 	249	393	1,993	5,725Others 	4	6	64	92From the United States 	594	852	9,777	11,008
8.859 164.857 282,164
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
Later, the hon. gentleman had something to say about the announcement we made on July 12, I think, with regard to the curtailment of immigration for the winter months of 1957-58. He said that this announcement, and the abrupt manner in which it was made, came as a shock and a surprise to many, and that it was an example of poor public relations. I quite admit that it came as a surprise to many, although it was, in a large measure, in accordance with the usual cut down of the rate of immigration which takes place every year during the winter months. However, it did become effective some six weeks earlier this year than in the previous years for reasons that have been thoroughly explained. The reason why I agree this came as a surprise- and it is one in which I am reinforced in holding as I look over what has happened in the past-the reason for the difference between the attitude taken this year and last year- is that this year we announced our decision, and announced it at the time it was made; whereas in the past information about immigration was as far as possible treated as a matter of secrecy; these decisions were not announced and explained to the Canadian people as they were made. It probably came as a great surprise to the people concerned because they thought this must be an entirely different policy, something which had never been done before. And when you find people are surprised because of an announcement that has been made, it is a good indication that people were not taken into the confidence of the government on earlier occasions by being informed with regard to our immigration policy and the decisions made to deal with it. We intend to continue this policy of informing the country of our decisions and of our reasons for making them.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the hon. gentleman, who, I know, wants to be completely accurate, would permit a question. There was, of course, no curtailment at all in 1956, as he knows. My recollection is that in 1955 the decision was announced, and that it was announced in previous years. I should also like to remind the hon. gentleman that when I spoke here in October, and in any other comments I have made, I never took any exception to the fact that open placement immigration was stopped as of July 31; that is, that the granting of visas was stopped as of that date. What I took exception to was the abrupt and sudden termination of the Hungarian movement.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I thought the hon. gentleman was going to ask a question. He seems to want to make another speech. I am answering some of the comments and questions which the hon. member raised earlier. In a
Total
18,403
4056	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration moment I will come to the question of curtailment of the other immigration movement about which he spoke, and also to the question of the restrictions on relatives which the hon. member for Trinity raised.
The next hon. member to take part in the discussion was the hon. member for The Battlefords who dealt mainly with Indians, and who dealt constructively with the problem of the economic development of these people particularly in the area from which he comes. The hon. gentleman suggested that we should undertake a study of the social, political and economic conditions of the Indians and then apply the results of such a study in a conscious and co-ordinated program of economic development. I am glad to be able to tell him that in British Columbia there has recently been completed a socioeconomic study of the Indians under the auspices of the University of British Columbia, and that the costs were paid by the department, and we are expecting a report of that study very shortly. We hope it will be very helpful to us in working out programs for the economic improvement and integration of the Indians in that province. I am corrected, Mr. Chairman. I am informed we have already received the report, and that it is being studied and analysed now in the department.
We have recently been approached by the government of Saskatchewan with regard to a similar type of study in that province under the auspices of the University of Saskatchewan, and we are endeavouring to make arrangements with the university for such a study to be undertaken. I understand, however, that the university finds itself rather heavily involved in other programs at the present time, and this makes the immediate launching of this project somewhat difficult. But as soon as the way is clear we shall be glad to do all we can to co-operate actively in a study in that province. We hope that these steps will form a developing pattern of study for the whole of the dominion so that eventually we will have a comprehensive survey of the present state of our Indians from the social and economic point of view which will serve as a basis for the working out of a program of improvement of their economic, social and agricultural conditions.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Would the minister permit me to interrupt and ask a question about the British Columbia report. I am wondering in what form and when that report might be available for the study of interested hon. members of this house.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I am informed that it is to be published by the University of British Columbia. We have advance copies now and


the report has been under study and analysis. I also understand that as soon as the report is cleared by those who participated in it the University of British Columbia intends to release it for publication. I am not sure but I believe it actually may be in the hands of the printers now.
I am also able to tell the hon. member for The Battlefords that we have recently asked for tenders from forest engineers to undertake the work of making surveys of Indian forest lands in British Columbia. The hon. member for Okanagan Boundary also expressed an interest in this matter and I am sure he will be glad to know that. We have bids in from a number of forest engineers in British Columbia and have put forward a submission to treasury board to authorize us to retain the services of one of these men so we can have a complete survey made of the forest lands of the Indians in British Columbia and then advise as to the best program of development and utilization of that important resource. We have chosen British Columbia mainly because-I believe I am correct in saying this-there is more merchantable timber in the reserves of that province than elsewhere but there are substantial quantities in other provinces, too, and as we obtain experience and results from the surveys in British Columbia we will be able then to have other surveys made where the timber resources on Indian lands warrant a similar study being conducted. 1 should point out that we have a trained forestry engineer on our staff whose immediate responsibility is northern Ontario.
The hon. gentleman also made some valuable suggestions concerning the development of agricultural lands and suggested it be done in co-ordination with or even through the Department of Agriculture. I should advise him that we had a competition advertised and that we are now looking to the appointment of a senior official in the department to advise on the development of a program for the economic improvement of the Indians and their agricultural lands and when appointed it will be his sole responsibility to work on such a program and develop it in conjunction with provincial government agencies and other agencies available and in co-operation with other departments of this government. The plan we have in mind is, therefore, quite similar to that put forward by the hon. gentleman.
The hon. member also mentioned the ration scale for Indians on relief as also did the hon. member for Skeena and one or two other hon. gentlemen. I have to admit to hon. gentlemen that we may not be proud of the ration scale that is in effect at the present time. The departmental officials with whom

I discussed this question about two weeks ago have advised me that efforts are now being made to improve the scale and bring it into conformity with the relief scales applicable in the provinces so that the Indians on our reserves will receive the same measure of relief and assistance as do their neighbours in the provinces concerned. I should point out in fairness, however, that the ration scale in kind is supplemented in many cases, if not in most, by the cash relief program under which Indians are also paid cash and allowed to make their own purchases therewith.
The hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke spoke mainly about immigration and he suggested that careful consideration should be given in working out the 1958 program to the economic situation and to the rate of immigration indicated by that situation. I may say to him that I am in thorough agreement with his point of view and it is on that basis that we are approaching the problem this year.
The hon. member for Trinity criticized us for the announcement made on July 12. He said that we had been harsh and inconsiderate and used a number of other critical words because we had provided not only that open placement immigrants would no longer be issued visas but even those applied for in the categories of relatives would not be issued visas unless they were assured of employment when they came to Canada. This criticism, I think, requires some answer in detail.
It would be a piece of disservice to Canada and to the cause of immigration generally if any government were to embark upon a program of bringing in immigrants carelessly without regard to the fact that when they reach Canada they could only enter into competition with those already in Canada in a tight employment market. Even though relatives may be sponsored, if they are in certain categories such as brothers and sisters and able-bodied men and if they are the type of immigrant we have been getting and want to continue to receive, they will not be content to sit idle for any lengthy period but will want to enter the employment market and to that extent they will compete with those already in Canada. For us to continue carelessly and without regard to the consequences to bring in large numbers who would inevitably compete in the employment market at this time would be a disservice both to those whom we bring in as well as to the cause of a steady immigration program and particularly an immigration program that is supported by the people of Canada. It was for that reason that we imposed this restriction for the winter months
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration which is being represented, perhaps unintentionally, as though it were a permanent restriction.
There is another feature of this restriction which requires emphasis and that is that there are compassionate elements of the immigration program of which account must also be taken and for these reasons it is desirable to admit certain categories of close relatives without restriction. These are in such categories as children under 21, parents over 60 and 65 respectively, widowed sisters and their dependants and relatives in the category of genuine dependants. It is most desirable that those should be allowed to continue to come in without the restriction. In order to ensure that we could allow that category of dependent relatives to continue to come in without restriction it was felt to be essential and humanitarian to impose this temporary condition that must be met by the other category of relatives in order for him or her to be admitted to Canada during the winter months. By placing this lesser restriction on the more distant degrees of relatives it made it possible for us to bring in close and dependent relatives and thus to continue the program of reuniting families.
This afternoon the hon. member for Vancouver East raised the question of the type of cases where applications are made for entering into Canada or for Canadian citizenship by those already in Canada and where the application is refused in such circumstances that information is denied. In general terms and without hesitation I agree with the hon. gentleman that it runs counter to the kind of system which we think, and which I think, should prevail, for anyone to be refused something which he believes he would otherwise be entitled to without being informed of the reasons for the refusal. I have been as outspoken in my criticism in the past as was the hon. gentleman this afternoon but I have always entered this caveat, that where the reason for refusal is on the ground of security, then there must be some holding back of information because otherwise you do run into the danger of compromising the source of that information.
I have said and I still believe that even if the ground of refusal should be made known and given in proper detail to the applicant, it should only be done with the written authority of that applicant for the making known of that information.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Might I ask a question with respect to a term used by the minister. We all use the term "applicant" loosely; does the minister mean the sponsor or does he mean the immigrant?

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Edmund Davie Fulton: So far as getting authority for the revealing of information is concerned, it would have to be obtained from the proposed immigrant. The result of the studies we have been giving to this matter so far would indicate that if the information is released directly to the proposed immigrant, if he wishes to send it on to his proposed sponsor or to other interested parties, then that is up to him.


An hon. Member:: But they cannot get it.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The present policy and the past policy with regard to security cases is that information is not given, nothing is said. With regard to certain health cases, nothing is said. These are the problems with respect to which we have been giving a lot of study and which are under review at the present time. Some of the work in my department has been subdivided so that certain committees can review the question of information in security cases, and with respect to immigration and citizenship, and information on rejections for health grounds. The system which I would like to see instituted and indeed the kind of system we have in mind, is a system where an applicant for admission to Canada or an applicant for the grant of a certificate of Canadian citizenship-perhaps I had better confine my remarks to immigration cases only for the moment-might be informed of the reasons for his rejection and might then have an opportunity to have his case reviewed by a board which would be guided by definite principles in considering that application so that the applicant or his sponsor in Canada- if he is sponsored-may if he wishes present his case to a review panel, and so that he will know and have a hearing.
There will still be many, many cases in which the applicant is rejected even after review, but it will take this matter out of the category in which it now is, thus relieving the department of much of the criticism which comes its way. This is criticism which conscientious and hard-working officials have to bear and it is not easy for them to do so. They are accused of being arbitrary and autocratic and many other things but above all they are accused of working in entire secrecy and merely rejecting applicants as the result of some whim or fancy. It is not a healthy situation where that type of charge is levelled against any department and, if for no other reason-even if I did not agree in principle with what I have just been saying-I would believe it essential to change the system in order that the department might be protected from the type of criticism of which it has been the object in the past.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I accept any jibes or barbs thrown in my direction for not having done this and for still having to say that I am working on it, but I personally have never minimized the problems and, like the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, I have been impatient, as I am still impatient, with regard to some of these matters. I have never denied the existence of the problems which are involved and I do know that you get into trouble in respect to security cases over compromising the source of information. I think in the final analysis, however, we will have to be guided here by our own security officers.
All I can say to the hon. gentleman is that we are making a study of the matter and I believe we are making progress. We have asked our security officers to study the matter comprehensively thoroughly and from a sympathetic point of view, to establish in what cases and to what extent we are able to give information on the grounds for rejection where those grounds are of the nature we have been discussing.
The other side of the problem with respect to health considerations involves our medical advisers. We have found that many considerations are raised by them as to the dangers which might follow if information were revealed, even directly to an applicant who asks for it, and they have advised that some safeguards must be set up. I do not believe these problems are incapable of solution, and we are now awaiting a report from the medical officers as to what system they may advise for the giving of information where rejection is based on health grounds.
If and when we solve these problems, then we will come back to the other problem of appeal procedure. We are, as you will see, working towards a system where, firstly, an application is reviewed, the medical, security and other information is obtained and the application is then approved or rejected. Secondly, when rejected, and I am not certain just how far down this appeal procedure should be carried, the applicant or his sponsor will be given the opportunity to have his case reviewed on appeal and to then bring before the appeal board all the information he has been able to gather to counter the reasons for rejection.
This will get the matter out of the present pattern where so much depends upon the individual decision of the minister. I certainly do not hesitate to pay tribute to the volume of work done by the former minister. I have a parliamentary assistant to help me, but there is a tremendous volume of work and one of the things which disturbs me is that

when you are dealing with so many individual files, with nothing but your own recollection to guide you, you cannot possibly be certain that this week you do not make a different decision from the one which you made in a similar case which was before you the previous week.
I do not think that is a healthy system and I would rather see one where we might have an open appeal procedure and a volume of precedents built up for the guidance of officials and of the public and of those who represent the applicants, so that these matters might be dealt with on at least a much more regular and open basis.
Let me also say that the cases which come before the minister and his departmental officials include what I might call hard cases. While the cases are many and complex, it is of course only those cases which are rejected with which I have been dealing. I would not want to leave the impression that such cases represent a very substantial proportion of the cases which come before the department by way of application. The great majority of applications are processed and approved and it is in those cases where there are difficulties, particularly with respect to health and security, that you get the kind of problem which I have been discussing. It is, however, a problem of sufficient importance and of sufficient size to warrant the study now being made.
I should also like to raise this one further caution. It is quite possible, in fact more than possible, that there is some information which we will require to obtain in the course of assessing immigration applications that we may never be able to reveal. In fact I know that the answer to the immigration problem will never be perfect. We will never be able to get the perfect system which will please everybody. One could not do that even if one had a policy of unlimited admission. There will always be some people who would be displeased, and very displeased, but we do hope to be able to improve the situation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: My question is a very simple one. I must say I thought the wisest observation the minister made was the last one. I am not going to attempt any critique of what he said. I am going to ask this simple question. Is the system he now has in contemplation to be applied only to sponsored immigrants or is it also to be applied to open placement applicants who have no connection with Canada?


Edmund Davie Fulton: That has not been decided. There are obvious difficulties in the way of applying it to non-sponsored immigrants. How would they get representation? At
4059
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the moment, at any rate, I would not contemplate sending appeal boards overseas. My thought is that the practical method of commencement is probably to restrict it initially to sponsored cases. It will be appreciated that if these changes are made much of this will involve changes in legislation. Much of it will also involve changes in regulations. After we have made a decision, where we find it possible to do it by changes of regulations it will be done and announced immediately. But a good many of the regulations depend upon the provisions of the present legislation so that, as I see it, an over-all change will not be possible until we have a substantial revision of the legislation.
These things do take time. When we have made some tentative decision within the department as to what is practical and how far we think we can go we will then, of course, obtain the benefit of the views of the various ethnic groups, labour and all other organizations interested in immigration. Then, of course, the time will come when draft legislation will probably have to be referred to a parliamentary committee.
In my opinion this is a long-range program. I do not believe it is advisable to make changes in immigration laws or policies just for the sake of making changes, because this is a subject matter of tremendous importance to Canada. There is nothing more important than the kind of people we bring into this country and the type of citizens they are going to be in the future. I believe that immigration law is one of the most important fields of law in Canada. While we and others are impatient with the present situation, I would be unwise and unfair if I did not indicate my belief is that the soundest kind of haste for us to make is to make haste slowly. I felt it only fair to take the committee into my confidence, if you like, as to our thinking on the kind of immigration system we would like to see and are working towards and studying at the moment.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I should like to ask a question about the security aspect which involves the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, our security vehicle, you might say. Might it not be possible to categorize the types of reports the R.C.M.P. have so that those of us who might inquire would have some idea of the source of some of this information? In addition to categorizing the types of sources, would it not be possible to categorize the actual charges themselves so that we would have something to go on? We would then be able to know that the R.C.M.P. were not merely listening to gossip by some local
4060	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration fanatic. If we could be given that assurance both generally and in connection with immigration many of us would feel much better in our relations with people who come to us after having been refused and are up in the air. I think most members of parliament tend to get up in the air with the R.C.M.P., and perhaps unfairly, when they have so little to go on.


Edmund Davie Fulton: We have asked the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to analyse their security program and to try to categorize the types of security reports they are able to let us have. We have asked them to study the question of evaluating security information and the problems that have to be met in dealing with an application. At the moment the police are studying these matters. They are reevaluating their own sources of information and are categorizing them in accordance with the countries in which they have to work and the agencies in those countries from which they receive their reports. Therefore we should eventually be able to have not a rigid system but a guide in the evaluation of security information which is on file on the one hand as against recommendations and character references which may be received on the other hand.
With respect to the question of whether we shall be able to divulge to individuals the sources of the information, that is a matter upon which I must give a very guarded answer. We want to give as much of the facts on which rejection is based as we can but we are not prepared to do anything which may prejudice the sources of security information, because there is a very definite obligation accepted by us to safeguard the interests of the state.


Harold Edward Winch: It might be an irresponsible source.


Edmund Davie Fulton: That is why we are trying to make a study now to see to what extent we can evaluate and categorize sources of security information.


Harold Edward Winch: I would hate to think my character depended upon the hon. member for Victoria.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think the hon. member would be in very safe hands.


Harold Edward Winch: I do not think so.


Edmund Davie Fulton: This afternoon the hon. member for Okanagan Boundary raised some matters in connection with Indian affairs, mainly having to do with leases and expropriation of Indian lands. In connection with expropriations, the Indian Act does provide in section 35 that where a municipal or


provincial authority has the power to expropriate, then that power may, with the consent of the governor in council and subject to any terms that may be prescribed by the governor in council, be exercised in relation to lands in a reserve or any interest therein. Where a provincial or municipal authority is prepared to expropriate we never consent to that expropriation without first consulting with the band council and getting their agreement as to the compensation to be paid.
In connection with leases, the general policy is for the consent of the band to be obtained to any proposed lease. If the lease is for more than a year we obtain surrenders to Her Majesty in the right of Canada from the band council and then the lease is made between Her Majesty and the proposed lessee. That is covered in section 37 of the act.
The hon. gentleman asked for the reasons for the non-renewal of a number of leases. In the year 1956-57, 716 leases expired of which 438 were renewed, leaving a remainder of 278 not renewed for the following reasons: (a) leases that were lapsing due to expiry date and the lessee not being desirous of renewing; (b) Indian owners desiring to regain possession of their own lands; (c) negotiations for renewal under way but not completed and (d) leases with respect to which renewals have been agreed upon but the documentation has not been completed.
It should also be pointed out that over recent years the policy has been against the granting of long-term leases, and with the concurrence of most band councils, in which I believe they show good business judgment, we have been trying to get the leases down to a short term. That is their desire in order that any change in economic factors, or in the value of the land, may be reflected in a renegotiation of the lease at a new rental, which is not possible if you tie the land up under long-term leases.


Frank Claus Christian: May I ask a question of the minister? What is the view of the minister as to the length of time this procedure of leasing Indian lands will be followed? Might it be a matter of 40 or 50 years, at which time the Indians might no longer be wards of the government? The reason I raise this question is that leased lands around cities and municipalities hold up the development of those cities. I am concerned with how long this leasing system is going to operate in so far as the lands adjacent to cities and municipalities are concerned.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I do not think the question raised by the hon. gentleman is so much affected by leases as it is by the question

of surrender. If a band agrees it can always surrender its land and that land can be sold or otherwise acquired by the municipality.
I should point out also that the policy of reducing the term of the lease is in accordance with what the hon. gentleman has in mind, so that we could be in a flexible position. If the band agrees, then they might be in a position to turn the land over instead of finding that it has been tied up for 40 years by a lease. I am not attempting to terminate discussion, but I should like to suggest that if we are going to get into a discussion of policy with regard to Indian affairs, that might be left until we get to the Indian affairs branch item.
The hon. member for Red Deer raised a question about a country in Europe which he said he learned through the press was contending, through a government spokesman, that former nationalists who were now Canadian citizens were still subject to military service. I can only tell him that no case has come to my attention by either seeing the press release or by correspondence, in which I have been advised that this suggestion has been made that anyone is subject to military service in the country from which he came. I have not heard of the government of any country in Europe, certainly not a country outside the iron curtain, having taken that view. I can say without hesitation that neither I nor the government of which I am a member would recognize any such claim by any government that a Canadian citizen is liable for military service in that country, whether or not he returns to that country of which he was formerly a national, unless he re-acquired citizenship of that country.
Then the hon. member for Timiskaming raised an objection with regard to sponsored movements of miners into Canada. I can only point out to him that we have not had such sponsored group movements since 1956, when I understand the Canadian metal mining association did get an agreement to bring in a group of miners, but that was not altogether satisfactory. There has been no request for such a movement since that time, and therefore the problem has not come before me. I must say I believe, in general at any rate, we should see a general pattern of immigration where the department, in co-operation and consultation with interested organizations, would be responsible for carrying out the main activity of selecting the immigrants who are to come to Canada.
In so far as the Chinese are concerned, I can only say here again the problems are well known and are being studied. We have the brief to which the hon. member referred, 96698-2571
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration and we have made but one change. It is no longer necessary for Chinese to wait until they are Canadian citizens before they can apply for the admission of relatives.
The problem in connection with Chinese children and grandchildren is, and always will be a problem difficult to solve satisfactorily. One of the problems is that of identifying satisfactorily the children who present themselves for immigration at Hong Kong as the children who are described in the application. This problem again raises humanitarian issues, and we are working on a satisfactory reconciliation on the desirability, on the one hand, of ensuring that the person who presents himself for examination is the person stated in the application, and on the other hand the desire of many of these elderly citizens to get in the people whom they claim to be their relatives and who could assist them in their old age.


William Arnold Peters: If these children referred to were legally adopted, and that could be arranged, would they then be eligible under this clause relating to a child under 21 years of age?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No, a child is defined in that clause as being one born within wedlock and who would have the status of legitimacy. This illustrates the sort of problem that arises because the adoption laws in Canada are exclusively provincial and it is a very difficult thing for us to say that a child adopted in China is the legal son of a Canadian living in Ontario and would be regarded as a legal son when he comes into Ontario. We do not know to what extent the Chinese law of adoption conforms to the Ontario law of adoption, and that is the sort of problem you get into in connection with this question of adopted children.


William Arnold Peters: I may say that there is a young Chinese chap now living in Ottawa, and who is a member of one of the government departments, who was adopted or sponsored, and I believe adopted, by the same gentleman who is asking to have these other children admitted. I am told also, although it is something we cannot condone, that if you go to the right legal authorities in Ottawa they can make these arrangements. Certainly, I do not believe that is the proper method of doing it, even if you have the money to do it. There is one relative, also a nephew, who has been in Ottawa for a number of years, who was admitted to Canada. I cannot see much difference between his case and that of these other children.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Without the relevant facts of a particular case before me, we very quickly get into the realm of speculation which is
4062	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration not a very profitable one to pursue. It may well be that the child who was admitted was brought into Canada as the relative of another Chinese, I do not know. Unless I know the facts, I cannot say why one case is dealt with in one way and another in another way.
With regard to what the hon. gentleman has just said, it is because of that feeling that we want to provide an appeal procedure, a general procedure for dealing with immigration cases, so that the applicant will know the reasons and can have his case decided by the appeal board. These suggestions about money changing hands are suggestions that, in so far as the officials of the department are concerned, I reject absolutely. We have had investigations of that, and there were investigations made during the time of my predecessor-


William Arnold Peters: I should point out that my information is not to the effect the arrangements are made in Ottawa, but that arrangements can be made at the other end for those who qualify.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Well, that is one of the general problems of Chinese immigration which is also being studied. There are a number of particular branches of immigration, if I might call them that, such as Chinese immigration, east Indian immigration, west Indian immigration and immigration from the iron curtain countries. They all present their special problems.
The hon. member for Skeena and others referred to the question of Indian education. He asked for an expression of my attitude toward Indians being educated in provincial schools, a process that has been under way for some time now. I must say that the position I take is that it is a desirable program or a desirable principle to follow, as it were, so that as far as possible Indian children may be brought up together with white children with whom they are going to be obliged to live for the rest of their lives. But there are certain safeguards that I think must be maintained.
First of all, the Indians must be generally in accord with the program of sending their children to public schools. There are problems of religious education and faith, and the rights of the Indians which were guaranteed to them in that connection must be safeguarded. Where that can be done, there is no objection that I can see to having the Indian children educated in the schools along with the white children. But to whatever extent that program may advance- and it is advancing quite rapidly; about 18 per cent of the Indian school population is now attending provincial schools-there will be for many years, if not forever, the residue 

who will have to be educated in the residential schools because of their distance from centres of population and other factors as, for instance, the fact that their parents are not alive and they have no home, and hence must be brought up in a residential school.


Mr. Castleden:: Would the minister permit a question?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes.


George Hugh Castleden: I believe the hon. member for Skeena was suggesting that the matter of the education of Indian children might be turned over to the provinces and the federal government might undertake payment on a per capita basis for the education of the Indian children, where the province is likely to undertake it fairly well in line with their educational program?


Edmund Davie Fulton: That is practically what is done now, where we are able to work out arrangements.


George Hugh Castleden: Have the provinces been approached with regard to their willingness to accept such a program and to what extent have they accepted it?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The practice has been to make arrangements with the local school board. The provincial school inspector is, of course, notified but it is an arrangement where individual negotiations have to be made and they are made at the local school board level. We are regularly in touch with the officials of the departments of education of the provinces as to the program.


Donald Cameron: Can the minister tell us what amounts are paid as contributions toward the cost of educating Indian children in British Columbia?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I did not hear the question.


Donald Cameron: How much does your department pay the local school boards toward the cost of educating Indian children in British Columbia?


Edmund Davie Fulton: May I suggest that we wait to ask detailed questions until we get to the Indian affairs branch?


Donald Cameron: Yes.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The hon. member for Skeena also raised the question of the attitude of the white population towards the Indian population. I can advise him that there are at the present time three placement officers in the department whose duty it is to consult with industries and labour groups in an effort to get Indians accepted for employment. From April 1 that number will be increased to five. If I am correct in my understanding of it, that was a project which

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
was conceived by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. I should like to say that I think it is one of the soundest things he did.
In a somewhat rambling and discursive way, Mr. Chairman, I think that covers most of the general points that have been raised by hon. members who have participated in the discussion. If I have been somewhat rambling in my remarks, I apologize and ask to be excused on the ground that this discussion commenced on January 15.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is one question
which the minister forgot. It was my first question. It has become a standard question from this side of the house. Would the hon. gentleman tell us how much waste and extravagance he has found in the department or how much the Minister of Finance has found?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Had it not been for the unexpectedly heavy movement-and I think "unexpectedly heavy" is a fair description of it-of immigration into Canada this year, I am confident there would have been some reductions I could make. I have been advised by my officials that there are some five votes in which we could have made reductions. The total would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $50,000. I refer to items where the amounts provided in the main estimates are not going to be exhausted. But as we are asking for additional money in supplementary estimates it would seem to me that it would be a little bit picayune if I moved a reduction amounting to $50,000 on the one hand and asked for supplementaries amounting to several million dollars on the other.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should be quite interested if the hon. gentleman after dinner on another item-because I think we are about ready to pass this one-could give me those items and what they are.


Stanley Haidasz: I should like to ask the Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration whether the cabinet order curtailing immigration from Europe as of July, 1957 was based on the confidential report which was in issue here in the debates last week?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I do not know on what basis my predecessor arrived at his decision.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is set out very clearly in Hansard.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I do not know whether or not he had it before him at the time he made his decision. However, after I was sworn in and had taken over this department, one of the first matters that was placed before me by my officials was this decision which was not to be effective until July 30. It was felt
-and quite properly and in a manner which I appreciate-that this was a matter which should be reviewed by the present government because the policy that was decided upon was not yet effective. It was on the basis of the report of the previous decision, plus the facts and information given to me since I took office, that I recommended to my colleagues the program which we implemented effective July 30.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I know the hon. gentleman does not want to be unfair. On October 17 I gave the reasons for making that decision of April 12 and they were that it was purely a holding order in order to give me an opportunity to review the matter after the election, an opportunity which the electors did not give.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think that we must get this matter cleared up. There is no real profit in pursuing it. However the hon. gentleman wants to describe it, it was an order that was made and on the basis of which instructions were issued to the officers overseas. I do not hide behind it. We made our own decision. But I think it should be known that there was an earlier decision.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Quite so. I have no apology for it at all.


Stanley Haidasz: Could the minister say upon what information the cabinet made the decision?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I do not think the hon. gentleman really expects me to go into detail as to what goes on in cabinet discussions. We have announced the decision. We are prepared to abide by it and to defend it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Six
o'clock.


Mr. Nesbitt:: May we call it six o'clock, Mr. Chairman?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Could this item be carried?


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I do not mind allowing this item to carry. I can say what I want to say on another item.


Erhart Regier: There is a matter that I wish to raise. I wonder whether you might not call it six o'clock, Mr. Chairman.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Erhart Regier: Mr. Chairman, I realize that the committee is anxious to get on with this item, but there are two questions with regard to which I wish the minister would give me some enlightenment.
4064	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
I notice from the tables for the year ended March 31, 1957 that of the 165,000 people who came to Canada, speaking in round figures, fewer than 50,000 were under the age of 20 and 65,000 were married. That leaves a remainder of some 50,000 who were single and over the age of 20-a high percentage of 155,000. I am sure we should all like to see as rapid an increase in the population of Canada as possible, though many Canadians are afraid they may lose employment as the result of immigration. I believe the complaint centres mainly on the single men who are immediately available for employment in the labour market. I wish the minister would tell the committee whether anything is being done by his department to encourage the entry into Canada of family units as opposed to single people. I have long felt that we were not receiving our share of consumers, and that too many of the immigrants are immediately available to look for work. I should like to see some of the money spent by the department being devoted to sponsoring family units as distinct from single persons. I know it may be said that single men come in first and bring their relatives later. However, such an argument can hardly be valid in 1957, because immigration had been heavy in the years prior to 1957 and there should have been many dependants-relatives of those who came here in earlier years-entering the country last year.
The other point with regard to which I should like some clarification is this: in the interest of building a greater population in Canada and yet avoiding the creation of a glut on the labour market, what attention has been given to the adoption of more immigrants under the age of 20? I am referring specifically, now, to orphans. I understand the hon. member for Timiskaming has raised the question of adopted children being brought to Canada, but I believe he referred to specific cases. I should like to know whether it is possible for the average Canadian family to adopt an infant anywhere in the world and bring it into Canada under our present regulations, provided they can satisfy the department with regard to the health of the child and their ability to support it. If not, what reasons has the department for refusing such admissions?


Edmund Davie Fulton: On the question of the age and marital status of immigrants coming to Canada, I think the hon. gentleman can be somewhat reassured because of the fact that a year and a half ago, or two years ago, the assisted passage loans scheme was extended to all European countries. Prior to that it had been confined entirely to heads of


families, or what the department calls breadwinners. They could come out on an assisted passage, get settled in Canada and then apply for the admission of their wives and children, so although they were not single men they were coming out with the status almost of single men without families. I believe it was early in 1956 that the scheme was extended so that a husband might bring his whole family with him as a family unit under the assisted passage loan scheme.
The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate made some reference to this when he spoke on January 15, and he was generous to admit that our urgings in that regard had been heeded by the former administration to the extent that this concession had been made, and I am informed that the result of that extension has been to bring out many more family groups to Canada than was the case in former years.
I am aware of the circumstances to which the hon. gentleman has referred, namely that particularly in the winter months if we bring out single men they are automatically in a position where they compete with those already in Canada on a tight labour market. Two things have been done to deal with this problem. One is the winter slow down, applied six weeks earlier than usual, and the other is the continuation of the policy of allowing the assisted passage loan scheme to apply to family units.
With regard to the second question, concerning difficulties in the way of permitting the entry into Canada of children adopted overseas, I dealt with this at some length in reply to an hon. member who spoke earlier this evening. As to the details, I should prefer to wait if I may, before replying. I think that if the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquit-lam will refer to my earlier remarks he will find the answer. If he has any further questions, I suggest we might wait until we reach estimate No. 68-the immigration branch-at which time I will have the immigration officials with me and can enter into a detailed discussion, should the hon. member wish.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, there is one matter I should like to draw briefly to the attention of the minister. I do not expect an answer now, and I realize this might better be dealt with under another item, but unfortunately I may not be able to be present at that time, therefore I should like to mention it now. I will be as brief as I can.
In addition to bringing this to the attention of the minister, I should like also to bring it to the notice of the committee which, I understand, has been set up to make recommendations concerning changes in the regulations under the citizenship act and the

Immigration Act. I hope that when this committee makes recommendations to the minister, situations such as I am about to describe will be eliminated in the future though, unfortunately, they have been going on for years and years-a state of affairs to which some of us have objected in the past.


An hon. Member:: Hasn't Davie changed it yet?


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Perhaps the hon. member who interrupted did not hear me mention that this committee has been set up to look into this matter, and there are so many things which need looking into, after the neglect of the previous administration, that it all naturally takes time.
The case I have in mind concerns an immigrant who came to Canada in 1948, a man by the name of Stanimir Jovanovich. He was of Yugoslav extraction, and during the last war he escaped from Yugoslavia after the German invasion and joined the Royal Air Force. He served with considerable distinction in the R.A.F. for three years, and I had the privilege of being able to see his discharge papers and recommendations, which were excellent. After he had arrived in this country he unfortunately contracted tuberculosis and had to be confined to hospital for a brief period. As the result of his illness, which was certainly no fault of his own, he lost his status as a landed immigrant and was, for a number of years, under an order of deportation because he had temporarily become a public charge.
The matter was brought to the attention of the previous administration on several occasions, and I understand that this order of deportation has only recently been suspended. Nevertheless it will be 1962 before Mr. Jovanovich can become a Canadian citizen under the present regulations and under section 10, subsection 1 of the citizenship act. It would seem to me that this type of incident could well be eliminated when the immigration regulations and the citizenship regulations are changed, because here is a man who served the allied cause with distinction, who came to this country and who, through no fault of his own, became ill; and because of that he is prevented from becoming a Canadian citizen until 1962, although his wife is already a Canadian citizen and so are his children.
I will simply say in closing I hope that when the act and its regulations are amended, as I understand they will be, situations such as this will be eliminated in future.


Mervyn Arthur Hardie: Mr. Chairman, when the minister answered those questions which were raised this afternoon I did not hear him say
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration anything with regard to the question of an integrated school system which was raised by the hon. member for Skeena and one other hon. gentleman. I wonder whether the minister would deal with the suggestion made by the hon. member for Skeena, who said he felt that no real advance would be made in the field of Indian education until the education of Indian children is turned over by the department to the provinces, with the federal government paying a certain amount of money to the provinces to meet the costs.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I made a reply to the hon. member for Skeena in that connection in which I pointed out that we were encouraging in some areas the education of Indian children in provincial public schools provided certain requirements were met, namely that the local school board agreed, and also that the Indians concerned agreed, and in addition that where there was a question of religious education the rights of the Indians were covered and protected in that regard. I further pointed out that there would be for many years, if not permanently, and no one can speak categorically here, a number of Indians who would continue to require education in the residential schools.
The one thing I omitted from my remarks this afternoon, and I am glad to supplement them and make up for the omission, was the tribute that should be paid both with respect to work done in the past by the religious orders and the churches of all denominations with respect to the education of Indians, the work that is being done today and the work that will require to be done in the future and which the churches stand fully ready to do in areas in which it simply would not be possible for the government of Canada alone to meet the requirements. I am unstinted in my praise of the churches of various denominations and the various men and women and orders in those denominations who do this as a work of charity to assist the government in discharging its obligation to the Indian people.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, since the item did not pass before six o'clock perhaps the hon. gentleman could satisfy my curiosity now about these potential reductions.


Edmund Davie Fulton: There were four votes for which we find we may move reductions, items numbered 62, 75, 78 and 79, to a total of $45,650. I do not know whether the hon. gentleman wishes a detailed explanation of each one of them.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would be content with a summary explanation.
4066	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Edmund Davie Fulton: Well, the summary explanation in one instance is that there was an amendment to the regulations which made the Dalance of the item no longer applicable and some of the work was deferred.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Was that in construction?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No. No construction item was affected. Because of the unemployment situation this winter we are pressing on with every possible construction program on which we can take action. An agreement on rehabilitation with the provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan has been revised. It seems to me it would be really wasting the time of the committee to move these small reductions when we are asking for a substantial increase in the supplementary estimates.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am quite satisfied with the explanation, Mr. Chairman.


Stanley Haidasz: I am not satisfied with the explanation. I have received letters from editors of the ethnic papers in Toronto complaining that the Department of Citizenship and Immigration has eliminated all advertisements placed in those papers dealing with the subject of education for citizenship. Would the minister like to explain this?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The answer is that we have spent all the money that was approved and provided by parliament in this field until the period of March 31, and until we get the estimates for next year we have no more money to spend. Possibly the previous administration did not provide enough money under that heading.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I might point out that
the hon. gentleman has brought in supplementaries.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether the minister would care to qualify a statement he has just made. Did he say that the department had spent all the money that was provided up to March 31? I wonder if he meant that it spent only ten-twelfths of the money because that is all that has been provided thus far. Surely this government is not spending money before it is approved by parliament.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The hon. gentleman knows
very well there are such things as transfers between allotments. We have not exceeded our authorization granted by parliament but if we spend any more we will do so. We are not prepared to exceed the authority given.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is it
not also a fact which perhaps should be part of the record when the minister is discussing the total expenditures of his department that there was a governor general's warrant in


August 1957 for an amount of $2,428,000 in addition to the sums that had been provided under the Appropriation Acts? I do not criticize the minister for having obtained a governor general's warrant. Of course, it is a matter of interest to us that the government does in fact know how to go about it in case -well, you know, just in case-but should not the amount of money so obtained also be included as part of the total expenditures of the department?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I had better raise my 25 per cent to 30 per cent.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I was quite prepared to deal with that on the immigration item if the hon. gentleman wants the details. There is no need to revise the percentage figure I gave to the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate earlier this afternoon because when I referred to the total expenditure the amount so spent was included.


Mr. Leboe:: I wonder whether the minister could tell me whether or not Mr. R. F. Welch who has contracts with the Canadian National has sponsored immigrants in the past and if he is continuing to do so?


Edmund Davie Fulton: In the past I understand
that the R. F. Welch Construction Company Limited did sponsor the entry of immigrants for the purpose of using them as track workers on the railways under contracts which they had mainly with the Canadian National Railways. That is no longer done.


Douglas Mason Fisher: On that point, might I ask the minister if it is not true that the R. F. Welch Company no longer handles such movements but this is actually handled by the railroads and the service which Welch supplies is to contract the men?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I understand that is correct.


Douglas Mason Fisher: One could perhaps make an unflattering comment on this department although I think it would be unfair owing to the fact that we have no descendants either in this place or in the other unreformed place of those people who were on the shore when Jacques Cartier arrived, but there are some other points I would like to make in connection with two aspects of the department. One is that in this debate this afternoon no one mentioned one of the difficult factors, certainly in so far as it applies to the Indians in the area from which I come, and that is the question of encroachment upon the portion of the lands upon which the Indians formerly lived, roamed, and trapped by those engaged in carrying out their mining and woods operations and the steady push of the American tourist-


Edmund Davie Fulton: I wonder whether the hon. gentleman would agree to let these questions stand until we reach the Indian affairs branch. I will then have the officials of that branch before me and will be better able to deal with his questions.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Who are these officials now present? Are they immigration officials or are they senior officials of the department?


Edmund Davie Fulton: At the moment I have before me the deputy minister and the head of departmental administration. When we reach the various branches we will get the heads of the departments to come down.


Douglas Mason Fisher: In other words, if I want to ask questions about immigration from Italy and that sort of thing I should wait until that time.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Questions relating to citizenship and immigration might be asked, I think, under item 68.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Citizenship-
63. Citizenship branch, $686,823.
Douglas Mason Fisher: On this item, Mr. Chairman, I am interested in the publications put out by this branch and, if I remember correctly, this is the branch which issues these handbooks for newcomers on the steps towards Canadian citizenship. I would just like to know something about the quantity involved and whether any more special efforts could be made to make these books more attractive. In other words, what I am saying is that I do not think these books are very attractive at the present time.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, we have looked at as many of these books as we had time for since we came in on June 21. Some comments have occurred to us but I do not wish to detract in any sense from the work done or the motives of our predecessors or the departmental officials who have designed these books. If the hon. gentleman has any specific suggestions, we will be very glad to take them into consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous grants-
67. Canadian writers' foundation, $6,000.
Douglas Mason Fisher: Has the minister considered the possibility of raising this appropriation next year-that is to say, the grant to the Canadian writers' foundation?


Edmund Davie Fulton: As a matter of fact this item will be transferred in the next fiscal year to the Canada Council.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Immigration branch-
68. Administration of the Immigration Act, $1,174,292.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would like to pursue very briefly the point raised earlier by the hon. member for Trinity with respect to the decision made by the minister to confirm the interim stop order which I made on April 12 with regard to open placement immigration. The minister said, of course, that I would know the reasons-which he did not himself know-why I had issued this order on April 12. I was perfectly frank with the committee on October 17 with respect to this matter and hon. members will find my remarks on page 97 of Hansard for that date. I am not going to repeat what I said on that occasion, but it was perfectly apparent on April 12 that there was going to be an unprecedentedly large number of immigrants arriving in Canada during this past year. It was perfectly obvious, as it will have been in the minds of many hon. members, that even the most conscientious minister would have some other preoccupations besides departmental administration or, to be specific, the conduct of the administration branch in the two months between April 12 and June 10. Therefore, it seemed to me only common prudence in view of this very large increase in immigration which was already quite apparent and also in view of the fact that because of the higher birth rate in the 1940's we could expect a larger increase in the labour force from our own Canadian babies, if I dare so to describe them-


An hon. Member:: Careful!


John Whitney Pickersgill: -this matter should be studied again at the middle of the year. That was the intention, or perhaps the illusion, which I cherished when I made that order on April 12. Of course, at the time when I came back to the department on June 12 I felt it would be quite wrong for me to give any consideration to policy matters. There were certain day to day administrative matters with which I did deal but this matter was left and, as the minister has very courteously acknowledged, I did suggest to the deputy minister that it should be brought to the minister's attention as soon as possible, because it was a matter upon which some definite decision should be made.
There was another matter about which the hon. gentleman and I had an exchange during October and in respect of which I did make a policy decision because it seemed imperative to do so. That was a matter about which I told the hon. gentleman myself because I felt it was something about which
4068	HOUSE OF
Supply

Citizenship and Immigration he ought to know so that he could exercise his own judgment thereon as quickly as possible.
I would like to say something very briefly about how these decisions were reached under the previous regime, with respect to cutting off-when it was cut off, which of course it was not in 1956-of open placement immigration. The department of Citizenship and Immigration maintains no statistical or forecasting service of its own. It relies entirely upon other services of the government, particularly the Department of Labour, the Department of Trade and Commerce, including the bureau of statistics, and the Department of Finance, and at no time in my experience was a decision ever made about any of these matters without the most careful study of the views and forecasts of these departments as to the capacity of the economy to absorb whatever available labour supply there might be. This, of course, at best, is only intelligent guesswork, but I agree completely with what the minister said before dinner when he mentioned that it would be utter folly for the government to encourage immigrants to come to Canada looking for work when there was no work to be found.
I have said on every occasion I have mentioned it that I think the minister was wise-I think events have proved that he was wise-in confirming the interim decision which I made on April 12. I have never taken any exception to that nor would I have taken the slightest exception to the announcement of it. Because there has been some controversy over this matter I want to make it clear now that the only part of what the minister did at that time to which I did take exception was the abrupt termination of the Hungarian movement. My feeling was that there might have been a more careful explanation of the whole business. Even in the case of the Hungarian movement, I quite agree with the minister that it would not have been wise to bring any large number of Hungarians to this country if there was no possibility of their placement. I made no attempt in June to form any conclusion as to the desirability or otherwise of making this decision.
I assume, of course, that the minister with his officials considered very carefully what the economic condition was at that time late in June and what the forecasts were that were available to the government at that time, and that all these things were taken into account in making a decision. That is what I would expect and I am sure that was what was done.
I am not going to suggest that the minister should give us any confidential information,
[Mr. Pickersgill.l

read from any confidential reports or anything of that sort. All I should like the minister to do is to give us the appreciation he had in July which led him to feel that July 31 was the right cut-off date rather than say August 31 or September 30. This would obviously have involved some estimate (a) of the number of persons likely to come into the labour force and (b) of the absorptive capacity of the labour market. At the same time perhaps the minister could give us-I do not want to waste a lot of time with this-his current appreciation, if he does not feel that to do so would be premature.
I notice that, in reply to the hon. member for Trinity, he said that this movement was stopped for the winter. Perhaps he could tell us how soon in the spring it is hoped to start the open placement movement again, and what proportions he thinks it is likely to reach in the year 1958. I recall that the minister made a speech in Montreal some time during the autumn. I do not have the reference to it under my hand at the moment but the minister no doubt recalls it himself. In that speech he indicated that the cessation of open placement immigration was for the winter only and that he expected a very large program for 1958. I think the committee would be quite interested in having the general appreciation that the minister made of the labour market and the absorptive capacity of the economy in July and also his present appreciation on which the program for 1958 will be based.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member has asked me to acquaint the committee in general terms with the considerations that were placed before me at the end of June on the basis of which we issued the order to implement the winter immigration program for the winter months of 1957-58. In answer I can tell him that in the department with which we are now dealing I was acquainted early by the officials with the economic forecasts that had come to their attention and which placed upon economic conditions and the prospects for the future a very different interpretation from that which we had been given by the previous government in the budget in March and in the election campaign during May and June.


Mr. Marler:: Nonsense.


Edmund Davie Fulton: There should be no hesitation about admitting that. I suspect that the forecasts that were laid before me then and which have been laid before me since bear out the economic forecast tabled in the House of Commons by the Prime Minister the other day. I suspect that the former minister's

order of April 12 was in part at least based upon that forecast or resulted perhaps indirectly but in large part from the forecast that he had received on the basis of the opinion of the economists whose responsibility it is to advise the government as to what the future months will hold and on whose opinion is based estimates of the labour market, amongst other things, in the coming months.
On the basis of the advice which I received it was apparent, as the former minister has said, that there would undoubtedly be a record movement in 1957 in any event. There was a record movement in the first six months over which we had no control and inasmuch as the movement was piling up we had to act fairly quickly to curtail it at all. If we had not acted quickly it would have reached proportions that might have carried it as high as 350,000 or possibly even 400,000 during the year 1957.
On the basis of the indications of what unrestricted movement would result in, as well as on the basis of the forecasts of economic conditions, we came to the conclusion that it would be advisable to confirm the decision arrived at by my predecessor and, indeed, even to expand it in one or two particulars. I should like to deal with some of the things that have been said by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate as to the ways in which we might have exceeded the terms of what he calls the provisional order he had made.
Let me deal first of all with the question of whether or not it was a provisional order. I do not want to read from departmental documents which are confidential. I will just ask the hon. gentleman, therefore, whether he does not recall that he had issued instructions to overseas officers that the arrangements were to be made effective immediately upon receipt,-


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is right.


Edmund Davie Fulton: -which is hardly a good way of describing a tentative order. Then the hon. gentleman says that he was amazed by and is critical of the abrupt termination of the Hungarian refugee movement which he says we brought into effect when we took over. I would ask the hon. gentleman if he does not recall that at some date early in May he placed very severe limitations upon the Hungarian refugee movement.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is perfectly correct.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The hon. gentleman has not admitted that before or alluded to it even obliquely in the references he has made. Again 1 say I am not hiding behind any decision
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration of the previous government. We had freedom of action to confirm or to vary. We varied it and we varied it in the way I have indicated. We confirmed it as far as it went and we went a little bit farther on the basis of the information which was supplied to us after June 21 when we assumed responsibility in this country. But most of the restrictive measures which were thus confirmed by our decision had been decided upon and communicated to overseas officers by my predecessor.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is perfectly correct, and I do not question a single thing the minister has said. There is just one question. I do not want to misinterpret anything the minister has said either. Perhaps I am paraphrasing a little and I will accept any correction the minister wishes to make, but I understood him to say that it was not solely the large volume of immigrants that influenced his decision but also the rather gloomy prognostication about the labour market. Would that be a fair summary of what the hon. gentleman said?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The forecasts of conditions which were given to us by the economic advisers when we took over.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. gentleman does not object to my adjective, the rather gloomy forecasts?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The hon. gentleman can use whatever adjectives he likes because those economic conditions were created under the administration of which he was a member.


John Whitney Pickersgill: At any rate, I shall use the adjective "gloomy" as the best interpretation I can give of what the hon. gentleman says was the information communicated to the government in June. I must say, though, that it is difficult to reconcile that with the view expressed by the Minister of Labour in a speech reported in the Montreal Star of December 10, 1957, delivered to the Montreal personnel association at the Ritz-Carlton hotel. This was six months to the day after the election. The Minister of Labour was presumably speaking after having heard the same advice from the same advisers who advised the Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. This is what the minister said:
There is hardly an. economist or a student of the situation who does not feel the unemployment situation is merely temporary and that given a brief breathing pause the natural buoyancy of the economy will assert itself.
Now, that is the formal view expressed by the minister who has the responsibility in this government for labour problems, a very optimistic view I think anyone would say.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Not only that, but we have the Prime Minister himself expressing a view in Winnipeg on the day before Christmas. He did admit there was some problem. This quotation is from the Winnipeg Free Press. I am sorry I have not a copy of the Winnipeg Tribune, but perhaps in these circumstances the Free Press would be satisfactory. I quote:
Prime Minister Diefenbaker said in Winnipeg Monday the current unemployment problem is being met.
It does seem to me that if the minister was given the gloomy view he says he was given in June, and if he communicated that gloomy view of the economic situation in June to the rest of the cabinet, it was not the Liberal government but it was someone else who was deceiving the public in December by saying that this was just a temporary lull and that the natural buoyancy would quickly reassert itself. I do not happen to have in my hand, because I did not realize this point might come up, the record of the federal-provincial conference which was read here yesterday. The Prime Minister's appreciation of the unemployment situation, as stated during the conference, has already been given to the house. He said that it was just a plateau from which we were going to climb to greater heights.
I must say that it is rather difficult to reconcile these optimistic views in late November from the Prime Minister, formally given to the federal-provincial conference, with the view expressed by the minister tonight. I cannot believe the Prime Minister's views were expressed without careful consideration. I know his predecessor would not have made any offhand statements in that way. They would have been based on a most careful appreciation of the economists' views. One can only assume the Prime Minister did the same thing. One can only assume the Minister of Labour did the same thing. Of course, it is true that the day before Christmas, while going through Winnipeg, the Prime Minister may not have been-well I do not attach the same importance to that. I say I do find these things rather difficult to reconcile with what the minister has told us about the gloomy situation he found in June. It seems to me that if this situation was as gloomy as the minister has pictured, then the people of Canada ought to have been told. They ought to have been warned and something ought to have been done about it in June and not on January 20.
It seems to me also, sir, that if the minister had access to the advice of the same economists who prepared this document in March, the advice they gave in June would have greater validity than in March. After

all this was a forecast of the economic weather. It seems to me that the forecasts in June would have had greater validity, in the light of all that had intervened between March and June. I am thinking of the economy and not of other things, though perhaps some of the other things had some influence on the economy. If, as the minister says, he was given this gloomy view in June, surely the Canadian people have been taken for a ride in the last six months by this government. The Minister of Labour goes down to Montreal and says that there is hardly an economist or a student of the situation who does not feel that the unemployment situation is merely temporary, and that given a brief breathing pause, the natural buoyancy of the economy will reassert itself. We are now enjoying the pause.


Edmund Davie Fulton: We are enjoying the pause from the sound of the hon. gentleman's voice. There is, as usual, nothing very much except sound and fury in the hon. gentleman's statement because there is nothing inconsistent in the statement I have made as compared with the statements made by the Minister of Labour and the Prime Minister. The adjective "gloomy" is one which my hon. friend has himself ascribed to the forecast of the economists who advised him in March and whose advice was concealed from the country, and in fact deliberately disregarded, so that a contrary impression could be created in the budget which his government presented to the country in March of 1957.
In simple terms, so the hon. gentleman may understand the situation, when we took over on June 21 it was brought to our attention by the responsible advisers, who I venture to suggest must have been somewhat more hopeful than they were before June 21, that those whom they advised would listen to them, that factors in the economy were not as encouraging as our predecessors had tried to persuade the Canadian people they were. We took account of that advice because we believe that Canada has built up one of the most efficient and reliable civil services of any country, and that the people of Canada will expect their government to give due weight to the advice they received from those responsible advisers. The advice did not contain unmitigated gloom; it was of temporary gloom relieved by the events of June 10, and was to the effect that if certain actions were taken the decline might be made only temporary.
All the factors pointed to the possibility that, if these actions were taken soon and vigorously, a further decline downward might be halted and from there on, to use my hon. friend's phrase, the natural buoyancy of

the Canadian economy would reassert itself and, with sensible policies applied, an upward trend might be resumed. Realizing that unemployment would reach, I am prepared to say substantial proportions, this winter as a result of the blind disregard of our predecessors of the warning that they had received, we did take account of that advice. We did say we felt that the proper and prudent course was to reduce substantially and deliberately the flow of immigration during the winter months,-


John Whitney Pickersgill: As I had already done.


Edmund Davie Fulton: -leaving ourselves a free hand to adjust the flow in 1958 to the adjusted economic factors which we hope and expect will flow from the new economic policies which we implemented. This is exactly what we are doing, and that is why the Minister of Labour was able to say in Montreal the other day that no economist regards this recession as permanent because the cause of the recession has been removed, namely the Liberal government. For these reasons the Prime Minister was able to say what he did say in Winnipeg as read out recently by the hon. member.


Henri Courtemanche: The hon. member for Port Arthur.


John Whitney Pickersgill: On the same point, Mr. Chairman-


Some hon. Members:: Port Arthur.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was discussing the statement of the minister, and surely, Mr. Chairman-


Henri Courtemanche: In my opinion the hon. member was discussing a point that was not in order. I recognize the hon. member for Port Arthur.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman-


Some hon. Members:: Sit down.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am rising on a point of order. I believe that a point of order is always in order. Surely you, sir, are not going to rule that on the item for the administration of the immigration branch it is improper to discuss the motives which actuated the government in determining the extent of its immigration policy. That is precisely what the minister was discussing; and the minister made certain observations about things that I had done and drew certain inferences from things that I had done. Surely in a debating forum such as this, it is proper to be allowed to reply, and I would crave your indulgence, sir. I will be very brief.


Henri Courtemanche: Order. I think both hon. members were out of order in discussing
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration unemployment. That is why I am recognizing the hon. member for Port Arthur.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Before I turn from the merits of the Liberal party and the Conservative party to the immigration estimates, perhaps I might say, in reference to the word that was coined by the minister the last time he was on the estimates about a "Pickersfilli-buster", that now we have had a "Pickers-fillibluster".
Some of the questions I should like to raise in connection with immigration come right down to specific cases in various countries. For example, from information that has very kindly been given to me by the immigration branch, I understand that there is in Italy at the present time a backlog of 52,000 applications of people who are seeking to come out to Canada and who are qualified under the regulations. Yet at the present time we have only the one office in Italy. That would be all right but I contrast that situation-it was not in the annual report-with the fact that we seem to have five offices in Germany and with the fact that we seem to have two offices established in the United States. We should all like very much to have United States immigration. It might be wonderful for our country. But I just wonder whether there is any hope of getting 52,000 Americans into this country.
One other point I should-like to make at this time is in connection with Hungarian immigrants who are here and who, through the fact that they have been unable to obtain employment, have been drawing in certain centres a $3-a-day fee to keep them going. In the area I represent this situation has led to a certain amount of bad feeling, because people are not aware of the background and of the rights that have been promised to these Hungarians by the government under the regulations under which they came in. As a consequence bad feeling is being stirred up there. I think it is a case where the department could spend some of the advertising money that it does not seem to have in order to make the people more aware of the rights of the Hungarians. At the present time we have a sort of ripple running through our whole community over the fact that these Hungarians are able to draw $3 a day and be provided with some kind of living quarters. In contrast, the unemployed man, especially one whose unemployment insurance has run out, is in a much poorer position.
One of the questions that I should like to ask also in connection with immigration has to do with the fact that the department opened an office again in Helsinki in 1956. Yet the latest figures do not seem to indicate that there has
4072	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
been any appreciable increase in Finnish im- and who it is that is refusing to pay the
migration. I understand, or I have been told, that there is a fair backlog of Finns who are anxious to come to this country. I should like to know in that specific case what is holding up the matter.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I regret, Mr. Chairman, that I shall be obliged to ask the hon. member to repeat his last question because of the fact that I was trying to get a proper answer to the first one with regard to Italy while he was continuing. With regard to Italy, it is true that we have a substantial backlog of applications there which are a cause of grave concern. The reason why we have only one office there is that our information is that however many offices we might open we would only be able to obtain co-operative facilities to process so many applicants; in other words, we might open ever so many more offices but we still would not be able to deal with the backlog of applications. Under these circumstances it does not seem reasonable to open more than one office in Italy. In the other countries to which he has referred, the same conditions do not apply. I regret that I did not hear the other question. Perhaps the hon. gentleman would repeat it.


Douglas Mason Fisher: It was in relation to the reopening of an office in Helsinki and the fact that the Finnish immigration has been very low in recent years, that is in relation to what it was say several decades ago. I understand there is still a fair demand amongst people in Finland who are anxious to come here. I should like to know whether the reopening of this office has had any effect; and if not, why not.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I am informed that the office in Helsinki was reopened in late 1956. The result is that the number of immigrants from Finland increased from 1,094 in 1956 to 2,829 in 1957.


Erhart Regier: I wonder whether the minister might resolve a few problems that I have. I understand that the tuition fees for unemployed Hungarian refugees wishing to attend night school are paid by the department and yet the same fees are not paid for unemployed immigrants from other countries. I refer in particular to immigrants out of Holland who are unemployed on the west coast and who are attending night school. They find that they cannot obtain free tuition; yet Hungarian refugees who are unemployed are able to do so. There is quite a bit of resentment at the discrimination. It may be that the British Columbia department of education is at fault. I wish the minister would clarify the matter and say exactly who it is that is paying the fees of the unemployed Hungarian refugees

fees for the unemployed immigrants from other parts of the world.
The other question I had is this. For how long is a sponsor responsible for the welfare of an immigrant into Canada? Is it now for a one-year period, a two-year period or a five-year period? I have had some reports that the regulation with regard to this matter has been altered of late. I should appreciate being informed as to what the situation is now. Has the minister ever considered that the federal government ought to assume responsibilities for the health and welfare of immigrants until the expiration of the five-year period? I understand that at the present time the federal government assumes responsibility only for a very limited time for the welfare in Canada of immigrants and that thereafter it becomes the responsibility of the provincial and municipal governments. I feel that here again is one more instance where the federal government might relieve the municipal treasuries of a burden.
I think the federal government ought to assume responsibility for a 5-year period at least. That is accepted as the period during which men must remain here before they can become Canadian citizens, and I think they should be regarded as wards, if you like, or at least as the responsibility of the federal machine.
I wish the minister could also give us a statement as to the refugee position in western Europe. How many displaced persons are still in camps, hospitals and sanatoria there? Has the government accepted any of these people recently, and is it entertaining taking in some of these refugees who for reasons of health are not able to comply with the regulations? I think, Mr. Chairman, that Canadians would be much happier if we accepted our share of the sick people and looked after them in our own country rather than help some international organization to look after them in these refugee camps.
I think the same feeling exists in Canada with regard to the refugees in the Middle East. I see our government is spending $1 million this year for the relief or welfare of refugees in the Middle East. Some rapid calculation would show that if we spent the same amount of money in looking after them in our own country not only would it help to solve the refugee problem but it would help the economy of our nation. After all, I would prefer to have them here and feed them on Canadian wheat than to pay Canadian money to buy United States wheat with which to feed them.
I wish to express to the minister my appreciation of the efforts the officers of his department have made in all the immigration

cases I have called to their attention during the past five years. I can say that not one worthy case has been refused admission to Canada. That is my experience, and I am very grateful for the assistance that has been given. The officers have gone to great lengths to find out what the difficulty was in every case. That may not be the experience of all hon. members but it has been my experience.
And now I wonder whether the minister could say whether or not there is any "follow up" in the case of sponsored immigrants. If a Canadian sponsors an immigrant and the department hears no complaint, and no one brings the immigrant to the attention of the department, does the department completely forget the immigrant once he has passed the immigration officers at the point of landing? I have in mind a number of cases where sponsors have illegally brought immigrants to Canada by agreeing to supply employment, knowing well that they have no such intention. Then, when the immigrant arrives, he is fobbed off on some restaurant proprietor who works him for 70 hours a week at 50 cents an hour, year in and year out. These people have no chance, working these long hours, of learning the language. They do not know what their rights are; they do not know how they are protected by the labour laws as to holidays with pay, and so on, and these laws are constantly violated. I think that a visit once a year by immigration officers to such immigrants to find out what they are doing, what wages they are receiving and under what conditions they have to work would serve a very useful purpose. Not only would it help the immigrant but it would remove much of the hard feeling that exists at present because many Canadian workers feel immigrants are competing unfairly by accepting positions at substandard rates of pay and working hours.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, in connection with the first question asked by the hon. gentleman with regard to the payment of tuition fees to Hungarian refugees attending night school, I would have to get the information in a specific form and reply to the hon. gentleman later, because we made some attempt to arrive at agreements with the provinces and some of these agreements are in effect while others are not. So far as I know, there is no general differentiation between Hungarian refugees and other immigrants who may be attending citizenship classes under the sponsorship of the department. Most of the classes are actually being operated by provincial education departments. I regret I am not able to give the hon. gentleman an answer in specific form, but I will try to do so later.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
With regard to the question of responsibility for sponsored immigrants, the answer is that whereas in former years there was an actual undertaking in the sponsorship form covering a period of years, the principle now is that the sponsor is responsible for the immigrant only until he is established, and that, of course, must be a flexible period.


Erhart Regier: What does that mean?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Until he is placed in employment-until he is established in a job at a proper standard of wages on the basis of which he is able to support himself in this country. I think the hon. member would agree it would be undesirable to insist that immigrants should remain in a particular location. There must be a stage at which immigrants are on their own and able to move around the country. It would be unrealistic as well as terribly expensive to attempt to hold the sponsor rigidly to the responsibility of an individual who after being successfully placed in employment in Ottawa leaves of his own volition to go to Winnipeg or Vancouver and becomes unemployed there. It is our feeling that the sponsor has discharged his responsibility when he has seen to it that the immigrant is placed in the employment which he has undertaken to find for him.
With regard to the last part of my hon. friend's remarks in respect of immigrants being exploited by unscrupulous operators, I am informed that of last year's immigrant move of 282,164, about 120,000 fell into the category of sponsored immigrants. I am sure, therefore, that the hon. member will appreciate it would be physically and financially impossible for the department to maintain or to keep physical contact with each of these men. We do our best but we do admit that we do not know all the details of every case and I must ask, therefore, that if the hon. gentleman has knowledge of a case such as this he should bring it to our attention privately or publicly as he prefers and we would be glad to follow it up.


Erhart Regier: I wonder whether the minister would undertake to send an inspector through the kitchens of Ottawa restaurants and find out who is or who is not an immigrant, what the rates of pay are and when the immigrant last had a holiday. I think he would be shocked by what such an inquiry would reveal.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I have some doubts as to whether we have any right to send inspectors into the kitchens of establishments in the manner suggested by the hon. member. Minimum wages are a matter of provincial

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration responsibility. What we can do is help when a case is brought to our attention of an immigrant who is being exploited, but without answering further I think we would be open to very proper criticism if federal immigration inspectors entered commercial establishments and demanded answers to certain questions. I would hope that the information would come the other way, that those interested in such cases would persuade the immigrants who are exploited to bring their cases to our attention. We could then take up the case with the provincial minimum wage officers and set in motion the necessary machinery to see that these immigrants are protected and not exploited.
With regard to the question as to the length of time for which the dominion government is responsible for immigrants after their arrival in Canada, the normal period is 12 months, on the basis that it is desirable that an immigrant should become integrated as soon as possible into the municipal, provincial and other local aspects of society in which he lives and should no longer be in a position different from that of the ordinary Canadian citizen or even a landed immigrant, and that position is one of looking to the federal government and the responsibility of it; but while that is the period in which we normally assume responsibility there is no hard and fast line drawn. Cases have to be looked at on their individual merits. We certainly wish to be held not responsible after 12 months, but in a winter such as this, with a very heavy immigration intake, as there has been, we realize that we cannot be dogmatic about the matter. There are discussions under way with the provinces now as to certain arrangements in view of the unusual circumstances that obtain this winter.
The state of the refugees in western Europe is not a matter on which we have statistics of our own. The general survey is maintained by the United Nations and the figures can be obtained. If the hon. gentleman wishes it, one of the officials will obtain the figures and provide them to him later.
With regard to the program for the emptying of the camps, I am glad to be able to say we have recently had discussions with Dr. Lindt, the United Nations high commissioner for refugees, who outlined the problem to us and indicated that he would be bringing to the attention of interested governments a survey of the facts and would discuss with us later proposals for taking care of that situation. I must say with regard to the hon. member's proposal, that if we were to bring

these men over here in large numbers and undertake to provide them with medical and other treatment and care in Canada this action would be the cause of a great deal of concern on the part of the provinces whose responsibility it is to provide for hospital and other kinds of medical attention. It is not a matter we could enter into lightly, because the burden would immediately fall on the provinces, but we are expecting to have further consultations with the United Nations high commissioner for refugees on the general refugee situation in western Europe.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Mr. Chairman, on the first day the minister had his estimates before the committee he was good enough to say that he looked at an order that had been issued by his predecessor under which the files on cases of certain Chinese immigrants had been closed roughly some two years ago. I hope that as a result of that decision, which was so well received in the house, the minister will be able to reverse the decisions made by his predecessor. As I mentioned the other day, during the five-year period ended December 31, 1929, there were four Chinese immigrants admitted to Canada. In the next five-year period which ended in 1934, there were three admitted, one in the next five-year period and none at all in the subsequent five-year period. Being familiar with conditions in western Canada I am sure the minister will agree with me that in many of the little towns in the west there are Chinese running restaurants who are among the outstanding people in the community.
I have in mind a Chinese cook in a restaurant. He brought his wife to Canada approximately two years ago, but it was decided by the department that the child this couple have supported and continue to support is not really their child and so the youngster is not permitted entry into Canada. I think we can afford to be generous In a case of this sort. If the minister were to have a meal in this restaurant and meet the couple in question I am sure he would agree they are fine citizens who would not wish to do an injustice to Canada. I think the least we should do is to permit this mother and father to bring to Canada the ten-year old child for whom they have cared all of its life. It is my hope that the minister will examine these cases which are being brought to his attention by hon. members in all parts of the house.


An hon. Member:: From what source was the hon. member drawing the figures he introduced?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Page 23 of the annual report of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. I should like to ask the minister about the East Indian immigration problem.

Some two years ago his colleague, the Minister of Public Works, made reference to a delegation of East Indians who came to Ottawa. I am sure the Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration would agree with his colleague about the fine contribution the East Indians have made to the life of Canada. According to the report, between 1952 and 1956, inclusive, we have admitted East Indians to Canada in the following numbers, 153, 154, 177, 249 and 322. Since India is a member of the commonwealth, and has a population of 370 million people, it does not seem reasonable that fewer than 300 have been admitted to Canada each year. Could the minister tell us how many applications are processed in our office in Delhi, where an office has been maintained for some time? Could he indicate how many people would like to come to Canada and whether his department is reviewing the situation? I think it is most unfortunate that one of the great men of recent times, Gandhi, would have been denied admission to Canada as an immigrant 40 years ago. Today there are many young people in that country who could make a worth while contribution to life in Canada. I think a policy of immigration that limits the numbers of immigrants to the low figure contained in the annual report of the department is one that ought to be reviewed. Could the minister make a statement concerning the immigration policy as it affects East Indians?


Edmund Davie Fulton: On the question of East Indian immigration, Mr. Chairman, I made a brief report this afternoon on the effects of the change made in the order in council of January 2, in which I pointed out that the result of permitting East Indians to apply for the admission to Canada of relatives as a right will have the effect of removing, from the quota, we hope, quite a number of those who would otherwise be able to come under the quota arrangement, so that we will be able to bring in more relatives of Canadian citizens under the quota than was the case before.
It is interesting to note that although India is a country of the commonwealth, as the hon. member properly remarks, the government of India is not suggesting that anything be done by the government of Canada with respect to the immigration of East Indians to this country, because India has the problem of developing that country. Although we have a space on the quota which would take care otf cases of Indians who, I might say, apply on their own to come to Canada, people of the type described by my hon. friend, scientists, technicians and other educated Indians, are badly required in their own country and as far as I am aware there is no pressure for them to come to Canada.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration The question of the numbers coming from India to Canada is a matter that is before us now. It is one of those subjects to which special consideration has to be given, as I said, as one of the categories of immigrants for whom we want to find a better solution than has been found so far.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I wonder whether the
minister has figures available showing how many applications were received last year at the Delhi office?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I shall have the officials with me under item No. 70, "field and inspection services abroad". I hope to be able to give the hon. member an answer at that time.
With regard to the Chinese, I might point out that the figures of entrants from China have increased substantially from the period to which my hon. friend has had reference, and in the month of December 1957 alone there were 206 who entered Canada from China.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Yes. I did not intend to
suggest that there had been no increase since the period with which I dealt, but in view of the fact that immigration from China was practically at a standstill for a 20-year period is it not reasonable to suggest that many of these people are anxious to bring their children to Canada now? In viewing the situation I think we should take into account the policy of the previous government with regard to immigration from China which I think can be accurately described as unreasonable.


Edmund Davie Fulton: As I have already said, Mr. Chairman, we are reviewing not only the policy with regard to Chinese immigration but every file into which we are asked to examine.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister about a development in my area. Late last fall a number of Mennonites came into my area from Mexico.
There is some question of whether or not they were immigrants or whether they were already Canadian citizens because they had lived here previously. These people came in, expecting to find work in the bush during the winter and they wanted to farm. They found themselves in pretty desperate straits, so bad, in fact, that the municipal authorities are looking after them and appeals have been made. I am wondering, if they are immigrants, whether the immigration department could do something on their behalf? There is not a large number involved but it is spread across the Timmins and Timiskaming areas.
4076	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Edmund Davie Fulton: I am informed that the bulk of this movement would be made up of persons returning to Canada from Mexico. These people had gone down there, mainly from Manitoba, after the first war, and have never taken out their Mexican papers. They had thus retained the right to return to Canada if they made application to do so.


Arthur Smith: I wonder
whether the minister would look into a situation which I think is rather important. I have in my hand copies of many of the kinds of literature which our immigrants are receiving from various parts of communist-occupied territories. I have also a copy of an envelope which, together with a letter, is directed to a German immigrant and I understand many such letters have been addressed to other immigrants. The purpose of these letters, of course, is to persuade them to return to their land of origin. The point I wish to raise is that these new Canadians are quite satisfied to stay in Canada and are extremely happy with their circumstances, therefore they are not going to concern themselves with this literature. They are, however, worried that the communists seem to be aware of the fact that they have relatives still in occupied areas, and I think it is important that these new immigrants who come to Canada have every rightful protection against any possibility that information might be made available to anyone outside of Canada. I am at a loss to explain how such information would be made available in such a way, but I merely ask the minister to look into this situation.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think this mainly arises under the citizenship branch, but I think I might take the time, under the circumstances, to answer this particular question. I think I am absolutely safe in saying that the citizenship branch reveals no information with regard to any citizenship application which might be on file to any unauthorized person. Nevertheless the hon. member will recall that it is a provision in the citizenship act that an application for citizenship must be posted in various courthouses for 30 days and, in spite of the fullest precautions, I am afraid we have to confess there is a possibility of enemy or foreign agents coming into Canada and it would therefore be a relatively simple matter for them to go into our courthouses and get these lists if they wished to do so. I think that is the explanation of the situation to which the hon. gentleman has referred.


Stanley Haidasz: Would the minister venture to answer a question put to him by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate in respect


of the increase in immigrants after the winter months are over. Is the minister also aware of the large backlog of immigration applications in Warsaw and, if he is, would he say whether he will do something about it?


Edmund Davie Fulton: With regard to the program for 1958, the hon. gentleman will of course appreciate that we are discussing matters for the fiscal year 1957-58, in other words, the year ending March 31 next. The estimates for the fiscal year commencing April 1, 1958, are not yet before the house and for that reason I am unable to answer his question in detail. I think I should repeat what I said this afternoon in regard to a comment of the hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke with respect to the 1958 program, namely that it will be adjusted to the situation and the absorptive capacity in Canada as it is is indicated from time to time in the reports we receive.
With regard to the situation in Warsaw, the facilities and staff there are under the control of the Department of External Affairs. I understand that these are regarded as sufficient for the requirements and I am informed that there is no backlog of applications on file at our embassy in Warsaw.


Stanley Haidasz: 1 have received several letters from my constituents, Mr. Chairman, who have applied as far back as May last for permission to bring in relatives from Poland. The information they have received is that there are not enough medical examiners to put through the applications promptly.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I understand the explanation is that we must rely on the local medical facilities in Poland.


Stanley Haidasz: Can the minister not send doctors from Canada to be employed in the Warsaw office?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think the hon. gentleman will realize that the movement from Poland is to some extent an experimental one and we have to move slowly and rather carefully. We do not like to press the situation beyond what we think would be welcome in the country with which we are dealing. We are advised by the Department of External Affairs, and I think the hon. gentleman will agree it is sensible for us to be so advised, to this effect.


Stanley Haidasz: In view of the situation which exists in Poland where at any time the communist government could cut off immigration from that country, and in view of the anxieties of the relatives of these people in Canada with respect to getting their

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
relatives out of Poland as quickly as possible, does the minister not consider that this is an urgent matter?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Of course the minister thinks it is an urgent matter, but the minister indicated earlier that he accepts the advice he receives from his experts and one such piece of advice is that in dealing with iron curtain countries we have to be very careful to make certain that the representations we make and the actions we take in matters such as these are acceptable to the countries which, after all, have control over the number of people who will be allowed to leave for Canada. I accept the advice which I receive from my colleagues and experts without any suggestion whatsoever that I am not as interested as the hon. gentleman in getting the maximum number of admissions which we can arrange with respect to people from Poland. I am however, unwilling to prejudice the whole operation by taking an unwise step and pressing it to an unwise degree.


Stanley Haidasz: I just wanted to bring this matter to the attention of the minister and to let him know that there have been complaints. I would like his department to review this matter.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the minister tell us the number of immigrants now on subsistence and how many of those people are Hungarians?


Edmund Davie Fulton: My information as of January 24, 1958, is (a) with respect to the accommodation summary for the week ending January 17, 1958, there was an increase of 25 persons accommodated in immigration halls for the week, 756 as compared with 731 for the previous week; (b) the number of unplaced workers in immigration halls in excess of two weeks a decrease of 10, or 430 as compared with 440; (c) number of persons provided assistance outside of immigration halls has decreased by 99, 12,296 compared with 12,395; (d) total number of unplaced workers in excess of two weeks inside and outside halls has decreased by 115, 5,602 compared with 5,717.
(e) total number of persons receiving assistance by the department throughout Canada is 13,052, a decrease of 74 from the previous week's report of 13,126.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Does the minister have the number who were Hungarians?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Of whom, for the week ending January 17, the total of Hungarian refugees in immigration halls and outside halls was 7,671.


George Hugh Castleden: Can the minister tell the house what is the daily subsistance rate paid to Hungarian refugees outside immigration halls?


Edmund Davie Fulton: It varies according to the circumstances of the individual and what he is able to find board and lodgings for up to a maximum of roughly $3 a day depending on local conditions.


George Hugh Castleden: Is that different from the others?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No, there is no difference be-twen the Hungarian refugees and any other immigrants.


Douglas Mason Fisher: On that point, does the minister not think it might be worth while publicizing the fact that there is no difference? Common opinion is prejudiced against the Hungarians because the popular belief is otherwise. There is one other point I should like to make. If the situation in Italy is such that because of the centralization in Rome we cannot have any more offices, surely that should not prevent the minister from obtaining more field officers to go out and check in the parishes where I understand the main backlog exists as far as applications are concerned. Most of the time in dealing with applications has to be spent in going out into the field and checking the parish records in the villages and towns where people live. Why could the minister not expand the field officer force even though he has to continue with the one office?


Edmund Davie Fulton: In connection with the Hungarian situation, it must be admitted that the majority of immigrants receiving assistance at the moment are Hungarians but when you consider the obstacles they had to overcome on arrival in Canada, the fact that they were not voluntary immigrants but refugees who came without preparation and without any form of capital, nothing more than the clothes they stood in and the $5 spending money they were given originally, and when you consider that the total movement has been over 36,000, I think a figure of 7,671, or roughly only one-fifth, is a very creditable record of performance in connection with these refugees.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
70.	Field and inspectional service, abroad, $2,343,364.
Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minister said he would have some information under this item on the number of applications at the office in New Delhi, India.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I have to apologize to the hon. gentleman. The report is not available here. We will obtain it from the office and give the
4078	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration hon. gentleman the information either later tonight or another day if these estimates are still being considered.


Erhart Regier: I believe this is the right item on which to ask the minister about the situation at Hong Kong. I understand there is a very heavy list of prospective immigrants who have applied. I have been advised of one case where the would-be immigrant was told to come back in approximately nine months' time. The list of applicants is so heavy and the number of officers is so limited that some Canadians are beginning to think it is a deliberate policy of the government to have only a limited number of officers there in order to slow down the flow of immigration through Hong Kong. As the minister knows, the situation over there is rather serious in that the city is plugged with some million and a half refugees. Some of these refugees are relatives of Canadian citizens. Some of our most reputable citizens have relatives among these refugees. What is the department doing to relieve the present situation?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The situation in Hong Kong is a baffling one and not one which I believe can be solved simply by an increase in staff. There are questions of identification, difficulties in getting information in regard to the background of these people, tracing their family relationships, medical examinations and so on. All these things are matters where the success of the operation is really dependent, I think, not so much upon the number of staff as upon the skill and knowledge of the staff regarding the conditions of the people with whom they are dealing. Last fall we sent an extra officer over there. We have increased the staff by one officer who can speak both English and Chinese. He is highly trained in Chinese. While I know the situation is not satisfactory, I can report to the hon. gentleman that in the month of December, 1957, we admitted from Hong Kong 206 Chinese compared with 77 in the month of December, 1956.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Can the minister not answer the question with regard to the expansion of field services in Italy on this particular vote? Is it not possible to increase those services?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think the hon. gentleman will appreciate that in Italy, as in many other countries, we are dependent for the information we receive upon facilities made available from outside sources. Therefore, we are not entirely free agents in the matter. They have other duties to perform besides examining and reporting to us upon prospective immigrants to Canada. That is one of the


strictly limiting factors with regard to our ability to deal with the number of applications we have from Italy.


Harold Edward Winch: What is the situation at the present time with regard to India? As the minister will remember, about a year ago the then minister promised that a new agreement would be negotiated with India with respect to the quota of immigrants allowed to enter Canada. Has that been done and, if so, has there been any increase in the field staff in India?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No, there is no increase in the field staff in India. The quota for India was set less than a year ago. It was set in May, 1957, when it was increased to 300. While I have had under consideration the question of some further negotiations, these are matters which you do not open too frequently as between governments. Furthermore, we had hoped to be able to deal with a considerable portion of the backlog as a result of the order in council of January 2, and until we see what effect that has in relieving pressure on the quota numbers we will not really be able to make an intelligent assessment of just what further quota number we should ask for.


Harold Edward Winch: How do you decide what the quota is to be?


Edmund Davie Fulton: As a matter of fact, of course, it will depend in part on what the views of the other government are and also upon the pressure that is exerted in this country for the admission of people from the country from which they are being applied for.
Before I make any further decision I want to see whether, in fact, the amendment that was brought into force on January 2 will relieve the pressure and enable us to take care of the volume of applications we are receiving. If I find it does not, then I shall be prepared to have a further look at the situation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
71.	To provide, subject to the approval of treasury board, for trans-oceanic and inland transportation and other assistance for immigrants and settlers, including care en route and while awaiting employment; and to provide further for payments to the provinces pursuant to agreements entered into with the approval of the governor in council, in respect of expenses incurred by the provinces for indigent immigrants, $2,483,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: wonder whether the minister, in relation to vote 71, would give us a little exercise in the relationship between estimates, supplementary estimates and governor general's warrants. In connection with this subject matter, I understand there is this vote of $2,483,000, provided by item 71 in the main estimates.

There is also in the supplementary estimates, item 684, which provides for $8 million. In addition thereto, there is the amount of $2,428,000 which was appropriated by means of governor general's warrants issued pursuant to order in council No. 19571134 dated August 19, 1957. I am not questioning the purpose of the money. I should like to know whether the $2,428,000 voted by order in council is included in that $10,483,000 set out in the estimates or whether it is in addition to the moneys that parliament is asked to vote?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The answer is no, the $2,428,000 is not included in the total to which the hon. gentleman has referred. It is included in the total of $54,055,059, which I gave earlier this afternoon as the total which would be covered by the amount in the main and supplementary estimates. In fact, I think I described it as the total estimated expenditure for 1957-58.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Did
that over-all figure that the minister gave include any statutory items of expenditure by this department?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes, the minister's salary; pensions and other benefits found on page 13 and Indian annuities also found on page 13. I believe these are the only statutory items in this department, unless there happen to be some from the national film board or the gallery or archives which report through this department, but which I do not believe have any statutory items.


Stanley Howard Knowles: In
other words, the over-all figure which the minister gave this afternoon is a figure which he has arrived at by adding up all the various moneys spent in this year by his own department. I appreciate the fact he has given us the over-all total. It is clear, however, that the amount appropriated by means of governor general's warrant does not come before parliament in any way. This has been voted by the cabinet, by the governor in council, separate from what is being voted by parliament. I do not make any secret of this, Mr. Chairman. My interest is in the mechanics of governor general's warrants because they are not everyday affairs, are they?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No. This warrant was made necessary by what I think I am correct in describing as a lapse of authority. Agreements were not made with the provinces in time to use the money which had been voted for this purpose and which was to be spent pursuant to agreements. Agreements were not arrived at by the end of March. The money was required and we did not have
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration any authority for spending it because agreements had not been made. Therefore the governor general's warrant was necessary.
The constitutional position, as I understand it, is that there is no parliamentary authority, and the matter will be covered and no doubt reported upon in the public accounts by the auditor general.
I think I may have been guilty inadvertently of misleading the hon. gentleman earlier. The total of $54 million which I gave does not include the final supplementaries, which I believe total $643,150.


Stanley Howard Knowles: take it then, Mr. Chairman, the amount appropriated by means of the governor general's warrant was, in effect, to replace money that had been voted in a previous fiscal year but which had not been used in that previous fiscal year?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes, an amount of $9 million had been included in the final supplementaries for the fiscal year 1956-57, after the Hungarian refugee movement was under way. This special supplementary estimate of $9 million was to be spent in providing accommodation, and so on, for Hungarian refugees in pursuance of agreements to be arrived at with the provinces. If our predecessors had been able to conclude the agreements by March 31 that would have provided the necessary continuing authority for the expenditure of the money after the end of the fiscal year. The agreements were not concluded, except with one province for accommodating refugees, and therefore there was no continuing authority for the expenditure of the money. When we took over in June, we were told that there was no more money in any vote which we could transfer to be spent for this purpose, and we would require a governor general's warrant until parliament could meet and we could get parliamentary authority for further expenditure.


Stanley Howard Knowles: This seems to have been quite a co-operative experience. When the minister was on this side of the house, he was one of those who urged the former government to do something about the Hungarian situation. By the time he got over there, some of the money had not been spent and he had to use a governor general's warrant to carry out the policy which he had pressed upon the former government.
The minister said that he assumes this item would be reported in the proper way. I can say that the Minister of Finance, on October 15, did lay on the table of the house a report that the governor general's warrants
4080	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration had been used in last August. It is something unique. I believe these are the first governor general's warrants that have been issued since 1945.


Erhart Regier: I believe the minister is the minister of emigration as well as the minister of immigration. I believe emigration also comes under departmental vote No. 71, because it relates to assistance in paying for transportation. I take it this vote would be used to help pay the passage of any emigrants. Perhaps the Hungarians who were flown out of the country had their passage paid with the money found in this vote. However, that is not the incident I have in mind, but an incident which occurred in the house on January 13 last.
At that time the hon. member for Okanagan Boundary referred to a proposal that some of the sons of freedom may leave Canada to settle in the U.S.S.R. The hon. member asked the minister whether the government was prepared to assist them financially in leaving the country when a suitable site is obtained. The minister said he would turn the matter over to the Secretary of State for External Affairs, and he said that the problem had not arisen. I sincerely hope that the hon. member for Okanagan Boundary was not advocating that this government afford these people any assistance in leaving Canada. I hope that if such a request ever comes before the minister, he will not accede to it because I think it is a shame that we cannot learn to get along with people like the Hutterites in Alberta or the sons of freedom in British Columbia.


Mr. McLeod:: Who cannot get along?


Erhart Regier: Apparently the authorities
cannot get along with these people. I feel that it would be a further blot. If the hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke has something to say I shall be very pleased to hear it. I have here an address which he gave on immigration. In my opinion the communists the world over would use the emigration of the sons of freedom out of Canada against us all over the world. I hope the government will not insist on that move.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I hesitate to do this, Mr. Chairman. I think it is the first time that I have ever attempted to call the hon. member to order. But may I point out that this matter has nothing whatever to do with the estimates of this department, and I should be glad to get on with them.


Erhart Regier: Might I ask the minister whose estimates are concerned with the return of some of the Hungarian refugees? Are they not the estimates of the minister?
[Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre) .1


Edmund Davie Fulton: The return of the sons of
freedom?


Erhart Regier: No; the return of the Hungarian refugees.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Our estimates; under the
general welfare of immigrants, we are responsible for immigrants for 12 months after they arrive in Canada.


Erhart Regier: If the government should
decide to assist Canadians to emigrate, would that matter not also come under the minister's department?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No; because as will be obvious, Canadians who emigrate are not immigrants and the decision certainly would not be a decision of this department.


The Acting Chairman (Mr. Rea):: Shall item 71 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian affairs branch-
72.	Administration, $512,213.
Mr. Bryce:: Mr. Chairman, it is rather late in the day to start to speak but I might say that I have a large number of Indians in my constituency and many are on reserves. I have here a brief that I think was intended for the hon. member for Bonavista-Twil-lingate. However, it has found its way to me. This brief is from a conference on the Manitoba Indian brotherhood. It reads as follows:
At this conference many matters of vital importance to the health and well-being of the Indians were discussed and drawn up as you will find the recommendations as follows, which each delegate will be looking forward to your due consideration and action thereon.
The present standard of education given to Indian pupils of the north is showing some progress, and the delegation wish to encourage the pupils by requesting you to grant the pupils the assistance for elementary education, also provide high schools and trade courses to advanced students.
You have stated in your speech last February-
This refers to whoever it was that visited the Pukatawagan reserve.
-that you hoped some day the Indian would become a mayor, or Prime Minister of Canada, and for this purpose the request is placed before you again, which we presume you will give your serious consideration.
I want to deal with the various reserves. I have a few remarks to make about each one. It would make them very disjointed if I were to carry on now and not be able to finish. I should like you to call it ten o'clock, Mr. Chairman.


Edmund Davie Fulton: How long will you be?


William Scottie Bryce: I am going to take my full 30 minutes.


Charles Edward Rea: Is it
agreed that we call it ten o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

George Carlyle Marler: Can the house leader indicate what will be the business tomorrow and Saturday?


Howard Charles Green: Tomorrow we shall continue with the estimates of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. Then we shall take the legislation estimates, public works, trade and commerce, health and welfare and finance.


George Carlyle Marler: May I take it that that order will be preserved tomorrow and Saturday?


Howard Charles Green: I am not sure about Saturday, Mr. Speaker; but I would hope that would be the order tomorrow.


Stanley Howard Knowles: the minister does not know about Saturday can he now tell us about Monday and Tuesday?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, I have never met so many curious people in my life before.


George Carlyle Marler: There are some fairly curious ones on the other side.


Howard Charles Green: I cannot give him certain information about Saturday and I certainly cannot tell him about Monday and Tuesday.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May
I ask the minister a question which in effect is supplementary to an exchange we had this morning on the orders of the day when the
Business of the House minister asked me to look at the order paper and see there the other items of legislation that he had not mentioned for today. I wonder whether he would tell me what he has in mind. In view of the progress that the house has made today, there are only four items of legislation left on the order paper. It has been indicated that three of them will not be proceeded with at this session. That leaves only one, namely item No. 7. What is the government's intention with regard to item No. 7?


Howard Charles Green: I would think the hon. member could figure that out for himself, with only one left.


Stanley Howard Knowles: When will it be called?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Does the minister remember the days when he used to insist that the government plan in advance the business of the house?


Howard Charles Green: No, Mr. Speaker. I have forgotten all about those days.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Truer words were never spoken.


George Carlyle Marler: A convenient loss of memory.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Might I have the ear of the house leader? The other day the house leader told us he expected that we would complete the business of this session by the end of January. Since we have only 24 hours left, I wonder whether he expects that he will carry out that commitment.


Howard Charles Green: No, Mr. Speaker. It is now fairly evident that we shall not be able to finish by tomorrow.


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

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

Mr. Olson: 1.	How much money did the farmers contribute to the P.F.A.A. by the 1 per cent deduction from grain sales during the year ending March 31, 1957, in (a) Alberta; (b) Saskatchewan?
2.	How much money was paid to farmers during the same year out of the P.F.A.A. fund, in (a) Alberta; (b) Saskatchewan?
Answer by: Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agriculture):
1.	(a) $1,732,861.	(b) $3,608,339.
Note: Figures shown as at July 31, 1957 (crop year 1956-57).
2.	(a) $958,469. (b) $621,553.
Note: Figures shown as at July 31, 1957 (crop year 1956-57).
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:



DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
61.	Departmental administration, $604,729. Citizenship-
62.	Citizenship registration branch, $462,955.
63.	Citizenship branch, $686,823.
Miscellaneous grants-
64.	Canadian general council of the Boy Scouts association, $15,000.
65.	Canadian council of the Girl Guides association, $12,000.
66.	Boys' clubs of Canada, $10,000.
67.	Canadian writers' foundation, $6,000. Immigration branch-
68.	Administration of the Immigration Act, $1,174,292.
69.	Field and inspectional service, Canada, including $10,000 for grants to immigrant welfare organizations, $5,962,518.
70.	Field and inspectional service, abroad, $2,343,364.
71.	To provide, subject to the approval of treasury board, for trans-oceanic and inland transportation and other assistance for immigrants and settlers, including care en route and while awaiting employment; and to provide further for payments to provinces pursuant to agreements entered into with the approval of the governor in council, in respect of expenses incurred by the provinces for indigent immigrants, $2,483,000.

Dominion-Provincial Relations


[Stage Direction]
CANADIAN NATIONAL TELEGRAPHS COPY DL St. John's Nfld 21 1957 Dec. 21 Right Hon. John G. Diefenbaker
Prime Minister of Canada Ottawa
I understand that you are bringing before parliament a measure enabling you to enter into agreements with Atlantic provinces governments for the development of thermal electric power plants stop I respectfully suggest that the word thermal would in practice virtually eliminate Newfoundland from any assistance from Ottawa stop My request could be met by adding the word hydro in case there is any reason why you must use the word thermal stop I would greatly appreciate your complying with this request stop Kindest regards
J. R. Smallwood
Ottawa, December 21, 1957. My dear Premier:
I have your telegram of December 21 in regard to the application of thermo-power agreements to the province of Newfoundland.
I am asking my colleague, the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, to look into this matter and get in touch with you. I know that he will be glad to see what can be done to bring Newfoundland clearly within the terms of the proposed agreements.
May I express my best wishes for the holiday season,
I am,
Yours sincerely,
John G. Diefenbaker.
The Honourable J. R. Smallwood, M.L.A., Premier of Newfoundland,
Legislative Building,
St. John's, Newfoundland.
Ottawa 4, Canada, January 8, 1958.
The Honourable J. R. Smallwood,
Premier of Newfoundland,
St. John's, Newfoundland.
My dear Premier,
I refer to your telegram and the reply from the Prime Minister, both dated December 21, concerning the application to Newfoundland of the legislation now before parliament with regard to thermal power in the Atlantic provinces. The Prime Minister asked me to get in touch with you further about the points you raised.
For your information I am enclosing herewith a copy of the bill that has now received
first reading in the House of Commons. As you will note, it is drafted in terms sufficiently wide that agreements can be made, within its provisions, with any of the Atlantic provinces. In short, the kind of arrangement that is being made with New Brunswick and with Nova Scotia, or a modification of it, could be made with the province of Newfoundland if the government of Newfoundland so desired.
You suggest in your telegram that "the word thermal would in practice virtually eliminate Newfoundland from any assistance from Ottawa". I think this impression arises from a misunderstanding. As you will note from an examination of the bill, it is only thermal power plants that come under its terms. Hydroelectric power plants are not covered by this legislation. However, the interconnection and transmission fines and related facilities that can be built are not limited to fines for the transmission of power produced in thermal electric plants. It would thus be quite possible to enter into an agreement with the government of Newfoundland for the provision of transmission and interconnection fines which, as you know, are often very costly and of great importance in the development of any power system.
In the case of hydroelectric plants there has, as you know, been an arrangement made with New Brunswick for the financing on an eight-year basis of the Beechwood plant. The Prime Minister has indicated that a similar arrangement could be made in other instances if an equally valid case for such financial assistance could be shown. The speech from the throne on October 14 also indicated that the government is prepared to enter into a joint program with British Columbia to develop the power of the Columbia river. I have been authorized by the government to say that if major hydroelectric projects elsewhere in Canada were to lend themselves to the possibility of a joint program on the same sort of basis the government would be prepared to give consideration to such a proposal. Conceivably this is the sort of thing that might be of interest to Newfoundland.
From what I have said you will appreciate that the policies that have been announced by the government with respect to power developments have had particular regard for the special problems of the Atlantic area and have also differentiated as between thermal and hydroelectric projects. It is, however, quite apparent that the programs do not by any means exclude Newfoundland from benefit under them.
Yours sincerely,
Alvin Hamilton.
[Stage Direction]


Friday. January 31, 1958