1958-09-03

PRIVILEGE


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, on Monday last the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) alleged on a question of privilege that I had misled the house. I now rise on a question of privilege to correct him. The hon. member was dealing with the question of the buying prices established for grain in western Canada, and I quote his words from page 4397 of Hansard, as follows:
The second question had to do with the exact buying prices, to which the minister replied that he did not have the figures in mind at that time. I had asked whether the figures were the same as the previous year. There are a great many grades and if there had been changes I would not and did not expect the minister to know, but on checking the figures set forth in the order in council and the prices for the grades in the previous year I can find no change in the grades set forth. I find that they are exactly the same.
I feel that the answer was misleading, though I do not suggest deliberately so.
I must say that was extremely charitable of the hon. member, but the facts are otherwise. He was referring to the Canada Gazette of August 27, 1958 and I presume compared the figures in that publication with the figures in the Canada Gazette of August 27, 1957, the publication for the previous year. I draw the attention of the house to the following facts. No. 1 Canada western amber durum is shown at a price of $1.50 in 1957 and $1.40 for 1958. No. 2 Canada western amber durum was $1.47 for last year and is $1.36 now. The No. 3 grade was $1.40 last year and is $1.30 now. In all, seven grades show substantial changes.
The hon. member for Assiniboia examined the Gazettes according to his own admission, yet he informed the house on Monday that there had been no changes. I make no comment as to whether or not the hon. member was deliberately misleading the house.


Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, if I may reply, also on a question of privilege, I frankly admit that I did not check the amber durum prices. I checked wheat as wheat is commonly known in the trade. Durum wheat is known as amber durum, as
the minister has referred to it. Wheat is known as bread wheat. I checked wheat, oats and barley, and there was no change. But the first part of my statement has not been alluded to by the minister, namely that it was his order in council that recommended these prices, and though the question was asked two days later apparently the minister did not know it had taken place.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is once again attempting to mislead the house. I answered the first part of his question on Monday. The order in council was passed with regard to these prices. He asked a question about when the prices would be set. I said I had been advised that the wheat board has established buying prices for the various grades of wheat, which was quite true. I also said, "An announcement to that effect will be made very shortly," which was quite true. The announcement was made and published in the Canada Gazette.


Hazen Robert Argue: You didn't know you had an order in council.



ROYAL VISIT


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, the house will be pleased to know that Her Majesty the Queen has now graciously agreed that her visit to Canada next year with Prince Philip will take place approximately from the middle of June to the end of July, and that the tour will extend to all parts of our country.
While announcing the timing and the general duration of Her Majesty's tour, it is not possible as yet, of course, to be more specific as to the dates or as to the special items and cities and towns to be included in the program. A number of suggestions have been received which will be considered by a special committee appointed for this purpose, and further announcements will be made later when Her Majesty has considered the recommendations of that committee for the general program of her tour.
Canadians in all parts of Canada I am sure will welcome Her Majesty's decision to spend some weeks with us and to travel extensively across the country. When she inaugurates

Questions
the St. Lawrence seaway Her Majesty will associate herself with the completion of a project which is bound to have profound significance in our national development. It will be a source of satisfaction to all Canadians that Her Majesty, in opening a new chapter in our history, will thus exemplify in vivid fashion a characteristic of our constitution involving the close relationship between the Queen and her people of Canada.


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of ihe Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, we on this side will share in the pleasure of all Canadians in the announcement the Prime Minister has just made that next summer the Queen is to visit her realm of Canada. That pleasure will be increased by the knowledge that she is to be accompanied by her husband, Prince Philip. It is also increased by the Prime Minister's announcement that she will be here not merely to open this great national and international undertaking, the St. Lawrence seaway, but that she will also have a chance to visit all parts of our country. She will, I know, receive the warm and enthusiastic welcome that she and her husband have received on previous visits to this country. Her visit will give us an additional opportunity to show our loyalty to the crown as a cornerstone of our democratic institutions.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, we in the C.C.F. welcome the announcement made by the Prime Minister that Her Majesty, with Prince Philip, will visit our country in July of next year for the purpose of opening the St. Lawrence seaway. We welcome Her Majesty not only as Queen but we welcome her because we are part of the commonwealth and she symbolizes the commonwealth itself in many respects. We hope the tour that is planned for the Queen will not be a killing one; we hope that time may be provided for relaxation; we hope that in making those plans every opportunity will be given the ordinary citizen to see the Queen. We in the C.C.F. are most anxious that this visit be made, and we welcome the statement by the Prime Minister.



STARRED QUESTIONS


Mr. Pickersgill: 1.	Were George P. LeBlanc and Alex P. Boudreau dismissed from the Cape Breton Highlands national park effective June 10, 1958?
2.	How long had each of these employees been employed by the national park?
3.	What was the reason for dismissal in each case?
(Mr. Diefenbaker.]


Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the first question is yes. The answer to the second question is as follows. George P. LeBlanc was continuously employed from April, 1951, to the date of his dismissal. Alex P. Boudreau was originally taken on strength on October 6, 1954. Mr. Boudreau was struck off strength on February 14, 1955 and was again taken on strength on May 11, 1955. He was continuously employed from that date to the date of his dismissal.
The answer to question No. 3 is that the dismissal in each case was made on the basis of a declaration by an hon. member that the employee had taken an active part in politics.


VISITS TO NORTHERN DEFENCE INSTALLATIONS
Mr. Argue: 1.	Have any Canadian departmental officials been unable to make visits in the Canadian north because of delay in granting permission by American authorities?
2.	If so, what were the names of such officials?
3.	What were the purposes of the visits?
4.	When was permission requested of United States authorities?
5.	By whom were the requests made and to whom?
6.	Were there replies from the United States authorities to these requests? If so, what was the nature of the reply in each case?
7.	Did any Canadian departmental official for whom these requests had been made leave the employ of his department?
8.	If so, what was the date of such departure?


Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, this question involves several departments, and I ask that it be made an order for return.


Hazen Robert Argue: I wonder whether it might be tabled during this session. I hope so.


Mr. Speaker:: Order for return.


ANSELM BOUDREAU
Mr. Pickersgill: 1.	Has Anselm Boudreau of Cheticamp, Nova Scotia, been dismissed from the position as clerk in the public works engineers office in the Cape Breton national park?
2.	If so, what is the reason for the dismissal?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the first part of the question is that Mr. Anselm Boudreau was employed on a casual prevailing rate basis at $1.20 per hour by the highways division in Cheticamp, Nova Scotia. He was appointed on June 11, 1958, and was released on or about August 8 after two weeks' notice. The answer to the second part of the question is that the clerical work at Cheticamp is to be carried out by the department's regular staff.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Argue: 1.	Have any Canadian departmental officials been unable to make visits in the Canadian north because of delay in granting permission by American authorities?
2.	If so, what were the names of such officials?
3.	What were the purposes of the visits?
4.	When was permission requested of United States authorities?
5.	By whom were the requests made and to whom?
6.	Were there replies from the United States authorities to these requests? If so, what was the nature of the reply in each case?
7.	Did any Canadian departmental official for whom these requests had been made leave the employ of his department?
8.	If so, what was the date of such departure?


FEDERAL LIQUOR EXPENDITURES
Mr. Howard: 1.	Has the government spent any money for spirituous liquor during 1956 and 1957?
2.	If so, how much was spent by or on behalf of each department for: (a) each month in the said years; (b) within Canada; (c) in countries other than Canada?
3.	Of the amount spent in Canada, how much was spent for (a) domestic spirituous liquors; (b) imported spirituous liquors?


PUBLIC WORKS EXPENDITURES, SHELBURNE-YAR-MOUTH-CLARE
Mr. McWilliam: 1.	What is the total amount of moneys expended by the Department of Public Works in the constituency of Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare in the years 1949 to 1957 inclusive?
2.	What are the annual amounts spent for the years 1949 to 1957 inclusive, under the following: (a) acquisition, construction and improvements for public buildings; (b) acquisition, construction, improvements and dredging for harbour and rivers?



MOTION FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 15-Mr. Benidickson:
For a copy of all correspondence since September 1, 1957, between the federal government and the province of Ontario respecting cost sharing of a roads to resources program.
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Stand.


Mr. Benidickson:: Mr. Speaker, we are coming to the end of the session and this motion has been on the order paper a long time. I think hon. members will recognize that in principle it is no different from returns that have been made under this heading many times this session even though continued negotiations may be proceeding with the provinces and are not concluded.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the hon. member agreeable that this should stand?
Inquiries of the Ministry


William Moore Benidickson: Has the minister any explanation why he cannot comply with the motion?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: The same explanation I made earlier in the session. Both No. 15 and No. 39 are in the same category. It is impossible to table this correspondence while negotiations are going on because it would embarrass the governments concerned.


William Moore Benidickson: His friends in Toronto.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: When we are negotiating with nine provinces, as we are now, I think it only proper that the correspondence remain privileged until the negotiations are completed.


William Moore Benidickson: Stand.
Motion stands.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether he has any comment to make on a prediction reported to have been made by the Minister of Defence Production in Sherbrooke, to the effect that Canada has decided to change her defence system.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I am wondering
whether or not the Leader of the Opposition has correctly read the press report. I did not read it in the definitive terms he has just used. In any event, until I have an opportunity to hear from the minister as to what was said I have no comment to make.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Perhaps I should read it so there will be no misunderstanding. Possibly I put it in my own words in a way which is not exactly as reported in the Canadian Press dispatch. The article reads as follows:
Defence production minister O'Hurley says no one should be surprised if they hear soon that Canada has decided to change her defence system.


Hazen Robert Argue: I wonder whether I might ask a supplementary question. Can the Prime Minister say whether such an announcement will be made soon? I am not asking for the announcement, but will an announcement on this matter be made soon?


John George Diefenbaker: I have nothing to say as to that at this moment.


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: May I ask a supplementary question. In view of the fact that wood scalers are primarily interested in quantities and amounts,

Inquiries of the Ministry is there any special significance to this announcement being made to the Quebec wood scalers association? Is the policy going to be that the estimates are going to be scaled either up or down?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.



UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. W. Monleiih (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont asked my colleague the Minister of Labour if during the course of last year unemployment assistance in federal funds had been paid to the province of Quebec in respect of unemployable persons not qualifying for unemployment insurance. Since this matter comes within the responsibility of my department, I might furnish the hon. member with the following answer.
No federal funds were paid to the province of Quebec on behalf of unemployable persons last year, since this province has not yet signed an agreement with the federal government under the Unemployment Assistance Act.


Mr. Pickersgill:: As a supplementary question, may I ask the minister if there are agreements with all the other provinces?


Jay Waldo Monteith: Yes, Mr. Speaker.



COMBINES INVESTIGATION ACT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. J. Martel (Chapleau):: Can the Minister of Justice inform the house if there have been any new developments with regard to the prosecutions in connection with the pulpwood price fixing practices of certain pulp and paper companies, as outlined in a report dated March 31, 1958 which was filed in this house on May 14 last?


Hon. E. D. Fulton (Minister of Justice):: I thank the hon. member for giving me notice of this question. I can advise him that the pulpwood case, as has been previously stated, has been referred to counsel in the province of Quebec for prosecution. I am advised that preparation is proceeding without delay. The combines branch has been given to understand also that the practices described in the report of the restrictive trade practices commission have been discontinued.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Can the minister say
Whether counsel retained have had any previous experience in such prosecutions?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I could not tell the hon. member whether or not they have had previous experience in this particular type of prosecution. They are experienced prosecution counsel, but I would have to find out whether or not they have ever been engaged in a combines case before this date.



HIGHWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hazen Robert Argue: Can the
Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources say whether or not the projected road to Uranium City has been decided upon, what is the route of the road, and when construction will start? There seem to be conflicting reports.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: The route of the road has been decided upon, Mr. Speaker, but the actual start on construction has not been made and I cannot inform the hon. member as to that. The agreement with the province of Saskatchewan is still not complete. There are some difficulties about the question of the financial formula.


Hazen Robert Argue: In view of the great interest in this road, is the minister able to say now what route has been agreed upon?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: The understanding I have with the minister of resources in Saskatchewan is that the announcement will be made simultaneously by both governments.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Rea in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND COMMERCE National research council-
257. Salaries and other expenses, $22,660,729.


Mr. Mcllraith:: The estimates of the national research council have not been before the committee for slightly more than two years. In view of that fact, would the minister care to make a statement particularly advising us of any changes in the work of the research council, or any changes in policy affecting the research council?


Gordon Minto Churchill: I have a short statement to make, Mr. Chairman. It is on its way down from my office. I expect to have it shortly and would ask my hon. friend just to wait for a minute.


George James McIlraith: Thank you.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I do not want to delay the committee while waiting for a document, Mr. Chairman. I thought I should like to make a short statement under three headings, namely what the federal government is doing with regard to research; some comments with regard to the laboratories of the national research council; then the problem of university support, concluding with mention of some highlights in the estimates themselves.
The national research council has three essential functions, namely the promotion and co-ordination of scientific research in Canada, the operation of laboratories, and the financial support of university research in science. The research carried on by the agencies of the Canadian government is of high quality, the facilities and conditions of work are good, and funds in considerable quantity are being provided for that purpose. It is estimated that when you consider all the money being expended for the purpose of research under federal government auspices it is approaching $140 million, which is a considerable sum for a country the size of Canada.
Sometimes expenditures of this nature are compared with those of other countries, and we naturally look to the United States to see what that country is doing along that line. The comparisons are of necessity rather rough, since accounting systems and definitions vary; but dealing with the subject of research for civilian purposes, I may say that Canada's showing is very good and shows, on a per capita basis, a figure slightly above that of the United States. But then when you add all the money that is being spent on research, adding military expenditures in the United States along with their civil expenditures for research you find, of course, that they vastly exceed those of Canada. The emphasis that is placed on military research in other countries such as Russia and the United Kingdom indicates also that they have very high expenditures for this purpose. Nevertheless, on the civilian side Canada's position is good, and it is expected that the continuing expansion of technology would require a continued expansion in government civilian research.
On the question of the laboratories, the laboratories of the national research council carry out fundamental and applied research in science and engineering which is of national importance and which is not being done elsewhere. The work is organized in eight scientific divisions in Ottawa and two regional laboratories at Halifax and Saskatoon. The laboratories have undergone a steady growth since 1939, when the staff was only about 300 until today, when in spite of having split off defence research and atomic energy the staff numbers 2353.
Supply-Trade and Commerce
During this expansion every effort has been made to maintain a steady and effective expansion of the laboratories as manpower considerations permitted. This steady increase is being continued. On June 30, 1957, the staff numbered 2260, on August 11, 1958 it numbered 2353, and the estimates allow for a further expansion to 2422 by the end of the fiscal year. Further, this year's expansion is being concentrated on scientific staff, who number at present 647 and will be recruited, it is hoped, to 700 by the end of the fiscal year. There is nothing spectacular in the estimates for the laboratories, but they permit a steady and efficient expansion as in the past.
On the subject of university support, which is of general interest, recent events have emphasized the importance of an extended effort among the western countries in basic research in science and medicine. The universities are the major source of such research and are also the sole source of trained personnel for research of all kinds. In Canada the main financial support for university scientific research, as distinct from teaching, has for 40 years been the national research council. Sizeable contributions are made for special purposes by other government agencies, but all of these are considerably smaller than the support from the council itself.
I should not like to give the impression that the national research council is the only one which has done research in Canada, because the pioneering work in research was commenced by agriculture and mining in days gone by. Since that time the national research council and other government agencies have entered the field. While as I have said, sizeable contributions are made for special purposes by other government agencies, all of these are considerably smaller than the support from the council. Support from private agencies is smaller still. In view of the magnitude of the research council support and its 40 years of operation it can be claimed with considerable justification that the present status of Canadian science is largely due to financial support from the national research council.
The expansion of the universities, together with the desirability of scientific expansion in the western world, however, has made the financial problems of university scientific research very difficult. Recognizing this, the government decided to increase national research council support to universities by 70 per cent in the present estimates. This increase of $2J million is by far the largest increase which has ever been made in the
4520	HOUSE OF
Supply-Trade and Commerce national research council budget for university support. This is a very substantial contribution and an obvious recognition of the need for the support of research within the universities.


George James McIlraith: Would the minister mind repeating that figure?


Gordon Minto Churchill: 
George James McIlraith: Arising out of the last part of the minister's statement with particular reference to the increase of $2J million to the universities, may I ask if that increase is being granted on the same basis as previous


expenditures on that account, or has there been any change in the system?


Gordon Minto Churchill: The same practice is being followed as in the past.


George James McIlraith: I take it from the minister's statement-and I hope he will correct me if I am not accurate-that the national research council is continuing the policy of the previous government. I also take it from his remarks that he shares the view concerning the work of the council that was expressed in the committee in 1956 when the estimates were last before it, an occasion when high praise of the council was expressed. He will recall that on that occasion two hon. gentlemen in the then opposition, the present Minister of Public Works and the present Minister of Veterans Affairs, spoke in praise of the work of the research council as it was conducted under the previous government. I take it that he shares that view and that there is no change in policy with respect to the research council.
I had the honour of heading the committees that looked into the work and activities of the research council since the end of the war and also the committees dealing with the operations of the atomic energy control board since that time. I must say I hold the view that the activities conducted by the government through the national research council were such as to commend themselves to hon. members on all sides of the house.
I must frankly admit I have always had a particularly favourable impression of the way they conducted their work in conjunction with the universities. Instead of drawing off manpower from the universities and in that way damaging them, they have sought to aid the work of the universities and have carried out that policy in different ways, through grants in aid of scholarships and fellowships. I believe the outstanding work done in the last number of years in that field has not had sufficient public acknowledgment or sufficient appreciation by hon. members, if I may speak for my colleagues in that respect.
At this stage of the session I do not have any further specific questions to ask about the estimates of the national research council.
I merely want to encourage the minister to continue the activity of this body in the way in which it has been conducted in the past, and to seek to support and expand it as the development of the country goes on.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, if I may reply immediately to one or two of the points raised by the hon. member for Ottawa West, I would say I am very happy that he

drew attention to the fact that the policy with regard to the national research council is a continuing one as to which there has been no political or party disagreement.
If in 1956 when these estimates were up I had been given an opportunity to speak on the subject I would myself have commended the council at that time and the policy followed by the government of that day. I have always had a very great interest in the matter of research, and in another legislative chamber I spoke at great length on the necessity for it. I welcome the hon. member's words of praise for the national research council. I continue to have, now in my present position, the same respect and admiration for the research council I had in the days when I was in the opposition.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, it is not easy to exaggerate the importance of the work of the national research council or the skill and devotion with which it has been conducted. One aspect that was mentioned by the hon. member for Ottawa West which particularly interests me is the relationship of that work to the universities, and I wish to pay tribute to the intelligent way that has been carried out. There has been some uneasiness expressed in the United States over the fact that in some universities so much of the research work is now being conducted under government supervision or through government assistance that this may in the long run prejudice the independence of the universities. I am quite sure that this danger does not exist in this country.
I should like to ask the minister merely one question. I believe he mentioned $10 million as having been made available to the universities for research through the national research council. Could he inform the committee what proportion of the funds devoted to scientific research at the universities is now represented by government contributions of this kind?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, the $10 million figure I mentioned included the contributions of all government departments, because the Department of Defence Production, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of National Health and Welfare contribute along with contributions from the atomic energy source, and other moneys are made available for research purposes in the universities. That is what raised the total to an approximate figure of $10 million. It is rather difficult to estimate. We do not have an accurate summation of the amount of money devoted by the universities themselves to this particular field.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Trade and Commerce Atomic energy control board-
48. Administration expenses of the atomic energy control board, $62,818.
Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, I do not know whether the minister is going to make a statement on this important matter. If he is I will wait until he is finished before I say what I want to say.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Thank you very much. I have a rather comprehensive statement to make on this topic, which is of major importance nowadays. I hope hon. members of the committee will bear with me for the next 15 minutes as I review the activities of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and indicate the objectives of that organization. The activities of that body may be considered in four general categories: (a) fundamental research (b) applied research (c) production and marketing of radioactive isotopes and (d) power reactor projects. I discussed the nature and objectives of these categories in my statement to parliament on February 1 last, and I would now like to bring that statement up to date and give a broad summary of each of these four categories of activities, dealing first with fundamental research.
The great developments in atomic energy during and since the war were based on a working capital of fundamental scientific knowledge built up earlier and especially during the 1930's. Our debt to Ernest Rutherford and to the scientists of several nations who followed him in exploring the physics of the atomic nucleus is one which can never be overemphasized. The present worldwide development of atomic energy is still drawing on that original capital of fundamental knowledge, and it is incumbent upon us to try to add to it to the extent that our resources permit.
Chalk River has lived up to its obligations in this regard. From the early days Canadian fundamental research has been held in high international esteem. At present Chalk River is pioneering in a number of new fields, and as an example I would mention the theoretical studies by one of the Chalk River physicists on the thermonuclear reactions that occur in stars. This work, which has attracted considerable attention, is leading to a better understanding of nuclear processes and has been made possible through the use of the electronic computer installed at Chalk River in 1956.
In the early days it was often possible to carry out fundamental nuclear research with very simple equipment. However, as the science has steadily become more complex it has been necessary to turn to increasingly powerful tools. The NRX reactor and a Van de Graaf machine have been the main tools

Supply-Trade and Commerce of fundamental research at Chalk River over the past decade. To ensure continued progress it has been necessary to add new equipment. A very precise beta-ray spectrometer has recently been brought into operation; a new high energy Van de Graaf is under construction, as well as special facilities for the study of the changes occurring in metals during irradiation.
But the most important of the new tools is the NRU reactor, which makes possible many experiments which hitherto could not be performed. In many of its facilities NRU is unequalled by any other reactor in the world and provides unique opportunities to Canadian fundamental research.
Fundamental research also has other uses. It is an extremely effective training ground for young men who in later years will turn to applied research and the exploitation of scientific knowledge. The applied research program at Chalk River has to a large extent depended on the contributions of men who began their careers in fundamental research. Another bypath of a healthy fundamental research program is that it tends to leaven the whole of the activities of an establishment like that at Chalk River. Daily contact with colleagues engaged in truly creative work acts as a stimulant to those involved in the applied research and development programs and contributes markedly to the rate of progress achieved. Canada's position as one of the leading atomic powers will be maintained only so long as we are prepared to devote some of our resources to the kind of research that lays the foundations on which all practical developments are based.
Applied research at Chalk River is mainly concerned with the translation of fundamental knowledge into sound reactor technology. Nuclear engineering brings together a wide variety of different disciplines. Complex electronic instruments are needed; the chemical and corrosive properties of the various liquids in a reactor system must be carefully controlled; radiation hazards must be thoroughly understood and the engineering design adjusted to minimize them; new fields in structural and mechanical engineering are opened up by the employment of novel materials; for example the metal zirconium, about which very little was known 10 years ago.
While all these problems are receiving attention in the applied research program at Chalk River, the largest effort is devoted to two problems that will have a decisive effect on our efforts to achieve economic nuclear power. The first of these is the improvement of uranium fuel elements, the 

second is the design of more efficient arrangements for the reactor core.
The heat contained in a ton of natural uranium is equivalent to the heat contained in 2,700,000 tons of coal. It is this basic fact which has given to atomic energy its great significance as a new source of fuel for power plants. But how much of the heat contained in a ton of uranium fuel can one release and use? Obviously the more use one can obtain the more efficient the reactor will be and the more likely it is that the electricity produced will be economic. Therefore the design, fabrication and testing of uranium fuel systems is an essential part of the applied research program.
The testing of such systems is carried out in the NRX and NRU reactors, where it is possible to simulate the conditions that will prevail in a nuclear power station. The testing is done in equipment known as "loops" which pass through the heart of the reactor. There are six such loops working continuously in NRX, which in effect are six separate reactors using different materials of construction, different coolants and different fuels operating under a variety of conditions. New loops in NRU will permit further engineering studies of various power reactor systems, including those cooled by gas as well as those cooled by liquids. New metallurgical laboratories under construction will be important for the examination of experimental fuel elements after removal from the loops as well as for fundamental research. Many of the studies in loops are carried out in co-operation with the United States atomic energy commission and the United Kingdom atomic energy authority.
The efficiency of a reactor depends to a large degree on the design of its core. The design of a reactor core requires careful calculation and experiment, since its behaviour depends critically on the size, shape and arrangement of the fuel and other components that are contained in it. Reactor cores are studied in the ZEEP reactor. The letters stand for zero energy experimental pile, which first came into operation in 1945, when it was one of the first reactors in the world. ZEEP was used to work out the best arrangement for the core of NRX, and when NRU was designed ZEEP was used to find the best arrangement for that reactor, too. It has recently been remodelled and is now being used to work out arrangements for our proposed power reactors.
However, as these reactors will be considerably larger than ZEEP itself, only part of a core can be studied at one time. It is therefore proposed to build a new, large

ZEEP so the complete core of a power reactor can be specified precisely and costly margins need not be left to cover unknown factors.
Another new reactor, the PTR, the pool test reactor, is in use for related experiments. In these one determines just how much a piece of fuel will contribute to the reaction. This reactor is unique in that it was designed especially for the purpose and can measure pieces of fuel at intervals during their service in other reactors. With ZEEP, the new large ZEEP and PTR, Chalk River will be well equipped to obtain the precise information required to design cores for future economic power reactors.
Applied search in the use of plutonium as a reactor fuel has been pursued to the point where Canada has a leading position in this field. In addition, applied research at Chalk River indicates what appear to be economic methods of disposing of radioactive wastes.
For many years considerations of security kept secret much of the fundamental and virtually all of the applied research at Chalk River. Fortunately in recent years it has become possible to remove these restrictions, and the work of the research scientists is now freely published and discussed. Much of it has recently been reviewed and has been recorded for presentation at the second conference on the peaceful uses of atomic energy organized under the United Nations at Geneva, which I believe is now in progress.
On the subject of production and marketing of radioactive isotopes, the commercial products division of AECL, was established to develop markets for radioisotopes produced in the Chalk River reactors. This work involves processing and selling, but in addition a considerable amount of applied development and design of accessory equipment must be done in order to develop uses and maintain markets. The already wide application of isotopes in many branches of industry, agriculture, research and medicine is expanding and will no doubt continue to expand. The volume of business of this division has steadily increased to where it is now levelling out at about $2,500,000 per year. There has been a very marked increase in the curie quantities of radioactive material produced; for example, 94,000 curies were shipped in 1956 and 196,000 curies in 1957.
The principal source of revenue continues to be cobalt 60 and cobalt 60 beam therapy machines. Four models of these machines are available on a production basis, and one other is ready for production. About 115 machines have been installed in 20 countries. Since about 85 per cent of the business is export, and in a highly competitive market, world
Supply-Trade and Commerce trade conditions and the premium value of the Canadian dollar are having their effect in limiting the volume of sales.
This division operates as a separate accounting unit and tries to break even on its operations. It continues to have a relatively large program of development, with special emphasis on the use of radioisotopes. From 15 to 20 per cent of total revenues are invested in development work, which is considerably more than is normal in a purely commercial operation. In spite of this the cumulative loss of the division since 1952 has been held to $54,000.
I now deal with power reactor projects. This is a field in which the experience with atomic energy leads to its practical application in the development of power. It has been established for many years that electric power can be produced from a nuclear plant, but it is also recognized in all nuclear power programs that the economics of nuclear power can only be demonstrated by designing, engineering, constructing and operating nuclear power stations. It is because of this fact that it has become the practice to refer to the first round of power reactors now in operation or under construction as demonstration power reactors. Examples are the Calder Hall station in the United Kingdom, the PWR station in the United States, the G-2 and G-3 stations in France and our own NPD reactor in Canada.
While the fuel costs in a nuclear power station will be lower than the fuel costs in conventional thermal stations, the capital cost of nuclear power stations will be higher. The capital cost of the first round of demonstration power reactors will range fom $600 per kilowatt to $1,000 per kilowatt. This cost must be reduced very greatly-an acceptable target would be a cost between $250 and $300 per kilowatt-if the benefits of lower fuel costs are not to be offset by excessive capital charges. The reduction of capital costs is primarily a task for the engineer and the manufacturer. Major engineering development work will be required before acceptable designs and manufacturing specifications can be produced.
Canada has two power reactor projects under way, the design and construction of a demonstration power reactor, the NPD, which will have an output of 20,000 kilowatts electric, and a design study for a power reactor with an output of 200,000 kilowatts electric. Both these projects are directed toward the development of a power reactor technology based on the use of natural uranium as fuel and heavy water as moderator, the technology which Canada pioneered with the NRX reactor.

Supply-Trade and Commerce
NPD, the small reactor now under construction, is a co-operative effort of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, the Canadian General Electric Company and the Hydro Electric Power Commission of Ontario. The design studies for a larger power reactor started with the work of a small group of engineers drawn from various Canadian utilities and other companies working in collaboration with A.E.C.L. staff at Chalk River.
The first report on the large reactor design study became available early in 1957. This report introduced for the first time a highly attractive design that, with development, offered excellent promise of producing power in a public utility at a cost of not more than 6 mills per kilowatt hour. In certain important respects this design was unlike that of the NPD reactor. It called for the use of horizontal pressure tubes for the containment of the pressure system including the fuel elements, in place of the single pressure vessel specified for the NPD reactor. This substitution of pressure tubes for a pressure vessel would remove one of the major problems incidental to the design and manufacture of a large nuclear power station using natural uranium as a fuel. An ingenious and very simple method of fuel loading and unloading was also proposed that almost doubles the yield of energy and therefore avoids the need of chemically processing the highly radioactive spent fuel. This was a decided improvement on the method to be used in the NPD reactor.
It was therefore decided that the work on the earlier design and on the construction of the NPD reactor should be suspended, and that a redesign should be prepared which would incorporate these new features. This redesign has been carried out by the Canadian General Electric Company in co-operation with Chalk River and the Hydro Electric Power Commission of Ontario. While the redesign has delayed the completion of this demonstration unit, now known as NPD2, it is considered that such a delay is well warranted, as it may now be considered as a prototype of a large reactor. The present design has been thoroughly evaluated, and the Chalk River staff are particularly pleased with the results and are confident that the basic design will stand comparison with any other in the world. Work has recommenced at the site near the Des Joachims power station, and the scheduled completion date of mid-1961 seems very realistic.
As I mentioned in my statement on February 1, the report of the preliminary design study for the large reactor recommended a broad program of engineering development, since such a program is essential to the


proving of the engineering feasibility of the conceptual design and the establishment of a reliable estimate of costs for a power reactor with an output of 200,000 kilowatts electric. A part of this development program will be undertaken in connection with the NPD2 reactor. However, the remainder of the proposed development work will have to be carried out independently of the NPD2 project.
It was therefore decided to establish a new division of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited in Toronto, to be known as the nuclear power plant division, which has the responsibility of directing the program for the large reactor project and co-ordinating the NPD2 project. Bearing in mind the desirability of carrying on the program in a manner which will provide for the fullest participation of the utilities and the manufacturers, the major portion of the development work will be done by contract, and it is proposed that the staff for the new division be recruited to the fullest extent possible from the utilities and manufacturers. Some manufacturers, consultants and utilities have already assigned staff to the office in Toronto. The Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario is contributing 15 engineers and is making available at no cost to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited office space in Toronto for the new division.
Although the fundamental research, applied research and nuclear power programs of A.E.C.L. have been discussed separately, they may be said to have the following common objectives:
(a)	To contribute to the development of economic nuclear power in order that nuclear power may be available for use in Canada and other parts of the world where a new source of energy is required to supplement conventional sources, and to make this contribution in a manner which will provide for the most effective participation of the utilities and the manufacturers.
(b)	To expand the civil market, both domestic and foreign, for Canadian uranium.
As I stated on February 1, the net cost of A.E.C.L.'s entire program, including A.E. C.L.'s share of NPD2 and the large power reactor development program, will be $140 million spread over four years. The estimates for this fiscal year total $27.7 million. Approximately $22.7 million is for the Chalk River program, with $5 million assigned to the nuclear power plant division and NPD2.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, I am sure the committee will have heard with interest the statement of the minister dealing with this very important matter. Indeed, it is difficult to contemplate any question that could come before parliament which would be more

important than the question of atomic energy, which will have such a far reaching influence on our future and, indeed, may determine whether we have any future at all in this world. It is of some coincidental interest to realize that this subject has been brought up here at the beginning of the second conference at Geneva on the use of atomic energy for peaceful purposes.
Canada, as I think the minister mentioned at the beginning of his statement, has been a pioneer in the development of the use of atomic energy for peaceful purposes along with the United States and the United Kingdom. I think that over the years we have had a fine record of accomplishment in this field due largely, of course, to the skill of the scientists to whom we owe so much in the development of this new form of energy and due also in part, I think, to the backing they have been given by the Canadian government. We also owe a lot, of course, to the co-oneration we have had with the countries I have just mentioned. Our record in this field is not merely one of national progress but one of good and fruitful international co-operation.
It is interesting to recall that from the very beginning of the development of atomic energy for peaceful purposes during the war Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom have worked together in the closest kind of three-power co-operation. In those days at the beginning and right up to the time I ceased having anything to do with this matter in an official way the exchange of information was always on a three-power basis. The combined policy committee in Washington which dealt with atomic energy matters was a committee that consisted of representatives of the three countries.
I hope Canada will be able to maintain that position of equality, at least equality in regard to the exchange of information and co-operation in this field with the other two countries.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I am not really qualified in any way, shape or form to go into the scientific aspects of this matter. I confess even that there were some parts of the minister's statement that I was not able to understand as an expert would. But I did realize from his statement that in this country we are continuing to make encouraging progress in this field. I do have, perhaps, a greater understanding of the political, economic and even strategic consequences of the work that is going on. I should like for a moment to say something about the sources of atomic energy which we are fortunate enough to possess in Canada and without which we would not be able to conduct this 57071-3-286
Supply-Trade and Commerce work. I am referring, of course, to our resources of uranium which are, at the present time at least, the source of the energy in question.
I am informed that at the moment the estimated resources of uranium ore in Canada amount to 334,100,000 tons, which is 100 million tons more than that made in 1956. It is not, of course, all being developed because the uranium mining industry has grown by leaps and bounds, but the development has already begun. Uranium production in Canada in 1957 amounted to $150 million, of which we exported $127 million. In the first six months of 1958 we exported, according to the official figures, $115 million worth of uranium to the United States, which is the market for the great majority of this product, whereas in the first six months of 1957 we exported to that market only $45 million. This shows what has happened to this industry in a very short time. It is now an industry in which more than $400 million is invested in this country, and uranium will very soon be our mineral of greatest export value.
The centre of this development at the present time, the most important area, is the Blind River and Elliot Lake area. It is perhaps, at the moment, the most important uranium producing area in the world. It is a centre where, in the words of the Ottawa Journal of a few weeks ago, uranium has built a modern community, as rich and confident as any in North America.
Not long ago this government ended the government monopoly in the buying and selling of uranium, and I think that was a sensible and wise decision to make. It is now possible for uranium to be exported by producers, at least in small quantities up to 2,500 pounds, under the present regulations.
I think that was a good move to make. It is of course, as the minister will agree very necessary to keep the export of this product under control. I think the government is wise in following an arrangement which had been laid down previously, that export could only be to the countries with which we have agreements. But within the boundaries of this control, for obvious reasons which I need not go into, it is of the greatest possible importance for the development of atomic energy in Canada that we seek and find markets for this commodity abroad, and that we should not have to rely any more than is necessary-it is certainly necessary at the present time-on selling to the United States.
I realize that efforts have been made by the government in this direction, and that markets have been found in the United

Supply-Trade and Commerce Kingdom and are being sought in Japan, Switzerland and Germany. It seems to me that a very important market might be developed in Germany. I was a little disappointed to read in the Montreal Gazette a Canadian Press story dated September 1 to the effect that West Germany appears to have lost interest, at least for the present, in the purchase of Canadian uranium. The story goes on, and the minister perhaps has seen it:
Last May 21 Germany signed a contract for the purchase of Canadian uranium, and thus became the first friendly country other than Britain and the United States, to do so.
However, the contract was for the purchase of only about 15 tons of the atomic metal. It was described by government officials as a trial order, expected to be followed by a larger order for 500 tons.
Now, government officials say there have been no active negotiations for a 500-ton contract.
I hope we can press ahead with this German contract, and indeed other contracts, because as I have already said it is extremely important to diversify our market for this product, especially in view of the fact that the present contract which we have with the United States comes to an end in 1962.
There is another difficulty which is looming up in respect to the marketing of this product, which is essential for atomic energy, a difficulty which I know the minister appreciates; that is that there is now going to be increasing competition with the United States in this field. There is not now, if I can believe some of the reports I have read, the same incentive for discovery and development of uranium as there was a year or two ago, because there are indications that at the present time the supply is in excess of the demand. In that connection I was very interested to read what Dr. Lewis, who I take it is heading our delegation to the Geneva conference, had to say as reported in the press on August 31 when he arrived in Geneva. This is a United Press report. It begins:
A top atomic scientist said today the heyday of the strike it rich uranium prospector was over-at least for 15 or 20 years.
Dr. W. B. Lewis of Canada made the forecast-
He said uranium was available in such surplus that, short of discovering an excessively rich vein of the strategic metal, there were no more fortunes to be made by uranium prospecting-
"For the moment, however, the uranium prospector has had his day," Dr. Lewis added.
I would be glad if the minister could comment on that report, which undoubtedly was received with great interest by the uranium industry of this country. Some credence was given to that view in an article in the New York Times some time ago, under the heading "Uranium Plentiful, U.S. Limits Output."
[Mr. Pearson.l
An atomic energy commission spokesman said on that date, October 29, 1957, according to this report, that uranium is now so plentiful it no longer is in the interest of the government to expand production of uranium concentrate.
Then this spokesman of the United States government went on to say that continuing major explorations should be conducted. The thing that worries one is that if in fact there is enough uranium for our immediate use and if the United States authorities admit that, but at the same time are encouraging the effort in the United States for further exploration, discovery and production of uranium, this is going to be an overhanging threat to our own industry. It underlines, if it needs underlining, the desirability of the closest kind of Canada-United States co-operation not only in the field of scientific progress such as that which the minister dealt with in his statement but in the field of materials development and materials planning; the kind of planning of raw materials production which we had, in fact, during the war.
It seems to me that such planning could with advantage be applied to the production and development of this new source of energy so we shall not find ourselves in the same position as that in which we have found ourselves in this country on so many occasions in the past in connection with metals and minerals development. When there is a shortage in the United States, as there was of uranium a few years ago, they come to Canada on bended knee and ask us to do everything we can to increase production. Then they find new sources of material or metal or mineral in the United States and we are left, if I may use a colloquialism, holding the bag. I certainly hope that will not happen in the field of uranium production.
The minister referred in his statement to the United Kingdom market; and that market, of course, is of growing importance to us in this field because the United Kingdom has made, I suppose, greater progress in the development of atomic energy for power purposes, than even the United States. Under their plans there will be 12 atomic power plants in operation in the United Kingdom by 1965. That constitutes, of course, an important and growing market for our uranium.
The minister made some interesting references to the progress that has been made at Chalk River in the development of a power reactor, and the progress we have made there in this matter and in power reactor technology generally under the direction of the atomic energy board of Canada. This is an important encouraging development. One

of the encouraging features of it is that it has been a co-operative development within the country among governmental agencies like the provincial hydro commission, and private industry. The minister stated-and I do not think anyone will have any quarrel with this statement-that the government is allocating $140 million, which I think is the figure he used, spread over four years for this work. That may seem to be a large sum of money, but I feel sure that it is not too large in view of the importance of the development itself. Perhaps it does not seem so large when you relate it to the fact that it now costs about $100 million in the United States to build one atomic submarine. Perhaps as a result of this progress before long atomic power in Canada may become competitive with other sources of energy.
The Northern Miner in an edition of June 26 of this year had an extremely interesting report on this matter. In this issue of Northern Miner a statement was printed by Dr. Lewis, whom I have already quoted this morning. Dr. Lewis stated:
"We feel we have reached an objective of years of research and can now design a nuclear power plant to generate electric power at 6 mills a kilowatt hour."-
I think that was the figure the minister himself mentioned. Dr. Lewis went on to say:
But we are not stopping at just beating coal at $8 a ton-
There are some members of this house who will not get a great deal of satisfaction out of the prospect of beating coal as a source of energy, but this is Dr. Lewis' prediction:
But we are not stopping at just beating coal at $8 a ton ... We fully expect to go beyond that in power-cost cutting, which would accelerate the building of nuclear power plants not only in Canada, but in the United States and other countries.
We have always appreciated the impact the successful development of nuclear power would have on uranium-rich Canada. It would establish a broad civilian use for uranium and consequently cheap nuclear power has been a foremost objective of research at Chalk River and will likely continue to be for years to come.
The minister this morning gave us some evidence which showed that this objective certainly has not been lost sight of. But while that is a very encouraging report from one of the men in the scientific and development field and probably most concerned with this whole matter, I noticed a month or so ago a Canadian Press dispatch quoting an atomic energy engineer and scientist from an outside country. I refer to Dr. Arms of Great Britain, who said:
-electricity produced by nuclear power plants would cost 55 per cent more for construction in Canada than in Britain.
57071-3-286J
Supply-Trade and Commerce
Then he went on to say this, according to this report:
He could see no reason why operating costs of a nuclear plant should be significantly different from operating costs of a conventional thermal plant in Canada. Fuel costs should not be higher in Canada than in the U.K. except for the relatively small cost of freight and insurance.
But according to his calculation that cost at the present time was a very great deal higher. If we are going to continue to progress, and if we are to realize the objective which Dr. Lewis mentioned in the statement I have read, we shall certainly have to cut down our costs of nuclear reactors.
Then there has been an interesting develop' ment in the United States in this field which I do not think the minister mentioned in his statement and which certainly has Canadian implications. That is the development-I think I have already mentioned this in the house-in the United States of what is called the Argonne low power reactor. This is a reactor which promises to be extremely important especially in Arctic territories-the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources mentioned this in his statement a few weeks ago-it is a small reactor with great power. Demountable; it weighs only ten tons, I am told. These are considerations which make it suitable as a portable power plant in remote areas. This United States portable atomic plant, according to the report I read from the United States, has been designed for Arctic operations for the reasons I have indicated, and particularly for operation in the D.E.W. line. However, this particular atomic plant is operated not by natural uranium but by enriched uranium which, I take it, in non-seientific terms is a kind of high octane uranium.
If that is the case then that would, under present conditions, give the United States a monopoly of these plants because I believe I am right in saying that we do not ourselves produce enriched uranium. I therefore ask the minister whether we could not in this country-and perhaps this is being considered; perhaps progress has been made in it-design a kind of portable atomic power plant of the type of the Argonne reactor which we could manufacture in this country as it would be designed to be operated by natural fuel. Otherwise we would be dependent on the United States for this kind of thing unless we made our own enriched fuel.
I am wondering whether we should not at this time take up with the United States in a very insistent way the question of D.E.W. line equipment of this kind, and urge that D.E.W. line or Arctic equipment to be used in Canada by the United States should be of a kind which would permit a later take

Supply-Trade and Commerce over and Canadian operation; of a kind which we could ultimately develop and manufacture in our own country. This might be of importance in the Arctic far beyond the D.E.W. line itself.
In this connection the minister of northern affairs said on August 14 in a discussion we had on northern matters, as reported at page 3513 of Hansard:
A package atomic power station developed by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited especially for such northern stations is expected to be built at the site-
He was talking about Frobisher Bay.
-although it will be coupled with diesel generated power source until day to day operation bugs are ironed out.
And then the minister is reported as having said:
We have such a station ready now but it is being run by scientists. We want to be sure it can be operated by ordinary technicians-perhaps Eskimos-before we use it as a single power source.
It would be unfortunate, I think, if we developed that single power source for Arctic use of a type suitable for us while the Americans developed the kind of power source to which I have referred for use in the north in stations to be operated by Americans a type which we could not take over and operate ourselves. I ask the minister when he replies to say something about this.
I have detained the committee for quite a considerable time, but I do not think it is necessary to apologize in view of the importance of the subject we are discussing. I shall conclude by saying that we on this side are satisfied with the minister's report, which indicates that we are making steady progress in this important field.


George James McIlraith: I hope the minister can reply to the wider issues which were raised by my leader, but in the meantime there are some other questions I should like to ask. The minister did not deal specifically in his remarks with the NRU reactor, and I wonder if he would tell us something about the temporary shut-down of that plant, whether it is to resume operation, and so on.
Next, I wonder if he would advise us of the progress being made in providing a reactor for India, which I understand is to be similar in general type to the NRX reactor. It was to have been made available under the Colombo plan, I believe, by the former government. In any event it is being continued in the program.
I would also ask the minister to tell us if there have been any changes in the personnel of the atomic energy control board as indicated in the annual report of that board for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1958, which

was tabled on June 30. The members of the board listed in that annual report were Dr. Mackenzie, president, Mr. Bateman, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Gagnon and Dr. Steacie, members of the board. I wonder, also, whether the minister would indicate any changes in the personnel of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited whose annual report was tabled on July 15 and whose officials, as of March 31, 1958 are named on the front page of that report. Perhaps I caD leave my other questions until later, when I have received a reply from the minister.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I am sure hon. members of the committee listened with a great deal of interest to the constructive remarks by the Leader of the Opposition, who has had considerable experience in this field in its application to affairs abroad and the implications of the use of atomic energy internationally.
I am not sure I can answer some of the questions he raised with regard to various matters and statements by various people- for example, the statement that the uranium prospector has had his day. I am not too sure about that, because while very large quantities of uranium have been discovered in various parts of the world, there are nevertheless different grades of uranium, and a prospector still has an opportunity to locate high grade ore which would, of course, be better than ore of a low grade.
I was particularly interested in the hon. gentleman's remarks about the necessity for close co-operation between the United States and Canada with respect to materiel planning. Obviously if either country overemphasizes the production of lower grade material, that would not be conducive to the long range objectives of the development of atomic energy and, moreover, we could get into difficulties with regard to overproduction. The link between Canada and the United States in the whole field of atomic energy has, of course, been quite close from the very beginning, and we keep in contact with our friends down there.
The Leader of the Opposition drew attention to a statement originating in the United Kingdom with regard to the cost of construction of atomic plants in Canada, suggesting it was unusually high compared with the United Kingdom standards. That would require examination, and I do not have the facts in front of me with regard to it at the moment. The objective is, of course, as has been stated, to arrive at lower capital costs so the target figure of 6 cents per kilowatt can be reached.
On the subject of a lower-power reactor, the Argonne, using enriched uranium, the

Leader of the Opposition made some pertinent remarks. We are interested in developing reactors that can be used in isolated areas and in the north country, but we feel that natural uranium might well be used as a fuel. Studies are being considered regarding these reactors of lesser power. The enriched uranium program followed by the United States is of course an extraordinarily expensive program. Though we are now spending millions of dollars on research and development, we cannot perhaps match all the expenditure that can be made by a country as large and as wealthy as the United States.
However, with the exchange of scientific knowledge we benefit from the things they do as they do from the things we accomplish. Whether or not they might have a monopoly with regard to this particular type of atomic plant will have to be determined later on, as experiments continue. It does not necessarily follow that an atomic reactor using enriched uranium will produce lower cost power than one with natural uranium and a heavy water coolant such as is being developed in Canada. Canada has played a prominent part in this scientific investigation.
I would like to examine some of the other matters raised in the speech of the Leader of the Opposition and perhaps convey to him later the information which is not readily at hand with regard to some of these problems as, for example, his interest in the reaction of West Germany toward contracts for uranium from Canada. I would want to examine that question and determine the state of negotiations.
The hon. member for Ottawa West asked about the NRU reactor. This went out of action on May 24 this year. That was caused by failure of one of the fuel elements where the aluminum sheath was not bonded to the uranium. As the damaged fuel element was being removed part of it fell and caught fire on top of the reactor, causing radioactive contamination to a certain extent throughout the building. But the building and equipment have been completely decontaminated, and the personnel at Chalk River with the assistance of personnel from the armed services conducted that work. There are about 160 rods to replace within the reactor and only a few of them can be removed each day, so the reactor will not be operating at its full power of 200,000 kilowatts before early October. That is the situation with regard to the NRU reactor.
The reactor for India which is being built under the Colombo plan is reaching completion and should be ready for operation in 1959. It is coming along very well. Officials of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Supply-Trade and Commerce have visited the plant from time to time during the last two years and have been keeping a very close eye on the work that is going on there, so perhaps a year from now that atomic plant will be in operation and will make its contribution to research and development there as our own plants are doing here in Canada.
The hon. member mentioned the atomic energy control board and the changes in personnel there. Mr. Bennett and Mr. Bateman resigned from the control board. It now consists of Doctor Mackenzie, Doctor Steacie, Doctor Gagnon, Mr. Gilchrist of Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited, now president of that firm, and Mr. Gray, the president of Atomic Energy. They comprise the board.
With regard to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, the directors are as follows: Mr. Gray, Mr. Stewart, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Gaherty, Mr. Gordon, Mr. Hearn, Mr. O'Sullivan, Mr. Stephens, and Mr. Wallace. Resignations were received from Mr. Bennett, Mr. Ambridge, Mr. Masseu and Mr. Scully.
Before concluding my remarks on this very important topic I should like to pay my tribute to the members of the atomic energy control board and the personnel of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited for the very fine co-operation they have shown during the time I have been occupying this position. I have received nothing but the finest co-operation from them. They have relayed to me a great deal of information, and although experts in their fields and some of them very distinguished scientists they have very patiently explained the intricacies of atomic energy to a layman, and for that I am extremely grateful.
I had the opportunity last year of visiting Chalk River and seeing the plants in operation there and meeting the scientists who are doing such excellent work. I believe the program Canada embarked on some years ago and is now vigorously pursuing is really very much worth while. Canada is keeping well in the forefront of atomic energy research. We are training Canadians in this field. Their work is on a basis comparable with that of scientists in other countries. Our development work in these reactors at Chalk River and our projects for the power reactors have attracted the attention of scientists throughout the world.
It is sometimes not realized that there is a constant exchange of scientists in this nuclear field. Some of our people may be found in the United States and the United Kingdom, and representatives of those countries are here in Canada, exchanging information and learning on the spot new developments in each of these countries.

Supply-Trade and Commerce
Our people are making a distinguished contribution in the presentation of scientific papers to the meetings of learned societies dealing with the problems of nuclear physics. All told, this program has developed in Canada a body of scientists expert in the nuclear field, and as our power reactor program continues the engineering and manufacturing sides will similarly in their turn develop skilled personnel so we will be in a position to compete satisfactorily with other countries when it comes to the construction and eventually the export of machinery or the type of building that is required for an atomic reactor.
With our large supplies of uranium in Canada we want to play an active part in the supplying of uranium to countries which in time will be requiring power reactors. None of this could be done without the basic work of Canadian scientists and the application of their knowledge to reactors such as the NRU and the NRX and these power reactors which are envisaged. Then in cooperation with that application we have the very good work being done by the engineers and manufacturers, who have gained a great deal of knowledge from their activities at Chalk River. I think, by and large, we may consider that Canada is making an eminently satisfactory contribution in the field of atomic energy.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Chairman, I am very glad to hear the minister speak in this way about the work being done by the scientists and technicians in this program and also the extremely important work being done by the engineers and manufacturers. I am sure he will not mind my expressing a personal thought. Having been associated in a small way with this program through the former minister, Right Hon. C. D. Howe, when these projects were being developed between 1945 and 1953, I am keenly interested in the program.
Personally I have a very keen appreciation of the work of that great engineer, and I am sure the members of the government will take no political offence at what I am saying in that respect. I have the most profound respect, admiration and loyalty, of course, for that friend whom I regard as a great Canadian and a great minister of the crown, but the point I wanted to bring out was his great work as an engineer in understanding this type of problem, pressing it forward and being able to organize and reconcile the work of the scientists, the engineers and the government.
I have a suggestion I would like to commend to the minister and the leader of the house, for their consideration, and I shall
[Mr. Churchill.l

try to express it very briefly. Recognizing the importance of the Canadian government continuing to press forward the activities of government in the research field for peaceful uses of atomic energy, I am going to venture to ask the government whether they would consider setting up a committee to examine into this subject next session. I think perhaps the best evidence of the value of such examination is the volume of evidence taken by previous committees. The volumes of evidence put out by the committee are equal to about the volumes of three weeks' Hansards of this house. Well, it is obviously impossible on the discussion of the estimates to take three weeks of the house's time to go into the subject, yet I feel the subject is of such paramount importance that it should receive that kind of treatment.
I am one of those who hold the view that there are already too many committees sitting, and the retort could immediately be made that here I am asking for another one. I would suggest that an examination be made of the problem from the point of view of leaving the activities of one of the present active committees in abeyance for the year to permit the setting up of a committee to examine into this subject instead of into one or other of the matters considered by the committees during the current session. With these words I will close any general remarks I have on the subject.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
692. To amend vote No. 786, of the Appropriation Act No. 4, 1951 by deleting therefrom the words "at a salary of $12,000," and substituting therefor the words "at such salary rate as the governor in council determines, but not exceeding $16,500", $1.
George James McIlraith: I want to say something very briefly on this and the next item. Perhaps I can discuss them together. This item, I take it, has to do with the appointment of a new assistant deputy or associate deputy minister, as the case may be. Will the minister very briefly explain this item, and then the next item, which has to do with commodities services. The item reads:
Further amount required including expenses of the small business branch, $30,000.
Am I right in assuming that this item is for the small business branch of the department?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, that is right.


George James McIlraith: I want to make one brief comment. In the throne speech we were led to believe that there was to be some new activity of government on behalf of small business. It was in the same careful language usually used in a throne speech, but from

the reference many of us assumed that some major activity on behalf of small business was being undertaken.
Here I want to interject a note of criticism of the government for having come forward on May 12 with that subject matter in the throne speech, and now we find that all that is contemplated is a gross expenditure of $30,000. It must be borne in mind that this includes such things as travelling expenses and very limited personnel. Really it is something that should not have been mentioned. It is merely an administrative matter within the department and should not have been in the throne speech. In other words, the language in the throne speech indicates one type of action, but the action taken by the government is merely an administrative action that is more or less routine in any department at any time in the administration of departmental business. In my view the government is subject to criticism and censure for having made the official pronouncement in the throne speech and then coming forward with no action in keeping with the pronouncement.


Lester Bowles Pearson: May I say one word. I do not think the $30,000 item justifies the $30 million build-up.


Hazen Robert Argue: I am keenly disappointed with the step the government has now taken in the light of all the soundings of trumpets and the $30 million build-up for this tiny and insignificant item. This may not be a question of much ado about nothing, but there has been much to do about very little. This will be something of a shock to the small business people of this country who were looking to the government for action in a very real way on this very important question. I wonder whether you would call it one o'clock, Mr. Chairman?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Would the minister like to continue for 15 minutes?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Unless there is extended discussion, what I have to say would take not more than five minutes.


Hazen Robert Argue: I thought I would break into my own speech by calling it one o'clock, and I shall continue my remarks at 2.30.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, at one o'clock I was saying that the small business community will be exceedingly disappointed with the item we are now discussing. Of course
Supply-Trade and Commerce there is nothing wrong or bad about the item itself but it is so trivial in relation to the many promises made by the government to come to the assistance of small business in this country. I have in my hand a report that appeared in the Charlottetown Guardian of February 28, 1958. It reports a speech made by the Prime Minister and reads as follows: He announced that if his government is re-elected, it is their intention at the first session of parliament to give consideration to a system whereby small business may be able to expand on reasonable terms, and have available to it a system of financing which is being considered to enable small business to meet its responsibility in expanding and assuring extra jobs. A community will continue to prosper and expand if small business expands, he said.
Where are the loans? Where is the system of credit in the item now under discussion? This is surely a very trivial and inconsequential item in comparison with the broad system of credit for small business promised by the government. The Prime Minister made speeches in many other places reiterating the same statement I have quoted from the Charlottetown Guardian. Small businessmen are very much in need of credit facilities at reasonable rates of interest. Over the years the federal government, including both Liberal and Conservative administrations has made available and continued a system of bank credits for farmers by way of guaranteed loans, guaranteed loans to fishermen and loans under the National Housing Act, but one of the very important gaps and omissions is the whole field of small business credit.
The average small businessman is not able to obtain long term credit at reasonable rates of interest. The banks cannot or do not provide credit on a long term mortgage basis. Banks will provide credit only for a short period. A businessman who needs short term credit of a few months duration to stock his store is very likely able to get that type of credit from a bank but if he needs long term credit to renovate his store or to build new premises or expand it is not readily available.
A couple of years ago we had a witness before the banking and commerce committee of the house from the hotel association of Ontario. He said that if hotel proprietors in Ontario wished to obtain money for expansion they had to pay an interest rate in excess of 14 per cent. I know of many businessmen who in order to stock their stores and provide facilities and equipment have had to go to finance companies, and borrow at rates of interest from 15 to 20 per cent per annum. The small businessman is not able to get credit in the same way a large business or corporation can. A very large incorporated business can obtain money on the money

Supply-Trade and Commerce markets. It can float debentures and obtain credit at reasonable rates. The small businessman is not able to do this. Yet in a given community it is very often the small businessman who provides credit to his customers on a short term basis without interest. He does this in competition with big business firms which are able to obtain credit for the purposes of their businesses at very low rates of interest but, when they provide credit to their customers on instalment purchases, charge interest rates of 15, 20 or 30 per cent per annum or more.
Therefore the small businessman is caught two ways. He is not able to obtain credit at reasonable rates of interest and he has to compete price-wise with big retail firms that charge enormous interest rates on instalment purchases by their customers. Because of the interest charges and the subsequent huge profits that flow to these companies therefrom they are often able to undersell the small businessman.
During this session we in the C.C.F. have made a special study of the needs of the small businessman. From time to time throughout the session members of our party have advocated measures in the interests of the small businessman. I do not know what other members are receiving in the mail but I know that I and other members of this party are receiving a great many letters from small businessmen having to do with the government's policy or lack of it as far as they are concerned. Many of these letters are identical and they are being sponsored by the retail merchants association. I have in my hand such a letter which is representative of the type of letters I have been receiving. It reads as follows:
I am writing to you in the hope that you will bring to the attention of the house the urgency of early enactment of legislation, the subject of which being small business asistance.
This subject was introduced in the throne speech and it is legislation if enacted that will redound to the benefit of the country as a whole. This is particularly true of the individual engaged in the operation of a retail store and who is desirous of obtaining terms of financing greater than that presently obtained from the chartered banks or institutions.
Small business loans can be, if patterned after the small business assistance act which our neighbours in the U.S.A. have in effect, self-liquidating . . . All that they need is government guarantee. We urge you, as our member, to voice your opinion in the house on this very important matter now.
This letter is signed by Mr. Aron Jansonn of Crestwynd, Saskatchewan. As I have said, this letter is similar to that used by a great many small businessmen in writing to their members of parliament. I would hope the minister and the government would act as

requested at an early date. We are disappointed in this estimate, which is so inadequate. We hope that action will be forthcoming in the very near future.
The small businessman is a very essential part of what is termed by many as our free enterprise economy. Most people, when they use the words "free enterprise economy", probably mean an economy wherein there are a very large number of independently owned and operated small businesses. I do not agree with the misnamed free enterprise system if by that is meant the kind of monopoly-ridden and monopoly-choked economy that we see in our country in many fields. But I do believe that the small, independent businessman, the local merchant and dealer is a very important part of our Canadian society; that he performs a very worth-while function in his community; that he is an asset to our nation, and that the government should do everything within reason to assist him to maintain the very important services that he provides.
I am one who believes very firmly in private property, so long as it is private property and so long as it is not used to exploit the community. The more private property we have, in the sense of property owned and controlled by individuals who do not use this property to try to exploit their neighbours, the better it will be for our Canadian society. We believe in private ownership, which is best illustrated by the kind of small businessman to whom I have been referring. We believe in co-operative enterprise, an association of many members in a co-operative organization on a self-help basis, with one membership to each participant and with one vote for one membership. This provides the greatest degree of democratic control of such an economic organization.
We believe in public enterprise. I referred the other day to Trans-Canada Air Lines as a publicly owned enterprise which I felt was doing an excellent service for the people of Canada. We do not feel that such a service can be provided by private enterprise, as I have defined it, by one or two people providing that service, obviously neither does it lend itself to a co-operative enterprise. We feel that rather than have Trans-Canada Air Lines owned and operated as a joint stock company or a private monopoly it is better to operate that organization under public ownership. The fourth type of ownership I would call corporate ownership, and when corporate ownership becomes a monopoly and such monopoly is used to exploit either the consumer or the worker, then we are opposed to such a type of ownership.

I feel that the government, in keeping with its election promises, should be doing far more than is being done under this legislation. There is need now for a system of credit to small business at reasonable terms of interest. I feel that is an essential step that should be taken now. Small business firms often find it very difficult to compete with the larger firms on a price basis. There is a widespread but mistaken opinion that the small, independent businessman is not efficient; that to have efficiency you have to have bigness. The reason big firms are able to override small business firms is because of their corporate strength; it is because they are able to buy more cheaply, because they can get credit more cheaply and because they are often in a position to provide credit to customers on an instalment basis at a very high rate of interest. But if the small, independent businessman in this country could have the goods laid down at his door at the same general cost level as the goods are laid down at the door of the big chain stores, I am certain that the small businessman would lick the chain stores every time. Small business can operate on a smaller margin. It can give better service, but small business has great difficulty now because of the things I have mentioned and more especially because it is unable to obtain long-term credit at reasonable rates.
I do not know why the government does not act now. I think parliament is sympathetic to the position of the small businessman. I would urge the government to fulfil its election promises, and not by providing a few thousand dollars in an estimate to hire one office manager and two or three stenographers to provide gratuitous advice to the small business people of this country. I do not think it is the kind of advice that they need. Unless the people who are appointed in accordance with this item in the estimates are most outstanding, I would question whether they are competent to give advice at all. I would be inclined to believe that the part of the item which has to do with travelling expenses is there so that the one or two officials who are appointed under this estimate may travel across the country interviewing small businessmen and learning themselves the kind of second-hand advice they should pass on if they get some letters of inquiry. I do not believe that, by this item, the government has shown that they believe at all in the free enterprise system about which they talk so much. One would wonder, from this item, whether or not the government believes at all in the system of free enterprise. However, I urge again that the government take adequate steps, even in the dying days of this session, to provide 57071-3-287
Supply-Trade and Commerce credit facilities to small, independent businessmen so that they can continue to provide essential services in their communities, and so that the government will be able to say to the Canadian public, we have kept this election promise.


Mr. Carter:: I should like to take advantage of this item to bring to the minister's personal attention a matter which is of very great importance to my own constituents, indeed to all the people of Newfoundland and particularly those who have to live in the smaller settlements. My problem has to do with the regulations laid down by the division of weights and measures, in so far as they apply to the sale of coal in Newfoundland.
Prior to confederation the standard ton in Newfoundland was the British weight of 2,240 pounds. This tradition, of course, left its mark on the ways of our people. Coal is sold in most settlements in Newfoundland over the side of a ship and is unloaded into a small boat which is rowed ashore, then men shovel that coal out of the boat into a barrel or measure. Then they have to carry it sometimes as far as half a mile or a quarter of a mile up to their homes, up the land wash and overland without any roads at all. The standard measurement that has been used all this while is that of 12 tubs to the ton, which gives a tub a weight of 187 pounds. That has been an easy thing to do because they can always get a pork barrel or a beef barrel and saw it off at the required length, and that gives the exact weight and measurements for this purpose. Furthermore, this weight of 187 pounds is about the weight that two people can carry under the conditions which I have just described. Also in certain places people contribute to the schools. Instead of contributing cash they contribute a barrel of coal. I may say that the people themselves own their own measures which they take off and compare with the one on board ship. Then on shore they use that same measure with which to unload the coal from the small boat and carry it up to their storehouse. They also use that same measure to carry coal to the schoolhouse if they are contributing in kind.
The standard ton or legal ton under Canadian law is the short ton of 2,000 pounds. The division of weights and measures have laid down the regulation that the only legal measure is a tub of 100 pounds or multiples of 100 pounds. A 200 pound tub is too heavy for two people to carry around under the conditions which I have just described. Some people in Newfoundland-a very few firms, I might say-store coal for resale. The ordinary small businessman whom the hon. member for Assiniboia has just described

Supply-Trade and Commerce might carry perhaps 20 tons or 30 tons as a sort ol emergency stock to tide people over the winter it winter conditions are unusually severe. The people who stock coal in quantity use the short ton, or they have adapted themselves to the short ton, but they find it more convenient to use the 250 pound tub because two tubs weigh one-quarter ton, four tubs half a ton and eight tubs would fill up the ton. These are amounts by which coal is bought on the retail basis. I would therefore urge the minister to do one of two things. I would urge him either to suspend these regulations in so far as they apply to the resale of coal in Newfoundland or else legalize the two measurements which are most convenient for Newfoundland to use, namely the 250 pound tub and the 187 pound tub.


Mr. Garland:: I have no desire to delay the committee, Mr. Chairman, but I should just like to ask a couple of questions. It is a well known fact that this matter of assistance to small businessmen was promised during the 1957 campaign and again during the 1958 campaign. Then again, as was pointed out this morning, it was mentioned in the speech from the throne. I should simply like to know what is the present status of the government's thinking on this subject. It will be recalled that in the 1957 campaign-and I will be very brief-the Prime Minister in speaking on the subject at that time sought to encourage small business. He said that a parliamentary committee would be appointed composed of cabinet ministers and representatives of small business associations from all parts of Canada. That was prior to the election. Then in June of this year the present Minister of Justice, in speaking to a group of retail merchants associations in his own province, dealt with the subject. The headline of one story that emanated from that meeting was "New Plans Announced by Fulton". It reads in part as follows:
The federal government Is proceeding "at once" ,o set up a small business section in government aimed at helping small businesses solve their problems, Justice Minister Fulton said tonight.
Then in an address to that same group, The Retail Merchants Association of Canada, he said this:
-Mr. Fulton said these steps are being taken to remove "artificial" obstacles to small businesses in Canada.
I was wondering whether the minister might enlarge on that aspect of the matter. Then we move along to other stories that have been emanating from what are usually represented as reliable sources, namely that all small businessmen may expect is some advice and 
not loans or any real assistance. I would appreciate any comment the minister would care to make.


Mr. Gour:: I will not remind the minister of the promises made during the election campaign in my riding. He promised five big bridges on the Ottawa river across from my riding to Quebec. On two occasions ministers were there in support of the Tory candidate and they were producing those promises. The Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys was one of them. However, I will not speak about politics.
I think it is a good thing that we should have some kind of credit guarantee by the government for small businessmen. I am the only one in my own town-and I thank God for it-who is able to stay in business in competition with these big companies. These big companies are using the business people in my riding to make them work for them and in ten years they will be out with nothing. It is through these big organizations or stores, through their sales, that these people are induced to buy refrigerators and everything. Many sell their products and there is nothing remaining for these people who sacrifice their own business. The point is that they do not sell on credit. It is only the small businessman who will help the people who want credit without interest. Most of the small businessmen give credit. Many of them give credit up to six months and many times-I and my friends have done it -a year without interest. If we had some kind of plan to guarantee these business people through the bank, something like that for farm development and for housing purposes, whereby a loan can be obtained at the bank at a lower interest rate, these people could give credit without interest to their customers. They treat their customers as friends, not as does big finance. Most of the time, now that a Tory government is in power, when they are short of work all over and business is bad they need more credit than ever. If it were possible to guarantee the loan to the bank or to have a special organization for small business people it would be a great advantage for all Canada. It will give credit to these people. They will buy more. As I said a moment ago, it is not for me. Up to now I have not needed a government loan. But I am only one in quite a large territory.
That would render a service to customers and give them a chance to buy the products they need-seed, agricultural machinery and so on. This is a good thing which has been promised, and this is the time to do it. As I said a minute ago the need today is greater than it was two years ago, since there is now less work and a greater shortage of money.

A measure of this sort will help to provide more work because it would give the people who need the goods a chance to buy them.
As many speakers have said, if borrowers go to the finance company they are obliged to pay interest at the rate of between 12 and 15 per cent. If, on the other hand, they bring their financial problems to the bank, the loans could be guaranteed by the federal government. The managers of the banks in the various districts are gentlemen. They know their people. They know those who should receive credit, and they know those who are likely to ask for more credit than they can handle. I do not think you could find anybody more qualified to extend credit than the managers of the banks in rural districts, certainly, and to some extent in urban areas also.
There is an urgent need for something to be done. However, I have one criticism to make. Thirty thousand dollars is not enough. It is peanuts. I myself would need more than that amount if I were to set out to buy something on any scale at all. I urge the minister, who is a businessman and who is in a position to be called the minister of business affairs, to consult with his friends in the cabinet and remind the Prime Minister of what he said so that something may be done this year to settle this urgent question.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I judge from the opinions that have been expressed during the last half hour and just before the lunch hour that there is general agreement that a small business branch should be set up and proceed to deal with the problems of small business.
I notice from the remarks which hon. members have made that they are fully aware of the problems which affect small business and are quite sympathetic towards them. These remarks will be studied carefully and the suggestions which have been made will be given close attention. I appreciate the fact that hon. members have put on the record some of their observations gathered from their own personal experience, as the hon. member for Russell, the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo and others who are in close contact with small business and know something of the problems which small businessmen face, have indicated.
I will set out briefly the plan as we see it at the moment, and conclude with one or two comments. As has been pointed out, this arrangement was forecast in the speech from the throne in the following words:
In order to assist small business, there will be established a small business section within the administrative machinery of government. The functions of this organization will be to provide liaison between the government and small businesses, to study the problems of small business and to advise on measures necessary to meet them.
57071-3-287J
Supply-Trade and Commerce
Small business is a large and important segment of the Canadian economy in terms of its contribution to employment and national output and its worth in the life of many communities. More than four-fifths of all manufacturing establishments in the country have fewer than 50 employees and account for over one-sixth of the total selling value of factory shipments. Retail stores with under five employees represent close to nine-tenths of all establishments of this type and are responsible for over two-fifths of the total value of retail sales. In the case of wholesale trade, firms with fewer than five employees make up about two-thirds of all establishments and conduct about one-fifth of all the wholesale business in the country. Small establishments with under five employees predominate to an even greater extent in the service industries, representing almost nine-tenths of all establishments and accounting for over one-third of total receipts.
Many representations have been made to the federal government by individuals and trade associations for some form of assistance to enable small business to meet more effectively the problems with which it is confronted. Most of the proposals have involved the establishment of a service which would provide small businessmen with information and advice on their production and marketing problems.
In the light of these considerations, the main objective of the small business office would be to help small businessmen to help themselves. The following terms of reference are suggested:
1.	To act as a clearing house in referring inquiries of small business to the appropriate departments of the Canadian government or provincial and municipal governments and to various other organizations and institutions;
2.	to compile and distribute bulletins and reports on topics of general interest to small business including information on government procurement;
3.	to assist small business on request to obtain statistical, technical and other information on management, production and marketing problems;
4.	to undertake studies concerning small business, particularly for guidance of the government in developing new policies in this field and as background material for dealing more effectively with the problems of small business;
5.	in the course of its work, to consult and co-operate with educational institutions, representative business associations and other private organizations.
That, Mr. Chairman, presents in general terms the functions that will be performed by the small business office which will be set up in the Department of Trade and Commerce. The Department of Trade and Commerce has a wealth of experience in dealing with business across this country whether large or small. Within the industrial development branch of the department a great deal

Supply-Trade and Commerce of information has been compiled in the past and consequently it is appropriate that this section should be set up in this particular department where considerable experience is already available.
I appreciate the fact that some hon. members feel we have not gone far enough at this stage. That is, of course, a criticism to which any proposal is open. However, I suggest we are indicating here the government's intention to do what can be done to assist small business, and I have already indicated the importance of small business in Canada.
The paragraph in the speech from the throne and the terms of the reference which I have just read out indicate that we are aiming to determine the problems of small business before any further plans are made. I am sure hon. members will appreciate that this is the proper way to approach any subject such as this where you are entering into a relatively new field. All the facts should be assembled, representations should be heard from those engaged in small business, the operation of similar institutions in other countries should be studied and plans carefully laid for the furtherance of the interests of small business in the future.
These things cannot all be done overnight impatient as some of us may be to get on with the job. We must have this background of material before proceeding and I think this is a step in the right direction. During the course of the month of October this office will be functioning and will be available for consultation with business associations across this country and before many months have elapsed I believe there will be established a body of information from which we can draw conclusions that will be advantageous to the government in formulating its plans for the future in connection with small business.


William Moore Benidickson: I believe the minister
in describing the policies of the administration has spoken as a true Conservative. Probably some of us expected this but on the other hand in a debate that took place yesterday or the day before I indicated that during the election campaign the Conservatives had used pretty large explosives which proved in the end to have very blank cartridges. I believe that is very true in regard to this particular vote which we are asked to approve.
In Yarmouth on March 25, 1958, the Prime Minister made a statement on the subject as reported in the Halifax Chronicle-Herald of March 26, as follows:
The Prime Minister said his government was planning to provide financial assistance for the small businessman, "who had found himself hampered by tight money".

He blamed this, of course, on the previous administration. I continue:
An inter-departmental committee in Ottawa was presently studying the problems of small business, he said and "the net step" would be a program making available financial assistance for this type of business.
That is not what we are asked to approve at this stage many months after this assertion. We are asked simply to approve a small vote for an increase in the civil service of an advisory nature and I believe there is an element of travelling expenses involved there.
The Financial Post analysing this problem some time ago indicated that perhaps the two elements of small business which had been most active and regular in approaching governments in the past had been retail merchants and the operators of tourist resorts who felt that the ordinary sources of money supply in this country were not available to them. I know that since the last decision of the electorate both these organizations have sent representatives to the federal government. They have sent their national officers to interview the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Minister of Finance, I believe. After all the promises we have heard it is pretty small potatoes when the government provides only $30,000 to set up a body to counsel and advise. I do not believe it is advice that the small businessmen seek at this time.
We have the industrial development bank. It is not appropriate to discuss that at this moment and I will not enlarge upon it. We will have an opportunity in a matter of a day or two to discuss that with respect to the estimates of the Minister of Finance. I believe the retail merchants association particularly which in its annual conference had heard a rather glowing speech in Vancouver from the Minister of Justice following the election will be disappointed to find that despite the very obvious hints made in that speech, this vote of $30,000 is simply to enlarge the staff of civil servants in the department of the Minister of Trade and Commerce to give advice to the small business community. That is not what they have sought. The thing they want most is access to credit facilities.
The mere fact that this supplementary vote is contained in the estimates of the Minister of Trade and Commerce and not in those of the Minister of Finance indicates for sure that all the present administration is likely to give to small business, notwithstanding the statement of the Prime Minister at Yarmouth which I quoted, is advice and counsel and, I suppose, a pat on the back. I believe this is very contrary even to the speech made by the Minister of Justice in

Vancouver to the retail merchants association. Surely the administration has noted that very recently, and I believe largely because of depressed economic conditions the United States Congress before adjourning as they did last week

and they were only generous in some of their fiscal changes with respect to small business in the matter of tax relief and in the matter of lending-did something very important and substantial to help what they call the small business community of the United States. Here we have what is simply a vote of $30,000, 75 per cent of which is for an increase in salaries for civil servants and the balance of which, as far as I know, is for the travelling expenses of those civil servants.


Chesley William Carter: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that the minister made a passing reference to the problem I placed before him a few moments ago. May I have his assurance that he will look into the matter and see what can be done because by so doing he will not only be helping the small businessman but also the people who depend on coal for fuel. If merchants are forced to go to the extra expense of these additional measures which his department is insisting upon that cost will be passed on to the purchasers and the cost of coal is already fantastically high in Newfoundland.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I shall certainly look into the matter presented by the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo. I quite appreciate that that is a really pressing problem on the part of the people who are accustomed to a different measure.


Mr. Crestohl:: Mr. Chairman, I have a question to ask the minister. On July 17 when the house went into supply on the minister's estimates I asked him then what progress was being made in connection with the small business proposal. The minister at that time told us that the government had not yet assigned a department which would deal with this matter. The house took it for granted that this would fall within the jurisdiction of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. When the minister spoke on July 17, as reported at page 2357 of Hansard, he said:
I cannot let this opportunity pass without correcting my hon. friend with respect to the statement I made on the setting up of the small business section. There has been no withdrawal from the plan to give such assistance as may be possible to small business in Canada. All I said was that a final decision had not been reached as to whether or not the Department of Trade and Commerce would have that responsibility and I hope within a very short time an announcement will be made to this house as to the setting up of a small business section.
My question now is, can we take it for granted that this small business section will
Supply-Trade and Commerce fall within the jurisdiction of the Department of Trade and Commerce?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, Mr. Chairman. When we discussed this on July 17 the decision had not been made, but the fact that it is under the trade and commerce estimates is one indication that it will be done by this department, and I so announce at this time.


William Moore Benidickson: The minister did not in a particular way refer to the remarks I made a few moments ago, but we have learned through the press that he proposes to enlarge his staff with the acquisition of, I have no doubt, an estimable gentleman who I understand served with the minister in the armed services during world war II, and he will take a distinguished position in the department. I know nothing about the gentleman concerned. Is he what might be called a small businessman? Press reports indicated that he might be taking the lead in advising the minister with respect to small business problems. Is any part of this vote of $30,000 to provide for the salary of the gentleman in question?


Gordon Minto Churchill: No. My hon. friend is referring to the appointment of the associate deputy minister, Mr. J. M. Roberts, who served as a brigadier in the army in the second war. This small business section may be placed under his supervision within the department; but in setting up a new section like this a most active part will be played by the deputy minister himself who has had 30 years of experience within the department. Mr. Roberts has had considerable experience in business. We hope to enlist from departmental circles people who have had experience along this line and, if necessary, receive other assistance from people who have had similar or even greater experience with small business.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, because we in this group are firm believers in legitimate free enterprise which as part of the mixed economy we believe is the next evolution that our economy will move toward, we have been very interested in the question of small business for some years. In fact, the group to which I belong have given some study to this question to my knowledge for a period of over five or six years.
I am very pleased indeed that the government is seizing on the idea at this time or, at least, thinking about the question. I listened closely to the minister's statement and explanation of the purpose of this $30,000. And while this, shall I say, is a very short step in the right direction, in view of the statements made by members of the government in the country and the anticipation aroused

Supply-Trade and Commerce amongst small business people during the election-and this is indicated by the actual correspondence that I receive from day to day-the minister's explanation this afternoon is going to be what I would call a damp economic squib.
I know very well that this cannot be undertaken without an organization and I am glad to see that the organization is being established and some study is being given to the matter because we believe that small business is an essential and very necessary part of our economy, particularly in view of the monopolistic tendencies that are being developed in all directions. It is for that reason that we believe some study should be given and an effort made to assist in a proper and sound way small industry, distribution and some services which would include tourist resorts and operations of that type.
I spoke previously at this session on this question and I do not intend to take up the time of the committee now except to say that I know dozens of small businesses which are being well operated at the present time and well managed, but because of the lack of opportunity to borrow capital over long terms at low interest they are experiencing difficulties, difficulties which are not created by inefficiency or poor management but which are created by our present economic system and by the intensive competition which comes from larger segments of our economy. I do urge that the government give consideration to every possibility of rendering the financial assistance that is so urgently needed. As this group has recommended and suggested before, it might be done through the industrial development bank; it might be done through guarantee by this government to banks of 10 per cent of the losses on loans, similar to the scheme which is provided under the Farm Improvement Loans Act, or it might de done by an amendment to the Bank Act. There are a good number of avenues open for exploration in this respect and I do hope the government gives this question very urgent and close consideration and at the next session presents this house with a proposal which will offer opportunities for legitimate private enterprise which on a sound basis can qualify to receive the necessary financial assistance that it urgently requires at this time.


John Richard Garland: Would the minister care to reply to the second question I asked earlier this afternoon with respect to the comment of the Minister of Justice who said that steps are being taken to remove artificial obstacles to small business?


Gordon Minto Churchill: I am not sure that I would know exactly what the Minister of Justice was referring to there, but I presume that in our planning and in our discussions with small business organizations we shall find what those artificial obstacles are and do our best to remove them. I would say that no one is more interested in this particular problem of small businessmen than the Minister of Justice who has discussed some of those matters with me on several occasions and has made constructive suggestions as to the operation of this particular section.


John Richard Garland: He said steps are already being taken. The minister can understand my concern.


William Moore Benidickson: The Financial Post asserted that the chief small business people who were organized were concerned about some government development in the field of credit. They represented the retail merchants association and the hotel and motel associations. As a result of this coming before us last week as a vote in the Department of Trade and Commerce would the minister suggest that from now on those organizations make their approaches to him rather than as in the past to the Minister of Finance, notwithstanding that their chief concern was the matter of arrangement of credit on a basis that would be comparable to that available to big industry under the industrial development bank, or to farmers under the farm loan board or the Farm Improvement Loans Act, or to fishermen, and so forth?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I hesitate to suggest to any association with which department it might consult. We are quite prepared to meet with representatives. If, on the other hand, they prefer to talk to the Minister of Finance and relieve me of that I would be perfectly happy. But at the moment I imagine that organizations such as the hon. member refers to might want to confer with the heads of both departments.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
The Chairman:: This completes the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Public buildings, construction and services-
Acquisition, construction and improvements of
public buildings-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, public buildings listed in the details of the estimates provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-further amounts required-
673. Newfoundland, $35,000.

Supply-Public Works


John Whitney Pickersgill: Just a minute, Mr. Chair- only for these buildings and I suggest that it man. Is this a new project or is it just would not be in order to discuss projects in additional money?	Hull under the vote.


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: Shall 673 carry?


Chesley William Carter: On item 673 may I just bring to the minister's attention again the plight of one settlement in my riding which I have already brought to his attention and concerning which considerable correspondence has been exchanged. I refer to the fishing community of Seal Cove in Fortune bay. The people of this community were forced to give up the fishery because the harbour deteriorated to such a point that they could no longer carry on that occupation. Subsequently most of them found employment in the woods operations of the paper companies in Newfoundland. With the curtailment of woods operations now they are once more forced back to the fishery.


Howard Charles Green: I do not wish to interrupt the hon. member but I think that comes under item 682.


Chesley William Carter: Oh, I am sorry. I thought it was 673.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Is this extra $35,000 for another project or is it just additional money?


Howard Charles Green: Item 673 is for additions and alterations to the building at Stephenville.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is the new building completed three or four years ago?


Howard Charles Green: Yes, apparently that is the case.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
675. Quebec, $270,000.
Mr. Chevrier:: May I ask the minister if he would allow this item to stand so that after the public accounts committee has completed its sittings there may be an opportunity for the house, if it so desires, to discuss any matters arising out of the hearings.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, I have no doubt it would be very interesting to have a discussion on what has been happening in the public accounts committee. The details of this item will be found on page 7. It covers four different buildings, a public building at Hudson in the amount of $35,000, a public building at Loretteville in the amount of $60,000, Pont Viau postal station in Montreal, $100,000-


William Moore Benidickson: That is Hudson, Quebec, not Hudson, Ontario?


Howard Charles Green: Yes, Hudson, Quebec. It also covers a public building at Schefferville, $75,000, or a total of $270,000. The vote is


Lionel Chevrier: May I bring these points to the attention of the minister? First, if he held up this item I do not think there would be a lengthy discussion of anything arising out of the public accounts committee but I think it is only fair to those of us who have been in the public accounts committee for many weeks that there should be one item on which there would be an opportunity to have such a discussion if that opportunity should be found desirable at the end of the session. I am sure the minister will realize that it is not with the intention of delaying consideration of the estimates that this is being requested. On the contrary, these estimates have been going through at a pretty rapid pace. This is the only item I can find under which, since it pertains to public buildings, such a discussion could take place. While strictly speaking the item is perhaps not attributable to the printing bureau in Hull, nevertheless it is the one that is more closely associated with it. Because of that I again appeal to the minister.
I also appeal on another ground. It is my understanding that these items can sometimes be transferred from one building to another by virtue of a ruling of the treasury board. For that reason also perhaps the minister might want to co-operate with us to that extent.


Howard Charles Green: It would be quite improper to make any arrangement of that kind. Under the rules of the house there is provision for discussing the reports of committees, and I believe it would be quite without reason for me to hold up an item which has nothing whatever to do with the printing bureau simply so that there can be a discussion of the printing bureau. It may be that the committee will not bring in a report. I do not know.


Lionel Chevrier: Quite possibly.


Howard Charles Green: I really think it is unfair to ask that the estimates of the Department of Public Works be held up-


Lionel Chevrier: One item.


Howard Charles Green: -that even one item be held up under these conditions.	.


Lionel Chevrier: I do not want to pursue the matter unduly. If the public accounts committee did not bring in a report there would be no further opportunity to discuss the matter. I think I can assure the minister that if he were to allow this item to stand there
4540	HOUSE OF
Supply-Public Works
certainly would not be any lengthy discussion at this time. However, in view of his attitude I am not going to pursue the matter unduly because we have arrived at the point where I think we want to give due consideration to his estimates. Having refused that request, would the minister be good enough to answer this question. Would he tell us whether or not it is accurate that on May 7, 1958, a call for tenders went out from the department for the installation of a centrifugal refrigeration system at the public printing bureau in Hull?


Howard Charles Green: Now, the hon. member is trying to reach the same objective by another route. This is a question having to do with the printing bureau, and it would be quite out of order for me to deal with it here on this vote. There was a vote passed by the house some weeks ago-


Lionel Chevrier: Does the minister remember how much?


Howard Charles Green: -which dealt with-


Lionel Chevrier: Does the minister remember how much it was?


Howard Charles Green: I think it was $800,000; two votes of $400,000 each.


Lionel Chevrier: Was it in the main estimates or in the supplementary estimates?


Howard Charles Green: There was $400,000 in the main estimates and $400,000 in the supplementaries. This is just a case of getting the door open one inch, and then going through it. I have no intention of doing that. The rules provide for the conduct of discussion on these estimates, and I must ask that the hon. members abide by the rules.


John Whitney Pickersgill: May I say a word on the point of order, and on the point of order only? The minister is well aware of the fact that these votes are all for public buildings in Quebec. What he is now asking is to add $270,000 to the votes that have already been passed by the house for public buildings in Quebec. The treasury board has the power to transfer this amount-I know this well because I sat on the treasury board over and over again when it was done-from one building to another in the province. It is the present intention to vote this money for the four buildings, but it is in fact available for any public building that is mentioned in the estimates this year in the province, and one of these is the printing bureau at Hull. I submit it would be quite wrong to ask any questions about anything that has happened in the past, but anything that is going on in the current fiscal year it does seem to me is quite in order under the rules 

because of the fact that the item relates to public buildings in Quebec in general and therefore my hon. friend's question is quite in order.


Howard Charles Green: In so far as the question the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has mentioned is concerned, if his suggestion were to be acceded to then the result would be, in effect, that there would be a second discussion on an item which was passed weeks ago. This, of course, gets us into an impossible position; it would be quite out of order. I can give to him assurance that these moneys that are voted here will be spent for those buildings which are listed under the vote I am now asking the committee to pass.


Mr. Bourget:: I just want to add a word on this subject. I think hon. members will find that for the past 18 years it has been the practice to allow hon. members to discuss any construction projects in any province as long as the item is in the main or supplementary estimates. If the minister will look in Hansard for the past years, he will find that great latitude has been given to members to discuss any project, and even if there were only four projects listed in the supplementary or further supplementary estimates. This has been the practice. I remember well, having been the parliamentary assistant for four years, that we allowed members to discuss all kinds of projects. As the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has stated, any of this money can be transferred from one project to another, and that means we are allowed to discuss any construction project in the province of Quebec on that particular item.


Howard Charles Green: From what I have read in the press, Mr. Chairman, I believe there has already been a rather wide opportunity to discuss the printing bureau in that committee. I do not doubt but that there will be a somewhat lengthy discussion even yet, before the house is prorogued. I say once again that I realize how nice it might be to have a free-for-all on the printing bureau, but this would be quite out of order on these estimates and I ask Your Honour to rule accordingly.


Lionel Chevrier: There is no question of having a free-for-all about the printing bureau. I can assure the minister that is not the intention. Certainly in so far as I am concerned, and I think I can speak for my two colleagues who have joined me in this, my intention is to ask two, three or four questions, and then I will resume my seat. The first question I should like to ask the minister is, if it is a fact that on the 7th of May, 1958 there was a tender called for centrifugal

refrigeration machinery at the printing bureau, and whether or not it is so that that tender was recalled.


Howard Charles Green: I submit that question is out of order.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman-


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: Order; it is quite impossible for the chair to permit hon. members to get away from the question of relevancy in connection with the items being discussed at the moment. It is impossible for the chair to know what is being decided by the treasury board and consequently we cannot, on this particular item, talk about what is being decided by that particular body. We can only discuss the items which appear in the estimates before us. Consequently, I would ask hon. members to confine their remarks to the item under discussion.
I believe that this question of the printing bureau can be discussed when the committee presents its report. Questions can be asked also about this matter during the orders of the day. I do not consider that it is relevant now to discuss this matter. Furthermore, in so far as the remarks of the hon. member for Levis are concerned, although there may have been a certain latitude given in the discussion in former years, I must adhere to the rules of relevancy which demand that we discuss the particular items as they appear before us. I, therefore, must ask hon. members to keep their remarks as relevant as possible.


Lionel Chevrier: I wonder if I might just ask a question for enlightenment, because I am sure you will want to guide those of us who sit on this side of the house. You have just stated that the matter could be discussed when the public accounts committee presents its report. However, if the public accounts committee should not present a report or if concurrence should not be moved in the report, then there is no opportunity for discussion. You stated also, sir, that a question may be asked on orders of the day, but the Speaker will rule such a question out of order immediately because the matter is before the public accounts committee.
What we are trying to do now is not to discuss matters that are before the public accounts committee, but to discuss a matter for which a portion of this vote, namely $270,000 for public buildings in Quebec, may be transferred for the construction and completion of a public building, namely the printing bureau in Hull, Quebec. All I am seeking to do is to ask three or four, at the most, pertinent questions, and not to delay the consideration of the estimates in any way, but to get this information for use elsewhere.
Supply-Public Works


Howard Charles Green: The hon. member, in his very last sentence, has given another reason why he is completely out of order. He wants to get these answers for use elsewhere, that is in a committtee of the house. We cannot discuss in the house what is happening in a committee. This is certainly, without any doubt, the rule, and for the hon. member to ask a question here in order that he can use that information in committee is another ground on which he is completely out of order in asking the question. He has no right at all to come in here and start asking questions about it.


Lionel Chevrier: The minister is quite wrong because we did elicit from the Minister of Transport and from the Minister of Agriculture the other day information concerning the procedure with reference to an airport building at Dorval and information concerning the Saskatchewan dam, and there was use made of that information at the committee.


Howard Charles Green: They were not under discussion in a committee.


Lionel Chevrier: I say to the minister respectfully that if a minister in the House of Commons makes a statement with reference to the policy in his department concerning a public building, surely that can be used at the committee. The purpose of this question is simply to confirm the information that we have at the moment with reference to this matter. The question I asked the Minister was whether or not this tender had been advertised for and recalled.


William Moore Benidickson: I do not know whether the committee on public accounts will report. However, I do not think that matter is relevant at the moment when we are discussing this item. I was given the privilege for several years of attending certain meetings of treasury board, but only those that had reference to preparing the estimates for the forthcoming year. However, as a result of that experience I have a recollection that in respect of a vote of this kind great freedom is given to the minister to transfer appropriations such as this one, which in total is $380,000, from one project to another provided it is within the province, notwithstanding the detail that is given the House of Commons in this particular respect on page 9. We are given an indication that it is intended -and I believe sincerely intended-to appropriate this $380,400 in a certain way as outlined in the details on page 9. But the vote after passing today is available to the minister and to his department, as far as I recollect. If he finds that one or two or more of these projects cannot be proceeded

Supply-Public Works
with for any other reason, he has full freedom to use the vote that we might now make and apply it to the printing bureau in Quebec for air conditioning or anything else that is subject to discussion, maybe not appropriately, in the committee on public accounts, because I think their basic job is to consider expenditures that were made prior to the end of the fiscal year ended March 31, 1958. But notwithstanding that, the point I want to make is that there is such transferability with respect to this vote that we are asked to approve, such discretion left with the minister, that we would have every right at this stage, quite irrespective of the public accounts committee, to ask the minister with respect to almost every appropriation that could conceivably be an item that would be transferred and utilized as a result of the vote we are just about to make, including the possibility of a further expenditure on the public works in Quebec and that involves the printing bureau in Hull.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, the minister has no discretion whatever to transfer money from this account. On the two points I have raised, namely that this matter is not covered under the item under discussion but under an item passed some weeks ago, and also the fact that here we have an attempt to combine the house and a committee which has not yet completed its business, getting information by questions in the house to be used in the committee, I submit that these questions are quite out of order.


William Moore Benidickson: That is a very interesting statement from the minister. I want to know whether we in committee of supply henceforth can feel that he has bound himself. I should like to know to what extent. We are being asked to vote $380,000 for public works within the province of Quebec under a certain statutory item in the estimates. All right. On page 9 we are given some details as to the purported intentions. There are probably ten individual items given in detail on page 9 of the further supplementary estimates (1), 1958-59.


Howard Charles Green: You are looking at the harbours and rivers.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Look at page 7.


William Moore Benidickson: Yes, page 7. The same principle, of course, applies with respect to the province of Quebec, the amount being $270,000 instead of $380,000 which I was referring to because I was looking at the other page. Do I understand the minister to believe that he would be restricted, under our rules or past practice? If it was not possible to expend within the fiscal year say $35,000 for the public building at Hudson, am I to

understand that he would not be able to spend any part of this $35,000, part of the $270,000, on anything connected with a public building in the province of Quebec except perhaps Loretteville, Montreal and Schefferville? Is that the restriction which my hon. friend feels he is confined to under the practice of the treasury board and so on?


Howard Charles Green: The statement I made, Mr. Chairman, was that I as minister have no discretion whatever to transfer any money from these projects.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to point out to Your Honour that the language of the vote is what governs and not the minister's own disposition in the matter, however agreeable that might be. The relevant words of the item are as follows:
-provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-
I should like to put a question to the minister and I am putting it to him with the utmost sincerity. Does the minister maintain that this vote 675 has no relation to the vote in the main estimates; in other words that the transfers can only be made between the four projects listed in the details of this vote and that it would not be competent to treasury board to take any of this $270,000 and transfer it to any other project in the year's program? On this point I quite honestly confess that the minister could be right and I could be wrong. However, my impression-and it is quite a strong one-is that these supplementary votes are added to the main vote and that in the bill it becomes one vote for public building in the province and that the transferability is between all of those projects.
I think our differences narrow down to this. If the minister is right in law that this item applies only to these four projects, I do not think we could insist any further, much as we think that the minister ought to be generous and take the kind of view his predecessor took.


Howard Charles Green: And be foolish.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I beg the minister's pardon?


Howard Charles Green: In other words, he ought to be foolish?


John Whitney Pickersgill: If the minister wants to say that his predecessor was foolish, that is his right. I do not want him to put those words in my mouth. What I am saying is that I think the minister ought to show some generosity, especially when he as an instrument of the executive is here craving from the Commons money to carry on the government of the country and he is not here as someone ordering us to stop asking questions.

The minister will appreciate the point, of course, because he has been quite recently in this position himself. What I am saying is this. If the minister with his legal experience and from experience in the treasury board can say that these supplementary items are treated entirely separately and distinctly in the statute from the main items, then I think our argument falls to the ground. But if, as I believe to be the case, in the appropriation act they are lumped together as a single vote for the purpose of building these public buildings and it is competent to the executive -not to the minister, I agree but to treasury board-to transfer the amounts within these from one to the other, I submit there could be no possible ground for arguing that we cannot ask questions about any of the listed projects in this year's estimates for the province of Quebec.


Howard Charles Green: What the treasury board might or might not be able to do I cannot say, but to follow the argument of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate to its logical conclusion would mean, if he is right, that whenever estimates are brought in such as these further supplementary estimates there could be a repetition of the discussion which took place at an earlier time, which would be an unbusinesslike and fantastic procedure. The test is: this is a vote for money to build four buildings, and the discussion should be confined to those four buildings.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am going to make one request of the minister. I am going to request the minister that he should not ask the Chair to rule on this point but that he should get a legal opinion on the point I have raised. We do not intend to pursue the matter any further at this time in view of the objection of the minister but we do think that the rights of the committee of supply are so important that he should get an opinion as to whether the minister is or I am right on this question, and if the minister is prepared to do that we are prepared to let this go through.


Howard Charles Green: The point I am interested in is whether or not it is in order to discuss the printing bureau on this item and I have made my submission to the Chair that it is not in order.


John Whitney Pickersgill: But I have raised the point -and in as conciliatory a manner as I could- that these projects are all lumped together and, therefore, that they constitute one item and that if the executive asks for more money for buildings in a province it is open to us to discuss any of the buildings in the province to which that amount might be applied. The minister does not think that is correct, but neither of us is sure of his ground-
Supply-Public Works


Howard Charles Green: I am perfectly sure of my ground and I have asked the chairman to rule on that point.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have asked the hon. gentleman if he will ask the chairman to reserve his judgment, in which case we will pass the item because I would prefer not to have a ruling on that important question without knowing-
If the minister will withdraw his request for a ruling, we will pass the item.


Howard Charles Green: As long as the item is passed, I do not want a ruling and I will not insist on a ruling.


William Moore Benidickson: I agree with my hon. friend from Bonavista-Twillingate, and I point out to the committee that one of the things we are talking about, the second point, is the right of the treasury board and the government to have transferability within a certain item. In the main estimates there is an item of $400,000 for the national printing bureau and our concern was whether or not the right of transferability within a provincial item would extend to a further appropriation by vote in the committee of supply in the further supplementary estimates such as we are discussing now, and the supplementary estimates, neither of which refer, of course, to an item for the printing bureau. The minister, by reason of our votes, is given a total sum of money to spend within the province of Quebec on the construction of public works. I quite agree that this is an important question and one that I do not recall has been raised in any detail in the past, but my understanding is that there is a great deal of freedom once a vote is made at any stage for provincial public works construction. If it is found that one building can go ahead faster than another there is an opportunity for the department to go to the treasury board and say: we think we would prefer to spend it this way; we are still within the province and we are still within the vote and we ask you to approve that it be transferred from, say, Quebec, to Hull, because the Hull project is proceeding faster than the Quebec project prior to the end of the fiscal year.
I think this is a very important question because there are related to it not only this question of transferability within votes in the main estimates and the various supplementary estimates but, of course, the opportunity to have debate in committee of supply in consequence.
My colleagues have suggested that we are not going to press this at the moment, but I think that when the minister comes next

Supply-Public Works
before the committee of supply this is something about which he should have a very firm opinion.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
679. Saskatchewan, $30,000.
Mr. Rapp:: Mr. Chairman, may I take this opportunity on behalf of the residents of Watson and district and myself to express our gratitude to the Minister of Public Works for including in the supplementary estimates the sum of $30,000 for a new post office in Watson. This public project is long overdue and anybody who has ever seen the old post office will agree with me in what I have just said namely, that it is long overdue.
The town of Watson has a population of just over 1,000 and serves a district of approximately 20 miles in radius. Two highways go through the town of Watson and two railroads. It is a prosperous district and the people are extremely thrifty. According to the royal commission on agriculture and rural life, Watson is a town that is classified as a service centre.
To be classified as a service centre it must be a certain distance away from cities and towns. It must have facilities to give adequate service to the town and district residents. Watson can fill these requirements adequately. The closest town is located 30 miles away and the closest city about 100 miles.
Watson has a hospital, physicians, dentists, barristers, a local newspaper, theatre, bank and churches of many denominations. The town has retail facilities including clothing, household appliances, drugs, apparel and accessory stores, furniture and liquor stores. Indeed, it provides the urban and rural population with a high level of service and entertainment.
It is a fast expanding town, as just last year four gas service stations established themselves there and the Saskatchewan department of highways built a storage shed and has a service branch in this centre. All this is an indication, Mr. Chairman, that Watson is justified in obtaining a new post office to give a better service to its people.
The new post office is going to have 1,000 foot working space. Although we were desirous of 1,200 feet, nevertheless we are grateful to the minister for the proposed new building with provision to enlarge if the need arises in future.
I sincerely hope that in due course he will give consideration to other public projects in my constituency which we feel are urgently required and in many cases overdue. On behalf of Watson and district I would like the house to approve the estimates before us for a new post office in Watson, Saskatchewan.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Acquisition, construction and improvements of harbours and river works-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, harbour and river works listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-further amounts required-
682. Newfoundland, $269,500.
Chesley William Carter: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the minister for the provisions made for Newfoundland and particularly for my own riding under this vote. I wish also to make one final appeal to him on behalf of the settlement of Seal Cove in Fortune bay. As I pointed out earlier, this is one of the larger fishing settlements in my riding with a population of about 500 people and a fishing population of approximately 85 or 90 fishermen. These fishermen were forced to leave the fishery years ago because the harbour had deteriorated to the point where they could not carry on the fishery successfully. Subsequently they found employment in the woods but that employment is no longer available and the people of this community are now forced to return to the fishery as the sole means of livelihood. They cannot carry on this occupation unless some dredging is done.
I have had a great deal of discussion with departmental officials concerning this question and I know it poses a dilemma for the department because the only way in which the harbour can be dredged at the present time is by hand dredging. I know we will all agree that hand dredging is not the most economical way of approaching this kind of job. On the other hand, if hand dredging is not done then the harbour cannot be made suitable for fishing for at least two or three years. This will mean the people of this settlement will have to accept able bodied relief for at least two years. There is a choice between two alternatives neither of which is very appealing. I urge the minister to take another look at this and see what can be done to make this harbour useable by the fishermen at the earliest possible date.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, the difficulty here is that we cannot get a bulldozer into Seal Cove. The departmental officials are of the opinion that hand dredging would not do the work properly and so the intention is to do some work at Hermitage and then land a bulldozer there from the sea. Apparently it could be taken from Hermitage to Seal Cove by road. We hope to get that done next spring.


Chesley William Carter: I understand that perfectly, Mr. Chairman, but what I was trying to point out to the minister is that if this course is

followed it will be a year at least before the bulldozer could be landed at Hermitage. That would mean the fishermen would not be able to carry on the fishery for a year or more. Then there is the problem of getting the bulldozer from Hermitage to Seal Cove which might take another year. There is the possibility of a delay of two years or more before the fishermen in that settlement could carry on the fishery. That is the urgency of my appeal.


Howard Charles Green: We are very sympathetic to the hon. member's request but evidently it is simply a matter of what can and what cannot be done. We believe we can get this work done within a year.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the people of Davidsville, Hare Bay- Bonavista Bay-and Musgravetown I wish to express the appreciation I know they will feel to the minister and his department for what his department is doing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
686. Ontario, $188,000.
Mr. Nixon:: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the people in the Montreal river harbour area north of Sault Ste. Marie I want to express appreciation for what the department did up there this past summer in making a new entrance to the harbour. I should like to remind the minister, however, that unless some cribbing is done to protect the entrance it will fill in. The gravel is washing away now on one side of the entrance. I believe it would be wise if the minister would have an engineer investigate the situation as soon as possible. I was there last week and saw what was happening. For very little money we could save the work that has already been done. I believe it would be worth while doing so.


Howard Charles Green: I am grateful to the hon. member for making this suggestion. We will have an engineer sent in right away.


George Ewart Nixon: Thank you very much.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, I rise with a great deal of trepidation. I very much fear the Minister of Public Works particularly after the remark he made in an earlier debate this session when he suggested that the results with respect to requests made of him were very likely to be in reverse proportion to the amount of speaking one did formally in the House of Commons. I have that very much in mind and I want to assure him he has me very frightened notwithstanding our personal friendship.
I was very pleased to have a decision from the minister with respect to the placing of
Supply-Public Works what I call a ramp or an apron on the shoreline of the public wharf at Fort Frances which will facilitate the launching of the hundreds-yes, even thousands-of boats that are being trailed today by tourists going up and down our highways. This type of provision is not new. It really came to my attention because one of my colleagues, the hon. member for Nipissing, has been able to obtain such a concession from the minister's predecessor. I had been asking for this kind of thing for some time but I guess I was not a good enough salesman.
I know the minister has travelled the trans-Canada highway which is under his jurisdiction and he will have noted as I have noted just how important this kind of thing is because alongside most of our public wharves we have a few feet of public leased land, probably leased from the provinces or at least there is a short space of land there. With very little expense a concrete base could be constructed to prevent the automobiles and trailers from getting bogged down when they back up to launch boats from which they want to enter a lake and do some fishing.
From the federal point of view the government has some doubt as to the responsibility because of the interest of the provinces in the tourist business as well, but having regard to the fact that the tourist industry may be the third or fourth most important source of revenue from the United States and without being extravagant in these matters, modest aprons or ramps could be provided alongside many of our wharves particularly in northern Ontario. I believe it is only proper that the federal government should do it in consequence of the value the government of Canada receives from the exchange position that is created by United States tourist trade.


Howard Charles Green: I had the opportunity of visiting Fort Frances about a year ago. It is a delightful town with very pleasant surroundings. We are planning to do this work at Fort Frances as soon as there is low water.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, I want to remind the minister that even before Fort Frances, I had urged the department-and probably even his predecessor two years ago -that similar provisions be made at Sioux Lookout, Kenora and indeed at most of the wharves in northern Ontario. In my opinion it is a facility that could be provided costing not more than $1,000 at each place. It would be very much to the advantage of our tourist industry.


Howard Charles Green: Another ramp is being put in at Kenora. The hon. member must not press

Supply-Public Works
us too hard because we have had a great
many things requested by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate.


William Moore Benidickson: I remember his big
speech.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It made a good beginning.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
6S7. British Columbia and Yukon, $251,500.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I see that $21,000 of this
vote is for a proposed breakwater at Okanagan Landing which I am sure is very necessary. Can the minister inform the committee what the breakwater is intended to protect and whether there was any particular organization interested in securing this breakwater at Okanagan Landing?


Howard Charles Green: As I recall it, requests were made from different bodies in Vernon, including the boat club or yacht club. I do not remember the exact name of the organization. In building those projects we always take account of the number of tourists who will be making use of them. A great many tourists are now using small boats from Okanagan Landing. Also, there is considerable danger in a south wind. The departmental officials decided that the request for a breakwater there was in order and that this work should be done. I expect the hon. member will be pleased to know-he already knows it-that we are going to put in a ramp at Boswell in Kootenay West.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am pleased with that and I know the residents are; but on this vote I do want to bring to the minister's attention the fact that an identical situation exists in the community called Nakusp in my constituency where many United States tourists use small boats, and the bay suffers from a south wind.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dredging-
689. Construction or acquisition of plant and equipment-further amount required, $250,000.
Lionel Chevrier: Will the minister tell us what kind of dredging equipment is being constructed or purchased by the department?


Howard Charles Green: This vote of $250,000 provides for the construction or acquisition of new equipment to augment the present fleet, or replace existing worn-out plant, such as dredges, tugs and so forth, required to maintain departmental dredging across Canada. This particular item provides $125,000 for Prince Edward Island-


Lionel Chevrier: May I simplify the matter? This is really not what I wanted to know.
[Mr. Green.J
Does the department do its own dredging with its own fleet of dredges, or is it done by contract? Is this item for the purpose of purchasing a dredge?


Howard Charles Green: The department does some of its own dredging and does some by contract. We believe, as the previous government did, that it is essential that the department should be able to do some of its dredging for one reason, namely to check on costs of the work done by the dredges which are privately owned. The sum of $50,000 of this vote is towards replacement of dredge No. 14 in Prince Edward Island; $25,000 is toward a new tug in Prince Edward Island; $50,000, alterations to dredge No. 12 in Prince Edward Island; $25,000 is for a five-drum hoist, dredge No. 201 on lake Winnipeg; and $100,000 is to provide for a contract to replace the Essington, which is a snag boat on the west coast.


Lionel Chevrier: What is the largest dredge owned by the department and where is it located?


Howard Charles Green: The largest dredge is one on the west coast; it was built within the last two years and is No. 203.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
690. Maintenance and operation of graving docks, locks and dams-further amount required, $52,625.
Lionel Chevrier: Can the minister tell me whether any of this is for a graving dock in Montreal?


Howard Charles Green: The sum of $40,175 of this vote is for the Champlain drydock and $6,950 for the Lome drydock, both in the province of Quebec, and $5,500 for concrete walls at the Champlain graving dock.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
6.91. Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for: a maximum of $15,000 may be expended in respect of any one work and, with the approval of treasury board, that maximum may be increased to $25,000 in the case of any one building construction project-further amount required, $400,000.
Lester Bowles Pearson: May I bring up a work under miscellaneous works which is certainly not miscellaneous but very important and which I probably should have brought up under 667, but unfortunately I could not be in the committee at that time. It has to do with a federal building in Elliot Lake where the need, of course, as the minister knows, is very great. The site has at last been secured. I would like to impress on the minister the need for getting ahead with this building in this growing community.


Howard Charles Green: As the Leader of the Opposition said, there has been considerable difficulty in

obtaining a satisfactory site at Elliot Lake, but this problem has now been settled and we shall get ahead with the construction of the building just as rapidly as possible.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I understand the services have been in a temporary building on the assumption that a new building would be constructed soon. I hope that construction will soon begin.


Howard Charles Green: We are pushing ahead with this building just as rapidly as possible.


John Richard Garland: May I inquire as to the status of the dock to be built at Lavigne, Ontario? The project was approved at least two years ago but it could not be proceeded with because of the relocation and the rebuilding of a road by the department of highways of Ontario. What is the status at the present time?


Howard Charles Green: Unfortunately, no provision is made for this project but I will have it checked at once.


Maurice Bourget: We are making good progress and I wonder whether the minister would not permit me to ask whether the figures put on Hansard on June 27 by the hon. member for Victoria are official. I assume he must have got them from the department. I am quite sure the minister has not got the figures here but I should like to know if these figures are official.


Howard Charles Green: Those were figures concerning the trans-Canada highway.


Maurice Bourget: I know.


Howard Charles Green: I have not had them checked but I will be glad to do so and then let the hon. member have an answer to his question.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-
371. To provide for the expenses incurred in constructing and supervising construction of married quarters, rental housing, schools and related services on behalf of the Department of National Defence, $720,000.
John Richard Garland: Mr. Chairman, although the minister's estimates were originally called as far back as June 6, I believe, today is really the first opportunity we have had to discuss in a general way the very important subject of housing in this country. It is not my intention to be in any way provocative. Instead I hope to make a straightforward examination of some of the facts that may be useful. It is not my intention to oppose what is being done but rather to urge this government to do more.
I suppose no other field has been the cause of so much mutual appreciation by
Supply-Public Works
members of the government, and perhaps that is understandable to a degree, as when they refer to their selfstyled marvellous achievements in the field of housing. The minister has himself on numerous occasions referred to the record number of housing starts, but how much of this is really due to government action? It is that aspect with which I should like to deal.
Let us now look at the facts. When parliament met on May 12 government funds had been exhausted. The Prime Minister had promised during the campaign, at which time these funds were exhausted, that more funds would be made available. Here again is another example of the government's flair for publicity which we have dealt with earlier, and I have no objection. The throne speech debate was set aside because of the so-called urgency of the situation.
The government requested and received from parliament $350 million and with the passing of this legislation much credit was taken by the government for its efforts in housing. They praised themselves for the efforts achieved by their agency lending program. Yet only a few days after this legislation was rushed through parliament the government slammed the door on agency loans and took unto themselves new authority, through Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, to enter directly into the loan field in the larger centres.
This dropping of the agency loan aspect and changing of policy caused many Canadians genuine concern. After all, people in the lower income brackets were having difficulty enough trying to arrange their financing. As I have said on earlier occasions, the lending institutions will prove to be even more selective when handling their own funds. This will cause extra hardship for the lower income borrower.
However, may I pursue the matter of the $350 million that was rushed through parliament. As I have said, only a few days later the government's policy was changed and they took the position of residual lender only. As early as June 5, Dr. Stewart Bates, president of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, had this to say on this subject:
It is anticipated by the government that this $350 million will keep us going for a year or two, and that is why we have stopped the agency arrangement at this moment of time and we are standing merely on residual loans to take care of those who cannot be picked up elsewhere. At the moment, we are leaving it to the banks and other companies to carry the program. It may be that by next September housing may be petering off in a way that the government does not like. If there has been a good demand for housing, if there are no unsold houses in December, it might be a wise policy for them to produce some more houses next winter.

Supply-Public Works
Now, my point is this. How can the government take full credit for a house building program that is being supported largely by the banks and other lending institutions? Of course, there is another version of this change in government policy. Perhaps the government is seeking more control in the field of housing. If this is true, then the government should say so. If they are seeking the use of public funds to control the number of starts made in a given period of time, then this attempt to control should be made known to the public.
Perhaps their change in policy is an attempt to hold back funds in order to assist during a future period of unemployment. I would not necessarily argue with that kind of a proposition but if this is government policy then I think they should say so.
However, regardless of the government's policies or lack of policies, the hard fact remains that the national housing legislation, desirable though it is, has been incapable of assisting 50 per cent of the Canadian people. Unfortunately, it is the 50 per cent of our Canadian wage earners who are in the medium and lower income brackets. We all recognize the splendid contribution made by the National Housing Act since its inception, but I think all will agree that it no longer does the job that was originally intended. While the top 50 per cent of the Canadian earning scale are being well looked after, the 50 per cent of our people in the lower half of the income scale are desperately in need of homes and it would seem that there is no relief in sight for them. In fact, the move is the other way. While the sizes and quality of homes grow each year to meet the popular demand from the top half, the accommodation and facilities in the lower half grow steadily worse. At this point I should like to quote very briefly from a story written by Harvey Hickey, a well-known press gallery correspondent, which appeared in the Globe and Mail and which emanated from committee meetings held in the other place. The headline reads: "Thinks All New Houses Over $20,000 Shortly", and the article goes on to say in part:
The point is rapidly being reached where it will be impossible to build a house for less than $20,000 in the Toronto area, the Senate finance committee was told today. This statement was made by L. A. Rice, president of the Toronto metropolitan home builders association-
There is a desperate need for low rental housing. As was pointed out at a recent conference of Ontario housing authorities at Niagara Falls, of the existing stock of four million dwelling units one million are over 50 years old. Half of these are in need of major repairs. It was also pointed out that one family in eight does not have private

accommodation and that many of our people are living in substandard homes.
I believe that emphasis should be placed on the low rental aspect of housing. I believe greater emphasis should be placed on the federal - provincial - municipal partnership basis, which would contribute to a greater degree to slum clearance and the rehabilitation of substandard dwellings. This is the kind of investment plan which would pay handsome dividends in the form of reduced welfare expenditures, public health, police and fire protection costs. I know the initiative for such a partnership should come from the municipalities but I would suggest that the federal authorities have a greater responsibility in bringing to the attention of the municipalities the economic benefits of such projects. With 50 per cent of our people sorely in need of better housing accommodation I suggest there is little room for complacency by the government.
We have heard several proposals in recent weeks. One was that the three levels of government, in co-operation, could acquire substandard dwellings before they fell into complete decay, rehabilitate them and lease them to those families in dire need of shelter at truly low rental figures. I would be interested to know what the government thinks of this proposition.
There is also the matter I raised in the house earlier this session, the proposition of making the financing of older homes easier. In other words, the government has been urged to take action to create a used house market as fluid as the used car market. I am wondering what the government's attitude is on this subject and if it feels this would assist families in the lower income brackets. I am sure that all of us recognize that financing of this kind is very difficult.
Many of our lower income people are forced to pay exorbitant rates of interest in an attempt to acquire even substandard accommodation. Most of us are aware of the hopeless plight of the low income borrower. He is at the mercy of every loan shark in his community, and is denied assistance through Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation because of a wage level barrier. I suggest this is not good enough for 1958, and I should like to know what the government intends to do about it.
I know it is not the responsibility of an opposition to outline policy for a government, but frankly our people are concerned about the apparent vacuum that seems to exist in so far as this government is concerned in the field of housing, and especially so soon after the election. The government must know that 50 per cent of our people are improperly housed and are unable to

improve their position through the facilities of the National Housing Act, as it is presently constituted. This is a fact. I just want to repeat that. The government knows 50 per cent of our people are improperly housed and are unable to improve their position through the facilities of the National Housing Act as it is presently constituted, yet they do very little.
I know that the government will be quick to say, but look at this new minimum house project. Well, let us look at it. If we take the minister's own words, this minimum house was designed primarily for erection in the less populated areas. While we all recognize the need for better housing in some of the more sparsely populated areas, it would seem doubtful if this minimum house will likely do much to improve the situation.
In reply to a question I put to the minister concerning Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation's attitude to this type of construction in the larger centres, the minister very properly pointed out that he doubted very much whether these homes could be built for this price in the larger centres. Therefore, it would seem evident from the minister's own statements on this subject that this minimum house project will do nothing to improve housing conditions generally, except in some rural areas.
Without being unduly critical of the government's minimum house or those who designed it, I doubt very much if its design and specifications will measure up to the desires or to the rightful ambitions of our rural population. I think it is a serious mistake for the government to assume that because people live in small communities they will be satisfied with second class accommodation. Since it is unlikely that this minimum house will meet the standards desired by our rural people and cannot, according to the minister, be built at the prices announced in urban areas, I know you will understand my hesitation at being overenthusiastic about the project at this time. However, we will be watching the acceptance of this unit in the next few months. I am sure it is the hope of all of us, and I underline this, that because of the unprecedented high cost of standard housing our people will not be forced into this minimum house construction.
Again, I do not want to be unkind or unfair, but I respectfully suggest that mass production of this minimum house, having regard for all the circumstances, could well develop into the slums of tomorrow. I would remind the minister that up to this point the corporation has a proud record of upgrading housing generally throughout Canada. While
Supply-Public Works
I do not wish to be critical of the government in this regard, I suggest that there are many other avenues open to them to ensure a steadier flow of housing in the future.
I should like to review very briefly some of these points. First, all of us are well aware of the lack of stability in the flow of mortgage funds in our respective communities. I do not believe you have any better example of this than what has transpired in the last few months. Last fall the private funds dried up and the government moved in. Then government funds were exhausted and the government promised more. The private lending institutions put money into the field. Then parliament met and more funds were approved. The government decided to cancel out their program for agency loans, and then the private institutions rushed in and since May they have been carrying the bulk of the load.
I suggest that that sort of indecision, that sort of lack of stability in providing mortgage funds in this country, does tend to have an upsetting effect. I know the government will be quick to point out the number of starts. There are many reasons to account for the number of starts. I suggest that one is the desire of all our people to have better housing, and a second is the willingness of private lending institutions, as I have shown here, to rush into the field during the last few months.
Now, I have often dealt with this subject in the house. I think it is a matter that should have most careful scrutiny by the government in order to make sure that the house construction industry can move ahead in an orderly fashion, secure in the knowledge that mortgage funds will be available. I am sure that hon. members from all parts of the house know of the reluctance of many of the lending institutions to make loans in this or that area in this or that year. Builders may well develop plans for a project, only to find the lending institutions have temporarily, and often without notice, changed their lending policies in that particular area. I sincerely believe there is a real need for a special study of this matter to ensure, as I said earlier, a steadier flow of mortgage funds for house construction.
While I am on the subject of mortgage funds, and again I do not wish to be unduly critical, may I suggest that the corporation should give consideration to finding ways and means of processing loans more expeditiously. I suppose there is not a member of this house who has not had complaints, especially from the small builders, concerning what seems to be a needlessly long delay in the cash advances to the builders. How many times have we heard them indicate their preference

Supply-Public Works
for a project that was being financed through the regular financial institutions rather than through Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation? This preference resulted from the longer waiting period apparently required by the corporation to process these advances. The need for more expeditious processing becomes more apparent if the corporation is to continue playing a major role in financing.
Another point I should like to stress at this time is that the government could lower the down payment required and in this way assist in home construction. This, of course, only adds to the carrying charges and monthly payments but it does make it easier for many of our people to take their first step.
Then, too, the government could lower the interest rate. This would be a really worthwhile contribution towards lowering the cost of houses to our people. All of us remember the frequent outbursts of the present Minister of Finance when he was on this side of the house concerning interest rates. I am not going to delay the house by reading the minister's many comments concerning the sins of high interest rates. However, I suppose the government has become so involved with its own need for borrowing that it is afraid to lower the interest rates. Here again is proof of the fact that the public, that section of the public which can least afford it, has to pay for the folly of this free-spending government.
The government could lengthen the amortization period. The average life of a home, especially with the better care it is receiving today, is much longer than the 25-year amortization period. I think we have every reason to expect an increasing life for the homes being built today. Surely, it is necessary and desirable to lengthen this amortization period. The former government, on earlier occasions, did contribute to lengthening this period to its present 25 years through amendment to the National Housing Act, and also showed real leadership in lowering the downpayment provisions below what they used to be, as well as lowering the interest rates.
Our people are also genuinely concerned about this question of increasing land costs. I realize that one of the reasons for this increase in land costs is brought about by municipalities transferring what used to be their responsibility for bringing in the trunk sewers and other services, to the land developer. These costs are now being added to the price of the land and, naturally, find their way into the mortgage. Normally, these costs would be paid on the old standard local improvement basis through the municipality. So far as the home owner is

concerned, he is not too disturbed. He pays off this additional amount over a 25-year period, rather than in the usually much shorter period under municipal financing.
However, there are many other factors that are contributing to the unusually high cost of serviced land throughout Canada, and it is to these problems that the government should be devoting their attention. Much greater use could be made of the section of the act that provides for land development on a joint co-operative basis, with the province and the municipality joining with the federal government, the latter paying 75 per cent of these costs. This legislation, where given effect, has proved very satisfactory, and I believe the government should be doing more in this field. Here again the initiative comes from the municipal or local level; but here again is an opportunity for the federal government to show leadership.
Another point I wish to make is this. The government could decrease the income requirements, thereby making the facilities of the National Housing Act legislation available to many more in the lower income categories. In this way, many of our people could make their own decision as to precisely the kind of obligations they would assume. I am sure that in the majority of cases their decision would be to buy a better home.
Mr. Chairman, there is much that could be done in the field of housing by this government. Why does it fail to act, in view of the very pressing needs of our people? Why does it choose to stand by and take credit for the house building program that is being instituted now, largely through the facilities of the lending institutions, and ignore the fact that 50 per cent of our people in the lower half of the income scale are improperly housed?
This is a time for bold and aggressive planning. This is a time for additional emphasis on research to find ways and means of, first, lowering the cost of housing and, second, making adequate housing facilities available to all of the Canadian people now in need. In its endeavours in this regard I am sure it will have the support of all hon. members in this chamber, regardless of party.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Nipissing is by nature cheerful and optimistic. I could not help feeling sorry for him as I noticed the sadness in his voice as he dealt with the housing situation in Canada today. I should hate to have him go back to North Bay in this terribly depressed frame of mind. Within the next 15 or 20 minutes I think I can make the world look infinitely better for him than it was when he rose to speak.

Whatever the faults of the government may have been, our housing policy has been one of our accomplishments of which we are extremely proud. Our only regret is that we have so little opportunity to tell the house and the Canadian people all about it. I would ask the hon. member, if he will, to think back to the situation a year ago or prior to June 10, 1957. Then he really had something about which to feel sad. Housing starts were falling off. Mortgage money was drying up. The house-building industry, which is Canada's largest, was heading for a depression. Thousands and thousands of builders across Canada would have been out of work last winter if something had not been done by the new government about this condition. Lumber mills would have been losing money and suppliers of other commodities would have been having an extremely difficult time if conditions had been allowed to continue as they were prior to June 10 of last year.
I am really surprised that the hon. member made the speech he has made today. His memory is extremely short. As everyone knows, within a few weeks of taking office the new government decided that something must be done to prevent a depression in the housebuilding industry and to help provide homes for those Canadians with modest incomes. We adopted the agency loan plan for small homes. There was available under the National Housing Act $150 million to be used on a new policy. We initiated the small homes loan plan. It was such a great success that last December we came back to the house and obtained an additional $150 million.


John Richard Garland: Will the minister permit a question?


Howard Charles Green: Yes.


John Richard Garland: Will the minister not admit that the only reason that it went so well was that the normal source of supply of funds had dried up?


Howard Charles Green: The normal source of supply had dried up before the Liberal government went out of power. They were doing absolutely nothing about the matter. We met this problem. As I pointed out, we provided an additional $150 million in December. By February that money had been going out so rapidly and houses had been started to such an extent across Canada in wintertime that we were obliged to stop loans for rental units during that month. By the time the new parliament assembled here in May practically all of the money had been used up. I have here the figures. By May $255,009,800 had been put out for small homes across Canada. Practically none of that money would have
Supply-Public Works
been spent and practically none of those homes would have been built if we had not adopted this small homes policy a year ago. It meant 26,030 units, small homes, for people with modest incomes.
We came to this new parliament during this session; one of the very first moves we made -I think it was within a week of the time the house assembled-was to bring in an amendment to the National Housing Act providing an additional $350 million in order that we could continue to encourage the construction of small homes. As of last week, $118,021,073 had been advanced. This is up to August 29. That amount was divided as follows. There was the matter of cleaning up the agency loan plan. Certain applications had been in when we ran out of money. We decided that it was only fair to enable those builders who had applied for money to get their loans from the funds that were voted in May. For that purpose $25,744,092 was advanced. That meant 2,163 additional small homes. Those are not rental units; those are small homes. In addition, for limited dividend companies which provide low rental units $21,304,281 has been advanced since May. That is infinitely more than had been advanced in a like period at any time since the National Housing Act became law. For our residual loans since May we have advanced $65,980,505. This is all since May of this year and the hon. member for Nipissing says we have been doing nothing- we have been sitting back and letting the housing situation deteriorate.
Now I am going to go to my prepared speech, Mr. Chairman. I am just a bit annoyed about the sadness with which the hon. member for Nipissing approached this problem. Before I get down to the speech which I have to read I may say that between January 1 and August 31 of this year $26,296,476 has been lent under the limited dividend schemes which is over $10 million more than was put out in the same time last year. I should also like to point out another fact which will cheer the hon. member, that loans in small centres in which he is particularly interested, from January 1 to July 31 loans have been made in respect of 14,581 units as against 7,531 units in 1957 and that in the month of July 1958 there were 1,000 more loans granted in small centres than there were in July 1957. These figures are going to be even more impressive in the future because we have a campaign going on to push these loans in the small centres, and every week these loans are increasing; by the time the hon. member gets back here next January we will be able to cheer him up even more on this particular point. And

Supply-Public Works
now to get down to this speech, because it explains what is going to happen from now on.
On May 20 of this year, by amendment to section 22 of the National Housing Act, parliament voted additional funds in an amount of $350 million for new housing through the direct lending programs of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. By the way, we were in indirect lending under our agency plan-it was our money that was going out through the offices of the banks and the lending institutions-now we are dealing direct with borrowers. The corporation was instructed to make direct residual loans on small homes to qualified applicants who are unsuccessful in obtaining loans from approved lenders. We then deliberately put ourselves in a residual position because we did not want to take over the business of providing all the mortgage money needed to build homes in Canada. This is the job of the lending institutions, and we have deliberately put ourselves into a residual position. Under the present policies, these loans are made as follows:
(a)	To prospective home owners for small homes. Refusal letters from two approved lenders must be obtained if the property is in an area having a population in excess of 55,000. One refusal letter is required in other areas.
(b)	To merchant builders for small homes, provided that the aggregate of direct loans since September, 1957 does not exceed 25 dwelling units. We put that limit on last summer that no builder could get more than 25 units, the idea being to spread the money out across the country and to as many different builders as possible and in particular to help smaller builders. The builder must obtain a refusal letter from each of two approved lenders that could normally be expected to make loans in the area. This is the plan under which the builders have been working from May until today.
(c)	To limited-dividend corporation for low rental housing. Apart from these, direct loans are not available for rental housing. We believe in these limited dividend corporation houses. That is the way to get the cheapest rents and therefore to help people with the least money. They are particularly beneficial where a service club or a church forms a limited dividend corporation for this purpose.
The statistics of these residual loans which I have given to the house from time to time indicate clearly that there is a demand for National Housing Act financing of the smaller house, and it is the smaller house in which this government is interested.

Between May 20 and August 31 of this year the corporation has made 8,302 loans for small homes in an amount of $91.7 million including the balance of agency loans. This total comprises 1,593 loans for $16.6 million to home owners in communities of
55.000	population and under; 784 loans for $8.4 million to home owners in centres of more than 55,000 population; and 5,925 loans for $66.7 million to builders in all areas. These were builders who had not previously used their quota of 25 mortgages.
In addition, from January 1 to August 31, 1958 the corporation made 33 limited-dividend loans comprising 3,325 units in an amount of $26.3 million. Of these totals, nine loans for 646 units in an amount of $5 million were approved prior to May 20. The balance, or 24 loans for 2,679 units in an amount of $21.3 million, have been made since that date.
At the same time approved lenders have almost doubled their insured lending under the act and they are expected to continue to lend at a high rate for the remainder of the year. These are the approved lenders, making regular insured N.H.A. loans. During the 35 weeks ended August 31 approved lenders made 33,285 insured loans in an amount of $391.3 million. This volume compares with 18,743 loans for $212 million in the same period last year. Almost doubled, the committee will note, and these are the loans made by the lending institutions quite apart from the small home loan plan of the government. The 1958 aggregate of all loans-insured and	direct-approved under the
National Housing Act to August 31 represents 54,916 units, which is more than double the number financed in the same period last year. Indeed, the total in 1958 to date exceeds the volume for the whole of 1957.
Taking into consideration these activities for which there is federal sponsorship or federal participation together with the normal flow of residential construction outside the National Housing Act I am convinced that total starts in 1958 will be of the order of
150.000	units. I believe that as a result of the policy I am announcing in a few minutes that might reach 160,000. Even 150,000 would constitute a record year and compares with the previous record of 138,276 starts in 1955-the highest to date-127,311 starts in 1956 and 122,340 starts in 1957. This means that there will probably be 30,000 more housing starts in 1958 than there were in 1957. That, I can assure my hon. friend, is largely due to the way in which this government has handled the housing problem. We also expect completions, as distinct from starts, to reach approximately 150,000 units which again would be a record.

Because residual loans are restricted to small, basic houses-for example, a 3-bedroom bungalow is limited to 1,050 square feet- they are making a particularly valuable contribution to families of lower incomes. This is borne out by the most recent comparison of insured loans by approved lenders and direct loans by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for the period January 1 to June 30, 1958.
Mr. Chairman, may I have permission to have printed in Hansard a table setting out figures for the average income, cost, loan and down payment for insured and direct loans.


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: Has the minister unanimous consent for the publication of this table in Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, the table is as
follows:	Insured	Direct	Per centloans	loans	decreaseAverage income ..	$ 6,148	$ 5,153	16.2Average cost ....	15,453	13,402	13.3Average loan ....	11,725	11,028	5.9Average down payment 	3,723	2,374	36.3
The hon. member mentioned that he would like to see the down payments decreased still further. I would be delighted to do that if I thought it were feasible. We did decrease the down payments in December. It will be observed that the average down payment under insured loans was $3,728 and the average down payment under direct loans was $2,374, a difference of approximately $1,400.
Commitments under section 22 of the National Housing Act from March 1954 to August 31 of this year total $505.9 million. Doubt has been expressed in some quarters that a new housing program of this magnitude could easily and quickly be absorbed into our economy. We have had to watch all the time to ensure that we did not break the market for small homes and did not assist in the construction of more homes than could be sold. This is something that my hon. friend as a businessman will realize has to be watched by the government. These doubts are dissipated, however, by statistics on completed and unsold houses which show that although completions are some 10,000 units higher than last year at the same time, completed and unsold dwellings were 2,028 in July or 8 per cent lower than in July, 1957.
I believe hon. members will agree that this adds up to a most encouraging picture. The government's actions have given a new and vigorous fillip to the housebuilding industry. Canadian families with lower incomes have been enabled to obtain their own new homes and, of paramount importance, the heavy
Supply-Public Works
volume of new house construction has had a tremendous impact upon the employment situation.
I do not think any Canadian will dispute that the small home policy of this government has meant thousands and thousands of jobs in the last year in Canada.
We are naturally pleased with the results. However, the government wishes to ensure that a supply of mortgage money adequate to maintain employment in the construction of small homes is available in the months ahead. The direct lending programs for homeowners and for limited dividend rental housing will, of course, continue and I am happy to inform the committee that as far as builder loans are concerned-and the merchant builders are the ones who are able to build a lot of houses quickly and that is what is needed to help create employment in the winter-an additional allotment of 25 residual loans will be made available to merchant builders, effective immediately. To be considered, completed and signed applications must be received by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation prior to December 31, 1958.
Many house builders and particularly the larger ones exhausted their allotment of 25 direct loans last winter. The government is acting to provide new quotas at this time so that builders in areas where demand is buoyant will not be delayed because of a lack of mortgage funds and will be able to proceed with another winter's operations.
The present quota of 25 to a builder will lapse. In other words, a builder who did not take advantage of the first allotment may now use only the second quota of 25. Similarly, if a builder has used ten of his original 25, he may now obtain only a total of 25, not 40. And if a builder has already used his full 25, he is still entitled only to an additional 25.
I must emphasize that this is a residual or backstop lending operation and is directed only toward the small home. I should also point out that the "minimum house" I announced to the house last week is only one type of dwelling unit that may be financed under the government's small home loan program. In other words, the financing arrangements I have been discussing today are not limited to minimum houses but may include others, provided the designs conform to the requirements already laid down as to floor area.
There are two other points. Previously, builders could qualify only if they had been engaged in house construction as merchant builders prior to September, 1957. Under the revised policy, builders may be admitted who

Supply-Public Works
operated for the first time subsequent to that time but prior to September 1, 1958.
Secondly, a builder will not receive direct loans if, at the time of application, he has more than five completed but unsold units comprising both insured and direct loans. The purpose of this restriction is, of course, to avoid direct lending to builders who have no market for their product.
Mr. Chairman, there can be no question of the impact already made by the government's actions in supplementing the flow of mortgage funds. We are equally certain that the current program, stimulated by this additional allotment of 25 loans to a builder, will ensure the construction of small homes in those areas where they are required and will, furthermore, make a vital contribution to the employment picture in Canada during the ensuing winter months.


Mr. Fisher:: Mr. Chairman, I have three separate questions to ask the minister. Before doing so I should like to congratulate him on the move he has just announced. It sounds as though it may be of considerable assistance with respect to unemployment this winter at least in certain areas of which I can think.
The minister indicated six or seven weeks ago that he might make a statement on his estimates on a matter which was the cause of some controversy that raged several months ago, about the relative efficiency of the employees working for Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation as compared with standard civil servants. This will be the subject of my first question. The minister is in charge of both a department that engages stock civil servants and Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. We would appreciate very much having his opinion on the subject of the controversy that raged at that time. We would also like to hear his views about some of the suggestions that were made to the effect that the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation employees should be brought under the civil service commission. I do not ask this question in an attempt to drag up a subject with which the minister perhaps does not want to deal.
Since the original controversy there has been quite a lot of talk going around in Ottawa. I have heard many pros and cons from civil servants and other people in the community. In a sense it is almost an Ottawa problem. I have heard some civil servants say some very biting things about the actual working conditions in Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation that would tend to ridicule the efficiency about which the director was so proud when he was before the committee in the other place. There must be another side to it. We would like to hear from the minister now.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, I have been minister for only a little over a year but my experience has been that both the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the Department of Public Works are extremely efficient. The corporation like, I think, most other crown corporations, is set up on a business organization basis and for that reason quite a few of its practices are different from those of a department. This is just one example of the faculty of Canadian people for working out a common-sense method of doing their business. A great deal of the publicity given in the press was sensational headline publicity and deserved to be considered as such. I have here the whole story about Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. From the peak of the staff employment in July 1956, when they had 2,369 people employed, to the end of April 1958, when they had 1,889 people employed, there had been a staff reduction amounting to 480 persons. At no time were there any mass dismissal or other such method used in reducing the staff. The reasons for the reduction were entirely those of greater efficiency and a change in the emphasis on the corporation's activities and the low trough of loan activities which occurred during the period from July 1956 to midsummer 1957. My memo does not say June 10, 1957 but it does say to the midsummer of 1957.
The staff reduction of 480 consisted of only 178 actual terminations owing to reductions in the establishment of various offices. This reduction of 178 took place over a period of 18 months, but the major portion was effected during the spring of 1957; for example, 118 in February 1957; 34 in April 1957; seven in March; and six in May. At the same time, during that same period, an additional 75 persons who had been hired did not complete their probationary period satisfactorily and consequently had their employment terminated. Then, there were 227 people who voluntarily resigned and were not replaced, so that the summary of the 480 works out in this way: employment terminated owing to establishment reduction, 178; employment terminated at the end of the probationary period, 75; voluntary resignations which were not replaced, 227; a total of 480.
The officials of the corporation point out that because of the drop in loan activity they would have been justified in dispensing with superfluous staff in the late months of 1956, but they did not do that because of the difficulty of obtaining employment. They kept the people on until the next spring.
As far as grading and salaries are concerned, the corporation endeavours to be as nearly as possible on the same basis as a

government department. In other words, it follows the pattern set down by the civil service commission. This, indeed, is the story, and I must say that I do not believe either the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the civil service commission or the department deserves very much criticism. I think they are each doing a very good job in their own field.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Before we leave this I would like to remind the minister that the original sensational charges were triggered by members of his own party.
One of the questions I would like to direct to the minister relates to the tremendously increased activity that he is talking about. I am sure it has to be true because of the figures. Is that being done without any increase in the staff of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation?


Howard Charles Green: I am advised that with the additional loan impact total of 1957 that this year it has been necessary to take on temporary help to the number of about 120 this summer in order to substitute for employees on vacation. The corporation really has done a magnificent job in handling this small home loan plan.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Is any consideration being given at this time to the proposition that has been mentioned in the house before, especially by Mr. Speaker when he was a private member, namely the question of the activities of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation being directed toward construction or supporting the construction of university residences? I raise this matter because there has been some criticism, and also some support, of the fact that in its grants the Canada Council has given a considerable amount of money to universities for residential construction. This is all very good, but I have seen it suggested in several newspapers that such grants would not be necessary if there was some scheme such as Mr. Speaker advocated several years ago. Has the minister anything to say on that?


Howard Charles Green: This is one of the possible changes which is still under consideration. The Senate committee which investigated Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation recommended against any such policy being adopted.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Because the Senate committee recommended against it I hope that is not the last word, Mr. Chairman.
My final question relates to the low cost homes which the minister announced. I am very intrigued with the plan. I hope one or two other plans will be developed within the same price range although I imagine in this
Supply-Public Works
particular plan there will be quite a number of adaptations. What I am asking really supports the point made by the member of the Liberal party who spoke and sort of asked or prayed that the government would try to give leadership in those smaller communities. I am thinking of the communities of 1,500 to 2,000 people where there are no lending institutions and quite often the builders have to go to larger communities nearby. I am thinking of it specifically in terms of my own constituency and of 10 or 15 communities where the office is a great distance away. I think of a place like Hornepayne which is some 380 miles away from Fort William. How is the corporation planning to link up with those small communities?
This is such a worth-while scheme and yet I am afraid it may founder on some of the doubts expressed by the hon. member who just spoke. How are you going to sell this plan in the smaller communities? I know that the minister challenged members to get out and do something about it and I hope to do so, but I would feel that it would have a much greater chance of success if there were a couple more field men operating in these smaller communities. I might point out to the minister that in my constituency is over one-third of all of Ontario and the office is tucked off in one corner in Fort William, not actually in my constituency. I do not think it is asking for too much, in relation to these small towns spread out to the eastward for over 300 miles, that there be some effort to cover them with field men in connection with these low cost homes. The nearest centres to the east are North Bay and Sudbury, a considerable distance away.


Howard Charles Green: Officials of the corporation are working on two additional sets of plans for these very low priced homes and it is expected that they will be ready in about a month. In addition, there are several practising architects working on similar plans. As I explained in the house some weeks ago, we have written to the mayor or reeve of every centre in Canada with a population of 1,500 or over pointing out the availability of the loans and the services that the corporation can render. In addition, we are willing to send a representative of the corporation to any municipality which wishes to have that done. There have been quite a few requests already for a visit of this type and the corporation is very glad to carry on that work. If additional field men are required we will see that they are engaged. We are very anxious to have the housing program used to a much wider extent than it has been in the smaller centres of Canada.

Supply-Public Works


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Chairman, this move by the government is very worth-while and I am hoping it will result in improved housing in small communities and also in rural areas throughout the country. We often hear it said that in certain large centres there are slum housing conditions. As one travels across the country one sees, no matter in what province, many rural homes that are in a very serious state which could well be described as slum conditions.
The national conference on winter employment was held in Ottawa some weeks ago and we have been looking forward to receiving the report of the conference. The report was promised yesterday by the Minister of Labour and has now been filed with the sessional papers office. I had understood that the report was to contain conclusions. It is not really a report of conclusions but merely a summary of proceedings. I was able to have the report in my own hands some days prior to it being tabled in the house and therefore I know that it does not arrive at any conclusions and is not the type of report I had in mind. But I am wondering whether the government has considered any incentives to endeavour to have as many houses as possible proceeded with during the winter months.


Howard Charles Green: I outlined the government's
policy in that regard while the hon. member was out of the house.


Hazen Robert Argue: I am very sorry. Would the
minister be able to say whether there are particular incentives for companies engaging in winter construction? I do not mean only the fact that this program is now available and it is hoped that many of these houses will be built in the winter. Are there particular incentives along the lines suggested in the report of the conference which would encourage builders to construct homes during the winter months? The minister is quite right that I was out of the house when he referred to this particular feature.


Howard Charles Green: There is great incentive in the new policy because loans are only available up to December 31; also setting the number at 25 means that a builder can borrow money from Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation up to approximately $250,000. We believe that this change in our small homes plan will result in the construction of a large number of homes during the winter. The work has to be started within a certain number of days after the application is made. The policy is deliberately designed so that the money must be used to build during the winter months. We had great co-operation from builders last year. It was largely because of the way in which they entered into the spirit of the plan

for building these small homes in the winter time that the plan announced last August was so successful.


Hazen Robert Argue: I am very pleased to hear that comment from the minister. Can he give the committee any indication at all as to how successful he thinks this plan will be in preventing what is sometimes called the normal or regular rise in unemployment in winter months? I notice that in the report of the conference the figure of 140,000 is used as being the additional number of persons who are unemployed during the winter months. Does the minister feel that the 140,000 can be wiped out entirely or reduced by half? Just how far does he think this very worth-while and important program he has been speaking about will be successful in reducing the figure of 140,000?


Howard Charles Green: This change in the plan should mean an additional 10,000 housing units being built during the winter months. If it does, that would call for about 40,000 men working directly on building. In addition, of course, there are the people who get employment making furniture and all the other items that are required to establish a home. No one can say just how many people will be engaged but we believe that this will be a great help as it was last winter and, as a matter of fact, as it has been all summer. The housebuilding industry in Canada, which is among the largest industries in the nation, has already had a tremendous year, the best year in its history. It may be that there will be 160,000 starts in Canada this year. I am not guaranteeing that but it just may happen.


Hazen Robert Argue: The minister has made a very interesting statement and the figures he has quoted are undoubtedly impressive. If he could discuss with some of his colleagues in the cabinet an appropriate program for each of the departments which would go a substantial way toward reducing unemployment we might have a much better winter ahead than is now in prospect. The minister has stated what his department has done to help maintain the employment level that existed last winter and this summer. However, in spite of the good showing in home-building and in housing starts, as the minister knows very well, unemployment has been an exceedingly serious matter. I do not wish to detract from the value of the work the minister has undertaken, but merely express the hope that what is being accomplished in his department may be accomplished in other departments so that this very difficult question of winter unemployment may be solved.
Mr. Chairman, I shall tell you in advance that I am probably out of order. However,

I think it would be very wise if the Minister of Public Works could get the Minister of Labour in a little higher gear than he apparently seems to be. This house has had no report as yet from this conference on winter unemployment which was held on July 14 and 15. We have had no recommendations. It seems a reflection on parliament itself that at this very late date, almost two months after the conference was held, we merely get the proceedings of this conference tabled in this house.


John Richard Garland: I trust the minister was not too disturbed by my remarks.


Douglas Mason Fisher: He likes people who whine.


Howard Charles Green: The hon. member is more cheerful already.


John Richard Garland: As I mentioned, I was not attempting to criticize but rather to urge the government to do more. Perhaps the minister did not hear my remarks in that connection. I noticed that the minister in dealing with this subject did not depart too far from his prepared text. So far as the announcement of the new policy being extended until December 31 of this year is concerned, and having regard to the continuing need for housing as well as the need for creating new jobs, we welcome it very much.


Douglas Mason Fisher: One of the hon. members of the house most friendly to the minister's party placed the following resolution on the order paper earlier this session:
That in the opinion of this house, the government should take into consideration the advisability of constructing suitable living quarters to provide accommodation, at reasonable rental rates, for non-resident members during the sessions.
I wonder if the government has given any consideration to that through its agency Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation?


Howard Charles Green: We are really a great deal more interested in housing Canadians than members of parliament, Mr. Chairman.


John Richard Garland: I wonder if the minister has given some thought-we all recognize the excellent job Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation are doing-to finding some way of shortening the long waiting period for cash advances. I think most of us who have had anything to do with building are aware of this long waiting period which is a hardship to the smaller builder.


Howard Charles Green: I would be glad to look into that. As a matter of fact, it takes an average of just five days to process a loan. This is very fast work but there may be some way in which we can speed up the actual advance of the money.
57071-3-288
Supply-Post Office


John Richard Garland: Perhaps the minister misunderstood me. I am talking about cash advances, and I am not discussing the original approval of the loan. It is not in that connection. It is getting the money into
the hands of the smaller builder faster.
*


Howard Charles Green: Apparently there is no delay once the title to the property is cleared. However, we shall be glad to look into the hon. member's suggestion.


John Richard Garland: I think anyone who has had anything to do with this in a practical way knows that there is a long period of time which elapses. The big builder is able to take care of himself, but for a smaller builder who is building perhaps half a dozen or a dozen homes, it is a very real hardship.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: This terminates the estimates of the Department of Public Works.



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
305. Operations-Including salaries and other expenses of staff post offices, district offices, railway mail service staffs, and supplies, equipment and other items for revenue post offices, including administration, and to authorize the re-appointment, effective the 16th day of September, 1955, of G. V. H. Christiaenssens as a postal clerk 2 in the Magog post office, at a salary of $2,700 per annum for the period from the 16th day of September, 1955, to the 31st day of March, 1956, and at a salary of $2,940 per annum for the period from the 1st day of April, 1956, to the 30th day of April, 1957, $101,387,706.
(Translation):
Mr. Caron:: Mr. Chairman, on August 1 last, I asked the Postmaster General (Mr. Hamilton) if he had received a petition protesting against the closing of the Fabre Station post office, which was established 33 years ago. Although the petition was not signed by all local residents, it was signed at least by the great majority of them. At that time, the minister replied in the affirmative.
In order to refresh his memory, I take the liberty of pointing out certain details in this connection. On behalf of the 29 people who had signed the petition sent to the Postmaster General, Mr. Ernest Demers wrote him the following letter:
Sir,
The signers of the attached petition have learned with much regret that, according to a notice received from Mr. W. J. Gagne, district director of postal services, North Bay, Ontario, file No. M-184, dated June 5, 1958, their Fabre Station post office, Quebec, Timiskaming county, would close on June 30, 1958, and be replaced by rural delivery.
Please note that this post office has been in existence for more than 33 years and serves 38 families.
Out of that number, 9 only are in favour of a rural mail delivery while 29 anxiously hope that the post office will remain. They do not want rural mail delivery which would delay for more than one day the delivery of our mail.

Supply-Post Office
We therefore urge you, sir, to be kind enough to agree to the almost unanimous request of families served by this post office and to keep it in operation as in the past.
We would be most grateful to you.
Please accept, sir, the expression of our best wishes.
Yours truly,
Ernest Demers
The executive assistant to the Postmaster General answered as follows to the request I have just quoted:
Dear Mr. Demers:
This is to acknowledge receipt of the petition you sent to the Postmaster General on June 12 last in respect of the closing of the Post Office at Fabre Station and of the establishment of rural mail delivery.
Hon. Mr. Hamilton has taken note of your representations and will discuss the matter with your member of parliament, Mr. Paul Martineau, to whom you have forwarded a copy of your letter and of the petition.
I have in my hand a copy of that petition. It bears 29 signatures. I have also read the copy of a letter sent by Mr. Gagne to Mrs. Goulet, who was postmistress. Nothing in the file shows any serious reason, economic or otherwise, pointing to the necessity of closing that post office which seems to have been entirely satisfactory to the great majority of residents for 33 years.
I have found there nothing which would indicate that this was a matter of economy. I still think, though, there is a nigger in the woodpile inasmuch as the letter sent by the executive assistant to the Postmaster General contains the following words:
Hon. Mr. Hamilton has taken note of your representations and will discuss the matter with your member of parliament, Mr. Paul Martineau-
I wonder if this is not a political step rather than one designed to cut down departmental expenditures. Mrs. Goulet happens to be the wife of a former Liberal member of parliament, a man who was active in politics, though she herself was never so. We know, also, that it was just after the Conservative party had come into power that the post office at Fabre Station was closed in spite of the representations of the majority of the people of that community.
I would therefore like to ask the minister to provide a few explanations which would be such as to satisfy at least the people of Fabre Station who feel they should be treated as fairly as the other residents of this country.
Does the minister not intend answering my questions immediately?
(Text):


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: think it might be a little bit easier and quicker if we heard the various questions first. Then I could deal with them altogether.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Suppose it is not on the same subject.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: know that everyone wants things speeded up.


Alexis Pierre Caron: If it is not on the same subject, I think it would be easier to answer each one separately.


Mr. Bourque:: A short time ago, when the Postmaster General was before this house with his estimates I told him that I would ask him a couple of questions about some of the items that we had to deal with. One of those items was commemorative stamps. He was kind enough to write to me giving me all the necessary explanations. I want to thank him kindly for this explanation. I do not think it will be necessary for me to deal any further with this question.
I understand that it is the intention of the Post Office Department to revise the preferential rates granted newspapers, magazines, periodicals and all other publications that benefit from these cheaper rates, owing to the presumed heavy loss incurred in the transportation of these publications at preferential rates. When I say "publications" I mean newspapers, magazines, periodicals, directories, listings, technical books, et cetera, all the publications that come under the preferential postal rate. I understand that United States publications in millions of copies coming into Canada regularly, when mailed in the United States contribute nothing to the revenue of the post office but owing to their bulk add greatly to the cost of carrying this second class mail or, perhaps I should say preferential rate mail. These United States publications are in direct competition with our-


William McLean Hamilton: rise on a point of order, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry to be obliged to interrupt the hon. member for Outremont-St. Jean, but this is a subject which is properly discussed under the first item, namely the administration branch which is responsible for the setting of rates and similar aspects of our postal operations. We are now on the operations section which deals with the day to day operations of the post office.


Romuald Bourque: Am I to understand that this matter comes under the next item? Am I to understand that I can deal with it on the next item?


William McLean Hamilton: It
comes under the previous item, namely that

of administration, which was passed at the last sitting of the committee when these estimates were under consideration.


Romuald Bourque: Then I cannot speak on this item?


William McLean Hamilton: No.
I am sorry because I appreciate hearing the views of the hon. member.


Alexis Pierre Caron: It can always be done by leave.


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: Order. If the hon. member is to be relevant to the item under discussion, it is quite correct that the only item to be discussed at present is item 305 which deals with operations.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, may I draw to your attention the fact that the hon. member is trying to discuss postal rates. Surely under the operations of the department, item 305, it is possible to do that because it deals here with district offices, railway mail service staffs, supplies, equipment and other items, including administration, and to authorize the reappointment of a certain person and so forth. Surely this is a matter that is going to take just a few minutes. I wish the Postmaster General would allow it to be discussed. It is a matter that has been on the mind of the hon. member for some time.


William McLean Hamilton: Perhaps we can reach an agreement. It is a fact that this matter should properly be discussed under the administration item. That is where it is to be dealt with. If we can reach an agreement I shall be glad to have the hon. member go ahead, but I just do not want a general debate to arise on the subject and to continue for several hours.


Lionel Chevrier: I do not think it will take that long.


Romuald Bourque: I thank the minister. These United States publications are in direct competition with our Canadian publications and many have so-called Canadian editions. They are a threat to the survival of our Canadian publications. United States publications account for a good part I believe, of the loss of $18 million which the post office has had to bear in the carrying of this preferential rate mail.
I should now like to make a plea to the Postmaster General on behalf of these Canadian publications. They inculcate in the minds of our Canadian citizens a true spirit of Cana-dianism. They promote Canadian unity, create a sense of pride in being a Canadian and, above all, they instil in every Canadian a love of Canada. They also spread Canadian knowledge and make us more conversant with things 57071-3-288-J
Supply-Post Office
Canadian. They contribute, Mr. Chairman, to the formation of a truly Canadian mentality. Over and above that, they give employment to hundreds of thousands of Canadian workers. Many Canadian newspapers and publications find it extremely difficult to make a living with the present postal rates. An increase in postal rates would create severe hardship for them and perhaps cause many of them to discontinue publications, hence increasing unemployment.
United States publications are a detriment to our Canadian way of life. Our Canadian culture is seriously endangered by the reading of United States publications. They are making our citizens United States minded instead of being Canadian minded. Our children must be taught to believe in Canada. It is the greatest country in the world. It is the country that offers the youth the greatest advantages and the best future possible. We need Canadian publications to tell them so. By encouraging our Canadian publications we create more employment, thereby benefiting our national economy.
These workers pay all the taxes levied- municipal, provincial, federal, school and sales taxes-and they are happy to be able to contribute their share to the welfare of Canada. We need to help along our Canadian publications and ought not to burden them with a load they could not carry. Increasing the postal rates would cause many of them to fold up.
I should like the Postmaster General, if he can, to give us an idea what part of the $18 million that was lost by the post office last year can be attributed to Canadian publications and how much to United States publications. I think the people of Canada would be interested in knowing just what amount the Canadian publications would have to pay. It would be most unfair, in my opinion, to ask the Canadian publications to pay for a deficit that is in large part due to the United States publications which are coming in and which bring absolutely no revenue to Canada.
I asked the Postmaster General, the last time I was speaking, what the increase in postal rates will be-and I am shortening my speech, Mr. Chairman, so that I will not keep you too long-or what the cost per person would be per year for having two deliveries a day instead of one delivery. I believe the Postmaster General told me that he would have these figures to submit the next time his estimates came up for consideration. Might I have an answer now, because I have other things to carry on with. I have asked this before and I thought the Postmaster General would have this ready.

Supply-Post Office


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: will be glad to accommodate the hon. member if he has somewhere else to go. He devoted a considerable portion of his remarks to our Canadian publications, and the $18 million loss which was referred to by the Auditor General in his report. I think it is correct to say that that is an estimate rather than an exact figure. I think that point should be made because of what I am going to say next, which is that our accounting and our studies of this matter do not enable us to apportion whatever loss there might be on this operation between United States and Canadian publications. We have no breakdown in that respect.
The hon. member asked about the annual cost of two deliveries a day. If we were to restrict it to five days a week, the minimum cost would be $3,750,000 a year rising ultimately to, say, $4,340,000. If it was to be done twice a day, five days a week, with one delivery on Saturday the minimum figure would be $4,800,000 rising to $5,925,000. The rise is of course due to increased payment on account of salaries and wages as employees attain more seniority. I may add that on top of that the government would also be required to supply uniforms and equipment and bear various other costs entailed in this service.


Romuald Bourque: Suppose it were to cost $10 million more compared with one delivery a day. That would represent 59 cents per person per year based on a population of 17 million people. Does the minister not think that if for 59 cents we could have twice a day delivery it would not be a desirable thing to do, because in addition to providing more employment it is surely recognized that once a day mail delivery imposes a real hardship on the population which is becoming practically unbearable. I say that if for 60 cents a year we could have the benefits of twice a day delivery it would be well worth while for the post office to spend that sum. I am bringing these figures in to show what I am coming to.
The annual cost per year per person of the loan we are converting at the present time is $17 or, in the aggregate, $289,125,000 a year. Under the Liberal regime the same sum was borrowed at different times and it only cost the country $192,750,000 or $5.66 less per year per individual than is paid at the present time. If we can pay $96,375,000 more in interest under this regime than we paid for the same sum under the Liberal regime, surely we can spend 59 cents a year more per individual each year in order to get a twice a day mail delivery and have the people satisfied.


Mr. McWilliam:: Mr. Chairman, the subject of twice a day delivery has been dealt with under the general item. I mention it only to show the minister's attitude toward mail delivery when he was an opposition member demanding twice a day service, as a preface to my opening remarks.
Some discussion took place previously with regard to postal services provided in rural areas. In the past I have urged the department to provide better rural mail services. In the majority of constituencies a large number of postal stations are served by bi-weekly or tri-weekly services and some by a once a week service. This low frequency service is out of step with the progress Canada has made in the past number of years. The situation is the same for tri-weekly service except that the waiting period is not quite as long. Why are many people living in rural areas subjected to inadequate mail services? Are they considered by the department as second class Canadians?
The minister might use the argument that the revenue does not warrant better service. This is a poor basis for argument in so far as postal services are concerned. Does the minister think that sufficient revenue is derived from postal patrons residing in street delivery areas to defray the costs of door to door delivery-I am sure he does not.
There are few, if any, postal areas that pay their own way if the costs of construction and maintenance of buildings used as post offices are taken into consideration- these costs are borne by the public works department-and also the cost of transporting mails to and from post offices by plane, train, trucks and other means of transportation.
Why do some Canadians enjoy modern, up to date mail services while other Canadians are served in the same manner, with the same degree of service as was available to our forefathers? In many rural areas the mail services have not been improved since the turn of the century.


William McLean Hamilton: On
a point of order, Mr. Chairman. The hon. member has been completely off this item since he started this speech. His speech relates to the transportation branch of the department. I think, however, that the hon. member might be allowed to continue in order to save time as long as we do not get involved in a debate on that subject.


George Roy McWilliam: I should have said at the beginning that I intended to make a passing reference to transportation but I believe I will be saving the time of the committee by continuing my remarks at this point. I am not going to list the mail routes that serve rural

areas in the constituency of Northumberland-Miramichi on a twice a week and tri-weekly frequency, but I ask the minister to direct the attention of his officials to these areas with the end in view of improving services to daily frequency. I also request the minister to examine the scale of salaries that are paid rural postmasters because the remuneration paid in most cases is extremely low when compared with remuneration paid for the same number of duty hours in other fields either in the public service or in free enterprise.
In other departments of government parttime workers engaged for a few days each month aggregate more remuneration a year than what is paid some postmasters in rural areas who provide quarters and service six days a week for 52 weeks a year.
Charges of alleged political activities in support of the Conservative party have been made against a postmaster in Northumber-land-Miramichi, who also holds a mail contract for a side service. Every member of parliament is aware of the Postmaster General's directive issued prior to the election warning them that they would be subject to dismissal if they took part in federal politics. I do not know if there is any foundation for this charge of political activity, nor do I intend to ascertain if this mail carrier was engaged in political activity in support of the Conservative party, my reason being that I am of the opinion that a mail carrier in his hours off duty should have the right to conduct himself as he sees fit.
It should be remembered that mail contracts are awarded to the lowest bidder. That was a policy strictly followed by the former Liberal government and one which, I trust, will be continued. The time of mail drivers, other than periods during which he performs the duties under his contract, should not be regulated as to his political activities by a directive issued by a minister of the crown any more than a contractor should not be directed not to accept any other form of employment in his off-duty hours.
There may have been charges of political activity made against mail drivers in support of the Liberal party. If any charges of alleged political activity have been filed with the department the officials should make sure that charges are fully substantiated before contracts are terminated.
Mr. Chairman, shortly after March 31 of this year I received a complaint, with the assurance that a sworn affidavit would be produced if requested, that a certain postmistress was openly canvassing votes for the Conservative party. This postmistress who is alleged to have made this canvass has
Supply-Post Office
provided splendid postal services for many years and continues to do so both as a postmistress and as a conveyor of mails as a contractor for a side service. In recognition of her past services I made repeated representations to the department a few years ago for an increase in remuneration but my efforts were unsuccessful.
I did not take any action on the charge made. No attempt was made to obtain a sworn statement because I felt that this postmistress was a victim of political pressure applied by a few people whom she classed as friends who incidentally, did not reside in this postal area and did not care if she jeopardized her position as postmistress or lost her mail contract.
I was surprised when I heard about the alleged actions in view of the splendid services rendered in the past and the fact that she never engaged in political activities in former years, keeping a strictly nonpartisan attitude in keeping with her appointment as postmistress and her appointment each election year as a deputy returning officer for federal elections including the year 1958. In the best interests of the postal services and the patrons of this area I decided I would not take any action on the complaint.
The only reason these two cases of alleged political activity were brought before the committee is because the department has made a dismissal without justification for some unknown reason which appears to have a political taint. Mr. Chairman, on July 26 as found on page 2752 of Hansard of that date the member for Laurier asked the minister this question:
May I ask the minister if following this statement and because of the directive referred to have there been any dismissals from the post office?
The member for Laurier was inquiring about dismissals due to political activities on the part of mail carriers.
The minister's answer found on the same page of Hansard was:
In the case of rural mail carriers, Mr. Chairman, the answer is no.
The minister cannot make the same answer for the group of non-civil service postmasters and postmistresses. Perhaps the minister will tell the committee how many appointees in this group have been dismissed since March 31.
In the constituency of Northumberland-Miramichi the postmistress of a small revenue post office, namely, Baie Ste. Anne, has been dismissed. There are no reasonable grounds for this dismissal. On the contrary Mr. Chairman, all the known facts support the contention that the dismissal was totally unwarranted. When this postmistress took over the post office she did so after much persuasion

Supply-Post Office
by local postal patrons and on the request of area postal officials, after no other resident would accept the appointment. It was evident that this village would be without a post office if she did not accept the appointment. As a matter of fact this village was without a post office for a short period following the resignation of the former postmaster.
When this now dismissed postmistress accepted the appointment a part of her home was set aside and renovated to provide up to date service. Mail boxes and a general delivery wicket were installed at a considerable expense borne by the postmistress. The part of the home set aside for postal services was a self-contained unit and was accessible by an outside entrance used only by postal patrons. The accommodations provided were superior to the average accommodations found in most offices in rural areas. The post office was located in the centre of the community.
Since this postmistress accepted the appointment about 15 months ago the revenue of the post office tripled. District and area postal officials were completely satisfied with her performance of the duties involved. No reason was given the postmistress as to why her services were terminated. As far as she was concerned she never took the slightest part in any political activity and her services with the department were of the highest order.
The devotion to her postal duties as proven by the increases in revenue and the favourable declaration of the local postal patrons by their action in forwarding a signed petition requesting that no change be made are concrete proof of the efficient services rendered. Reliable information states that a petition signed by approximately 90 per cent of the postal patrons of this office requesting that the postmistress be retained was received by the department. The receipt of the petition is verified by the answer to my order paper No. 172. This petition was drafted and circulated by known supporters of the Conservative party and bears the signatures of a large number of supporters of the minister's own party.
It is stated that a copy of the petition was forwarded to the defeated Conservative candidate and when he was approached by a Conservative supporter, following receipt of the copy of the petition, it is alleged that the defeated candidate, who now administers both federal and provincial patronage, stated that he received the petition and that he had already recommended the dismissal of the postmistress.
Actions of this kind, Mr. Chairman, break down the morale of persons serving the public in the postal services. It places in jeopardy the appointment of non-civil service postmasters who are deemed to have cast a vote
[Mr. McWllliam.l
against this government, even though they never took the slightest part in politics.
This is the first time in my memory that a postmaster or a postmistress has been dismissed on trumped-up political reasons. It is the first time within my memory that anyone has been dismissed in the constituency of Northumberland-Miramichi for any reason other than inefficiency. In this case the people of Baie Ste. Anne are convinced that the action taken was purely of a political nature, one that had no foundation, one that was most unfair and unwarranted.
The husband of this postmistress is an active supporter of the Liberal party. He had no connection whatsoever with the post office. Surely, Mr. Chairman, a dismissal on this ground is out of keeping with our democratic system. My remarks on this dismissal have nothing to do with the newly appointed postmistress. She is a woman of splendid character and I would be the last person to criticize her or harm her good name.
This action is a new innovation in the Post Office Department and one that I would fight most strenuously if the Liberal party was in power. Non-civil service postal appointees should not be dismissed without cause, dismissed with no reason given, denied the opportunity of a right of appeal, dismissed on the recommendation of a defeated candidate of the party in power. With very few exceptions, the people of Baie Ste. Anne are indignant against the Post Office Department for such high-handed, unwarranted action meted out to one of their residents who gave splendid service and who is widely recognized as a person who never took part in politics of any kind. I feel sure the minister does not know the true facts of this case and, surely, he will have an independent investigation made, in view of the widespread protests, and if the facts are as I have presented them, then surely the course of justice will be followed and a reinstatement made. I urge, yes, Mr. Chairman, I demand that an independent survey be conducted toward bringing out the true facts surrounding this case to make sure that no injustice is done to this dismissed postmistress' good name, her character, integrity and ability.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Just before the hon. member resumes his seat will he tell me how long this dismissed postmistress held the position?


George Roy McWilliam: Mr. Chairman, I know exactly just what the Postmaster General is going to say. He is going to say that this woman's appointment-


William McLean Hamilton: Answer the question.


George Roy McWilliam: Restrain yourself and you will get an answer. He is going to say that this woman's appointment was never made permanent, but I say that is a very flimsy excuse, Mr. Chairman. She was sworn into office the same day as the Postmaster General was sworn in; she served faithfully for over a year, tripled the service there and it is the minister's responsibility to make that appointment permanent.


Mr. Houck:: Mr. Chairman, when any group of civil servants are performing a splendid job I am not only willing but very happy indeed to say something on their behalf. I want to say to the Postmaster General and through the Postmaster General to his department that not only in Niagara Falls but in the Niagara district as a whole we have some of the finest civil employees that any department could have.
As the minister well knows, Niagara Falls is the outstanding tourist section of the country and not only in the Dominion of Canada but indeed in the world. Because of that fact our mail, especially in the summer, is exceptionally heavy with respect to the postal card service. I want to say to the minister, and I think he will agree with me -if he does not he can correct me if I am wrong-that all the men in the postal department, especially the postal men themselves, have to work four hours a day on every statutory holiday with the exception of Christmas and New Years. There is an old saying that the mail has to go through regardless of the weather.
I want to pay my respects to the postal men in Niagara Falls and district. They are a fine, courteous bunch. One thing has impressed me greatly, not only in Niagara Falls but in the area. Because of the great influx of tourists you will find that the letter carriers are stopped a dozen times a day when they are on their beat and asked for directions to various parts of the city and various parts of the province. These postal men are always courteous and willing to give advice. I say to the minister that we in Niagara Falls and in the Niagara district are indeed proud of his employees and I would plead with the minister and through him to his department to give consideration to increasing the small salaries they are receiving for the fine work they are performing.


Mr. Deschalelels:: I have a very brief comment, Mr. Chairman. I have a letter from a Mrs. Leonora Starr, 129 Prospect street, Newmarket, Ontario, which contains, I think, a very interesting suggestion. Mrs. Starr has noticed that the United States postmaster is using on his cancellation stamp the words,
Business of the House
"Pray For Peace". She has made the suggestion that we in Canada should adopt the same term or a similar term. I am leaving this suggestion with the Postmaster General and I hope he will give it his kind consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
The Deputy Chairman:: This completes the estimates of the Post Office Department.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Lionel Chevrier: May I ask the leader of the house what the business is for tomorrow?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we shall commence with estimates. I am not sure at the moment whether it will be the supplementary estimates standing in the name of the Prime Minister which concern the federal district commission or those of the Department of Finance. Then, hon. members should be prepared to go on with the items in the further supplementary estimates.


Lionel Chevrier: May I interrupt here to indicate to the leader of the house that it would be useful for the Leader of the Opposition if as soon as the minister can indicate whether it is finance or the other that comes first he should advise us on this side of the house.


Howard Charles Green: I shall be very glad to do that. Then we shall take item No. 2 on today's order paper, second reading of the bill to amend the Customs Act and then item No. 3, second reading of the bill to amend the Canadian Citizenship Act.


Lionel Chevrier: And on Friday?


Howard Charles Green: On Friday I believe the Prime Minister intends to move the first reading of the bill of rights and we hope it will be possible to conclude all business on Friday.


Lionel Chevrier: I can assure my hon. friend that we on this side of the house will cooperate to the fullest extent.


Howard Charles Green: Arising out of the last remark of the hon. member for Laurier, I should like to thank the members of both opposition parties very much for sitting past six o'clock today.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I should like to say on behalf of this group that we shall co-operate in every way possible to the end desired.
At 6.35 p.m. the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.

Question



ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Boivin: 1.	What was the cost of the temporary floodlighting of the centre block?
2.	What was the cost of the recently installed permanent floodlighting of the building?
3.	Were tenders called for this work?
4.	If so, what are the names of those who submitted tenders and the amount of their respective tenders?
Answer by: Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works):
1.	$3,135.48.
2.	$9,000.00.
3.	Yes.
4.	Stanley G. Brookes, $9,000; J. C. Robinson & Sons Ltd., $9,100; Ruiter Electric Ltd., $9,314; MacFarlane & Leblanc, $9,520; Universal Electric Ltd., $9,680; George Bolton Ltd., $11,660; A. C. MacDonald & Sons Ltd., $12,408.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:


DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND COMMERCE
[Stage Direction]
Atomic energy control board-
48.	Administration expenses of the atomic energy control board, $62,818.
49.	Grants for researches and investigations with respect to atomic energy, $400,008.
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (research program)-
50.	Current operation and maintenance, including expendable research equipment, $18,382,600.
51.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment and to authorize Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to undertake construction of works at Deep River for Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, $9,301,700.

[Stage Direction]
257.	Salaries and other expenses, $22,660,729.
258.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $3,331,475.
Loans, investments and advances-
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited-
500. To provide for advances to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited in such amounts and on such terms and conditions (including the delivery of Her Majesty, in satisfaction of the advances, of obligations or shares of the company) as the governor in council may approve; to finance the construction of housing and other works at Deep River; and to authorize Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to undertake construction of the said housing and other works at Deep River for Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, $345,000.
501. To provide for working capital advances to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, subject to such terms and conditions as the governor in council may approve, $6,000,000.

[Stage Direction]
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited-(research program) -
665. Indemnity against nuclear hazards-to authorize, subject to the approval of the governor in council, execution and performance of an agreement between Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and McMaster University, amending the agreement made as of 15th October, 1957, whereby the company agreed to lease to the university enriched uranium to be used as fuel for the research reactor installed and to be operated by the university on its premises at Hamilton, Ontario, so as to provide that the university shall carry insurance satisfactory to the company in the sum of $500,000 against liability to third parties for nuclear hazards (as defined in the agreement) arising out of the possession or use of such enriched uranium and that the company shall indemnify the university and its suppliers against such liability in excess of that amount, $1.
General Administration-
692.	To amend vote No. 786 of the Appropriation Act No. 4, 1951 by deleting therefrom the words "at a salary of $12,000," and substituting therefor the words "at such salary rate as the governor in council determines, but not exceeding $16,500", $1.
693.	Commodities services - further amount required including expenses of the small business branch, $30,000.

[Stage Direction]
Trans-Canada highway-
366.	To provide for construction through national parks, $12,500,000.
General-
367.	To provide for advance planning of projects including acquisition of sites, $1,500,000.
368.	To provide for balances required to complete any projects undertaken in previous fiscal years and for which no specfic provision is made in the fiscal year 1958-59, $900,000.
369.	Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for: a maximum of $15,000 may be expended in respect of any one work and, with the approval of treasury board, that maximum may be increased to $25,000 in the case of any one building construction project, $1,000,000.
370.	To supplement, on approval of treasury board except where less than $1,000 is required, any of the appropriations of the Department of Public Works, $700,000.
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-
371.	To provide for the expenses incurred in constructing and supervising construction of married quarters, rental housing, schools and related services on behalf of the Department of National Defence, $720,000.
372.	Special payments to the Howe Sound Mining Company, subject to such terms and conditions as may be approved by the treasury board, towards the cost of supplying and servicing accommodation at the Britannia mine, British Columbia, up to the 30th day of June, 1958, $48,000.
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-
510. To provide for advances to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for the purposes of subsection (1) of section 37 of the National Housing Act, 1954, in respect of housing projects for veterans and for housing projects at Gander, Newfoundland, for sale or rental, $1,086,000.

General-
612.	Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for: a maximum of $15,000 may be expended in respect of any one work and, with the approval of treasury board, that maximum may be increased to $25,000 in the case of any one building construction project-further amount required, $250,000.
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-
613.	To provide for reimbursement to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for losses sustained by it during the fiscal year 1957-58 as a result of the operation of Federal-Provincial projects undertaken under section 36 of the National Housing Act, 1954, $99,531.
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-
660. To provide for advances charged to the special account in the Consolidated Revenue Fund established by subsection (4) of section 36 of the National Housing Act, 1954, in respect of housing and land development projects undertaken jointly with the governments of the provinces during the fiscal year 1957-58, $15,000,000.
Public Buildings Construction and Services- Acquisition, construction and improvements of
public buildings-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, public buildings listed in the details of the estimates provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-further amounts required-
673.	Newfoundland, $35,000.
674.	Nova Scotia, $50,000.
675.	Quebec, $270,000.
676.	Ottawa, $235,000.
677.	Ontario (other than Ottawa), $150,000.
678.	Manitoba, $25,000.
679.	Saskatchewan, $30,000.
680.	Alberta, $155,000.
Supply-Items Passed
681.	Furniture and furnishings for government departments-further amount required, $300,000.
682.	Newfoundland, $269,500.
683.	Nova Scotia, $166,000.
684.	New Brunswick, $173,000.
685.	Quebec, $380,400.
686.	Ontario, $188,000.
687.	British Columbia and Yukon, $251,500.
688.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $75,000.
Dredging-
689.	Construction or acquisition of plant and equipment-further amount required, $250,000.
690.	Maintenance and operation of graving docks, locks and dams-further amount required, $52,625.
General-
691.	Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for: a maximum of $15,000 may be expended in respect of any one work and, with the approval of treasury board, that maximum may be increased to $25,000 in the case of any one building construction project-further amount required, $400,000.

[Stage Direction]
305.	Operations-Including salaries and other expenses of staff post offices, district offices, railway mail service staffs, and supplies, equipment and other items for revenue post offices, including administration, and to authorize the re-appointment, effective the 16th day of September, 1955, of G. V. H. Christiaenssens as a Postal Clerk 2 in the Magog post office, at a salary of $2,700 per annum for the period from the 16th day of September, 1955, to the 31st day of March, 1956, and at a salary of $2,940 per annum for the period from the 1st day of April, 1956, to the 30th day of April, 1957, $101,387,706.
306.	Transportation-Movement of mail by land, air and water, including administration, $56,296,275.
307.	Financial services, including audit of revenue, money order and savings bank business; and postage stamps, $2,811,748.
57071 3-289
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, September 4, 1958