1960-02-08

[Stage Direction]
Mr. G. K. Fraser (Peterborough) presented the first report of the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, Canada's prohibition
against the importation of swine, uncooked pork and uncooked pork products from the United States is being removed as of this date. The embargo was imposed in 1952 under the provisions of the Animal Contagious Diseases Act, following a severe outbreak of vesicular exanthema in the United States.
The United States declared its swine industry free of vesicular exanthema on October 22 last year, and there has been no actual outbreak of the disease since November, 1956. Discussions between veterinary officials of the two countries satisfied Canadian authorities that the disease no longer poses a threat to the Canadian swine industry.
The removal of the restrictions on United States pork imports into Canada now that vesicular exanthema has been eradicated in the United States, is in keeping with the principle followed in dealing with international restrictions on animal health grounds. The embargo imposed by the United States against the import of Canadian meats, after the outbreak of foot and mouth disease in Canada in 1952, was removed following certification by Canadian veterinary authorities that the disease had been eradicated.
More recently, in 1959, certain states had imposed embargoes against Canadian sheep because Canadian measures for the control of scrapie disease were not considered as rigid as those followed in the United States. The Canadian control program was revised to make it equivalent to that of the United States, and the state embargoes have since been withdrawn.
79951-0-521
Under these circumstances we have no option but to remove the embargo on United States hogs and pork.



REPRESENTATION ACT


Mr. Reynold Rapp (Humboldi-Melforl) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-45, to amend the Representation Act.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Reynold Rapp: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to change the name of the electoral district of Humboldt-Melfort to Humboldt-Melfort-Tisdale.
I would like to mention in this connection that the residents of Tisdale and district are thrifty people who pride themselves on being the hub of the Carrot river valley. The Carrot river valley is rich in productive farm land, evidence of which is seen in the district. Tisdale is also known as the centre of the rapeseed industry in the west.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member will have time to debate his bill in due course.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 8-Mr. Robichaud:
For a copy of all correspondence exchanged between the right hon. the Prime Minister, the Minister of Justice, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the government of the province of New Brunswick or any other person in connection with a raid by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on the Vista bay club at Bathurst, New Brunswick, on October 29, 1959.
Mr. Thomas M. Bell (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, it is understood that this will be subject to the usual reservations regarding privileged documents and the consent of the province.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitations expressed by the parliamentary secretary, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion? Motion agreed to.



NATIONAL GALLERY


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 17-Mr. Pickersgill:
For a copy of all correspondence of the Prime Minister, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, or any other minister with Mr. C. P. Fell
[Stage Direction]
Motions for Papers
and Mr. Cleveland Morgan with respect to the resignation of these gentlemen from the board of trustees of the national gallery of Canada.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 18-Mr. Pickersgill:
For a copy of all correspondence of the Prime Minister, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration or any other member of the government with Mr. Alan Jarvis respecting the latter's resignation as director of the national gallery of Canada.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 21-Mr. Chevrier:
For a copy of a letter written by the Minister of Transport to the mayors of the south shore municipalities opposite Montreal, in February, 1959, concerning the construction of bridges across the St. Lawrence between the island of Montreal and the south shore.
Motion agreed to.
GRAVEL REPORT, ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY Motion No. 22-Mr. Chevrier:
For a copy of the report made by Mr. C. E. Gravel, consulting engineer, concerning the representations of south shore municipalities to the St. Lawrence seaway authority, together with the recommendations arising thereout.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 24-Mr. Bourgel:
For a copy of all telegrams, correspondence and other documents exchanged since July 1, 1957, between the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources or any officer of his department and the government of the province of Quebec, in connection with contributions to provinces for the purpose of assisting in the development of roads leading to resources.
Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: With the usual reservations, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservations expressed by the minister is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr. E. A. Winkler (Grey-Bruce) moved:: That in the opinion of this house the government should initiate a policy of standardizing the dates of beginning and terminating daylight saving time in the six time zones of this country.
He said: Down through the years the people of Canada have used different systems of

time, beginning with solar time. Following that, on the advice of Sir Sandford Fleming the country adopted the present system. Slightly less than half a century ago Sir Robert Borden, as a war measure introduced provision for daylight saving time. We know this was meant strictly as a wartime measure and we know, of course, that it was used during the second world war for the same purpose at the instance of the federal level of government. Since those years it has been generally accepted as a standard of time throughout the country.
It is difficult to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this system as it affects the entire country, but it is not the intention of my motion to promote such a discussion. And in speaking of the motion itself I may say it would be a simple matter to take a somewhat negative attitude with regard to it. It could be said, as indeed it has been, that it is unconstitutional, or matters could be left strictly as they are and thus remain in a disorganized state of confusion.
I hasten to admit that I have made one slight error, in stating that there are six time zones across the country. In actual fact there are seven; Newfoundland, Atlantic, eastern, central, mountain, Pacific and Yukon times.
I have discussed this matter with a learned constitutional authority, and have been advised that this matter may be legally discussed and dealt with at this level of government. However, in the motion itself I have used the word "initiate" which will eliminate the possibility of any embarrassment in the event that I have been mislead by my counsel. This will also serve to eliminate the possibility of embarrassment resulting from any action taken by this house or by the government in this regard. This would leave it open to this level of government to participate in discussions arising from this motion and any action resulting therefrom.
In reviewing the question of daylight saving time in Canada at the present time I note that it is controlled in four provinces. In one of these it is outlawed, while in the remaining provinces it is left to the discretion of the local government to determine its applicability. I do not have to remind the house or the government of the keen interest taken in this matter by the smaller towns and rural areas. Since members of municipal government have not the time to investigate annually the decisions of towns in their areas, it seems to me that the federal government could give valuable leadership in this matter as it has done so capably in other fields.

The Canadian federation of mayors and municipalities has petitioned the government sufficiently on this matter to warrant this consideration and perhaps to lead it to institute action. In a pamphlet entitled "A National Municipal Program" the Canadian federation of mayors and municipalities clearly states that the federation may represent the public interest at the national level in matters which are generally the responsibility of municipal government.
I should like to place on the record the most recent resolution on this subject proposed by the national federation of mayors and municipalities at its conference in 1958:
Whereas the adoption of daylight saving time each year by various municipalities across Canada, while other communities remain on standard time, causes great confusion throughout the whole country; and whereas the country-wide uniformity as to time and regulations would eliminate such confusion;
Therefore, be it resolved that the Canadian federation of mayors and municipalities request the dominion and provincial authorities to consider recommending the necessary legislation in order to bring about uniformity in daylight saving time regulations throughout the whole country.
It could be argued on this point that the words of that resolution are at considerable variance with the words of the motion. However, the intent is very similar, and in my opinion the achievement of uniformity in this regard would assist the Canadian economy in general.
It is a well known fact that any leadership in the establishment of uniformity has come about on the part of the railway association of Canada, which has a vital interest in the matter. Although there are many other facets of Canadian life to which this matter is equally vital, particularly business life and probably thousands of personal issues, I feel that a much greater degree of uniformity and satisfaction could be achieved were this matter to be dealt with by the federal government.
As I indicated, to a large degree the railway association governs the dates of commencement and termination of our system of daylight saving time after a general canvass of the larger cities and towns of the country. This, of course, is the way it must be on account of. the economic conditions in those larger centres, but there are smaller towns which have substantial industries and which are, in my opinion, discriminated against because of the lack of uniformity. Consequently in many instances there is a substantial business loss. It is not my intention to cause any discussion or any undue argument, as between urban and rural areas, but if we are realistic it is not difficult to realize that this system of daylight saving time has
Daylight Saving Time been in existence for a considerable period of time and will continue to be in existence for a further considerable period of time.
I have noted, Mr. Speaker, that the government at Westminster is considering the establishment of double daylight saving time. If adopted this will have to be established, of course, by the central government. I hasten to add that I do not propose to discuss the merits of this or any other system that is observed. I mention it because it will be controlled by the federal government of Great Britain. Further, in my efforts to learn how daylight saving time is administered in other countries I have found that it is controlled by the federal governments of 21 other countries, and possibly more, though this information was not available to me when I investigated this particular point.
It is not difficult to realize the serious situation in regard to the towns and villages to which I have made reference. I can assure the house that I am aware of several instances where there are from five to eight municipalities within a radius of from 15 to 20 miles, each of which terminates its observance of daylight saving time on a different date extending anywhere from Labour day week end to the last week end of October. Hon. members will realize immediately that this can be very important and costly, particularly with respect to transportation services, broadcasting schedules, business life and so on. I am thinking now particularly of the many commuters who go from town to town to earn their living.
As I mentioned, it is not only inconvenient but very costly. I feel that the answer to the problem as I have outlined it may very well lie within the terms of the resolution I have presented. This resolution if adopted would cause the cities, towns and villages, or anyone wishing to observe daylight saving time, to begin and terminate such observance on the same day. I would emphasize to the house that there is no compulsion in the terms of the resolution, that is for the observance of daylight saving time. There is no compulsion at all in the resolution, so it should have no bearing on the arguments that have been raised in the past, or likely to be raised in the future, by people in the rural areas. The regulation is simply aimed at uniformity, as I have stressed.
For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I have proposed this resolution. If there are other hon. members who wish to voice their views on this particular matter I am certainly prepared to hear and consider those views. I should like also to assure the house that as a result of the inquiries I have made amongst

Daylight Saving Time
the members I have found quite a measure of agreement, because certainly the people who live in the larger centres are in agreement and the other centres would merely incorporate this system in their plans.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, in an effort to curtail lengthy and useless debate, I would suggest that after other hon. members have voiced their sentiments we get the concurrence of the house in the motion.


Mr. Hubert Badanai (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, with due respect to the hon. member who sponsored this resolution, who hails from an eastern Ontario county and who may have some justification for advocating daylight saving in his own region, I must say that I could not agree with him that the government should initiate a policy of standardizing daylight saving time in all parts of Canada. The lakehead region does not need and does not want daylight saving, for the simple reason that the cities of Fort William and Port Arthur, and the district, are on eastern standard time. It could be said that we are in fact on daylight saving all the year round, by virtue of the fact that we are a thousand miles west of the region of the hon. member who moved this resolution.
In the district of Thunder Bay we are exactly one hour ahead of Toronto and Ottawa by sun time. The city councils and chambers of commerce of the twin cities have repeatedly gone on record against any proposal for the adoption of daylight saving. In 1941 daylight saving was made compulsory throughout Canada as a war measure and the two cities, though reluctantly, went along with it.
Our experience on that occasion was not good. We did not like it because during the months of May and June the sun did not set until 10 or 11 p.m., and it had the effect of keeping the school children up late. They simply would not go to bed while the sun was still up. Our farmers did not like it because it upset the milking routine of their cows, and I daresay even the cows did not like it. The only people who relished the extra hour of daylight were the golfers and the baseball fans. Now we have floodlighted playgrounds for baseball so, even in that regard there is no longer the necessity to provide extra daylight.
If any region wishes to implement daylight saving for the benefit of its communities, such as those in the constituency of the hon. member for Grey-Bruce (Mr. Winkler), all well and good. I would be the last to object to such a proposal; but to try to force daylight saving on districts where instead of a blessing it would be an unwanted menace, does not appear to me to be sound legislation.

The only justification for such a measure would be the production of beneficial results to the people concerned. So far as I know, no benefits could possibly be expected from the introduction of daylight saving time in places such as the lakehead, where we already are one hour ahead, by sun time, by comparison with most regions in Canada.
I submit that this resolution if adopted would mean blanket approval of a measure of doubtful value, and one which would represent an invasion of the right of people in various regions to determine for themselves whether or not they approve of daylight saving. The request for such a measure should come from the communities desirous of such legislation. I do not see how the hon. member for Grey-Bruce can reconcile his suggestion that all regions would not be obliged to follow this legislation. If such legislation were passed then, so far as I am concerned, this would be a policy for the whole of Canada to observe.
The hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge) brought the matter of daylight saving time to the attention of the house a couple of years ago. At that time his suggestion, if I remember correctly, was that the question should be referred to a federal-provincial conference. It seems to me that this is, after all, a question which comes under provincial jurisdiction. The provinces would be more conversant with the wishes of the people in the various sections of their domain.
I sincerely trust that this resolution, notwithstanding the good intentions of the mover -and I have every sympathy with him- will not pass this house. In other words, so far as I am concerned I will vote against it, and I would urge every member to do the same, especially if they live in regions, as I do, where the sun does not set for an hour after many people in Ottawa and Toronto have gone to bed.


Mr. M. W. Marlin (Timmins):: Mr. Speaker, I intend to be even briefer today than I normally am. I should like hon. members to pay close attention to the wording of this resolution. It reads:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should initiate a policy of standardizing the dates of beginning and terminating daylight saving time in the six time zones of this country.
Surely, Mr. Speaker, that is a policy that could be supported by every hon. member in this house. The people in this country who are interested in the problem of daylight saving time are divided into two groups, those who think it is a good thing and those who think it is a bad thing. Surely those who believe it is a good thing must agree that if we are going to have a good thing

it should start on the same day all across the country and finish on the same day. In so far as those who think it is a bad thing are concerned, then I say it is a good thing to have a bad thing start on the same day and finish on the same day all across the country.
I would suggest, therefore, in view of the fact that there have been some rumblings both inside and outside this house to the effect that we have tended, on occasion, to waste a little time, that this is one occasion when we can save time by passing this resolution and getting on with something else.


Mr. W. H. A. Thomas (Middlesex Wesl):: should like to make just a few brief remarks on this resolution. The use of daylight saving time is a matter of great concern to both the urban and rural people in the part of the country which I have the honour to represent, Middlesex West.
Generally speaking the urban people are strongly in favour of the use of daylight saving time during the summer months. By moving the working hours of the day ahead, a longer after-work period is established. That period can be used for working around the home, gardening or recreation. On the other hand the rural people or, at any rate, a great many of them are strongly opposed to the use of daylight saving time. It upsets their schedules for milking cows and doing the other farm work, work which is largely governed by sun time which is the nearest thing we can get to standard time.
In order to indicate the feeling of some of these people may I say that a short time ago I received a resolution from the Napier women's institute, which is a fine body of women in our constituency. I believe all hon. members of this house are familiar with the work of women's institutes in Canada. If not, I would say they are a national body organized to promote better living conditions in the rural areas of our country. The resolution covers a number of points of which I think the house should be aware when it is considering this matter. The resolution of the women's institute reads as follows:
Whereas our organization works for the best interests in our home and our country; and
whereas daylight saving time is causing ill feeling between rural and urban people and is increasing the tension of modern living in our homes; and
whereas it is upsetting to the health and habits of our children and teen-agers; and
whereas making adjustments to the new time is not conducive to early retiring or attention to studies because of prolonged daylight and is a drawback on fall mornings especially to rural school children; and
whereas it in no way increases productive power but has worked hardship on the farmer since a considerable amount of his work is governed by sun time; and
Daylight Saving Time
whereas hired help insist on working by the clock; and
whereas it has caused confusion in transportation circles where new schedules have had to be drawn to fit in with new times; and
whereas starting and ending daylight saving time dates have varied in different counties and added to the confusion;
Therefore be it resolved that our government through this resolution bring about the final abolition of daylight saving time.
The president of the association is Mrs. John A. McNeil and the secretary is Mrs. Wilbert Dinning. The resolution was moved by Mrs. John Clothier and seconded by Mrs. Bruce Hay.
In that resolution there are one or two points that might stand further elaboration. One is that which has to do with the setting up of transportation schedules. As hon. members know, high school children and a great many elementary school children go to school in buses. In that area a condition has arisen under which different times are being used in adjacent municipalities, and it becomes an extremely confusing matter to prepare bus schedules for the transportation of the school children. Of all the reasons why daylight saving time causes irritation to rural people, I think this one matter of the difficulty of setting up schedules for school buses is the most outstanding.
There is another matter touched on in this resolution, wherein it states that hired help insist on working by the clock. Much of a farmer's work must be done in those hours when conditions are right. This statement applies to haying, harvesting and certain other matters. When the hours of work for hired help are fixed on the basis of standard time, any change causes irritation between the hired help and the farm employer. For these various reasons the rural people are strongly opposed to the use of daylight saving time. They would prefer to remain on standard time.
As has been pointed out by the hon. member for Grey-Bruce in moving this resolution, the federal parliament of Canada has little jurisdiction over the setting of time zones, etc. He pointed out that we have seven different time zones in Canada. We could go into quite a long discussion on the reason for these zones, but I think we can spend our time to better advantage by getting right down to the authority which is responsible for setting the time in the municipalities.
I understand that about two years ago the province of Saskatchewan made the use of daylight saving time general all over that province but that, because they found so much dissatisfaction over the matter, the legislation was repealed in the following

Daylight Saving Time year. The province of Alberta have decided not to use daylight saving time in that province, though the municipalities on their own initiative may use it if they so desire.
I am going to quote briefly from chapter 90 of the revised statutes of Ontario, 1950, the definition of time act. It is a very short act and, as far as we in Ontario are concerned, it quite clearly outlines who has the authority to deal with this problem of daylight saving time in Ontario. Section 1 of the definition of time act reads as follows:
1. (1) Where an expression of time occurs in any act or in any rule of court, bylaw, deed or other instrument, heretofore or hereafter enacted or executed, or where any hour or other period of time is stated either orally or in writing, or any question as to a period of time arises, the time referred to or intended shall, unless it is otherwise specifically stated, be held to be "standard time".
(2)	As regards that part of Ontario which lies east of the meridian of ninety degrees west longitude, standard time shall be reckoned as five hours behind Greenwich time.
(3)	As regards that part of Ontario which lies west of that meridian, standard time shall be reckoned as six hours behind Greenwich time.
(4)	The lieutenant governor in council may from time to time make regulations, and may from time to time amend, modify, suspend, repeal and re-enact such regulations, varying the reckoning of standard time as defined by subsections 2 and 3.
(5)	Such regulations may authorize the Ontario municipal board to fix the timetables of all railways subject to its control, and to make such other orders as may be necessary for the convenient carrying out of the provisions of this act, in so far as may be necessary or convenient for carrying out the regulations.
Section 2 reads:
The expression "month", where it occurs or is stated as in section 1 mentioned, means a calendar month unless it is otherwise specifically stated.
Section 3 reads:
The hours of the day may in any locality be numbered in one series up to twenty four.
That is the whole of the definition of the time act as it appears in chapter 90 of the revised statutes of Ontario, 1950. Section 260 of the municipal act being chapter 243 of the revised statutes of Ontario, 1950 reads as follows:
Every council may pass such bylaws and make such regulations for the health, safety, morality and welfare of the inhabitants of the municipality in matters not specifically provided for by this act, as may be deemed expedient and are not contrary to law, and for governing the proceedings of the council, the conduct of its members and the calling of meetings.
This indicates that the matter of time could come under the authority of section 260 of the municipal act of Ontario.
I do not wish to take up more time, Mr. Speaker. There is no unanimity on this matter of using daylight saving time. There was a time when the majority of the population of Canada lived on the farms. That time

has gone. Now there are only about 12 per cent to 15 per cent of the working force of Canada employed on the farms of this country. Or course the people so employed will have to fit in as best they can if a preponderance of public opinion favours the use of daylight saving time. In our own area of southwestern Ontario there is much to be said for it and there is much to be said against it.
I believe this resolution is a good resolution, and is the best we can do in view of the fact that there are such strong and sharp differences of opinion concerning the use of daylight saving time. At least to make it uniform in certain areas would help to cut down some of the confusion caused by it.


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kooienay West):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to support, in principle and in spirit, this resolution, and I shall do so with very few words. I have made this suggestion over a period of years on the estimates of the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys (Mr. Comtois), and I must say that I am flattered to know that my ideas have had some effect upon Progressive Conservative members' thinking. That frequently occurs from this end of the house. If you read back in Hansard over the years you will find where we have advocated something; then finally it has begun to seep into the consciousness of our friends opposite; then someone is brave enough to advance it before the house, and some years later it may even become legislation.


Mr. Broome:: Would the hon. member agree that the flow also goes in the other direction sometimes?


Mr. Howard:: Very seldom, really.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I will agree, Mr. Speaker, that we are always subject to influence, but I am glad to say that in this group we are subject very slightly to bad influence.
When we are discussing this question it must be realized it is not a question of whether or not we like daylight saving time. I sympathize with the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Badanai) and the cows he was speaking for. Daylight saving, in effect, is almost general in Canada. That is what we have to realize. I know the attitude of farm people, and so on, but in my opinion it is about time we ended this ludicrous, self-imposed inconvenience. In my own district we have mountain time, Pacific time, standard time and daylight saving time, and you can imagine the confusion and unnecessary inconvenience caused in meeting buses or trains. Our trains run on standard time, our buses run partly on mountain time and partly on Pacific time, and so on. I think we should face the fact that generally speaking national time is the wish of the majority of Canadians

at this time, and we should do something to get agreement on what, in my opinion, is a very simple matter in view of all the circumstances.
I support the hon. member's resolution, in principle and in spirit, because he is trying to get federal government to initiate his proposal. This does not mean that the federal government will impose its will on the provinces. I think the federal government, under the direction and guidance of the genial Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys-who I am pleased to note, Mr. Speaker, visited my constituency last summer and had a most delightful picture of himself taken and placed in the papers-should initiate discussions on this matter, I suggest at a federal-provincial conference.
I did not intend, in speaking on this question over the years, to indicate that such a conference would be a large affair costing very much money; it is simply a question of a representative from each province meeting with representatives of the federal government, sitting down and dealing with the situation as it exists, and then coming to an agreement that this, as I said before, ludicrous, self-imposed inconvenience should end.
I think there is general support for this policy across Canada, perhaps with the exception of a few isolated and backwoods communities. I think all that is necessary is an application of common sense, with a spirit of co-operation, to remedy what to me seems a silly and unnecessary situation in this day and generation.
That is all I have to say, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. John Smith (Lincoln):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in the debate on this motion, I must say that in principle I do support legislation of some kind to provide a uniform system of daylight saving time across Canada, thereby eliminating the confusion existing today by having some municipalities on daylight saving and some not.
Daylight saving has been in force in many parts of Canada for many years. This indicates quite clearly that it has the support of many Canadians. However, I always feel that as members of this house we should not be too ready to put into legislative form ideas or opinions of our own without first being satisfied that we are doing what we believe to be the wish of the majority of our people.
Therefore, in order to give us a chance to study this motion more carefully, and on the understanding that we will have an opportunity to consider the matter further at some future time, I move that the debate be now adjourned.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.
Low Interest Loans to Small Business FINANCE



PROVISION OF LOW INTEREST LOANS TO SMALL BUSINESS

Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo) moved:: That in the opinion of this house the government should give urgent consideration to the provision of some means whereby low interest loans may be made available to small business.
He said: This resolution which I have the honour to present concerns a matter of special interest to a great many Canadians in all parts of the country. I know it is also a matter of great interest to many hon. members of this house and I will, therefore, endeavour to compress my remarks into a small space of time in order to provide as much time as possible for other hon. members who may wish to speak on this subject.
This resolution is couched in broad general terms for two reasons. The first reason is, of course, to enlarge the scope of its appeal so as to solicit the widest possible support. The second is to endeavour to have the debate confined as much as possible to the principle of the resolution. The essential factors in this motion are embodied in phrases which employ words of a relative character. Were more precise language used we might get into a debate on secondary issues. For example, we might become involved in a discussion of what is a small business, or what is meant by a long term loan, or what constitutes low interest rates. It is obvious that interest rates which might be considered low today would have been considered high a few years ago.
It is, of course, evident that if this resolution is ever implemented it will be necessary to bring forward legislation. When that legislation is presented, that will be the time to define these factors in specific terms. Certainly a small business will have to be defined, but the definition will have to be sufficiently flexible to cover different types of enterprises and different types of situations. The criteria will have to vary for different types of businesses; but whichever criteria are used, whether the number of employees or the volume of the turnover, or a combination of both, it will be impossible to escape borderline cases. However, before this legislation can be drawn up it is necessary to debate the principle of providing long term low interest loans to small businessmen, to establish the need for such loans and to solicit ideas as to the best means of attaining this objective and as to the scope of the legislation required. By affording us an opportunity to pool and clarify our ideas on this subject this debate can serve a very useful purpose.
As far as the principle of the resolution is concerned, it is simply an extension of the

Low Interest Loans to Small Business principle already recognized and incorporated in legislation governing the farm loan board, the fisheries loan board, the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the industrial development bank. I think we would all agree that the backbone of our economy is not the big corporations but the vast number of independent small enterprises, many of which are family enterprises; that the security and well being of our nation demands that these small businesses be encouraged, and that their actual and potential capacity be developed to the maximum.
The nature of most of our provincial economies is such that they do not lend themselves to the operations of large companies but, rather, to small enterprises serving local needs. This is particularly true in the Atlantic provinces and I believe in the prairie provinces as well. The greater the number of small and prosperous enterprises, the sounder will be our national economy. A community which has 50 small industries each employing 20 persons has a far more stable economy than a community dependent on a single industry employing 1,000 people. Not only is the small operator better able to adapt to changing conditions, but he is also much closer to his employees. Moreover, the more small enterprises there are, the more opportunities we have of developing leadership, initiative and independence; qualities of character which are great national assets.
Unfortunately, however, the law of the jungle too often prevails in the business world. The large devour the small. All too often in the Atlantic provinces we have seen big corporations buy up local businesses and then close them down, or else undercut them until they are forced out of existence. The small businessman is in a particularly difficult position in times of tight money, when he has very little means of protecting himself against the unfair position into which he is forced through no fault of his own.
On the other hand, in times of tight money the big corporations can fall back on alternative sources of financing; often they can get credit from the chartered banks or, if not, they can fall back on the flotation of bond issues. The small businessman cannot do this because the size of his loan is too small to interest the investment houses.
If the little fellow is to survive, some source of long term low interest credit must be made available to him. The industrial development bank is meeting only a small part of this need, since its loans are restricted primarily to manufacturing industries. The majority of our small businesses-our retail stores, drug stores and service industries-do


not qualify for loans from the industrial development bank because they are not primarily manufacturing concerns.
It may be argued that it is the function of the chartered banks to look after the financial needs of this type of small enterprise, but the chartered banks are not meeting this need either, on anything near the scale required. In times of tight money most chartered banks refuse to grant credit on the scale required by the small operator. Even when the small businessman does secure a loan from a chartered bank it is not very satisfactory, because usually it is a very short term loan and payable on demand. This demand hangs over the head of the small businessman like the sword of Damocles, and for that reason many operators who might be able to get short term loans from chartered banks are reluctant to take them for the purpose of expansion and improvement, for fear that the banks may demand repayment of the loans and thus cripple the small operators or put them out of business.
At very best a loan payable on demand requires all the profits of the business for the next three, four or five years, as the case may be, to retire the loan. In a case where the owner has died and left income payable out of profits to his widow and minor children, then the son or sons or whoever is managing the business would be afraid to take a short term loan from a chartered bank because if they were forced to repay it there would be no income to pay the widow and the minor dependents.
To develop their actual and potential capacity to the fullest degree it is essential that small businesses plan an orderly program of expansion and improvement over a period of years, as is done by big corporations such as the Canadian Pacific Railway or the Aluminum Company of Canada. To do this they must be provided with capital advances that can be budgeted for and repaid' in orderly instalments over the lifetime of the improvements.
When it comes to considering the means by which this can be best accomplished, one naturally would wish to explore the possibility of using agencies already in existence. The one that comes first to mind is the industrial development bank. However, even if the scope of the industrial development bank were extended to include other types of small businesses it is doubtful if this would be a suitable agency. Even in its own restricted field the industrial development bank, in my opinion, is not operating in the best interests of the economy as a whole.
The 1959 report of the industrial development bank indicates that only 14 loans have

been made to the province of Newfoundland since confederation in 1949. In the 15 years of its existence the industrial development bank has made loans to 2,866 businesses. Of this figure 1,718 or 60 per cent of the total were made to businesses in Ontario and Quebec. Only 239 or 8 per cent of these loans went to business in the Atlantic provinces, and only 275 or 10 per cent to firms in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.
Last year, 1959, was a year of tight money. The total loans made by the industrial development bank in 1959 amounted to $30,579,000. Of that sum $17,447,000 or 59 per cent went to firms in Ontario and Quebec. Only $2.5 million or 8 per cent of the total went to the Atlantic provinces and $3,043,000 or roughly 10 per cent went to the provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Thus we see that in a year of tight money 82 per cent of the loans made by the industrial development bank went to areas where inflationary pressures were already high and where unemployment was low, but only 18 per cent went to regions where unemployment was extremely high and where there were no inflationary pressures at all.
Actually, in a time of tight money, in my opinion it should be the other way round. The industrial development bank or a similar agency should act as a balance wheel to inject flexibility into our economy and make money available to those areas where development can take place without increasing the inflationary pressure on the economy as a whole.


Mr. Caihers:: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. member permit a question? Does the hon. gentleman have any figures on how many loans were applied for from the province of Newfoundland?


Chesley William Carter: No, I am afraid I do not have that information. However, I do not think it is relevant to the argument I am making at this time, because the only relevant figures are those concerning loans that have actually been made. If it is true, as I have said, that only 14 loans have been made in Newfoundland in a 10-year period and if, let us say, 50 had been requested, that would put the industrial development bank in an even worse light than that in which it is put as a result of the argument I am advancing.


Cecil A. (Tiny) Cathers: But if the industrial people of Newfoundland do not want and do not apply for loans, how can they get them?


Chesley William Carter: I am not saying they do not apply for them. I cannot give the hon. gentleman those figures. However, apparently they are not applied for by people in Saskatchewan, Manitoba or any of the other Atlantic
Low Interest Loans to Small Business provinces either. The only place where they are applied for on any scale is in the central provinces of Ontario and Quebec.


Mr. Chown:: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. gentleman a question? Is there an industrial development bank for the province of Newfoundland?


Chesley William Carter: There is no branch.


Gordon Campbell Chown: Does the hon. member advocate one like they have in the province of Manitoba?


Chesley William Carter: I think it would be better if we did have one. I notice that on the last page of the annual report of the industrial development bank for last year it is stated that there is a regional office for British Columbia, one for Alberta, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories combined, one for Manitoba and Saskatchewan combined, one for Ontario, one for Quebec, one for New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island combined, and one for Newfoundland and Nova Scotia combined.


Gordon Campbell Chown: I think the hon. gentleman misunderstood my question. I asked if there was a provincial industrial development bank under the Liberal government in the province of Newfoundland, as there is in the province of Manitoba where we have a Progressive Conservative government?


Chesley William Carter: We have an industrial loan board in the province of Newfoundland, if that is what you want to know, but that is not what we are discussing in this debate. I do not see what relevance the hon. member's question has to the resolution we are discussing at the present time.


Gordon Campbell Chown: A provincial agency can make loans also.


Mr. Habel:: Why don't you make your own speech?


Chesley William Carter: My hon. friend will have lots of time to rise and make his own speech after I sit down.


Gordon Campbell Chown: He is reading his speech.


Chesley William Carter: I said, Mr. Speaker, I did not consider that the industrial development bank, with its small number of branches dispersed across Canada, would be a suitable agency, even if its scope were enlarged, to give this service. Also, our experience with loans to fishermen indicates that the chartered banks would not be very anxious to enter this field, and even if they did they would not function very satisfactorily. In my opinion what is required is the creation of a new special agency along the lines of that which exists now in the United States, with branches

Low Interest Loans to Small Business widely dispersed throughout Canada after the pattern of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Such an agency could take over the function of the industrial development bank, which could then be abolished. It might also be possible for this new agency to administer loans to farmers and fishermen; it might also be possible to combine it with Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for the administration of building loans.
The operative word of this resolution is "consideration"; that the government should give urgent consideration to the provision of some means of providing long term low interest loans. No doubt the government has already given consideration to this matter. The Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) has already shown that he is aware of this problem. During the 1957 election he was quoted by the Montreal Star of May 9, 1957 as saying:
This is a country of small business. Of the 37,400 manufacturing establishments in Canada 35,110 employ 99 persons or less. Of these, some 17,000 have fewer than five employees.
There are 150,000 separate retailers in Canada, and 143,000 are independent-These small businesses are the backbone of industry.
The quotation goes on:
The Conservative leader said these concerns were not getting a fair share of government contracts. Nor were they receiving the technical assistance or special consideration in government financial policy which they needed to be able to compete with big business.
A Conservative government would set up a committee of cabinet ministers, small business representatives, economists and other experts to develop a policy favouring establishment of new businesses and expansion of existing small businesses, he declared.
On May 18 the Prime Minister is quoted in the Calgary Herald as having said:
The tight money policy has dealt "a mortal blow" to small industries, and a Conservative government would enact legislation similar to that in the United States which would assist small business.
During the 1958 election the Prime Minister was quoted in the Charlottetown Guardian of February 28, 1958, as saying:
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.
There is no doubt about the need for such legislation, and it is important to the well-being and security of our national economy that this legislation be brought down as quickly as possible.

In view, then, of the personal interest of the Prime Minister in this matter, may we hope that consideration will give way to positive action at a very early date.


Mr. G. H. Aiken (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: Mr. Speaker, with certain qualifications, which I will mention later, I will state now that I agree with the motion placed before the house. I believe we all agree that in principle the government has no business in the field of lending money. That is a job for lending institutions and banks. When the government lends money, either directly or indirectly by loans or by guaranteeing loans, it is using the funds of some of its citizens to lend to others. Therefore, before loans of any nature of public funds can be justified we have to ask ourselves whether the particular loan meets with the wishes of our people and whether it is in the national interest. However, over the years we have found governments entering the field of direct and indirect loans to different classes of persons throughout the country.
I should like to look for a few minutes at the situation under which this parliament has authorized loans to be made, and try to find out the underlying basis for each type of loan. Undoubtedly the greatest use of public funds for loans in the last two and one half years has been in connection with housing. We have authorized the expenditure of $1 billion of public funds for loans under the National Housing Act, and at the present time we are being asked for a further sum of $500 million. Make no mistake about it, Mr. Speaker; in my humble opinion the greatest single factor in maintaining the economy in a stable position in the past two years has been the housing loans. This has been done at a time when a recession of serious proportions seemed imminent and, in my opinion, the program undertaken by the government and authorized by parliament has had the effect which it was intended to bring about.
Now, I think we must examine how we justify such a loan from public funds. First, it should meet a social need of the people for decent houses to live in; second, it should provide markets for national products. Third, it should provide work when work is needed. Fourth, it should give a boost generally to our economy when such a boost is needed. In my opinion, in all particulars, the objectives have been met.
There is another type of loan from public funds which has been popular, and that is agricultural support prices and deficiency payments. The basic reason, I believe, that these loans are authorized is to maintain in a stable position a national occupation which it is desirable to maintain.

We have had a further type of loan, advances for home-stored grain in a previous year, and this year guaranteed bank loans for grain producers to meet temporary difficulties arising from their inability to thresh their grain. In this particular case the basic reason, as I see it, was to meet an emergency situation in a business from which this country derives a tremendous amount of foreign dollars.
Another means we have used to make loans, as has already been mentioned by other hon. members, is through the industrial development bank. I do not intend to enlarge on the comments made. We know that, here again, the bank was set up to assist and encourage the development of manufacturing industries in Canada which was considered a matter of national importance and one which affected the whole country. So, we could go through the list of situations in which public funds have been lent to different classes of people.
In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, they break down into a number of causes which I should like to enumerate. I feel that wherever public funds are being lent to people in various parts of the country, the following situations should exist: First there should be an urgent or emergency situation, overriding the general rule about loans, which is one of national interest; second, I feel that loans must be made to groups to whom the government, speaking as a whole, has an obligation. Third, I feel that such loans should be a substitute for the government directly entering a particular field. Finally, there should be an inability of lending institutions to meet the situation.
I should like now to apply these tests to the resolution which we have under consideration. It relates to small businesses. I do not intend, as did the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter) who introduced the resolution, to attempt to define small business, to define what low interest rates are, and so forth. I accept his invitation to speak in general terms on the resolution in connection with small business. There are cases where there is not an emergency situation which the government has met by other means than direct or indirect loans. There are two matters which the government has undertaken which, in my opinion, indicated the intent of the government to help small businesses. I come back, to the housing program which stimulated small businesses by creating a better atmosphere in this country. This program created opportunities for sales by a lot of small businesses which were directly or indirectly connected with housing. This is one feature of Canadian life which runs all across the country. Indeed, this program gave all types of small business a boost and gave them
Low Interest Loans to Small Business what I feel was a better opportunity than direct loans because it created an atmosphere where loans, in a good many cases, were not required.
This program created what is of greater advantage, an atmosphere in which small business could prosper. As I mentioned, this program was adopted at a time when the profits of a good many small businesses seemed to be dwindling. These housing loans, of course, directly affected the lumbering and building trades, but they were also of concern to a good many workers who are not directly connected with these industries. They also benefited all those with whom small business people dealt.


An hon. Member:: All?


Gordon Harvey Aiken: I submit, yes; they did affect indirectly all of those with whom small business people dealt.
There is a section that concerns small business which was set up in the Department of Trade and Commerce in September, 1958. This was another effort to create an atmosphere of prosperity for the small businessmen rather than come to their direct aid with loans. Now, the job of this small business section was to improve opportunities for small businesses in Canada. Frankly, we have not heard too much about the work of this section. I have made some inquiries and I find that they are, in fact, doing a tremendous amount of work to which little publicity has been given. They seem to be carrying out the job for which they were set up.
We talked about this subject on July 16 last. At that time the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill) indicated the reasons which prompted the setting up of the small business section, and he indicated what its job would be. As I say, he reported to parliament on July 16 last, and I am hoping that he will report again at this session concerning the progress made.
The minister indicated that the terms of reference for the small business section were to act as a clearing house in referring inquiries of small businesses to the appropriate department of the Canadian government or provincial and municipal governments or various other organizations; second to compile and distribute bulletins and reports on topics of general interest to small businesses, including information on government procurement; third, to assist small businesses on request to obtain statistical, technical and other information on Canadian production and marketing problems; fourth, to undertake studies concerning small businesses, particularly for the guidance of government in the development of new policies in this field and
822	HOUSE OF
Low Interest Loans to Small Business for background material for dealing more effectively with the problems of small businesses. Finally, in the course of its work, the section was intended to consult and cooperate with educational institutions, representative business organizations and other private organizations.
These two measures come to mind and there are others which have contributed to creating a better atmosphere for small businesses in Canada. In fact there was such a considerable success in this program that many business people commenced to improve their facilities, to put on extensions to present buildings and to borrow from lending institutions for this purpose. This process created a demand for credit which, along with the other features, used up a great deal of the available credit and sent up the interest rate. I know that other arguments will be advanced from one place and another as to what caused the interest rate to go up. I am not an economist but I do know that when business is good, people are encouraged to expand, to grow, to go into an additional line, to buy larger stocks, and to improve their stores and shops in such a way that they want to borrow money. In borrowing they use up, to a large extent, the available credit facilities and they have done so.
I want to speak for a minute or two about the businesses which did not benefit from this general upsurge and we must admit that there were some, because all businesses did not improve and have not improved. I think they fall into three classes. The first class is those who were already in debt and who found it difficult to get out of debt, even with an improved atmosphere in the business world. Second, there were those who did not improve their position because of the nature of their business. Third, there were those to whom normal credit facilities are denied. I think these are the people to whom this resolution ought to apply. These three classes of people have not benefited by the general improvement in the business situation in Canada. There may be those among the small businessmen who could not "make it go" in any case and those are the difficult type that must be dealt with in considering any general small business loans. In every instance it is a case of applying the rules for each application; but I think we must consider class by class the person to whom a small business loan would apply.
By way of example, I should like to mention the case of a group of persons in whom I have had a continuing interest and on whose behalf I have spoken a good many times in this house. I think their situation


points up a class of people who do not fall into the group who have benefited under the improved business situation. I refer to the operators of tourist establishments. To apply the rules that I have already mentioned:	Is there an urgent situation in
relation to these people? Owing to lack of funds, many tourist operators are not making in their facilities the improvements that are absolutely necessary if they are to keep up with the standard of building and improvement which is being carried on in competing nations. I think particularly of the nation to the south of us. There are great improvements in facilities at border points. We run into situations wherein people heading out for Canada often do not arrive here.
Tourism is the third largest producer of foreign currency in Canada. Notwithstanding the fact that we had in this country in 1958 a direct revenue of at least $394 million from people travelling in Canada from beyond our borders, we had a substantial travel deficit. This is increasing. I might say in passing, Mr. Speaker, that we are hopeful that 1959 will have seen an improvement in the situation. Figures compiled for the first nine months of 1959 indicate that there was an increase of 10 per cent in tourist revenues in this country. I think a great deal of it was brought about by the royal visit because a good many people came to this country who normally would not have done so. I think right here in Ottawa one of the most significant things was the changing of the guard which took place on the lawn of parliament hill last summer and which I understand is to be enlarged and extended. A great many of the people who are visiting the country are greatly attracted to a display of colour such as that which is put on each day during the summer months. In 1958, however, the travel deficit increased by $31 million to a deficit with all countries of $193 million.
In fairness, however, I think we must remember that a travel deficit is created in one main way, namely that more people from Canada are travelling abroad and spending money there, than are coming to Canada. While at first glance this situation seems to be "a bad thing," the fact is that it indicates a prosperity in Canada which encourages and permits Canadians to travel abroad more extensively than ever before. The figures which are included in the travel deficit also include purchases which Canadians have made while abroad, and that factor makes quite a difference in the picture. However, I believe we are not securing a fair share of the world-wide increase in travel and that our facilities have much to do with the situation.

The second test that I have set out is whether it is in the national interest that the tremendous revenue of foreign dollars that we take in from this particular trade should be maintained to its fullest extent in our general world trade picture. I truly believe that it is a matter of urgent national interest.
There has been some talk of putting our house in order for the centennial celebration in 1967. I can think of nothing more urgent when we invite people to come to our country to help us celebrate our hundredth year of existence as a country than to have in this country facilities of which we shall be proud and which we can without any hesitation ask our visitors to accept.
The next question is whether it is justified, to keep government out of private business. Applying this test to the tourist trade as well, I find that some governments in other countries directly enter into the tourist business in order to sustain and to encourage it, and in order to provide facilities which are apparently beyond the reach of their own citizens and those people who care to invest in that country. This intervention is most undesirable in our country. The alternative is to aid and support private interests who are willing to take the risk and are anxious to do so and put in the hard work that is necessary. However, even here in Canada we find that governments-federal, provincial and even municipal-are entering into this field. I think that is not a desirable thing. I think the alternative is to support private interests rather than to have government enter into the field directly.
We know it exists, particularly in the case of provinces where camping grounds are provided on a grand scale. I will admit that camping grounds are a good thing for attracting visitors to this country. Some of our tourist operators perhaps feel they are being undercut. But most of them feel that as long as they bring people to this country, people who cannot afford to stay at a luxury hotel but who can come and bring their small families and camp in one of these camping grounds, then when they come back in a few years when they are established in their business and the children are a little older they will stay at tourist hotels, motels and other accommodations.
The temptation of the provincial governments is to expand beyond just providing camping facilities and go into the restaurant business and the outfitting business with regard to these camps. It is quite a temptation, and in one or two cases the province has come into it and-


Mr. Benidickson:: Are they doing that in eastern Ontario?
Low Interest Loans to Small Business


Gordon Harvey Aiken: I hope not. There are two cases in Ontario though where the provincial government has built accommodation for restaurants, and they have resisted the temptation to the extent that they have left the operation of these places to private interests. But it is one of those things where as long as the private interests are not providing accommodation, the government feels that they must.
The same thing applies to our national parks. I must admit that so far I have heard no direct criticism, and being a member of the mines, forests and waters committee, I may say that we did make a very close check of the national parks. We found that in several instances there had been, at times in the past, a temptation to provide these facilities which to some extent was resisted. I think it must be resisted as far as possible, because it takes away the possibility of private persons setting up these places. It is very difficult for a person with a small business, with limited capital and no ability to get any, to go into competition with any government, provincial or federal.
The final test that I would apply is the question of the ability of lending institutions to provide normal lending facilities. The reason that the tourist operator has been unable to secure loans from normal institutions is that the business is considered risky by most financial institutions. It is risky because of a short season. It is risky because of the danger of bad weather, a change in operation or poor operation. As a general rule, banks and lending institutions place tourist operations at the bottom of their list. There are so many people who are looking for loans in various fields that unless you come high on the list your chances are never very good.
Just by way of comparison, the tourist business provides to this country almost as much foreign currency as the sale of wheat. It comes after the sale of wheat and is just as important. Yet, quite properly, we spend much of our time in this house attempting to keep our wheat production and income in balance and to keep agriculture generally on an even keel. I often wonder why parliament does give the majority of its attention to one type of business and practically ignores another which is in difficulties and which is getting no assistance. I had thought at different times that perhaps the people who were interested in tourist businesses did not yell loud enough in the house. I have been trying to do so, but I have to admit, Mr. Speaker, that it is quite a job to keep up with such hon. members as the hon. members for Acadia (Mr. Horner), for Athabasca (Mr. Bigg), and for Rosthern (Mr. Nasserden), and about forty others in this
824	HOUSE OF
Low Interest Loans to Small Business house, who keep the problems of their constituents before us. I do think, however, that we must give consideration to the provision of loans for small businesses which do not come within the classes I have mentioned, and to that extent I do support the resolution.


Mr. Macdonnell:: I wonder if I could ask the hon. member for Parry Sound-Muskoka (Mr. Aiken) a question. I have listened to his speech with great interest and, as he knows, I am very interested in the welfare of the tourist industry myself. Has he any figures showing the extent to which competent people in the tourist industry have been refused credit? I know that the banks are always providing us with lists of the large numbers of small loans which they have made, and I wonder if the hon. member can throw any light on the actual situation. I fully recognize the importance of the tourist industry, and I am wondering to what extent it is being held back for that reason.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: I have no figures on the question of the people who have been refused loans. That is something which is very difficult to get. I practise law myself in a tourist area, and I know from my own experience that almost all the loans for which we applied on behalf of tourist operators were turned down. But as far as having actual figures is concerned, I am afraid I have not got them for the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell).


William Moore Benidickson: There was some evidence before the mines committee last year about that.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I rise to express the support of this party for the principle, the purpose and the spirit of this resolution. From previous debates in this house I am sure a good many hon. members will realize that the C.C.F. has always been particularly concerned with the problems of small business, whether that business be operating in industry or in retailing or in services.
We recognize that small business is a thread in the social fabric that must be kept strong if we are going to retain a democratic form of society. It is for that reason that the C.C.F. over a number of years has, within the caucus itself and within other groups in our movement across Canada, conducted study groups and discussed the problems of small businesses, whether they were in industry or in retailing or in services, with various other groups in one place in Canada and another.

Since the last interesting debate on this question, which I think was early in July of last year, I have had an opportunity, like the rest of the hon. members here, to return to my constituency and meet a good number of business people. I have had the opportunity to meet groups in Nelson, Trail, Ross-land, and other smaller communities in my district. I believe in getting in touch with the people in the various groups in the community and finding out what their particular problems are. I found in almost every case when I had discussions with them that the particular problem at the present time with regard to small business in Canada is its inability to get a suitable type of long term, low interest credit.
I have had some very interesting illustrations brought to my attention. For instance, I met a young man in the contracting business who had returned from overseas after the second world war, had worked for the construction industry and, finally as the result of his ability and initiative, had gathered together a little capital and formed a company which was particularly concerned with contracting for the application of asphalt on the highways which are being built in British Columbia at the present time. Incidentally, these highways are mesmerising some people as to the delinquencies of the social credit government of British Columbia. However, this young man went into business and was getting along very well in a small way, becoming quite well known, fulfilling small contracts and doing an excellent job comparable to those done by the large construction firms usually imported from the United States to do this work. Suddenly he was faced with this difficult credit situation. Another contract came to him, good as gold, one might say. He had the experience, he had the equipment and he had the contract. He went to the bank to borrow, having in the bank at the same time $10,000 worth of this government's bonds, and the bank manager said to him: I am very sorry, but in the circumstances the maximum I can let you have is $500, and you can sell your bonds.


An hon. Member:: Oh.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Did I hear someone say "ah" or was he yawning? What I have said is quite correct. That is one situation I encountered. I have run into similar situations in a somewhat different form involving men connected with the lumber industry in a small way, small logging contractors and so on, in addition to retailers and those who perform other services.
There is no question about it, one of the most serious needs of small business in Canada at this time is the opportunity to obtain

long term low interest credit on somewhat the same basis as we are providing under the farm credit act. This problem is general in Canada. Last year we had representatives of the retailers association appearing before various caucuses of the house-I understand that after they met the C.C.F. caucus they went on to meet other groups-am I correct?-


William Moore Benidickson: The other way around.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: -in order to discuss their problems with them, and I am sure the majority of hon. members here received resolutions from a large number of small business people in their constituencies urging amendments to the Combines Investigation Act and, in particular, urging this government to take some action to institute immediate financial aid for small business, meaning by that, of course, long term low interest credit.
In addition to the small business people themselves being very concerned about this, we find that the royal commission on price spreads of food products was interested in the problems of small business in Canada and also recognized the part small business plays in our economy. Personally, I feel concerned about this, as do other members of this group, because we believe, as I said before, that small business plays an effective and necessary role in a democratic society. We are concerned with this matter just as we are concerned with the maintenance of the economic family farm. These units in our society make a great contribution to maintaining its democratic structure, its versatility and its flexibility. In order to indicate the interest of the royal commission on price spreads in this question I wish to quote briefly from the report, because these gentlemen made a very lengthy study of this problem. I wish to quote from page 59, volume 1 of the report directly beneath the heading "The Problem of the Small Business Firm":
We have pointed out that we have been unable to discover evidence to support the view that the increase in the size of the large firms in the food industries, which has accompanied the general expansion of the market, has resulted in reduced costs and a tendency to reduce prices to consumers.
This is regardless of the fact that a good many people are of the opinion that these large monolithic food distributing mammoths and monopolies are doing a favour to the people of this country. The report goes on to say:
We are disposed to explain this partly in terms of the tendency for large firms to compete in offering services rather than reduction in prices. We find no substantial basis to suppose that if
Low Interest Loans to Small Business the major firms in the food industries continue to increase in size this will operate in the direction of reducing prices to consumers.
I think that is a very significant paragraph. And now, if I may, I will read one other paragraph which appears at the conclusion of this particular phase of the report.
At the same time we are concerned about the narrowing opportunities which exist in our economy for individual initiative outside the framework of the large corporations.
So are the members of this group concerned about the narrowing opportunities available. Then the report goes on to say:
The emphasis we have intended in our report is on the widest possible distribution of the gains from efficiency and it is not our wish to suggest procedures which would place on consumers the burden of maintaining high cost firms. Nevertheless, we feel that in order to provide a greater measure of equality of opportunity for the small and efficient firm-
I may point out that there are two things which members of this group do not support: one is laziness, and the other is inefficiency. Let no one think we do. The report goes on:
-in order to provide a greater measure of equality of opportunity for the small and efficient firm, and for the enterprising new firm, greater solicitude should be shown for the small organization and for businesses struggling to become established. In the concluding section of our recommendations we refer to deficiencies in the statistics on small firms, and we recommend that more complete information on the operations of small enterprises should be obtained and made available. This is the first and necessary step in devising action appropriate to the needs of the small business.
It is very strange, but I think it was the session before last when one of the members of this group, the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch), speaking on this question suggested the very same thing. He put forward the very same proposal, and here we have a royal commission coming to the same conclusion after an extensive investigation; the same conclusion as was reached by this little, valiant band a year previously.
Now I want to say a word on the second volume of this report. These royal commissions are an advantage, because if we read their reports we find they offer evidence and reach conclusions which provide us with guidance as to the course of action we should pursue. I think that guidance is strongly given in support of the resolution which has been moved by the hon. member the name of whose constituency I cannot pronounce, the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter). On page 65 of this report, I find the following:
The unattached independent food retailer has a place in food distribution which can be attributed to the particular advantages that he may have.
And there are advantages. Personally I like going to the small individual store, and I feel

Low Interest Loans to Small Business that other hon. members agree with me. I do not like this mass buying and mass form of distribution. I like to go to a store where
I	know the owner, and have a chat with him and then, when I get on the rocks in the wintertime because I cannot sell a few fence posts or something, I can get credit.


An hon. Member:: Oh, come on.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: That is what I have been used to, and I appreciate services of that kind. The report continues:
Many of these advantages may also exist for retailers in voluntary chains. Independent stores have been able to compete effectively with the chains particularly in the less densely populated areas where the volume of sales has not been sufficient for efficient chain operation.
In areas where they compete directly with the chains, they are able to provide certain types of services such as:
(1)	providing a degree of personal attention to the shopper not possible in a larger organization:
(2)	offering telephone service, charge accounts and delivery service; and
(3)	in some instances staying open to serve customers in evenings and on holidays (particularly where the workers in the store are members of the owner's family). These advantages are attributable to a considerable extent to the fact that the independent store operator, may be the owner, the manager and the worker in the store along with members of his family.
I am sure all of us know a good many who fall within that category. I continue:
In addition to providing the above services, he has greater flexibility and can adjust prices quickly and in some instances can even buy products advantageously. There also appears to be a place for independent stores handling food specialties, although the potential extent of overall operations here does not appear to be great.
I quoted these extracts from volumes I and
II	of the report of the royal commission on price spreads of food products because in the first place I think they indicate clearly the important function that the small businessman-and here particularly we are dealing with retailers-plays in our economy, the service they render, and it also indicates the validity of the argument of those who make representations and proposals for the government to take some action along the lines suggested in this resolution.
I always believe it is wise to keep the house up to date on the thinking of hon. members of this party in this corner of the chamber in order that our position will be understood. I want to place on the record the C.C.F. policy with respect to small business as it was placed on the record by the hon. member for Vancouver East on July 1, 1958, as reported at page 1812 of Hansard:
1.	Broaden the class of loans under the industrial development bank to include a broad coverage of non-industrial enterprises such as the service industries, distributive trades, etc.
[Mr. Herridge .1
2.	Increase the capitalization of the industrial development bank to accommodate increased lending, investing and guaranteeing of loans.
3.	Amend the Bank Act to allow chartered banks to lend money or make advances to qualifying small business upon the security, mortgage or hypothecation of real or immovable property. May I say that this would be in addition to the special exceptions which have already been made in this respect under the National Housing Act, 1954, and the Farm Improvement Loans Act.
4.	Guarantee term loans by chartered banks to small business against losses up to 10 per cent of the total amount of such loans made by any bank. May I add there that the figure of 10 per cent was chosen by our group because the same percentage is operative under similar guarantees, for example, with respect to farm improvement loans.
5.	Enable chartered banks to sell mortgages securing such term loans to the industrial development bank in the same way in which the banks are enabled to sell housing mortgages to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Furthermore, ensure that banks can receive advances from the Bank of Canada using such mortgages as eligible security in the same way in which they can receive advances from the Bank of Canada using housing mortgages as security.
I briefly put those five points on the record so hon. members would know our policy with respect to small business. Once again I urge the government to take some action.
Last year toward the conclusion of the debate on this question the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill) spoke and if I remember correctly he suggested that government policy in establishing the small business section of the Department of Trade and Commerce would be to provide a clearing house of ideas and also to provide reports and bulletins for small business in Canada, to make available the necessary statistics, a course of action we advocated two years previously and which the royal commission also spoke of as being necessary. He went on to say it would also have the purpose of undertaking studies and consulting with various educational institutions and other groups with a view to assisting the welfare and interests of the small business people in this country.
I think the mover of the resolution would agree that we hope to hear from the minister before the debate concludes this evening as to how far the government has gone with respect to the implementation of the purposes of the small business section of the minister's department. It is obvious that there has not been any effective action taken to date or otherwise we would not travel around the country and hear a considerable percentage of the small businessmen complaining of their difficulties as a result of-I do not like the term "tight money"; I dislike the word "tight" and I think the description is incorrect-a shortage of cash and credit. They would not be complaining about the situation if the small business section and its activities had done

something to promote their interest since the minister spoke last year. In conclusion I want once again to emphasize our concern with this important group in our society and their welfare, and say that we anticipate an excellent speech from the Minister of Trade and Commerce before the debate on this resolution concludes this evening, and to hear the results of the high hopes he raised in the house for this session when he made his speech last July.


Mr. R. S. MacLellan (Inverness-Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to rise in this debate to speak on this resolution because this is a matter which I have always considered of paramount importance and one which I think should have the fullest support of this house and the government. I also find that I am in agreement with the principle of the resolution and with almost all that has been said thus far in the debate as I am sure most hon. members are.
Certainly, as far as the question of whether or not the government of Canada is encroaching upon any private domain by entering into the field of special credit assistance to small business is concerned, I believe everyone will agree it is a time-honoured principle that the first and primary duty of government in credit assistance is to help out in the situation where the ordinary doors of capital are not open to a borrower.
Where there are sectors in the economy which do not have access to bank loans, mortgage company loans and other credit sources, I think it is the place of any government to step in to fill that credit gap. That has been the principle behind legislation extending credit to farmers, fishermen and other sectors of the economy. Prior to the development of farmer's and fishermen's credit facilities it was difficult for those groups to obtain loans.
Private capital seeks out the borrower who seems to represent the best risk, who can put up security which is most easily liquefied in case of default of the loan and, above all, seeks a loan which requires the least supervision and administration. For this obvious reason a businessman or salaried person in an urban centre who enjoys a relatively more stable income and who resides close to the lender's vaults finds it much easier to borrow than the rural dweller. A mortgage company or bank which can lend in the city looks askance at the farmer or fisherman whose security for a loan is not so easily liquefied in case of default and whose income is subject to the whims and perils of the weather, the market, or the other thorns of fate that beset the rural dweller.
Low Interest Loans to Small Business
This credit gap was partially closed by the legislation which provided bank guarantees for farmers and fishermen and by similar legislation. We have this type of help from both federal and provincial governments. Under the same principle we have government intervention to meet a gap in the credit facilities offered by private capital for house building. The National Housing Act was passed to provide funds for good housing in every part of Canada. Before the institution of this form of credit the home owner himself had to have at least 40 per cent of the cash requirement to build a house. Private mortgage fund sources were limited either by law or by practice to 60 per cent of the value of the property which would act as security for the loan. This type of lending could never have provided the houses needed to house the great increase in our population since the war.
One of the most important provisions of the National Housing Act was that, in addition to providing a guaranteed type of loan through an approved lender, it also provided that in areas where private capital was not too willing to act, a borrower could make a direct application to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I know personally a great number of home owners from rural areas and small towns who were declined funds by approved lenders, who could then turn to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and obtain the funds which they needed to build houses. Surely, in a situation such as that it is the duty of government to provide funds where otherwise they would not be available.
When legislation is introduced to assist small business the priority on available funds should be given to the small businessman who is having the most difficulty in obtaining funds from the regular channels. One of the best illustrations of the limitation of available capital to some small businesses is that given by the hon. member for Parry Sound-Muskoka (Mr. Aiken) in his suggestion that the tourist industry could benefit largely from legislation of this kind. The tourist motel or hotel proprietor, at least in my province, cannot build under bank financing. What he needs is long term mortgage financing, which is not available from the banks. On the other hand, if he applies to the conventional mortgage companies he might be able to borrow 60 per cent of what he needs, which is a relatively small fraction of the big expenditure required. Hostelry is not a very high income-producing investment in many areas particularly for the small motel, and the conventional mortgage assistance that is available is not satisfactory to do the job of

Low Interest Loans to Small Business financing tourist accommodation. The repayment risk is often higher on a motel or hotel than on an ordinary dwelling loan.
A commercial building mortgage is usually considered to be a little more risky than a loan on a dwelling. The loan requires more supervision; it costs more to administrate in many instances than a dwelling loan. The practical result is that if mortgage funds are available at all for tourist accommodation, they represent too small a portion of the capital required. There is little encouragement in our present capital lending system, as regards hotels and motels for the tourist business.
In some instances some provinces have stepped in to help, as was mentioned by the hon. member for Parry Sound-Muskoka. In Nova Scotia loans are available through the department of industry for the building of hotel accommodation, and tourist accommodation in general, but the capital the province has to offer for this is, perforce, very thinly spread and, as in the case of the conventional mortgages, the motel owner in Nova Scotia must have a very substantial amount of cash on hand before he can consider building. He must have 40 per cent or over in some cases, or he must be able to find a private mortgage, usually a short term one, to finance his building. It is not, to my mind, the type of encouragement that this very important industry should have. I am sure the department of trade and industry in my province would very warmly welcome long term capital to assist in the building of tourist accommodation.
The reluctance of private capital to finance tourist building is bridling a national industry of first importance and limitless potential. I believe one of the first priorities for money made available for small business should go to the motel owner or innkeeper. Surely, there are very few spheres of business activity which so affect everyone in the community as the tourist business. The tourist dollar makes a wide circle once it starts to travel, and the man who makes it possible for us to earn that tourist dollar in many instances is the motel or hotel operator. I believe it is in everybody's interest to encourage him not only in financing but in any other way we can.
The reason raised by the hon. member for Parry Sound-Muskoka as to the propriety of government setting up tourist accommodation in some of our national parks interests me. In fact, the situation is that in some of our parks, particularly in areas where the season is not too long, it is not economically practical for free enterprise to build tourist accommodation. Cape Breton Highlands national park, a large part of which is in my riding,

was visited by 189,000 people this year. It boosted the tourist industry in Cape Breton island by 39 per cent last year and by 17 per cent this year. It is a very important business in Nova Scotia. The hotel accommodation in the Cape Breton Highlands national park in the first instance was built by the government of Canada and leased to the province of Nova Scotia. It would be pleasant if we could say that if this had not been done private enterprise would have come in and built the accommodation and provided the first lure, if you like, for tourists to the province; but that probably would not have been so. Now that so many guests have started to come in as a result of this government investment, then private enterprise, hotel and motel operators, were able to build accommodation to provide for the new people who were coming in. But the first investment had to be made by the government. I believe it was a wise investment; it certainly has proved so in dollars and cents in my riding.
I have spoken of the tourist industry. But the best illustration of the general need for small business credits is to be found in the rural areas throughout Canada. The primary producer on the farm, or engaged in lumbering or fishing, whatever he is doing, suffers many handicaps. He has to travel for his medical and other professional services. If he does not, then he must pay double the cost to have those services brought to him. His labour and products are generally at the mercy of the shifting values of demand and supply, while his brother in the city is protected by a union or association, or a gentleman's agreement. He braves the sea and the wind, or the flood and the drought, or the heat or the cold.
But all these troubles are as nothing compared with the discrimination he faces when he wants to borrow some money. The mortgage companies are of very little assistance in the rural areas, as I have said. They prefer to lend in the cities. The farmers and fishermen have been greatly assisted by federal and provincial loan legislation; but the lumberman still finds it very difficult to obtain long term money to modernize his plant or to bring in new equipment. The small sawmill operator in many parts of Canada is a very important rural employer. He turns out a necessary product and I am sure, in my riding, if there were more encouragement to the sawmill operator to expand he would develop a very vital local industry. The provisions of the industrial development bank are of very little help to the lumberman, and since he is not manufacturing a finished or semi-finished product he does not come within the aegis of the help provided by the province.

There is another rural businessman who should have priority for loan assistance, namely the small packager or processor of farm and fish products. An important aspect of the Nova Scotia fish industry is salt fish processing. We have growing export markets for good salt fish. Most of this product comes from shore fishermen and is handled by small buyers who operate small plants in the main fishing areas. Those small buyers provide the chief market for the shore fishermen. They supply salted fish at a competitive price for the export trade, chiefly with the West Indies. Their capital requirements are not large, but it is almost impossible for them to borrow long term capital.
Every small businessman will welcome legislation that will help him to secure long term capital, but in particular such help is needed in the rural areas. The rural businessman is the real Cinderella of the credit world. He is the last to obtain money when there is lots of it and he is the first to feel the squeeze when money is tight. I think we will all agree that the first credit help to small business should go to the businessman for whom ordinary capital doors are hardest to open. And first in this category are the merchants, the co-operatives, the small rural processors and packagers, the lumbermen, and the contracting tradesmen who service our rural areas.
There has been some discussion in the debate so far, some suggestions put forward, as to the way in which money could be made available to the small businessman, and the ways that would help him best. I understand that, some years ago it was suggested by the retail merchants association that a good way to assist retailers would be along the lines of the loans now extended to farmers and fishermen. They asked that the government should guarantee 10 per cent of a bank loan up to $25,000. The government puts up no money, but guarantees a bank loan to the extent of 10 per cent over a period of five or six years. A plan of this nature would be very helpful and could be accomplished without a complex administration because the work would be done, as it is now for the farmers and fishermen, by the bankers.
However, even more useful to the small businessman would be a form of guaranteed mortgage loans. Under present laws, building mortgage funds are not available through the banks. I think, myself, that the chief financial problem that faces the small businessman stems from the fact that he must have so much of his capital tied up in fixtures, plant, buildings and so on and that he is short of capital for inventory and other current purposes. If mortgage lenders were
Low Interest Loans to Small Business encouraged to look more kindly on commercial building loans amortized over 10 or 15 year periods, a large part of the financial problems of many of our small businessmen would be removed or greatly ameliorated. This also raises a general question as to whether there is any longer a need to prohibit banks from lending on the security of real property. I believe the time has come when we should re-examine that rule in the light of modern business conditions, particularly from the point of view of small business loans.
We have made an exception already in the case of the National Housing Act loans. Where a certain percentage of the loan is guaranteed by the government, the banks are permitted to lend money on the security of real property. It is very common in the United States for banks to accept security of all types for loans, including buildings, cars, furniture or any other security that is offered.
There is another agency whose scope could be widened very easily to provide more credit service and that is the industrial development bank. The industrial development bank was incorporated by act of parliament in 1944 and commenced operations on November 1 of that year. Its functions are described in the preamble of the act which set up the bank, and I quote:
Whereas it is desirable to establish an industrial development bank to promote the economic welfare of Canada by increasing the effectiveness of monetary action through ensuring the availability of credit to industrial enterprises which may reasonably be expected to prove successful if a high level of national income and employment is maintained, by supplementing the activities of other lenders and by providing capital assistance to industry with particular consideration to the financing problems of small enterprises-
The chief purpose of this act was to make money available to those to whom it would not otherwise be available, particularly small businesses. The president of the industrial development bank is the governor of the Bank of Canada, Mr. J. E. Coyne, and the directors of the bank are the same as those of the Bank of Canada. The bank was set up with a $25 million capitalization, which was provided by the Bank of Canada.
I have always felt, like the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter), that the industrial development bank left a lot to be desired, particularly with regard to its functions in the field of small business. It is true that over the last three years the services of the industrial development bank have greatly improved.
I notice from the bank's annual report that in 1955 a total of 221 loans were granted by the bank. This had grown, by 1959, a few years later, to 599 loans. For example, in
830	HOUSE OF
Low Interest Loans to Small Business my own province, in 1955, there were only 4 loans granted by the industrial development bank and in 1956 there were a mere 7. In 1959 the number had reached 33. In terms of the money involved there was $252,000 lent by the bank in 1955, that is in Nova Scotia, and in 1959 the total had reached $1,369,000. I noticed when the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo was speaking that he mentioned that in all the years the bank has been in operation, I believe some 15 years, there have been only 14 businesses in Newfoundland that were able to take advantage of it. It is interesting to note that of these 14, there were 7 loans granted in 1959 and only 7 in all the previous years of the bank's operation. This shows that the industrial development bank has been trying to make more money available.
However, there is one specific trouble with the industrial development bank and that is that it does not seem to like small loans. If one looks at pages 6 and 7 of the bank report, it will be seen that of the $30.5 million the bank now has loaned, loans of $5,000 or less account for only $105,000; loans between $5,000 and $25,000 amount to only $3.9 million. If you total these two figures and consider loans of $25,000 or under, they account for $4 million and there is $26.5 million tied up in larger loans. This is the problem the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo has found, as I have found in so far as the industrial development bank is concerned. People in my riding, who live in rural areas and small towns have told me they have found the bank rather snooty.
Some of my constituents, for example, have applied to the bank for a loan for use in the forestry industry, which is an important industry in my riding. I notice the bank's report indicates there has been only one forestry loan granted between the years 1955 and 1959. I am told that people from rural areas who seek a loan of this nature meet a rather cool reception at the bank. It seems also that the bank gives the cold shoulder to the man who wants to borrow money to build or modernize a small food-processing plant, such as in the salt fish industry. I think the bank could greatly extend its service by looking again at its small loan policy. Perhaps the bank should consider setting up a special department to handle loans under $25,000. At the moment, there seems to be as much red tape involved in a simple mortgage loan of $10,000 as there would be for a loan of $200,000.
I have been following the progress of a constituent of mine who has applied for a small loan to assist in constructing a salt fish processing plant. The bank required that an
[Mr. MacLellan.l

appraiser drive some 90 miles from Sydney to appraise the building and fixtures. They required a special audit. They required long range forecasts of prices and markets and practically wanted a guarantee of the price of fish five years from now. They wanted an architect's drawing of a $7,000 or $8,000 one storey building, and so on. If and when my constituent does obtain his small loan from the industrial development bank he will have paid heavily for all of this appraising and information and I doubt whether the loan is worth the trouble. I wonder whether the industrial development bank would find it feasible to have small loans of this type processed by the local banks, particularly where the borrowers are from small towns or rural areas.


William Moore Benidickson: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Robert Simpson MacLellan: Yes.


William Moore Benidickson: Will he indicate, if he knows, the approximate range of the loan of the constituent of whom he has just spoken?


Robert Simpson MacLellan: 1 know, but I believe it would be a breach of confidence if I gave that information. It is quite a small loan. In the case to which I have just referred, I am sure the local bank manager would have processed that loan in one quarter of the time that was required by the office of the industrial development bank, some 250 miles away in Halifax. The banker would know at a glance whether the proposition was sound and feasible. He knows the man's history and character. He would know whether or not he is a good credit risk. Certainly long before this the man of whom I speak could have had a decision upon whether or not the loan application would be accepted by the bank.
There is another consideration also. The bank manager is able to advise and counsel the applicant. I should like to see some consideration given to having local bank managers in rural areas act as agents of the industrial development bank for small loans.
The industrial development bank, like every other bank, wants to show a little profit and above all it wants to preserve its assets. But it differs from other banks in that it is set up with public funds to serve a special purpose. One of those purposes is to provide credit to the small businessman who is operating an industrial enterprise and who cannot get funds elsewhere. Most small businessmen seem to think there could be a great improvement in the exercise of this responsibility.

In conclusion, may I say that I agree with this resolution and support it. I think that small business could be helped greatly by setting up a new agency which would make loans available either by bank guarantees or, as in the case of the National Housing Act, by long term mortgage loans. Improvement could also be effected by making existing agencies more flexible and more attuned to the problems of small industry in the nation.


Hubert Badanai: At the
outset, Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter) for introducing this resolution urging the government to give consideration to legislation designed to help small business in which I would also include the tourist operators. Those who belong in this classification are severely handicapped because of the seasonal character of their business and yet they are responsible for much of the wealth brought in by tourists and which has not cost the public treasury any money.
Last year the Canadian tourist association presented to the government a brief asking for legislation designed to relieve Canada's tourist industry of the serious disability caused by lack of financial credit and to get the government to provide funds for much needed loans for expansion and modernization of facilities and buildings to enable them to compete effectively in this particular business from which, directly or indirectly, everyone benefits.
The hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell) asked the hon. member for Parry Sound-Muskoka (Mr. Aiken) just a few moments ago whether he knew of any instances in which tourist operators had actually been handicapped by want of capital, and the hon. member replied that he did not have figures. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that I know of instances of tourist operators in Fort William being forced to get out of the business because they were unable to borrow money for the purpose of modernizing their facilities.
The government's attitude toward the suggestion of loans was that it considers technical assistance but no money. This technical help may be of some value but, without money, all the advice in the world in the majority of instances would mean practically nothing. I think that the government could assist small businesses by guaranteeing loans to the bank in a way similar to that in which it is now providing funds for the con-structon of homes through the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
When a similar resolution was introduced in July, 1955 by the hon. member for Parry
Low Interest Loans to Small Business Sound-Muskoka who spoke this afternoon- and very well indeed, I may say-it was well received by all parties, but it met the same fate as many other well-meaning proposals. It was talked out because this government did not want it to come to a vote for fear perhaps that it would unmask some hypocritical double-talkers. Where the life of the government is not at stake I think it should perhaps be possible for resolutions or bills before the house to be the subject of a free vote. I do not pretend to be an authority on parliamentary procedure, but it seems to me that the system of allowing private members to speak out and vote according to their thinking would be a decided improvement over our present custom of voting as we are told.
It should be remembered that the small businesses of the country-in which I include all classes of merchants, garages, filling stations, grocery and fruit stores, drug stores et cetera-probably account for 60 per cent of internal trade in Canada, upon which the well-being of the people and the prosperity of the country depend to a great extent. It is therefore not inconsistent to ask the government for consideration of certain financial problems which have to do with expansion of facilities of small business to enable them to compete with huge chain stores which are now in the process of driving the small businessman out of business.
When speaking on the subject of small business during the debate on the supply estimates of his department during the 1958 session the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill) made the following statement and I quote from Hansard, page 4536:
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.
I believe that I should perhaps read the paragraph in the speech of the minister in

Low Interest Loans to Small Business order that we may have a clear understanding of what the Minister of Trade and Commerce had in mind. I quote:
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 is what is said in the speech by the Minister of Trade and Commerce.


William Moore Benidickson: That is more than two years ago.


Hubert Badanai: That was 1958. What happened to the proposed bureau of assistance? Like many other promises, it never came to fruition.
The hon. and very distinguished member for Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell), speaking in the house on March 19, 1957 during the budget debate, referred to the problems of small business in these words, as reported on page 2466 of Hansard:
In the United States there are definite provisions for the assistance of small business but in Canada, apart from some income tax easement, there is none.
In the United States the government has established a small business administration, which assists the banks in making loans to small firms and provides small businessmen with advice and information on problems of incorporation, taxation, the obtaining of government contracts in competition with larger firms. Small business advisers are appointed by the government in the various defence departments of government to ensure that a fair proportion of their business is directed to small firms. Why cannot we do as much for small business here?
Well, nothing has been done so far.
I would like to say that many farmers, particularly the western farmers, have often been rescued from financial troubles by the Canadian Farm Loan Act. I am sorry that I cannot say so for the farmers of Thunder Bay, but I never oppose assistance to farmers. In fact, I would like to make it broader in scope to embrace all farmers, regardless of what they produce. I think the small merchant, the tourist operator and motel owner who may find themselves in difficulties deserve consideration to the same extent as the farmers in order that they may rehabilitate themselves.

In support of assistance to small businesses, I find myself in a distinguished company in no other than with the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker), who, on June 4, 1957, promised that he would introduce legislation during the 1957 session of parliament to establish a loan fund which would be available at low interest so that small businesses would not be driven out by larger groups. On page 1611 of Hansard for November 28, 1957 a question was asked which indicates that the Prime Minister was very much in favour of giving aid to small business. He was asked a question by the then hon. member for Quebec-Mont-morency, as follows:
May I direct a question to the Prime Minister. Is it true that the government has decided to propose legislation at the present session to establish a loan fund which will be available at low interest so that small businesses will not be driven out by larger groups? This was a promise made by the Prime Minister at Cambridge, Nova Scotia, on June 4, 1957. If so, when?
The reply did not come from the Prime Minister but from the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming), who said this:
Mr. Speaker, a somewhat similar question was asked a few days ago in the house and answered by me. I pointed out that representations had been received by the government from associations and organizations representing small business. They have submitted various proposals, and those proposals are under study at the present time.
That was in November 1957. Later on we find another question which was asked on January 9, 1958 by the then hon. member for Okanagan Boundary, appearing on page 3058 of Hansard as follows:
I should like to ask the Minister of Finance a question of which I have given him short notice. Has the government taken any steps or does it consider it necessary to take action to assist small businesses and industries throughout Canada by the granting of long term loans at low interest rates?
The Minister of Finance replied as follows:
I thank the hon. member for his short notice of this question. The government, as such, has no power to do any of the things the question contemplates. Parliament has made provision for loans to assist industries in certain cases through the agency of the industrial development bank. Further action on the part of parliament, and the relationship of the government to it, would have to be a matter of government policy. I have already dealt with the subject in reply to similar questions asked frequently during this session, and I do not think I could usefully add anything in that respect to the answers I have already given.
Then there are other questions which were answered in a very similar way. It is, of course, typical of the answers which are received from the Minister of Finance whenever a question is directed to him involving promises of financial assistance.
If the government is serious about wanting to help small business, this is the opportunity in which all can participate, all hon. members

who have spoken and are to speak on this question, by voting for the resolution before us. That is the important question, and I trust that all hon. members here will vote for it, because there does not seem to be any disagreement as to the need for help on the part of small business. Therefore, this appears to be an excellent opportunity for each and every one of us to vote in favour of a very popular question.


Mr. Speakman:: Before the hon. member resumes his seat, would he reply to a question?


Hubert Badanai: Yes, I will.


James Stanley Speakman: The hon. member said in the course of his remarks that it had been extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the farmers in the Fort William area to receive loans from the farm loans board. Would the hon. member not agree that the new farm credit corporation is making available funds to his farmers as well as to farmers in other parts of Canada?


Hubert Badanai: I hope that the hon. member is right. I hope that the new measure which changes the name of the old fund will be of assistance. Up to the present it has not helped anyone; but I hope that applications will receive favourable consideration, and I would be very pleased to see that happen.


Mr. Murray Smith (Winnipeg North):: Since my election to the House of Commons I have felt that private members' days and private members' hours were one of the most important aspects of our governmental system. That thought was in my mind this afternoon when the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter) rose to speak on this resolution, and after he had concluded his remarks the same thought was still in my mind. In looking through the Parliamentary Guide I found that the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo has been here since 1949. But that did not dispel the thought that these were the hours when individuals rose and spoke in their places on matters which affect the people of this nation as a whole.
But I wondered why there were not other members of his party supporting his motion, and when the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Badanai) rose I knew the answer. When I look at the fact that the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo has been here since 1949, coupled with the fact that a resolution or bill of this nature has not heretofore been introduced by any member of the Liberal party, and couple that with the political speech made by the hon. member for Fort William, I realize that this is nothing more than political propaganda by a party which now finds itself in opposition instead of directing the affairs of this nation.
833
Low Interest Loans to Smalt Business
The hon. member for Fort William has gone on record at great length to quote men who now occupy seats on the treasury benches, and to say everything he could to embarrass the government and to make political capital. In the course of his remarks he even indicated and admitted that he has in the past been told how to vote since his election to the House of Commons.


An hon. Member:: And you haven't been?


William Murray Smith: I can say in
all sincerity to the hon. gentleman who interrupted me that never in my life have I been told how to vote on anything either in this house or out of it. This resolution is a desirable one when you look at it the way it is worded and when you discount all the political implications which have been brought into it by the hon. member for Fort William. But in listening to this discussion I could not help but wonder why those who were so vociferous on other occasions in the front benches of the Liberal party have not risen to speak to this motion. Could it be that in the past they have not supported it and therefore do not wish to go on record as supporting it now? Or could it be that the Liberal party as a whole does not want to commit itself as far as small business and the average Canadian is concerned?


Murdo William Martin: Would the hon. member suggest he is making a non-political speech right now?


William Murray Smith: That is the furthest thing from my mind. And I would like to say in answer to the hon. member for Timmins that his colleague the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge) did his best to make a political speech on this occasion. He recited to us the platform of the C.C.F. party as far as small business is concerned, and I want to say in that regard that the C.C.F. platform in respect to small business is the same as its platform with respect to anything else-a monument to the incomprehensible.


Mr. Winch:: Are you in favour of this motion or are you against it?


William Murray Smith: The hon. member for Vancouver East has just voiced his usual interjection and added his usual intelligence to this debate. In answer to him I will say I am 100 per cent in favour of this resolution, as is this present government from any indication which they have given to the people of this country. But in looking at this resolution I think we have first of all to answer the question: is there a need for government lending to small business? In order to answer that question I feel we have to look at the business world in general.

Low Interest Loans to Small Business
May I say that I am one of those who do not believe in government interference in the business world unless it is absolutely necessary because I feel that in a democratic system the individuals and those other components comprising the state owe a duty to our system in the same way as does the government. There are institutions in our system which lend money and which perform other functions of a financial nature for other aspects and segments of our system. First of all, we should examine those aspects and determine whether or not these institutions are fulfilling their duty toward our democratic system. In that regard we must look not only at big business but at moneylenders and our banking practices.
In the field of big business, because of the large capital and other resources available, demands can be made which not only must be but invariably are met by the people with whom such undertakings deal. This is done without regard to other aspects of our economy. We could look, for instance, at the large chain store which is capable of offering a certain quantity of goods for a certain price and which, in turn, could return a handsome profit to its shareholders but which in spite of all this does a certain amount of harm to other people and other businesses engaged in the same method of operation. We can look at the banks and ask ourselves: are they fulfilling the functions that they were designed to fulfil in our democratic and free enterprise system or have they become more concerned with making money for their shareholders, forgetting the services which they are morally obligated to provide under our system? That is the general picture of the argument that may be put forward in support of this resolution as far as the country as a whole is concerned.
Now I should like for a few minutes to become somewhat more parochial and concern myself with my own constituency of Winnipeg North. Those who live in Winnipeg North are primarily wage earners and small shop keepers. There is no main business and no main manufacturing industry in my constituency and, therefore, the problems of the small businessman have been brought to my attention as no other problems have been. Since my election I have contacted all the druggists in my constituency, nearly 80 per cent of the operators of corner grocery stores, hardware stores, small chain stores, dry goods stores and so on. I have discussed their problems with them. They pointed out to me over and over again that the main problem confronting them as far as getting ahead in the financial world was concerned was the problem of capital.

I queried many of these businessmen in my constituency some five years ago, in 1955, and I found it interesting to make a comparison between conditions obtaining then and their present day situation. I found in my own constituency, and I am sure this applies in other ridings, that those small businesses- and here I use the word "small" as meaning small, the corner grocery stores, drug stores and so on-in 1955 employed on the average three people in addition to the proprietor. In 1960 on the average they employ only the proprietor and, in some cases, a part-time delivery boy. I also learned that their turnover and gross sales increased in 1960 over 1955 but their net return and their incomes have been lower. All this has been brought about by competition with large stores that are in the advantageous position of being able to buy in quantity thereby achieving reductions and discounts that the small businessman cannot obtain.
At this point I should like to cite an example. One corner grocer told me that his jobber could sell him a certain brand of soap at 71 cents a package. The mark-up figure on a percentage basis would bring his selling price to 79 cents. However, the grocer was able to go to one of the large general stores in his locality and buy a case of this brand of soap at 60 cents a package and sell it for 69 cents, 2 cents under the price at which his jobber was able to sell it to him.
I do not say we should have government legislation to interfere with this because that is part of our free enterprise system. I do say, however, that those who offer large discounts owe a duty to our democratic system just as the government owes a duty to them. I say they are not fulfilling that duty when they are making things so tough on the smaller businessman that he is no longer in a position to compete.
Those who advocate the practice of free enterprise to the ultimate limit might say this is a good thing but I say it is not, because in this nation we have far more people employed by and dependent upon smaller businesses than we have in relation to larger businesses.
One could lead the discussion into other fields. We do not have to stay with the grocery trade, the garages, small manufacturers, fishermen, lumbermen, and so on. I am very glad that this resolution is worded in the broadest possible terms but I suggest that if private enterprise and our financial institutions are not doing the job they ought to do and which they are morally obliged to do under our system, then the government must step in and provide loans to those who otherwise would not obtain them.

The hon. member for Fort William rather chastised the government for doing nothing since its election to office. I would remind the hon. member that this government assumed office on June 21, 1957, and in the time previous to that we had 22 years of Liberal rule during which the Liberals, as far as I am aware, did nothing for small business. Indeed, it might be said that they did more for big business in the United States than they did for any business in Canada.
I was impressed by the remarks made today by the hon. members for Parry Sound-Mus-koka (Mr. Aiken) and Inverness-Richmond (Mr. MacLellan). They dwelt at length upon the requirements of the Bank Act and amendments that may have to be made to that statute in order to allow small businessmen to borrow money from the bank. Their arguments, I feel, have covered that ground far more adequately than could any of mine.
I feel there is a great deal of merit to this resolution. It is something which if brought into effect would certainly assist those in my constituency who today find themselves in a position where they could become bigger businessmen except for the fact that they cannot find the capital which will meet their needs.
As I pointed out earlier, I feel that if those institutions in our economy that should provide this service are not providing it the government of this country should step in and make that assistance available. In answer to those hon. members who questioned me earlier I would say that I am in wholehearted support of this resolution and my only regret is that it was not brought in by the hon. member who sponsored it when his party was in a position to do more about it than it is today.


Mr. J. F. Browne (Vancouver-Kingsway):: Mr. Speaker, this resolution is, of course, one that is of interest to all hon. members of this house as has been evidenced by the many contributions we have already had to this debate.
This question has been of concern to the country for some considerable time, of course, and I am rather surprised that there has not been more comment made to that effect. Everyone seems to greet this as though it were something new coming before us for the first time but this subject, as a matter of fact, has commanded the attention of the house on several previous occasions.
The hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter) suggested that he had worded this resolution in very broad terms and I could only take from his statement that he had
79951-0-53i
Low Interest Loans to Small Business intended it to be as vague as possible. My own feeling is that a resolution of this nature should embody a specific proposition so that we could discuss it intelligently. I am sure all hon. members are and have been aware of this problem for some considerable length of time. I consider it fruitless to go over the same ground without reaching some specific solution to the problem.
The government has made clear its policy on this matter on many occasions. In fact, the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) in speaking to the nation on October 1 reiterated the government's policy and later in this debate I shall remind the house of what he said on that occasion. Before doing so, however, I wish to deal with the vagueness of this resolution.
In the first place the resolution gives no indication of what constitutes small business. That has been the argument that has always arisen when this question has been before the house. It is useless to refer to small business without giving some definition of it. It is not my intention to waste the time of the house by reviewing the arguments made in that regard and I think it is sufficient to say that any definition we would want to attribute to it, small business would constitute some 80 or 90 per cent of the businesses in Canada.
When we examine the question in that light we begin to grasp the immensity of the problem. This is not a matter like those dealt with on earlier occasions when the government has provided credit for one purpose or another. This is something that will tax the entire resources of the country.
There has been an admitted storage of capital in Canada. Everybody recognizes that fact. We have heard it over and over again. Indeed, one of the criticisms of the opposition has been that the government, by interfering in things, is using up too much of the credit in one way or another. The resolution goes on to say that:
The government should give urgent consideration to the provision of some means whereby low interest loans may be made available to small business.
There is only one interpretation of that resolution that one can come to. It would amount to setting up some government institution to provide loans to small business and at low rates of interest which, I presume, would mean lower than the average rate of interest in the country at the present time. At least, that is the assumption one would come to when the hon. member specifically mentions low interest rates. This again means that some sort of subsidy would have to be
836	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Low Interest Loans to Small Business
paid in order for the government to borrow the money. It will have to go out into the money markets and borrow the money and set up such an agency, as I have already pointed out.
When one considers that what they are going to provide credit for constitutes some 80 per cent or 90 per cent of the business in Canada, he can begin to see something of the amount of money they would have to raise in order to do that particular thing. One thing is perfectly obvious to me. The government could not under any circumstances today go out and borrow enough money, or take from any source the money, and put it into a fund that would be able to satisfy all the demands of small business for credit; it would be an utter impossibility. Therefore, the thing that we must give some consideration to is that if they cannot supply the demand for all the credit that is required the government would have the right to provide credit to some small businesses to the detriment of others. It is perfectly obvious to me that if they took the money out of the total supply of money available in Canada for development and made it available to some small businesses, then it would not be available for others.
During the course of the debate many hon. members have referred to other times when governments have interfered. One case I have in mind is where hon. members pointed to the National Housing Act changes which were made, allowing the banks to put money into long term mortgages. It is suggested that one thing that could be done here is to allow money to go into mortgages for small business purposes. One other time when we had this matter before the house a number of remarks were made by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) in stating what he declared to be the policy of the C.C.F. party in this regard. We heard a reiteration of that policy in part today from the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge), but I want to take issue with some of the remarks that the hon. member for Vancouver East made back on July 1, 1958 when he dealt with this matter. Perhaps I should refer to his remarks for the sake of accuracy.


Harold Edward Winch: Are you quoting what I said last year or the year before?


John Ferguson Browne: I will give you the reference when I come across it. This quotation is taken from the debate on July 1, 1958, at page 1811 of Hansard:
I am certain that hon. members will remember that there were some bankers who were opposed to the National Housing Act of 1954 which allowed the banks to enter the long term mortgage field.

Experience since 1954, however, has clearly demonstrated that banks can allocate a certain amount of their bank credit in the form of long term mortgage loans without impairing to any appreciable degree what is termed the liquidity of the position of the banks.


Harold Edward Winch: Is my hon. friend not going to comment on that?


John Ferguson Browne: I want to show what happened in that regard. The banks were allowed to use money for that purpose, and I want to show just how it has developed and how money could be tied up and add to the difficulties that we are having with regard to the shortage of capital. The tying up of that money might even have led us into some of the difficulties we are having with respect to the shortage of capital for small business. All those who appeared before the committee at that time, including the governor of the Bank of Canada, said that it was quite all right to go ahead and do this, it was not going to improve the situation very much so far as capital was concerned.
Let us have a look at what happened in 1955, which was the first year that the banks were able to put money into mortgages. They put in $74 million, and this amount has risen very steadily to the point where, as of October 28, 1959, it had reached $941 million, which was the amount in insured residential mortgages. That is a very considerable sum of money, and I think it will be very difficult to say whether it has not had some effect on the shortage of money that we are experiencing at the present time. I am not saying it was wrong to do that; I am simply pointing out where the money went and how it has added to the difficulties in obtaining capital for small business. That was only one of the measures taken at that time which I believe added to the difficulties we are facing now. When we consider the amount of money that was allocated for that specific purpose and the limited field that there was in that regard, I believe if we were to do any such thing for small businesses we could take a good part of the present resources of the country and it could be tied up in long term credit of that sort where it would add immeasurably to the difficulties we are facing already.


Harold Edward Winch: Are you against government aid, as recommended here, to small business?


John Ferguson Browne: Mr. Speaker, that is a question that one would certainly not hope to answer with a yes or no. I am in favour of the government doing whatever it can within its means and within the means of the country to aid small business.


Harold Edward Winch: You promised us aid in your campaign speeches.


John Ferguson Browne: I know, and I shall show the hon. member for Vancouver East through you, Mr. Speaker, just exactly what the government has done to aid small business, and I can assure him it is a great deal more than has been done by anybody else in this country. Will you call it six o'clock, Mr. Speaker?
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at 8 p.m.
John Ferguson Browne: When the house rose at six o'clock, I had been stating that I did not believe the immensity of the proposition contained in this resolution had been recognized. It is true, and is a fact, that small business as referred to in this resolution would certainly constitute some 80 per cent or 90 per cent of the total business in Canada. The proposition set forth here is that the government should establish some sort of institution which would lend out money to small business at low rates of interest. I was further saying that this, of course, went far beyond what it appeared to do at first glance because it meant going into the whole question of the allocation of the existing credit we have.
I should like to bring to the attention of the house some of the remarks of Mr. Coyne, the governor of the Bank of Canada, contained in the annual report of that institution for the year 1958. These remarks deal, to a large extent, with this situation. This whole question, then, goes back to what has been commonly referred to as tight money or a shortage of capital in the country, and here is what Mr. Coyne had to say about it:
The experience of 1955-1957 is, I hope, fresh in our minds. In the conditions which were then experienced, and which may recur, many people feel that they do not have a fair opportunity to obtain access to capital and credit for what they regard as necessary and proper purposes. The impression arises that some borrowers, particularly in the larger category, are able to do better than others and that there is undesirable discrimination and misdirection in the allocation of resources or in the ability to command resources. As I have emphasized many times in the past, monetary policy does not create these problems and can do little itself to alleviate them.
I think that brings to the attention of the house something of the immensity of the problem. I pointed out earlier in my remarks that the government certainly has given great consideration to this matter. I was rather surprised, as I said, at the bland acceptance by
Low Interest Loans to Small Business the house of this proposition as something new, something that had not been considered, and that should still be considered in such general terms. I feel it is rather useless to go on urging the government to do one thing or another unless there is some specific course to be followed. I do not believe any case at all has been made out for the propositions that have been advanced, of which there have been only two so far as I am aware, one of which has been that we should expand the industrial development bank to meet this need and the other suggestion, which seems to be implicit in the resolution, that it would be necessary to set up some new sort of institution for the government to carry on this allocation of credit.
I have not heard anybody hazard any sort of guess as to what this institution might have to be capitalized at or from what source the money would come. It seems quite clear to me, as I said before, that there is a shortage of capital in the country. We cannot, under any circumstances at the present time, meet all the needs of all the businesses in Canada. If we were going to set up some sort of institution of this nature, it is quite clear that one small businessman would be able to get a loan from it and another would not. In other words, one man in one block would be subsidizing his competitor down the street, thus helping to put himself out of business. I do not think any such scheme as that is going to work at all or be of any value to the country.
The Prime Minister, in his remarks made it quite clear that he felt very much the same about the situation. Here is what he said when speaking to the nation on the program "The Nation's Business", over the C.B.C. on October 1, 1959:
It is obvious that if we make more credit available to small borrowers, it can be done in one of two ways; either a greater money supply must be created, or what is available must be more equitably apportioned.
He went on in that same vein in those remarks to the nation. Later on in his speech, he said:
Accordingly, one place to look for the solution of the present problem of credit is in the allocation of the total supply of credit available. I think, because it is from the chartered banks in the cities, the towns and the villages, that the lifeblood of Canada's economic growth comes, that banks should realize that when they say "no", money becomes a problem and a difficulty.
Then, he went on further to say:
Perhaps one answer is for the banks to reconsider their lending policies and rearrange their outstanding loans to the end that some larger borrowers will be taking less so that smaller borrowers can get more.
I think that sums up very well the crux of the matter. I should like to examine now
838	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Low Interest Loans to Small Business for a moment the position in which we find the banks in the allocation of their credit. The other day the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) accused the Prime Minister of saying that the banks were discriminating against small borrowers. Of course, when asked for the quotation out of the speech from which I have just read, the Leader of the Opposition was not able to give it. However, I believe the Prime Minister did bring validly to the attention of the banks these facts and I believe this statement from him has had some influence on the allocation of credit by the banks. This is one means that the government has of dealing with the banks and dealing with financial policy, that is to state publicly the position of the government and the policy of the government in anticipation that the banks will carry out their wishes and no legislation will be required. The Prime Minister made it quite clear that if legislation was at any time required to protect the interests of the small borrowers he would certainly recommend to the country that it be passed.
There are two or three things in here that I think are of great importance in the allocation of credit. This is >a publication called the statistical summary of the Bank of Canada. It is a quarterly publication and this is the one for October, 1959. It shows, and I quote at random, December 31, 1958. dealing with various lines of credit and showing the amount that the banks have in authorized lines of credit in excess of $100,000, the total amounts authorized under that category were $4,457 million. The interesting thing about this figure is that of that total amount oustanding, the amount that had actually been lent to these people was $1,821 million. In other words, 59 per cent of the money that had been allocated by the banks to large borrowers in excess of $100,000 was actually in the bank and had not been loaned.
I think that is something to which the banks should direct themselves, and I think that was the intent of the Prime Minister when he spoke to the banks and told them they should make a better allocation of the money than that and have more regard for the small borrowers. As I have said before, I have no doubt that the advice he passed along will be studied by the banks. I am sure if one were to have the most up to date records, which are not available yet, he would see there had been a change in this regard.
There is one other thing I should like to look at about which I believe there is room for improvement in connection with the allocation of the money supply we have now. I spoke earlier about the way in which the

National Housing Act had been changed and how the banks had gone into mortgage lending. They have, at the present time, some $900 million-odd tied up in that line of credit, which is long term mortgage credit, and which has taken that money out of the current supply available for business. I feel this has restricted the supply somewhat and so was partly responsible-it certainly must have had some effect upon the situation.
The other thing that was done around the same time was the amendment of the Bank of Canada Act in 1954. At that time all that the banks were required to keep on hand as liquid assets was around 5 per cent of deposits. When the Bank of Canada Act was amended in 1954 that figure was increased to 8 per cent. Power was also given to the Bank of Canada to increase that figure to 12 per cent if they saw fit to do so. The Bank of Canada subsequently increased that figure to 12 per cent and indeed, although they did not have any statutory power to go beyond that figure, by voluntary arrangement with the banks and by using their moral suasion on the banks, they prevailed on the banks to raise the figure to 15 per cent.
I do not know whether that figure could safely be reduced and still afford protection to the depositors of the bank but it seems to me that a further 10 per cent increase in the total of the liquid asset reserves of the banks-in 1954 it was only 5 per cent and at the present time they are keeping on hand 15 per cent-has taken a good deal of the available money supply out of circulation. It seems to me that is something to which we might well direct our attention as a possible solution to the problem of making more credit available.
In addition to these things I have mentioned so far as aiding small business is concerned, may I say that I do not believe that providing direct loans to small business is the only means of aiding them by any stretch of the imagination. Certainly the United States has been mentioned many times in the debate. The experience down there was that advice was every bit as important as a direct loan. In many cases it was lack of knowledge and/or lack of efficiency that was causing the financial difficulties of some small business.
Some of the figures that I have been able to obtain from the small business branch which has been set up under the Department of Trade and Commerce would indicate how that branch and its services have been welcomed by small business generally. Here are a few of the publications they have now made available to small business

in order to assist them in addition to providing various courses of instruction and so on. They are providing pamphlets on management aids for small manufacturers, technical aids for small manufacturers, small marketers' aids, small business management series, starting a management of business series, and a small business bulletin series. Since its inception this publication program has dealt with over 245 different topics and over 6 million of these management publications have been distributed up to the middle of last year.
In addition to its publications program the small business administration has a management development program. Through this program it co-sponsors management educational courses with educational institutions and helps management clinics and seminars. According to the last report of the small business administration 19,000 small businessmen attended 595 courses conducted at 210 educational institutions.
Another part of this over-all educational program of the small business administration is its counselling and conference service offering practical and sound advice on sound management principles. Management conferences are co-sponsored by the small business administration in conjunction with local chambers of commerce, banks, trade associations and civic groups. I could go on but I am sure that branch is making its opinions known to businessmen on their own.
With regard to the other actions that have been taken by the government and that have been of direct benefit to small business, the hon. member for Parry Sound-Muskoka (Mr. Aiken) brought some of them to the attention of the house this afternoon in a forceful and, in my opinion, accurate way. He mentioned the loans that had been made available for houses which certainly had an effect, not only on small business directly by the products that they were able to supply in the building of houses but of course they also help small business. They put more money into the hands of the Canadian public and therefore gave them greater purchasing power which also had a great effect on the small businessman because it is quite evident that even during the recession we had and have now come through the purchasing power at the retail level kept up very well.
Another factor that led to the keeping up of that purchasing power was the increased unemployment insurance benefits which is another instance where the government policy has had a direct bearing on small business. It also put into effect a winter works program which has helped again in the ways I have
Low Interest Loans to Small Business mentioned before, not only by helping the people who are supplying the goods but by putting more money into the hands of the people who were working on the program and so helping to stimulate small business.
I could go on at great length to mention other measures that the government has taken in that regard but I would conclude by summing up and saying this, as I have said before. I do not believe that the immensity of this problem has been recognized by hon. members generally. I think it is wrong to go on urging the government to do something unless there is a specific and profitable course that can be followed. The Prime Minister has made a statement on this matter. As I have shown, the government has taken action in many respects. No new proposals have been made, surprisingly enough, in this debate this afternoon. I find that there is a complete lack of new proposals.
It becomes perfectly obvious then that we are going to be confronted with this problem of a shortage of capital in Canada for some time to come. There has been a chronic shortage over the years and there certainly is no easy or simple solution to it. While it is always very nice to be able to climb on the bandwagon and to say yes, it would be nice to give loans to small business and certainly nobody could be opposed to the principle of such a scheme, in the absence of any proposition that I can see before the house of a nature that is going to succeed in providing capital on any proper or equitable basis for small business, I feel very strongly that it would be absolutely wrong to start any program that is going to start making loans available to some small businesses and not to others and that may be the only result of the government's interfering at this time and setting up another agency.
We simply cannot make available all the capital that is required. Therefore, in the instances that I have mentioned I believe that we should see what we can do toward making a better allocation of what is available in the banks at the present time. We could see whether possibly the liquid assets ratio of the banks could be lowered. I believe those are two distinct possibilities where we could take some constructive action. But as to setting up a new agency to make loans available to small business, I repeat that it could only have the effect of discriminating against some and I feel it would be wrong for the government to embark on such a policy.


Mr. H. M. Batten (Humber-St. George's):: Mr. Speaker, at this time I should like to say a few words on this resolution. First, however, I should like to congratulate my
840	HOUSE OF
Low Interest Loans to Small Business friend the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter) for introducing it. I should also like to commend him for the manner of his presentation of it. I believe this resolution is one that is prominent in the minds of thinking people at the moment and I believe has been very much in the minds of Canadians ever since the elections of 1957 and 1958.
I was interested in the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway (Mr. Browne). He emphasized the immensity of such a program. In fact, I believe that such a program would be of benefit.
The Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker), in various references he has made to loans to small businesses, has often referred to the loans to small businesses as they are administered in the United States. An estimate of the proportion of United States businesses included in the small loans act of the United States is about 98 per cent. When one considers that in that country businesses which come under the small loans act include 98 per cent of the total businesses in the United States, he does really see the immensity of the program.
I can understand my hon. friend from Vancouver-Kingsway (Mr. Browne) when he talks that way. But let me point out to him that when the Prime Minister was making statements about loans to small businesses during the elections of 1957 and 1958, surely he realized how immense the program was. He realized then how big it was.
Let me quote a statement by the Prime Minister, as reported in the Montreal Star of May 9, 1957. The Prime Minister said:
This is a country of small businesses, said Mr. Diefenbaker. Of the 37,400 manufacturing establishments in Canada, 35,110 employ 99 persons or less. Of these, some 17,000 have fewer than five employees.
Now surely in making this statement the Prime Minister understood the immensity of the problem about which he was talking. Surely there appears to everyone to be something wrong with trying to point out to the Canadian people in 1957 that such a large number of small businesses in Canada were being denied their rights under the previous government, and yet when the new government is elected the problem is too big to be tackled.


An hon. Member:: It is being tackled. You are too blind to see.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Mr. Speaker, there is no ignorance so profound as that of the closed mind. The hon. member will have a chance to make a speech when his time comes.
I want to point out that certainly in 1957 and 1958 the Prime Minister recognized how


big this problem was. I think we will all agree with him there, and I agree with the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway that the problem is a big one. But this is a promise which the Conservative party made to the Canadian people, not only in the 1957 election but also in the 1958 campaign. I can read various statements of the Prime Minister and other members of the Conservative party about what they said during these election campaigns, and the promises they made. Now that the time comes to implement these promises, we find people saying, "Oh, this thing is too big". We find, for example, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) being very careful about what he says here. I quote from Hansard of January 9, 1958, where on that occasion the then hon. member for Okanagan Boundary asked the following question:
I should like to ask the Minister of Finance a question of which I have given him short notice. Has the government taken any steps or does it consider it necessary to take action to assist small businesses and industries throughout Canada by the granting of long term loans at low interest rates?
The Minister of Finance replied:
I thank the hon. member for his short notice of this question. The government, as such, has no power to do any of the things the question contemplates. Parliament has made provision for loans to assist industries in certain cases through the agency of the industrial development bank. Further action on the part of parliament, and the relationship of the government to it, would have to be a matter of government policy. I have already dealt with the subject in reply to similar questions asked frequently during this session, and X do not think I could usefully add anything in that respect to the answers I have already given.
Mr. Speaker, this is the reply of the Minister of Finance to a question dealing directly with one of the planks of the Progressive Conservative platform in 1957 and 1958. We recognize even now how often and how loudly the Prime Minister attacked tight money in 1957 and 1958, and how he talked of high interest rates. Yet today we find the interest rates are even higher than they were then. Tight money is now tighter than it was then. Surely, if the problem existed in 1957 and in 1958, it exists now. Yet we have people saying that the problem is too big to tackle, and that maybe there should be some other way of going about it. It was only last weeek that the Minister of Finance stood in his place in this house and said that the Conservative government has honoured all its promises. As I say, that was only last week. Here is one promise which has not been honoured, and I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that during the coming weeks there will be many others which will be brought up before the house, and then we will know how many of these promises will be honoured in the actual sense of the word.

I listened too to the hon. member for In-verness-Richmond (Mr. MacLellan). He referred to the industrial development bank and made special note of the fact that loans made by the industrial development bank had greatly increased during the last three years. I should point out to him that to a large extent the increase in the loans made by the industrial development bank in the last three years has been largely due to added categories which were added to this act in 1956. There were seven categories added in this year, and in the three years which have followed these categories have been able to take advantage of loans made by this bank.
It is interesting to note, if we are going to refer to the industrial development bank, the number of categories where there are less loans made now than three years ago. For example, with textile products there was $621,000 loaned in 1959, as against $837,000 in 1955. In paper products $171,000 was loaned in 1959; in 1956 it was $2,107,000. With non-metallic mining products the loans made in 1959 amounted to $1,497,000; in 1955 the total was $3,449,000. With petroleum products and coal $169,000 was loaned in 1959, but $893,000 in 1955. It may be true that the number of loans made by the industrial development bank in the last three years have been greater than in 1956; but I suggest again that this increase in the amount of money loaned is largely due to categories which were added to this act in the year 1956.
I was a little disturbed by the comments made by the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Smith). He accused some of the members of the opposition of making political speeches, and then he himself dived right into the most political speech of the evening. He wanted to know why some of the front benchers of the opposition have not spoken on the resolution. My answer is, for the same reason the front benchers of the government have not spoken yet, and maybe for the same reason the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill), who is more concerned with this than anybody else, has not been in his seat this afternoon.
The hon. member went on to say that for 22 years the Liberal government did nothing for small businesses. Well, that is a pretty broad statement.


Mr. Graffley:: Your leader is not in his seat.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Is yours?


William Heward Grafftey: No.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: You are not in your seat either.


Herman Maxwell Batten: The hon. member for Winnipeg North went on to say that for 22 years the 79951-0-54
Low Interest Loans to Small Business Liberals did nothing, yet there has not been one Tory member today who has talked on this resolution who has not referred to the great things which may be done with the industrial development bank. I suppose they want to claim that as a credit to themselves too. But I will say this, that if there was nothing done for small businesses under the Liberal regime for 22 years, remember that this was the government which was elected to arrange everything. They were going to fix everything up and cure all the ills of the Canadian nation, and one of the things they were going to do was to give loans to small businesses. They made that statement three years ago, and still nothing has been done.
We have heard a great deal about the small business branch which has been set up by the Department of Trade and Commerce. Sure, it has been set up. It has a director and it has a number of research officers and it has sent out to Canadian businessmen literature containing advice and counsel. With every bit of that, I agree and to be quite frank, if this small business branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce does nothing else but advise small business I think it could justify its existence. I agree with these things wholeheartedly, but that was not the promise made to the small businessmen of Canada, in 1957 and 1958. That a great deal of information has been given to the small businessman there is no doubt, and this has been of great advantage. But how many loans have been made to small businessmen? Where have they been made? For what purpose have they been made? What is the amount of each loan and the total amount of the loans made by this branch?
The fact of the matter is that while such a branch was promised by the Conservative party in 1957 and 1958-almost three years ago-nothing has been done.


Mr. Siarr:: A branch has been set up.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Yes, it looks very nice in the report of the department.


Michael Starr: Do you not think they have to look into the whole situation first?


Herman Maxwell Batten: This branch has been set up, but nothing has been done to carry out what was stated by the Prime Minister.


Michael Starr: We set it up in a year and a half and you did not set it up in 22 years.


Herman Maxwell Batten: However, I agree with this idea of loans for small business, and I believe that across this country small businesses are the backbone of the nation. The Prime Minister has said so himself.



Low Interest Loans to Small Business


Some hon. Members:: Order.
The Depuly Chairman: Is the hon. member rising on a point of order?


Mr. Kindt:: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Would the hon. member mind giving the house his definition of small business before proceeding?


Herman Maxwell Batten: There is no point of order in that.
I do agree with the principle of this motion and I believe that some assistance should be given to small business in this country in accordance with the statements which have been made by the Conservative party. I believe, too, that the economy of this country could be strengthened by the Department of Trade and Commerce if its department of small business would give consideration to making loans which would keep these small businesses going, and going profitably.
Mention has been made this afternoon of the tourist industry. There is no doubt that the tourist industry is of fundamental importance to Canada. In fact, I suppose it could be called the third or fourth largest industry in Canada. Each year large numbers of people come into this country and spend money. My province has not yet been able to take a very large percentage of the tourist dollar but we hope the day will come when we will get a larger percentage than we are getting now. If the tourist operators on the mainland need money from some loan board to carry on their businesses, surely that is still more true with regard to those who are trying to operate tourist establishments in my province.
In conclusion, I want to say again that I support this resolution brought forward by the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo and I hope it will be voted on rather than talked out at ten o'clock.


Mr. J. R. Keays (Iles-de-la-Madeleine):: have listened with great attention to the debate now in progress concerning the means whereby low interest loans may be made available to small business.
The hon. member who has just resumed his seat no doubt got the attention of this house by referring to a lapse on the part of the present government, but I should like to know where the hon. member for Humber-St. George's (Mr. Batten) was from 1953 until this date and what speeches he has ever made on the subject of small business. The government which he supported did not concern itself with small business; rather, it adhered to principles laid down 20 or 25 years ago.
The principles laid down by the present Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) anticipated the need for aid to small business, and the

promises which he made-and I will not deny it-during the election campaigns of 1957 and 1958 were sincere. The proof of this was that immediately upon taking office he proposed the establishment of the separate branch within the Department of Trade and Commerce to deal with the subject.


An hon. Member:: What has been done?


James Russell Keays: Today we are discussing small business, and I believe it is only fair that before continuing such a debate as this we should try to find a definition of small business. I should like to refer to a few of the definitions which have been given in this house. The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam (Mr. Regier) speaking in this house has tried to define small business. At page 1818 of Hansard, volume 2, 1958 he is on record as saying:
My interpretation of a small business in need of government interest and concern is a business not necessarily of a certain size or volume with regard to its assets, but a business in which there is some relationship between ownership and management. It may be a business consisting of $5,000 or $10,000 of assets; it may go as high as half a million dollars depending on the type of enterprise.
Then there was the definition given by the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge) on page 1969 of the same volume:
A large business is able to accumulate capital by the issuance of shares on the market and bonds and debentures, and things of that kind. The type of business that we speak of has no access to that capital in the same way because of its local and personal management and the lack of general knowledge by the public concerning the operation of the business in question.
Then again, there was the definition given by the hon. member for Port Arthur (Mr. Fisher) as reported on page 1994:
The experience of the small business administration has got down as far as loans of from $6,000 to $10,000 for businesses that have assets of from $25,000 to $50,000. The point that has been raised by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. MacLean) certainly does require a certain amount of definition.
I believe that a definition of small business can be found in the words of the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill) as reported at page 4535 of Hansard of September 3, 1958:
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.
The minister then went on to state the objectives of the small business branch in these terms:
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.
I should like at this time to endeavour to define small business in the way in which we consider in the province from which I come and especially in the area which I represent. Small business is defined as one which would not be called upon to pay more than a corporation or private concern would pay on the first $25,000 of net profit, namely 20 to 25 per cent in income tax. That is a definition which I should like to advance concerning small business.
This government has made a promise and has taken steps to fulfil it. It has set up the machinery to answer queries and disseminate information concerning the incorporation of small businesses and their continuance. It has undertaken studies in the United States with the surprising result that here in Canada through the industrial development bank we loan on the ratio of 3 to 1 on capital compared with what is done in the United States on the basis of the same facilities as those available through the industrial development bank.
It is true that the industrial development bank does not answer the problem in full. It is limited in what it can do and those who suffer most are possibly those who are refused loans from that bank because they are in the retail or wholesale business. There is no doubt, however, that the powers of this bank could be extended so that its facilities could meet the problem of those who cannot qualify under the present restrictions.
The question of responsibility also arises. I should like at this moment to refer to the responsibility that rests with provincial jurisdictions. I speak of the province of Quebec which is very much concerned with small business. As a result of the action taken there, the corner grocery still exists in that province. Corner grocers are able to operate notwithstanding the competition of chain stores and the ensuing pressure confronting them. There are ways and means of making this possible. The province of Quebec has seen fit to allow the corner grocer to sell beer in his establishment and has denied that privilege to the chain stores.
79951-0-544
Low Interest Loans to Small Business
There are various ways in which this government has already given aid to small business. I wish now to refer to those whom I consider the most underpaid people in the Canadian economy, the fishermen of the Atlantic coast. Every fisherman operates his own business, owning his own boat and gear. Through this medium he must provide a livelihood for his family. Through the years the federal government has provided facilities under which fishermen can borrow money. I refer to the loans made to fishermen at a rate of 5 per cent, of which they could take advantage if they wished. I refer to the assistance which has been given through the Fisheries Prices Support Act, fisheries salt assistance, the fishermen's indemnity plan, and research. These are some ways and means through which this government has come to the aid of small business. It is true that not enough has been done for the fishermen. Not long ago it was stated in this chamber that we must give to the western farmers a fair share of the national income. I am in favour of that, but let us not forget the eastern fishermen. They are also entitled to a fair share of the national income and we must find ways and means of ensuring this.
This government has instituted a special branch called the small business section in the Department of Trade and Commerce. I am quite confident that after this branch has studied the national problems of an economic nature, many of them peculiar to one region or unique because of geographic considerations, the government will find a way of meeting these problems through providing loans at a fair rate of interest.
We must remember that at this stage in the development of Canada when the rate of expansion is so greatly accelerated and when perhaps the funds normally available for this purpose are already being expended, to take action in this regard could bring about an increase in the rate of interest. But knowing the policies of this government, knowing that it is doing everything possible to hold down the rise in inflation and knowing that it is going forward steadily and intelligently, I am confident that very soon when the fury has subsided the government will implement some action which will make it possible for the small business sector of the Canadian economy to borrow money at reasonable rates of interest.


Murdo William Martin: It was not
my intention to speak on this resolution today. I would much prefer to see it come to a vote and some decision taken by the house. However, after listening very closely to the debate, I have found that some very interesting things

Low Interest Loans to Small Business have happened. For one thing, we found out why nothing has been done by the present government in the last two or three years.
I know that most of the small businessmen were looking for big things after hearing all the glowing promises that were made in 1957 and in 1958. Unfortunately, since that time nobody has been able to define what a small business is, and therefore the present government has been unable to do anything about it.
One hon. member on the government side of the house mentioned the fact that while it is true we have not done too much for the small businessman, and there is not really very much we can do for them in regard to money because it is too hard to find, yet we shall give them plenty of advice and we may even improve on the advice we are giving to them.
When I was first elected to the House of Commons not too many small business people used to come to me to discuss their problems. They were far too well steeped in the good Tory propaganda that they must watch out for those socialists who were going to regiment them, and so forth. Therefore, for a long time none of the small businessmen saw fit to bring his problems to me. However, they were so busy watching the front door to see that socialists did not get in that they forgot to close the back door, and they found that their good free enterprising friends in the chain stores and corporations had been able to sneak in through the back door, sneak right up and catch them by the throat and strangle them.
One small businessman in my constituency came to me not very long ago. For many years he had been operating a small store. He had saved up all his life savings and he tried to enlarge his store and make it into a small supermarket. He wanted to know where all these stories had come from about money not being available. He said, "There is lots of money available. All you have to do is put a mortgage on your store, sign over all your life insurance, offer a discount here and there, and you will wind up paying 40 per cent." There is lots of money available. This is the biggest problem we have to face today. It is not a question of money not being available but just how much you are willing to pay for it. The money that a small businessman cannot get from the bank he can get from the finance company which gets it from the bank, I presume. I do not know where else you get it. But you have to pay three times, four times and five times the interest that is charged by the banks, and that money is always available, provided you are willing to pay usury rates for it.

If we had a little more work done on this problem and a little less talk about it, then we would have some hope of coming up with something to keep the small businessman in business in this country. If we do not, we shall find that the small businessman, like the family farmer, will pass out of existence.
I think it is time to get busy, do more work and have less talk so that we will have a vote on this resolution before ten o'clock tonight.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Speaker, perhaps all of us in the house this evening have noticed-and the hon. member who just took his seat drew attention to this fact-that there has been some difficulty this afternoon and tonight in defining big and small business. We have asked ourselves the question, when is a business big and when is it small? What is a big business; what is a small business? The very fact that there is difficulty in definition justifies the policy approach which has been taken by the present government. As I shall explain later, I feel there is no one piece of legislation, there is no one single cure-all that can be hoped for to correct what a lot of us really and sincerely believe to be the situation which is facing the so-called small businessman. I repeat, myself, the very fact that there is some difficulty in definition encourages my point of view that the government, by its cumulative policies, is following, in so many ways, a wise course.
Inferences were drawn in the house tonight as they were drawn this afternoon that the present government has broken some promises. This is an old trick of the opposition. Inferences were drawn on the floor of the house this afternoon and this evening but not once did hon. members clearly state where we have broken a promise. There were the same old slanderous insinuations but no facts. I challenge them. There was not one constructive debate from an opposition member today. I noticed that hon. members on the government side have come in well prepared and well documented to take part in a debate to encourage small business people. After all there is one thing that can happen in a debate on small business on the floor of this house today. It could' be an informative debate. Out of a debate and discussion such as we could have on the floor of the house lots of valuable information could come forward that could help those who are formulating government policy.
It is not surprising to me that a party that for 22 years forgot not only the little businessman but the little people in general have not made one constructive suggestion in the debate in this house today.


Mr. Hellyer:: Tell us what you propose
to do.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Speaker, I come from a province that has a high regard for free enterprise, that has always supported the policy of individual free enterprise initiative. I do not have the statistics with me but I imagine that we are ahead of the national average in percentage terms in what is called small business and for this reason, it gives me a great deal of pleasure to speak on this resolution tonight. Let us go back to the resolution as proposed by the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter). It reads:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should give urgent consideration to the provision of some means whereby low interest loans may be made available to small business.
I underline the words "some means". Hon. members who have made categorical statements during the debate this afternoon and this evening should take a closer look at the resolution. I repeat, the very words "some means" underline most significantly the fact that there is not one single magical cure-all to solve this most pressing problem that should have a high degree of bipartisan support in this house. That is why I think the opposition are performing what I essentially term an irresponsible function if they try to tell the Canadian people that there is one magic overall cure-all for this most important problem.


Paul Theodore Hellyer: That is what you told them in 1957.


William Heward Grafftey: I should like to say that the debate this afternoon and this evening has pointed out to me that while there might be an intermediate course for bettering the situation that is facing small business and small businessmen, there are two courses that definitely can be followed in relation to the question. The first course, as we have learned from speaker after speaker, is not unlike the one that the United States adopted in 1953, when they set up a temporary small business agency which has since become an agency of a permanent nature. This also required a definition of small business.
However, for the lack of a better expression I may say there is the indirect effect that government policy could have in helping small business. It might have, as hon. members on the government side of this house have shown what you could almost term a direct effect in helping the small businessman in this country. It is this cumulative effect about which I want to talk. Time and time again we have made references to the small business section that has been established in the Department of Trade and Commerce. I would say that our approach to economic and business policy has been a wise one, not only
Low Interest Loans to Small Business for the large businessman but also for the small businessman. We have got away from that Howe attitude which resulted in the little man being forgotten for 22 years.
In giving thought, Mr. Speaker, to the part this cumulative effect has played, I want to make reference to the fact the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) has made a great effort to cut down the non-statutory expenditures in our budget. This is helping in a very real way to reduce interest rates. When we are going in the direction of a balanced budget we are making a very real contribution toward holding the line on these rates.
I think it has to be said again and again to the Canadian people, and we should discuss it as hon. members in this house, that the government itself is a very large borrower. When the Minister of Finance takes such a reasonable course, this also is one of those things, I repeat, which helps with this general problem.
Another indirect policy, if you want to call it that, to which I should like to refer, is indicated in the remarks of the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) in relation to this proposition. I should like to say-


Mr. Rouleau:: He does not care what you say.


William Heward Grafftey: And you do not care what we do. For 22 years you did not care about the people of Canada, either, and you know where you are now. You are going to stay there a long time. You do not care about the little businessman, I know that. I recall in opposition days when the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) would seek to give the impression of the bad Tories, the lackeys of St. James and Bay streets. Just the other day he said that we were attacking the big bad banks, and that is the old divide and rule game. The Liberals used to try to divide the big man from the little man. When we were in opposition we were the lackeys of Bay and St. James streets, and today we are attacking the big bad banks. A little consistency might be a good thing. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate used to join up with the former minister of finance to try to paint this picture, but it is not true today that the government does not care about the plight of the small businessman.
I should like to say that our party believes you cannot-although I am going to try to arrive at what some people might think is a definition later on-just draw a line between what you might call a big man and a little man as easily as all that. At the same time I do believe many speakers today have made reference to the fact that when the Prime
846	HOUSE OF
Low Interest Loans to Small Business Minister was speaking on television to the bankers of this country he was making a very real, honest policy plea to the banks. I think all of us who have been in small business or who have had anything to do with the small businessmen in our constituencies realize exactly what they are up against.
When the larger businessman is up against a problem, what happens? I visualize this type of situation. He is called in by the bank manager who says that there is a tough situation ahead so you had better broaden yourself out; we will give you a bigger loan limit, so to speak. The bigger businessman is forewarned of what you might call a credit pinch. However, the small businessman is not warned. When times get rough his credit is just cut off. He does not know where he is going. He finds he cannot get credit or the credit he has is cut off, whereas the bigger man is forewarned.
Oftentimes I suggest-I am subject to correction on this but it is something that I suspect-the larger businessman is not using up his full line of credit and yet the banks themselves call this extended credit. This makes it increasingly difficult for the little man to get credit which should be available to him. The banks should study this aspect of the problem.
I should like to draw an analogy for you. About three weeks ago I had the great pleasure of being invited to the Montreal forum to see a hockey game. You could not get tickets. There were thousands on the waiting list. As I went into the forum, I noticed there were box seats which were empty while the children in the poorer districts would have given their eyeteeth to see a hockey game. The boxes held by large corporations and the wealthy people were empty, while the people on the streets were desirous of seeing a hockey game and some of them perhaps never will see one. I say the same situation applies to credit. The larger corporations are not using up their full line of credit, yet the little man cannot get any. I am subject to correction on this, but this is a debating chamber and we are considering a problem. I believe cognizance should be taken of this fact.
There are no attacks on the banks here, Mr. Speaker. The policy of our government is simply to make sure that these financial institutions realize their stewardship involves more than making a profit. I should like also to join with other speakers in this debate in saying that I fully realize the industrial development bank, as it is currently set up, does not solve the problem we are discussing.
The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) tried to paint a black and white
[Mr. Grafftey.l

situation when he asked the question, are we for government subsidization on bank loans? While it might have been a good question to ask at the time, it has no bearing on this resolution. I point to the fact the resolution says, "by some means", so the question does not fall squarely within the motion.
At this point, I should like to offer what I feel might be a guide, a definition, of this very important problem. Again I come back to the question of a definition. I should like to say that others who have spoken in this house today have called attention to the United States experience and have said that you cannot superimpose the United States experience 100 per cent on our own national picture. In the United States the small business administration has a definition of small business which is as follows:
1.	A wholesaler, with annual sales of less than $5 million.
2.	A retailer (or a dealer in services), with annual volume less than $1 million.
3.	A construction company, whose annual receipts for the preceding three years have been less than $5 million.
4.	A manufacturer:
(a)	must have 250 or less employees:
(b)	manufacturers with between 250 and 1,000 employees are classed as small or large depending on their type of activity.
On the above basis, as was mentioned by another hon. member in this debate, 98 per cent of the United States companies are small businesses.
I should like to draw the attention of the house to some of the measures passed by the 85th congress. There were three important measures dealing with loans and tax relief for small business. The ceiling on the individual loans it may grant was raised from $250,000 to $350,000. This measure might not have too much bearing on our own particular situation here. The interest rate charged was reduced from 6 per cent to 5J per cent. Tax relief was also granted. It took the form of faster tax write-offs on new equipment in the first year after purchase; extension from two to three years of the period for which a loss may be carried back and applied against previous income to gain a retroactive tax refund. This next point is extremely important in relation to small family companies which often times are liquidated because of the difficulty in raising money for succession duty purposes. I refer to the provision made for 10 years instead of 15 months in which to pay estate taxes on a business held by a few persons.
The small business administration was set up in 1953 as a temporary agency to assist smaller concerns to obtain credit. Now it is a permanent independent federal agency

Funds will not go directly to the individual entrepreneurs but to certain qualified investment companies. Under the new law in the United States, the above-mentioned agency has been given $250 million in loan authority to furnish long term equity capital to small businesses.
I repeat that this whole matter in outline, as described in relation to the United States experience, cannot be superimposed on our picture. However, I thought that reference to it was pertinent at the present time.
Therefore in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, let me state simply that, in my opinion, while the government could possibly, like the United States, go into the direct loan field, backing certain loans for small business;- being a free enterpriser at heart I feel that the present government policy is a wise one. The matters that I have outlined-the cumulative effect of the policies we are now following-seem to me to be policies that recognize the problems of the small businessmen and small business and should be pursued to that end.
It is being stressed time and time again that the present administration is wisely following a policy of more goods produced by Canadians for Canadians in Canada. This certainly is encouraging our small businessmen. This certainly is encouraging what we might call our secondary industry and it is all part and parcel of the solution to the problem. The motion at present before the house calls for the provision of some means whereby low interest rates may be made available to small business. I should like to say that the members on the government side certainly have suggested and put on the record of this house many thoughtful suggestions, some of which might be taken up and added to what I repeat is the present wise government policy.


Mr. H. F. Jones (Saskatoon):: Mr. Speaker, may I compliment the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey) on his address here tonight and particularly for the assistance he has given the house with respect to the definition of what is small business. I think that is one of the problems that has been bothering all hon. members this afternoon and this evening. Certainly many have referred to the different definitions which commend themselves to different hon. members as to what in fact constitutes a small business. I think probably the difficulty hon. members find in making that definition is ample justification for the course that the government has been following in assembling information from the small businesses across the country, those who are interested in small business and the various organizations which have
Low Interest Loans to Small Business submitted briefs to the government on this matter containing opinions on what might constitute this particular classification of business. Obviously it is a difficult matter and is going to take a good deal of consideration and research before a final conclusion can be reached.
I was surprised this afternoon to hear interjected into this debate by the Liberals the allegation that this government has not moved rapidly enough in aid of the small businessman. Of course I welcome the fact that after 22 years the Liberals have discovered the small businessman. I am glad they have done so. I think all hon. members will welcome the opportunity that has been afforded for discussion of this important subject at this time in the house.
The hon. member for Humber-St. George's (Mr. Batten) mentioned the contribution the industrial development bank had made towards this problem. I think the observations he made in that regard were helpful. Certainly the industrial development bank has been of assistance to people in this country but obviously he must not be satisfied that the industrial development bank meets the need or else he would not have spoken in favour of this resolution.
I think all hon. members of this house will realize that much remains to be done in order to assist small businessmen in the difficulty they have in meeting the transformation of their businesses necessary to compete with the large enterprises which range across the country. I have seen many representations on this particular subject from individual retailers, from the retail merchants' association, from small manufacturers and from others. One particular contribution that I should like to mention at this time is a private research carried out by Mr. M. A. East, past president of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, a small businessman in my home constituency and a person who has over the years devoted much time and attention to this particular problem.
I recall to hon. members the fact that the submissions of the retail merchants association of Canada, as set forth in a letter addressed to myself, included the proposition that the government should establish loan facilities through the chartered banks for small business to finance necessary capital expense and modernization to meet changing conditions. That is one of the facets of the problem which faces small business. To meet the general problem of small business there was contained in the speech from the throne of May 12, 1958 the following:
In order to assist small business, there will be established a small business section within the administrative machinery oi government. The functions of this organization will be to provide liaison

Low Interest Loans to Small Business
between government and small businesses, to study the problems of small business and to advise on measures necessary to meet them.
This small business branch has been established within the Department of Trade and Commerce. The staff has been employed. Investigations have been undertaken. Liaison has been effected with the United States and with the provinces in an effort to get at the problems which affect small businesses.
Everybody knows from first hand or from representations made by people in their constituencies the general problems affecting particular categories of small business. But the experience in the United States means that a good deal of investigation was necessary before the classification of these problems could be undertaken to a degree which might permit the government to take satisfactory action on them.
In this regard I would like to refer to something the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill) said in this house, as reported in Hansard for July 16, 1959, at page 6140. He was outlining the terms of reference of the small business branch which was established by this government, and he said they were as follows:
1.	To act as a clearing house in referring inquiries of small business to the appropriate departments of the Canadian government or provincial or municipal governments and to various 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.
As at July 16, 1959 the steps which had been taken by the government were outlined by the minister, and I think they should be set forth here in order that a clear understanding of what in fact has taken place may be brought to the attention of all hon. members. The hon. minister went on:
At the present time the branch has seven employees, including an assistant director and three research officers. The size of the staff has been kept small purposely during the initial stage of the branch's development until it is able to assemble information and make a report. The most important duties of the officers of the branch have been to advise on a program based upon the branch's terms of reference and the staff requirements for such a program. An important part of the work of the branch has been a review of studies relating to the problems of small business

in Canada and other countries and with the collection of quantitative and qualitative material on the position of small business in the Canadian economy.
You will notice from the two quotations I have just made, the emphasis I have placed on the direction of the government to the small business branch. They should undertake studies particularly for the guidance of government in developing new policies in this field; and to advise on a program based upon the branch's terms of reference and the staff requirements for such a program. Those are very necessary and very wise directives, because you just cannot develop small business assistance before you have the facts before you. The Minister of Trade and Commerce pointed out in the same debate on page 6141 of Hansard:
-we have to have the facts. It is the assembling of the facts and information that is the duty and responsibility of the small business branch and the senior officials to whom the branch reports, who subsequently report to me.
Then he goes on:
I pointed out that in the United States financial aid to small business was only undertaken after years of investigation and experience in other bodies, and the same thing is going to be true in Canada. We have not said either yes or no with regard to this particular problem and are not going to give an answer one way or another until we have the facts before us.
The situation in the United States, as has been mentioned by the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi was that long before 1953 the United States had been investigating this particular problem, and it was not until 1953 that they were able to establish even a temporary small business agency in order to carry out the initial work in this particular field. When the United States small business agency was authorized in 1958 to make provisions of small business investment companies expectations ran high. People in the United States thought that the program which had been developed up to that time in regard to loans made through the small business investment companies would be a real contribution to the solution of the problem. I would like to refer, if I may, to the feeling which was prevalent in the United States at that time. This is a quotation from Business Week of October 11, 1958:
This summer, congress tried to plug a wide gap in the nation's financial structure by authorizing a system of small business investment companies. Its purpose was simple: to extend to small businesses some of the same access to equity capital and long term financing that large business enjoys.
Suddenly, it's beginning to appear that congress opened up wider vistas than anyone had suspected. No one in Washington was prepared for the interest that has been shown-not only by small businessmen who hope for loans but also, and more significantly, by bankers and big investors. The Small Business Administration, which is still drawing up regulations with publication about three

weeks away, already has received well over 6,000 queries. At least half are concerned with investment possibilities.
Then under the heading "Wave of Excitement" the report goes on:
With this kind of interest on the investment-opportunity side, the system of S.B.A.'s begins to look like one of the most important changes in many years. One Washington official hails it as nothing less than another wave of enthusiasm like that for the mutual funds.
Before dealing with what in fact happened in the United States after their program had been inaugurated I should like to draw to the attention of the house just how this particular program was developed and worked. The S.B.A. had a revolving fund of $50 million to carry through to next June 30, with $200 million to be split between the next two fiscal years. This $250 million is only the seed for the system; the bulk of the capital for the S.B.I.'s will come from private sources.
Business Week, goes on to point out the following:
Emphasis is on the wide distribution of the financial help for small business. S.B.I.'s will doubtless be spotted geographically where the need is greatest and the alternate sources of financing are fewest. Moreover, they are not allowed to tie up more than 20 per cent of their paid-in capital and surplus in any one company they are helping.
Then they point out how they form a small business investment company:
An S.B.I. is a corporation set up by private organizers. They need a minimum of $300,000 in capital to start with, but up to $150,000 of this can be obtained from the Small Business Administration;
S.B.A. will buy debentures that are subordinated to all other paper except the common stock. There is no set time for redeeming these debentures, which will probably carry a 5 per cent interest rate.
To add to its original working capital, an S.B.I. can also borrow from S.B.A. up to 50 per cent of its paid-in capital and surplus, including whatever S.B.A. provided by buying debentures. A minimumsized S.B.I. thus could borrow another $150,000 at S.B.A.'s 5 per cent or perhaps 51 interest rate.
That was how the plan was to work. I just mention this because the summary of how the plan was to work indicates some of the problems which were faced before they could even contemplate setting up this form of assistance to small business. There was clearly a need to put this idea across and ensure a favourable reception for this project in the minds of the United States investors. The arrangement was that the S.B.A. would provide one part of the funds, and to that would be added the capital supplied by other investors. The S.B.I's have only one function: to provide the small business with long term funds, either through loans of up to 20 years, with a discretionary 10-year extension possible, or through purchase of debentures that are convertible into common
Low Interest Loans to Small Business stock at the creditor's option and at a sound market value fixed at the time the debentures are issued.
An S.B.I. can borrow and reinvest as much as four times its capital and surplus in contrast to regulated investment companies in the past whose borrowing has been limited to one third of their total assets. Thus, even the smallest S.B.I., with $150,000 in private capital matched by $150,000 from S.B.A., is empowered to line up $1.5 million for investment.
Then again, the S.B.A. set up a definition of small business to which reference has already been made. Perhaps it would be worth while to repeat it. The definition varies according to the industry concerned but generally the term covers retail and service businesses grossing up to $1 million a year, wholesale businesses grossing up to $5 million and manufacturing operations with up to 250 employees. In some industries the ceiling rises to 1,000.
That is an indication of the necessity for careful planning in this field and the considerations the S.B.A. had to take into account before developing the program which they put into effect. The result of the experience in the United States which, as I have said, was certainly hailed at its inception with great enthusiasm, is a result which we must all bear in mind when we are considering this resolution.
For a number of years the lending operations of this agency have been under criticism. The small business investment companies which were authorized under the small business investment act has been disappointingly small in number, and the field of operation has been restricted. It has been found that the loans made by these investment companies have had to be made at interest levels considerably above the general rate applied on similar loans to other borrowers. Once again the necessity for careful investigation is apparent to ensure that the small borrower is credit worthy and has a reasonable chance of utilizing the borrowed funds with success. These considerations have made the administrative cost of these loans very high. This has been the experience in the United States. As I say, the project was received with enthusiasm despite the intensive preparatory work which had been undertaken. The results have been disappointing.
This is no reason at all for us to say that this is something which should not be done. It is, however, reason for us to develop assistance to small businesses on a sound basis, on a basis which has been developed by contact with small businesses across the country and with those who have made a study of

Low Interest Loans to Small Business small businesses in order that our own small business branch may come to a sound determination of the policies which it recommends to the cabinet.
The diversity of problems encountered by small businessmen cannot be underestimated. The financial problem is not the sole problem; it is only one of the problems. Small businessmen must be assisted along a broad front-management, education, research, control of monopoly and the elimination of unfair competition are all subjects which must be dealt with, and are vitally important in our consideration of this particular matter. It is apparent from United States experience in this program of assistance to small business that the S.B.A. has been very conscious of the importance of management education.
As has been mentioned already this afternoon, it has conducted a widespread and worth-while educational program with seven different types of bulletin to provide information to the small businessman about the ways in which he can cut costs, the ways in which he can obtain markets, the ways in which he can improve his management, the ways in which he can start new businesses and about the ways in which small manufacturers as well as retailers may be assisted.
This program which is being developed by the government along these lines meets part of the problem. Hon. members will realize from what I have said that this small business branch which has been set up is intended not only to assist small businesses directly but also to assist them by providing advice to the government as to the best way in which small business can be helped. The S.B.A. in the United States has realized that the knowledge about the role and the importance of small business in the economy is very far from being complete. In consequence of this, last year the small business administration launched a research program. They have already been carrying on a program in which state agencies and educational institutions carry on projects to add to the knowledge of small businessmen. I suggest that all these steps are necessary in Canada.
The small business associations have been asking the government to assist them to obtain capital funds and in addition to attempting to realize improvements of good management practice they have asked the assistance of the government in promoting such good management practices.
I think all of us should become more fully aware of the important work that is being done in this area. In establishing the small business branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce this government has taken

a forward step of a type which will result in real assistance to the small businessmen of this country.
In the process of coming to grips with the whole problem of interested groups and individuals in this particular field, many have been making their views known to the government as well as to individual members of parliament. As I mentioned, I have received a number of briefs myself in which groups and individuals had set forth their views as to the way in which the government could be of assistance in this particular field. One such that I mentioned was a study carried out by Mr. M. A. East. In his letter of transmittal to me of his research brief dated October 20, 1958, he said:
It has become increasingly evident that the position of privately held companies in our Canadian economy is becoming rapidly less tenable respecting growth programming in relationship to that being developed by public companies.
I respectfully submit that the main reason for this condition resolves itself around the fact that privately held companies are restricted today in the matter of expansion programming because of capital account expenditure requirements and because of tax impact.
Canadian banks have done a good job over the years respecting the financing of inventories and accounts receivable for all forms of business, whether publicly owned or privately owned. Canadian bankers, nevertheless, with some exceptions, have not made long term capital account loans readily available to privately held companies. This situation has now reached a point where privately held companies cannot meet the capital costs of new machinery, equipment and plant that is required to match the expansion programming demanded of it. This situation, I believe, is especially true in the province of Saskatchewan.
Mr. East then goes on to point out some of the problems that small businesses are faced with in actual competition. He states:
May I draw to your attention a recent press release which indicated that a large steel fabricating plant is contemplated for establishment in Saskatchewan in 1959. The company in question is a public company. It has substantial holdings in Manitoba and Alberta, as well as in other parts of Canada; and now the economic pattern respecting the province of Saskatchewan has justified a capital account expenditure by this organization, which I understand will be very substantial.
By the word "our" in the next sentence, Mr. East refers to his own privately owned company. He went on to state:
Our privately held company is, therefore, faced with a condition whereby a large public company will be entering the Saskatchewan market because of the fact that an expanding Saskatchewan market exists which is not currently being adequately served by our own organization or others. It is, therefore, especially significant that our own privately held company is being placed in a noncompetitive position with a public company because of capital account. This condition has been developed during the past 10 years even though the profits of our organization have been in alignment with the national level and even though the net

earnings of the company have been largely plowed back into plant improvements and modernization by our company.
He then goes on to make a number of suggestions. I see that I shall not have time to go into his suggestions this evening. There is not sufficient time left at my disposal to embark on an adequate explanation of the solutions that he proposes other than to say that he feels there should be a source of long term borrowings through conventional sources such as banks, insurance companies and so forth that are able to provide this assistance for the benefit of privately held organizations.
He also makes reference to certain tax advantages which should be made available to small businesses in order that they may compete with large corporations on something approaching a fair basis. Large corporations are able to obtain finances by going into the public market with bonds and debentures, a course which small businesses certainly cannot follow. Small businesses have to depend for their capital at the present time on what they can borrow from the bank and on capital additions provided by friends or which can be plowed back from profits into their businesses.
I believe from what I have said this evening it has been amply demonstrated that the problem of small businesses is a very complex one. The problem of providing suitable assistance to them is one that must be solved in the light of the facts rather than upon a knowledge of partial facts. I believe that some form of capital assistance for small business particularly through the provision of funds at reasonable rates of interest would be most helpful but before this country embarks on such a course I should like to see analysed the reasons for the lack of interest in the United States in the small business investment companies which were so widely hailed at the time of their inception and which have apparently failed to do the job which the small business associations there set forth for them.
I believe it is evident that before this present resolution could be acted upon the house and the government should have brought before them not only the facts of the experience in the United States but also the facts of the Canadian situation which undoubtedly parallels in some degree the United States experience in terms of small business conditions.



PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
"citizen"
Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege based on a Canadian Press report appearing
Question of Privilege
in this evening's Ottawa Citizen entitled, "Twenty Five Homes Raided in Toll Probe".
I should like to read three paragraphs from this article:
Montreal (CP)-The R.C.M.P. has launched a search for evidence of fraud or theft in toll collections on Montreal's Jacques Cartier and Victoria bridges. They raided homes of 25 collectors during the weekend, it was learned today.
Superintendent R. J. Belec of the R.C.M.P. said papers and documents relating to income tax returns and property holdings were seized.
He did not elaborate and refused to comment on reports that previous investigations disclosed no evidence that could he used in court.
The R.C.M.P. began investigations two months ago after transport minister Hees said in Ottawa that revenues on the Jacques Cartier bridge increased sharply last summer after automatic toll collectors were installed. A parliamentary investigation into the toll collections is to begin in Ottawa this week.
You, sir, will recall that the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) informed the house at the time he made his motion for an investigation into the tolls, and I quote from page 766 of Hansard:
There was no evidence that would support criminal charges.
He also assured the house that the moment any prima facie evidence is found against any person by that committee the investigation of that part of the case would be concluded.
It is true that the committee has not yet begun its investigation, and therefore the committee has found no evidence; but the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which the minister told us had not found any evidence up until the time he made his motion, is now reported to be collecting evidence and to have seized papers and documents.
My question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, which affects every hon. member in this house is that any investigation by a committee of this house should be suspended until the police investigation is completed and the law has taken its course; otherwise there will be two parallel investigations, and the investigation by the committee of this house might well deprive those involved of their right to a fair trial.
I feel sure that if the Minister of Transport had known that a further police investigation is under way he would not have made his motion as he did on Friday. I am sure he will be as anxious as we are to see that parliament does nothing to interfere with the course of justice. Therefore, I submit respectfully, that the investigation by the committee of this house should be suspended, and that the government should give consideration, if the police investigation warrants it, to proceeding instead with a judicial inquiry.
In fairness to myself I think I should add that I have made every effort to get in touch

Question of Privilege
with both the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Justice (Mr. Fulton) because of the statement which I have made; I have not succeeded and I am sure that both are detained because of other business.


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I entertain some doubts as to whether this is a proper question of privilege. I doubt the wisdom of entering upon this alleged question of privilege at five minutes before the closing hour today, when it might more properly be raised at the next sitting of the house, and particularly so when the minister of the crown who might wish to make a statement on this particular case is not present.
The hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Che-vrier) has indicated that he made an effort to locate the Minister of Transport, who happens to be out of town on this occasion, and yet he has persisted in pursuing this question of privilege in the minister's absence.
The complaint that is being made by the hon. member for Laurier relates directly to the proposed investigation which was indicated to the house by the Minister of Transport, and I think that that minister should have been here before this matter was raised and certainly should be here before any conclusion is reached with regard to it. I note in Beauchesne's "Parliamentary Rules and Forms", fourth edition, 1958 at page 96, citation 105(3), the following:
A matter of privilege must be one which has recently arisen involving the privileges of the house, and calling for its immediate interposition.
I doubt very much whether the house needs to interpose itself at five minutes to ten o'clock on Monday night with regard to an investigation which has really not been entered upon by the House of Commons, although the ground work has been laid through the appointment of a committee.
The question of privilege is founded on a report which has appeared in one of the Ottawa papers. Whether that report is accurate or not the house is not in a position to discover at this moment, and I presume we would need to have the Minister of Justice here to confirm or deny the fact that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police had been conducting the investigation alleged to have been made in the newspaper report.
I notice in Sir T. Erskine May's "Parliamentary Practice", 14th edition, at page 140 that when complaints are raised against members-and in effect this is a complaint against hon. members of this house-the comment is as follows:
Before making a complaint against a member it is the practice, as a matter of courtesy, to give him notice beforehand.
[Mr. Chevrier.l
If a member who makes a complaint against another member has failed or been unable to give the member notice of his intention to do so, or if although the latter has been given notice he neglects to attend, the more regular course is to adjourn further consideration of the matter of the complaint to a future day and to order the member whose conduct is impugned to attend the house in his place on that day.
I am not suggesting that the honour of any hon. member is being impugned on this occasion.


Lionel Chevrier: No complaints are made here.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I do suggest that without the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Justice present this matter of privilege should not be proceeded with because, as these comments go on to explain:
Where the member complained of is present when the complaint is made-
And this complaint refers to actions taken or contemplated by members of this house- *-it is the rule that he should be heard in explanation or exculpation as soon as the question on the motion founded upon the complaint is proposed from the chair-
And so on. I submit that in this particular instance that if there is no motion supporting this question of privilege there is nothing that the house can consider as being before it at this present moment, and I suggest that the matter be deferred. If the hon. member for Laurier wishes to raise it at the next sitting of the house, when the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Justice will likely be present, that will be the most suitable occasion to bring the matter to our attention.


Lionel Chevrier: May I be allowed to say a word in reply to what was said by the leader of the house who raised the point that first there was no question of privilege. I should like to draw to Your Honour's attention the fact that the matter could not have been raised earlier than it was because the committee sits tomorrow morning at ten o'clock. It will, therefore, not be possible to raise the matter when the house meets tomorrow afternoon at 2.30 o'clock. It will then have been too late; the committee will then have been seized of and entered upon the investigation. Therefore, this was the only time available following the report which appeared in the afternoon Citizen, and this was brought to my attention about six o'clock tonight. It was, therefore, not possible for me to raise it earlier than I did.
With reference to the other matter, I am afraid the leader of the house has entirely misinterpreted my suggestion. I have made no complaint. I have raised a question of

privilege and I have brought it to the attention of the house and the government in that, it seems to me, it would be entirely irregular to have two investigations being carried on at the same time; otherwise, there will be grave prejudice done to those who may afterwards be charged with criminal offences. I am simply bringing it to the attention of the government so that between now and ten o'clock tomorrow morning they will have an opportunity to consider the question of privilege I raise.


Mr. Speaker:: Before anyone speaks further I want to assure myself that I understand the point raised by the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier). He complains that it would not be proper for the committee to proceed with this investigation in view of some act, some investigation or action of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police which has intervened since the house referred this matter to the committee. It seems to me this is more a matter relating to the proceedings of the house than a matter of privilege. I do not believe the hon. member asks for a statement that the committee is incompetent to proceed. It may be inadvisable for the committee to proceed if the subject matter before it should also be before the courts by way of a criminal charge. I do not believe the committee would proceed under those circumstances. The house itself usually observes the proprieties by refusing to discuss matters which are before the courts.
I think, perhaps, the hon. member by raising his point has done all he can do. I do not understand that he is proposing any motion. Do the two gentlemen who are rising desire to speak?


Mr. M. J. A. Lambert (Edmonton West):: With all due respect to the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier), first of all I would submit to you these representations are made on the basis of an unsubstantiated newspaper report. Second, the fact that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police may have commenced an investigation does not tell us the nature of the evidence that may be disclosed. There may be no evidence at all.


Lionel Chevrier: That is not what the report says.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: There is nothing disclosed in the report as to the nature of the evidence. Unless the hon. member for Laurier is reading into the newspaper report the fact that there will be conclusive evidence on which a charge or charges may be based, then I do not see that he has a point. There are no charges laid nor are any in contemplation. Therefore, how could there possibly be a question of the privileges and rights of this house? I fail to
Business of the House see, with all due respect, how this point is properly taken at this time.


Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: I want to agree with the substance of the question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier). I think it would be most inappropriate for a committee of this house to proceed with an investigation that is being paralleled by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Their investigation may lead to a court action which could be prejudiced by the investigation of a committee of this house. I am quite confident in my own mind that the members of the government would not approve of a committee of this house undertaking that kind of an investigation.
In so far as action from here on is concerned, Mr. Speaker, I would think that this is a question to be decided by the committee; that the committee itself has the power to make whatever investigation it feels is within its terms of reference. I would think that the members of the committee, tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock might very carefully examine the question of privilege that has been raised in this house, and should be most cautious in any investigation that they may undertake in order that the rights and privileges of citizens in this country may not be infringed.


Mr. Speaker:: I think the matter has been sufficiently discussed now that hon. members will know how to proceed from this point forward. In my opinion this is not a question of the privileges of the house, it is a question of the propriety of a committee proceeding, and the propriety of its proceeding tomorrow can be raised in the committee. If there are circumstances which make it improper for the committee to proceed, for example in the face of a pending decision of the courts, that would be a relevant matter to be raised then. I do not think there is a prima facie question of privilege of the house. It is rather a question of the privileges of persons outside the house.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

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


Gordon Minto Churchill: Tomorrow we will proceed in committee of supply with the consideration of supplementary estimates which we were considering last Friday. If they are concluded, then we will take, first, the resolution standing on the order paper in the name of the Minister of Justice, being an amendment to the Department of Justice Act; second, the one being in the name of the Minister of Public Works, an amendment to the National Housing Act.

Business of the House


Mr. Speaker:: Before I leave the chair, may I ask if the arrangements for Wednesday and Thursday have been completed? Would it toe in order for the house to make an order for the termination of the debate on Thursday?


Gordon Minto Churchill: 1 meant to refer to that, Mr. Speaker. Our understanding last week was that we would have a debate on external affairs on Wednesday and Thursday. It was not expressly stated at that time that it should terminate on Thursday, but that is what I should like to have the house consent to, and on the order paper will appear the normal motion transferring the items in the estimates of external affairs to the committee which will launch the house into the debate. I would hope the house would agree with
me that in arranging for this debate on Wednesday and Thursday it will terminate Thursday night at ten o'clock.


Lionel Chevrier: That was our agreement, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Just so that the order and the agreement of the house will be on record, it is understood if the debate on external affairs is launched on Wednesday on the motion referring the estimates to the committee that debate will be concluded at the time of adjournment on Thursday at ten o'clock, unless it is concluded before that time.


Some hon. Members:: 
[Stage Direction]
It being seven minutes after ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
FEBRUARY 8,	I960			855
			Questions	
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 1- Since		1950 have any persons or		corporations
been fined for infractions of the Combines Investi-				
The following answers, deposited with the gation	Act	or section 411 or 412 of	the CriminalClerk of the house, are printed in the official °^,de^	so,	(a) what	are the names of the persons	report of debates pursuant to standing order or corporations so fined? (b) what was the amount	39: of the	fine	in each	case? (c) when	was the fineimposed?	d) what infractions occasioned the fine?	COMBINES ACT AND CRIMINAL CODE INFRACTIONS j\nswer fry; Hon.	E. D. Fulton	(Minister of
Question No. 31-Mr. Howard: Justice)		:		
1.	Yes. 2.				
(o)	(6)	(e)	(d) 0)Amount	Date fine	InfractionPerson or corporation	of fine	imposed	against (2)Hobbs Glass Limited	$ 10,000	Oct. 6, 1950	C.C., s. 498Pilkington Brothers (Canada) Limited	10,000	"	Consolidated Glass Limited	10,000	Advance Glass & Mirror Limited	2,500	Canadian Plate & Window Glass Limited	2,500	UExcelsior Plate Glass Company, Limited	2,500	"	J. P. O'Shea & Company, Limited	2,500	"	Queen City Glass Company, Limited	2,500	Lloyd's Glass Co	1,500	Canadian Bakeries Limited	10,000	Oct. 2, 1951	C.C., s. 498Weston's Bread and Cake (Canada) Limited	9,000	"McGavin Bakeries Limited, Winnipeg	8,000	-McGavin Limited, Edmonton	1,000	"McGavin Limited, Vancouver	1,000	"Edmonton City Baking Limited	1,000	Eddy Match Company Limited	25,000	Oct. 29, 1951	C.I. Act, s. 32Commonwealth Match Co. Ltd	15,000	Canada Match Co. Ltd	10,000	Federal Match Limited	10,000	-	Valcourt Company Ltd	25,000	"	The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company of Canada, Limited...	10,000	Sept. 24, 1953	C.C., s. 498Dominion Rubber Company, Limited	10,000	"	UDunlop Tire and Rubber Goods Company Limited	10,000	"	"Gutta Percha & Rubber, Limited	10,000	U	The B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company of Canada, Limited	10,000	Dominion Rubber Company, Limited	10,000	Nov. 23, 1953	C.C., s. 498Gutta Percha & Rubber, Limited	10,000	The B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company of Canada, Limited	10,000	((	ftAlfred Lambert Incorporated	10,000	"	UKaufman Rubber Company, Limited	10,000	"	The Miner Rubber Company (Limited)	10,000	ltNorthern-Woodstoek Rubber Limited	10,000	*	11The Rubber Association of Canada	10,000	Firestone Tire & Rubber Company of Canada, Limited	10,000	If	ifThe Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company of Canada, Limited...	10,000	Dominion Rubber Company, Limited	10,000	The B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company of Canada, Limited	10,000	"	Dunlop Tire and Rubber Goods Company Limited	10,000	Seiberling Rubber Company of Canada, Limited	10,000	The General Tire and Rubber Company of Canada Limited.. ..	10,000	Gutta Percha & Rubber, Limited	10,000	"	The Rubber Association of Canada	10,000	Howard Smith Paper Mills, Limited	10,000	June 22, 1954 C.C., s. 498	The E. B. Eddy Company	10,000	Provincial Paper, Limited	10,000	"	Rolland Paper Company, Limited	10,000	"	Alliance Paper Mills, Limited	10,000	Don Valley Paper Co., Limited	10,000	Canada Paper Company	4,000	856	HOUSE OF Questions	COMMONS	(a)	Cb)	(c)	(d)Amount	Date fine	InfractionPerson or corporation	of fine	imposed	against
Biintin Reid Paper Company Limited....
Fred W. Halls Paper Company	
Kruger Paper Company	
T. B. Little Papers Limited	
McFarlane, Son and Hodgson (Limited)...
La Cie J. B. Rolland et fils	
United Paper Mills, Limited	
Whyte-Hooke Papers Limited	
Wilson Munroe Company Limited	
Buntin-Gillies

Mr. Howard: 1.	How many inmates of penal institutions under the authority of the federal government, by institution, have been released pursuant to the prerelease or gradual release system?
2.	What has been the experience of this system insofar as reformation, rehabilitation and recidivism are concerned?
Answer by: Hon. E. D. Fulton (Minister of
Justice):
1.	During the years 1955 to 1959 inclusive there were 132 inmates of penal institutions under the authority of the federal government released pursuant to the pre-release or gradual release system. There were from Dorchester penitentiary, 7; St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary, 10; Federal training centre, 2; Kingston penitentiary, 28 (male), 41 (female); Joyceville institution, 1; Collin's Bay penitentiary, 2; Manitoba penitentiary, 20; Saskatchewan penitentiary, 3; British Columbia penitentiary, 18.
2.	The general purpose of such a system or program prior to the release of an inmate on parole or at the expiry of his sentence is, especially in the case of longer sentences, to help him gradually readjust to community life and, in all cases, to assist him complete his post-release plans.
It is not possible at this experimental stage of this program to say much more than that immediate benefits have been realized where inmates have been enabled to obtain employment, pursue trades and education training programs, renew relationships with family.
The total answer may be known later from a pilot study which is now under way in the national parole service.



JACQUES CARTIER BRIDGE


Mr. Fisher: 1.	Has the government any employees connected with the operations of the Jacques Cartier bridge?
2.	If so, how many?
3.	What is their status, by position, and in relation to the civil service?
4.	What hirings, resignations or dismissals have taken place since January 1957?
5.	In connection with any of these, have recommendations regarding any employees been made by any members of parliament?
6.	If so, by whom, about what persons, at what dates, and to what effect?
Answer by: Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of
Transport):
1.	Yes. National harbours board advise as follows:
2.	49.
3.	National harbours board employees-* not under the civil service commission,-44; Comptroller of the treasury branch of the Department of Finance-under the civil service commission,-5.
4.	(a) Hirings, 28;	(b) Rehirings (under
grievance procedure), 7; (c) Transfers from other departments of the harbour, 23; (d) Retired, 3; (e) Resignations, 18; (f) Dismissals, 17.
Note: The above figures do not include students employed as temporary toll collectors or clerks for the summer months only.
5.	Yes.
6.
(a) Employees hired:
Name of employee	Recommended by	Date of Recommendation	Auclair, J. R.	A. Vincent, M.P.	March	14, 1957Law, R. C.	Y. Leduc, M.P.	Oct.	16, 1956Turcotte, A.	J. P. Deschatelets, M.P.	j Jan. (April	25, 1957 23, 1957Leger, C. E.	J. A. Bonnier, M.P.	Sept.	6, 1956Fournier, H.	Roch Pinard, M.P.	Nov.	26, 1956P. Sevigny, M.P.	Sept.	22, 1959Gagne, W.	A. Gillet, M.P.	Oct.	27, 1958Lesiege, F.	C. E. Campeau, M.P.	Oct.	22, 1958
Questions
(b)	No employee resigned as a result of a recommendation made by any member of parliament.
(c)	No employee was dismissed as a result of a recommendation made by any member of parliament.



ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY MITRE AND SECTOR GATES

Mr. Argue: 1.	Who was the prime contractor and subcontractor for (a) fabrication; (b) erecting; (c) painting, of the mitre gates and sector gates for the St. Lawrence seaway authority at St. Lambert, Cote Ste. Catherine, upper and lower Beauharnois?
2.	What was the prime contractor's price on accepted tender for mitre gates at each of above places?
3.	Have any reports been made by members of the inspection division of the St. Lawrence seaway authority or Warnock-Hersey Company Limited (inspection service) in connection with unsatisfactory (a) fabrication; (b) erection; (c) painting; (d) operation, of mitre gates and sector gates at the above places?
4.	If so, what was the nature of each such report, the date and numbers of each, and the name or names of officials signing such reports?
Answer by: Hon. George H. Hees (Minister
of Transport):
The St. Lawrence seaway authority advises as follows:
1.	For mitre gates: Prime contractor, Canadian Vickers Limited.
Subcontractors, (a) fabrication, none; (b) erection, Provincial Engineering Ltd.; (c) paintings, John Davidson & Sons Ltd.
For sector gates:	Prime contractor,
Dominion Bridge Company Limited.
Subcontractors, (a) fabrication, Maritime Steel & Foundries Ltd. (2 of 6 pairs of gates); (b) erection, same as (a); (c) paintings, R. F. Walsh Company Ltd.
2.	$4,269,825 for all mitre gates.
3 and 4. In the normal routine of fulfilling their responsibilities, many progress reports were made by officials of the inspection division of the St. Lawrence seaway authority and Warnock-Hersey Company, which from time to time referred to parts of the work which required rectification. Such reports, which have the status of internal communications, received the full consideration of the chief engineer.



NUNS' ISLAND BRIDGE, MONTREAL

Mr. Loiselle: 1.	In what year was the bridge crossing the St. Lawrence ovec Nuns' island, now known as the Champlain bridge, authorized?
2.	Who made the announcement and what was the estimate of cost?
3.	How many contracts were let for the construction of this bridge, what are the names of the contractors, the date contracts were awarded and the price of each?
4.	How many subcontracts were let for the construction of this bridge, what are the names of the subcontractors, the date contracts were awarded and the price of each?
5.	What is the present estimate of the cost and the date of completion of the bridge?
6.	When the bridge is opened to the public, what will be its potential capacity for motor vehicles?
7.	Where is the exact location of the Champlain bridge exit in Montreal?
8.	Is there an understanding with Montreal authorities to extend the exits to Dorchester boulevard? If so, what are the details?
Answer by: Hon. George H. Hees (Minister
of Transport):
National harbours board advise as follows:
1.	Champlain bridge was authorized in 1955.
2.	Hon. George Marler, former minister of transport, made the announcement August 17, 1955. Estimate of cost was $35,000,000 not including interest during construction.
3.	Ten major contracts have been awarded as follows:
860 HOUSE OF COMMONS Questions				
Contract	Contractor	Amount	Date	Fill material, north end, Nuns' island bridge.	Edouard Monette Ltee	$ 108,332.72	July	25, 1957Piers IE, 1W, 2E, and 2W, Nuns' island bridge	Atlas Construction Co. Limited	638,863.34	July	25, 1957Fill south approach, Nuns' island bridge -	Walsh-Canadian Construction Co....	56,144.30	Sept. 25, 1957	Construction of temporary causeway from City of Montreal to Nuns' island	Edouard Monette Ltee	298,851.40	Feb.	26, 1958Construction of piers and abutments, section 3 of Nuns' island bridge	The Foundation Company of Canada Limited	1,640,650.00	July	29, 1958Supply and placing of fill on Nuns' island....	Miron Construction Limited	178,743.85	Sept. 19, 1958	Extension of St. Pierre collector outlet	McNamara (Quebec) Limited	343,223.00	June	5, 1959Construction of superstructure, section 3 of Champlain bridge	Creaghan & Archibald Limited	1,044,540.00	July	17, 1959Construction of piers and superstructure, sections 5 and 7A of Champlain bridge...	McNamara (Quebec) Ltd. Key Construction, and Deschamps...	8,317,797.00	June	29, 1959Construction of superstructure, section 6 of Champlain bridge	Dominion Bridge Company Limited	5,907,000.00	Oct.	2, 19594.	(a) Five.(b)	The names of the subcontractors are- 1. J. G. Fitzpatrick Co. Ltd., 2. J. I. Haas Company of Canada Ltd., 3. Charles Duran-ceau Ltee., 4. Montor Construction Company,5.	Laurent & Gendron Ltee.(c)	Details regarding the dates and prices of subcontracts are not in the possession of the national harbours board.5.	(a) $30,500,000, not including interest during the construction period; (b) Late in 1961 or early spring of 1962.6.	12,000 vehicles per hour.7.	The approach on the Montreal end of the bridge will be between the C.N.R. railway line and the boundary between the city of Montreal and the city of Verdun. The exact points of exit are under negotiation.8.	No.



EXPORTS TO EUROPE AND U.K.

Mr. Badanai: 1.	What quantity of Canadian (a) wheat; (b) bacon; (c) dairy products; (d) uranium, was shipped to the European market during (i) the year 1958; (ii) the year 1959?
2.	What were the total sales of lumber to Great Britain (a) during the year 1958; (b) during the year 1959?
Answer by: Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister ot Trade and Commerce:
* See page 861.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION


Mr. Boulanger: 

HOUSING


Mr. Boulanger: 1.	What was the amount of reserves relating to mortgage insurance, insurance for home improvement loans and rental guarantees as at December 31, 1959?
2.	How many properties have been taken back by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation on account of default in payments on the part of purchasers?
Answer by: Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of
Public Works):

1.	As at December 31, 1959: Reserve for mortgage insurance $61,082,000; Reserve for home improvement loan insurance, $1,610,000; Reserve for rental guarantees, $2,943,000.
2.	As of December 31, 1959, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation had acquired, as a result of default by purchasers and borrowers, the following properties:
Questions
(i)	Attributable to the mortgage insurance provision of the National Housing Act, 1954, 53 properties.
(ii)	Attributable to other legislation, 60 properties.
In addition, C.M.H.C. acquired a one quarter interest in 179 properties as a result of default under loans made jointly by C.M.H.C. and lending institutions.
*	1. (i) and (ii). Available statistics on exports of the specified commodities to the European market in 1958
and 1959 are as follows:-
		Year 1958		Year 1959
Commodity	Unit	Qty.	Value	Qty. ValueWheat	Bush.	180,293,989	$299,170,365	173,099,409 $290,570,705*Bacon and hams, shoulders and sides, cured or smoked	Cwt.	386	$ 26,295	class discontinuedBacon and sides, Cured, n.o.p	Cwt.	not available	nilDairy products	Cwt.	481,559	$ 6,321,208	1,032,230 $ 17,305,692Uranium ores and concentrates	s	$ 13,816,874	$ 32,864,586
2. (a) and (b). Statistics on sales of lumber to Great Britain are not available. Statistics on exports of lumber to the United Kingdom during 1958 and 1959 are as follows:-
Lumber
Year 1958	Year 1959
M.ft. Value M.ft. Value
437,412 $ 35,886,981	348,543 * 27,647,378
* This classification was discontinued in 1959, a new classification entitled "Bacon and sides, cured, n.o.p. was established. There were no shipments made during 1959. It is not possible to determine from the 1958 figures the breakdown between hams and bacon.

Tuesday, February 9, 1960



RAILWAYS, CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES CONCURRENCE IN FIRST REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE

[Stage Direction]
Mr. G. K. Fraser (Peterborough) presented the first report of the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.