Mr. LEADER:: 1. How many pure bred herds of beef cattle are accredited for T.B. or are now being accredited in each of the provinces?
2.	What are the number of breeds (Shorthorns, Herefords and Aberdeen-Angus) ?
3.	How many herds are under federal supervision as per above?
4.	How many provinces have tuberculosis free areas?
5.	What are the names of such provinces, and what area is under test in each of them?
6.	How many areas in Canada have complied with the regulations and are awaiting federal government action in regard to the initial tuberculosis test?
7.	What are the number of cattle under test in each province, classifying as to breeds, both dairy and beef, including accredited herds?
8.	What is the total number of cattle in Canada?
9.	How many bulls have been purchased by the federal government during the last ten years and loaned to farmers under the bull loaning policy?
10.	What are the number by breeds (beef style) ?
11.	What type of beef animal is in demand in the British market?
12.	Has any preference been expressed for any particular breed?
13.	How many Canadian cattle were exported to Britain in 1937?
14.	Has the government any information in regard to the type of feeder cattle exported by Ireland to the British market?
15.	How many Irish cattle were exported to Great Britain in 1937?

Questions


Mr. GARDINER:: 

NANAIMO, B.C., GOVERNMENT WHARVES AND WHARFINGERS

Mr. TAYLOR (Nanaimo):: 1.	How many government wharves are in existence at the present time in the federal electoral district of Nanaimo?
2.	Where are these wharves situated?
3.	Which of these wharves are in charge of a wharfinger?
4.	What are the names of the wharfingers in each case, and what are the dates of their respective appointments ?
5.	What are the specific duties of each wharfinger, and how is he paid for his services?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	42.
2.	Beaver Point, Brentwood (floating landing) , Burgoyne Bay, Chemainus (floating landing), Cliffside (floating landing), Cowichan Bay, Cowichan Lake, Deep Bay (floating landing) , Degnan'sBay (floating landing),Fernwood (floating landing), Fulford Harbour, Gabriola Island (centre), Ganges, Hope Bay, Kuper Island, Ladysmith, Lyall Harbour, Maples, Maple Bay (floating landing), Mayne Island, Musgraves, Nanaimo Assembly wharf, Nanaimo, Patricia Bay (floating landing), Port Renfrew, Port Washington, Retreat Cove, Roberts Bay (floating landing), Saanichton, Shawnigan Lake (floating landing), Sidney, Sooke, South Pender, Sturdies Bay, Thetis Island, Valdes Island (floating landing), Vesuvius Bay (floating landing), William Head quarantine station:	Main wharf, Coaling
wharf, Bentinck Island (floating landing): Under administration Department of Pensions and National Health; Cole Island-under administration Department of National Defence, Piers Island-under administration of Department of Justice.

Questions
3 and 4. Nanaimo assembly wharf, Frederick J. Lodge, wharfinger appointed March 24, 1938.
5. The specific duties are the supervision and control of the wharf and the collection of the tolls and dues to be paid in respect thereof. The only provision for the remuneration of a wharfinger under the statute is from the tolls and dues collected for the use of the wharf.



BELLS CROSSING, LEEDS COUNTY, ONT, POST OFFICE

Mr. STEWART:: 1.	Is the compensation of the postmaster at Bells Crossing, Leeds county, fixed and paid on the same basis as the compensation of the former postmaster at Rockspring?
2.	Has there been any increase or decrease in the compensation formerly paid for the carriage of mails from the Canadian Pacific railway to the post office?
3.	If so, what is the amount of such increase or decrease?
4.	Has there been any increase or decrease in the compensation of rural mail carriers owing to the removal of the post office from Rockspring to Bells Crossing?
5.	If so, what is the amount of such increase or decrease ?


Mr. EULER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	No. Cost of service to post offices in each case included in the cost of rural mail delivery service.
3.	See answer to No. 2.
4.	A decrease due to the invitation of public tenders and the completion of new contracts.
5.	$249.88 per annum.



YOUTH EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE

Mr. GREEN:: 1.	Has the youth employment committee, appointed under the provisions of National Employment Act 1936, been abolished, and have the members thereof been released from the government service?
2.	If so, on w'hat date or dates, were the different members thereof released?
3.	What sums were paid to each of the different members of this committee for the period from February 1, 1937, to date or to the date or dates of release, as travelling expenses?
4.	What sums were paid to each of such members for such period as living allowance?
5.	Were there any other sums paid to any of the members .of such committee for such period? If so, what were the respective amounts, and what was the nature of such payments?
6.	If any such members have not been released, what sum is now being paid to her, him or them, whether by way of living allowance or otherwise ?


Mr. ROGERS:: 1.	P.C. 2242 of September 2, 1936, appointing members of committee was rescinded by P.C. 245 of February 1, 1938.
2.	Answered by No. 1
3.	Travelling expenses from February 1, 1937, to date of release: Allan Chambers, [DOT]S508.60; A. Montpetit, $71.35; J. McCulley, 8263.82; W. C. Nickerson, nil; R. F. Thompson, $93.30.
4.	Living allowance from February 1, 1937, to date of release: Allan Chambers, $3,480. (Mr. Chambers was chairman of this committee and served continuously until June, 1937); A. Montpetit, $322.50; J. McCulley, $607.50; W. C. Nickerson, nil; R. F. Thompson, $157.50.
5.	No payments other than those shown above.
6.	Mr. R. F. Thompson had resigned from the committee in May, 1937, having been appointed by P.C. 1331 of June 5, 1937, as supervisor of youth training in the department of Labour, at a salary of $312.50 per month. All other members of the committee were released as from February 1, 1938.



CANADA AND GULF TERMINAL RAILWAY MAIL SUBSIDY

Mr. LAPOINTE (Matapedia-Matane):: 1.	What amount is paid to the Canada and Gulf Terminal Railway Company for carrying mail between Mont-Joli and Matane?
2.	Can the contract be cancelled at any time?
3.	Is such contract renewed each year or every four years?


Mr. EULER:: 1.	The Canada and Gulf Terminal Railway is subsidized by the government under the Subsidy Act.
Under this act, when the mail earnings are less than 3 per cent of the government subsidy, payment for the carriage of mails is made to the receiver general. When the mail earnings are over 3 per cent of the government subsidy, the amount in excess of 3 per cent would be paid by the Post Office Department to the railway.
The mail earnings of this railway being less than 3 per cent of the government subsidy, payment for the carriage of mails is made by the Post Office Department to the receiver general in accordance with the provisions of the act.
2 and 3. Answered by No. 1.



* CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-SALARIES OF OFFICIALS

Mr. LAPOINTE (Matapedia-Matane):: 1.	What are the names of the Canadian National Railways officials who receive a salary of $4,000 a year and over?
2.	What is the salary and address of each of such officials ?
Questions


Mr. HOWE:: This is a question having to do with the internal management of the Canadian National Railways and is of a type that all governments have consistently declined to answer. I ask that it be dropped.
Question dropped.



MONTREAL AND TORONTO POST OFFICES-SUNDAY EMPLOYMENT

Mr. DESLAURIERS:: 1.	How many employees work on Sunday at the Montreal post office?
2.	How many hours are they on duty, and what rate of pay do they receive for each working hour?
3.	How many employees work on Sunday at the Toronto post office?
4.	How many hours are they on duty, and what rate of pay do they receive for each working hour?


Mr. EULER:: 1.	The number of employees required to work varies in accordance with the mails to be handled. On a normal Sunday approximately 224 men are on duty.
2.	(a) Approximately 1,432. Determined by the volume of mail to be handled the number of hours of work per employee also varies. Sunday work forms part of the regular week's work and employees who work in excess of the 44 hour week are given corresponding time off in compensation therefor at some later date.
(b) Employees in post offices are paid at annual rates of salary ranging from $1,020 to $1,740 a year.
3.	The number of employees required to work varies in accordance with the mails to be handled. On a normal Sunday approximately 226 men are on duty.
4.	(a) Approximately 1,449. Determined by the volume of mail to be handled the number of hours of work per employee also varies. Sunday work forms part of the regular week's work and employees who work in excess of the 44 hour week are given corresponding time off in compensation therefor at some later date.
(b) Employees in post offices are paid at annual rates of salary ranging from $1,020 to $1,740 a year.



MR. H. E. PELLETIER

Mr. DESLAURIERS:: 1.	Is Mr. H. E. Pelletier of 3587 Ontario street east, Montreal, an employee of the Montreal post office?
2.	If so, has he any other employment
3.	How many days was he absent from duty during September and December, 1937, and January, 1938?
4.	To the knowledge of the department, has Mr. Pelletier purchased any of the leave owing to other employees?


Mr. EULER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Acts somewhat in the capacity of manager of a store owned by his father, aged 76 years, for which he receives approximately $25 a week on the understanding that he supports his two sisters and provides for them in every respect.
3.	September, 1937, 4 days; December, 1937, 12 days; January, 1938, 15 days.
4.	No.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. LAWSON:: 1.	What number of prosecutions were conducted in each province by the weights and measures inspection service during the fiscal year ending March 31, 1938: (a) of independent retail grocery stores and meat markets for the infraction of section 63 and of section 64 of the Weights and Measures Act, giving number under each section separately; (b) of local chain grocery stores and meat markets for infraction of section 63 and of section 64, of the Weights and Measures Act, giving number under each section separately; (c) of national chain grocery stores and meat markets for infraction of section 63 and of section 64, of the Weights and Measures Act, giving number under each section separately?
2.	What were the number of withdrawals and dismissals and the number of convictions secured in each of the above groups of cases?
3.	What were the numbers in each province
of prepackaged goods inspected and the results of such inspections as to overweight, short-weight or correct weight, during the fiscal year ending March 31, 1938, by the -weights and measures inspection service in:	(a) rental
independent grocery stores and meat markets; (b) local chain grocery stores and meat markets; (c) national chain grocery stores and meat markets ?
4.	(a) What were the number of test purchases made by the weights and measures inspection service during the fiscal year ending March 31, 1938, in each province; (b) what were the number of items overweight, short-weight and correct weight in:	(1) groceries,
(2) meats, showing the results separately, for purchases made in independent retail grocery stores and meat markets, local chain grocery stores and meat markets, and national chain grocery stores and meat markets?


Mr. EULER:: Return tabled.


SHIPWRECKS IN CANADLAN WATERS
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	How many wrecks in Canadian waters, during the last three years, were investigated by the wreck commissioner or other officers of the Department of Marine?
2.	What were the names of the ships in each case, and the number drowned or injured?
3.	What were the findings of the wreck commissioner succinctly in each case?



193S

[Stage Direction]
Relief and Agricultural Distress
4.	What were the complete findings in the Sand Merchant case?
5.	Was the said ship sea-worthy, and had it wireless equipment?
6.	Were the owners of the ship "Sand Merchant" prosecuted under the criminal code?
7.	How many men of the department are engaged in life-saving work under federal authority, and at what cost?
8.	What aid has been furnished by American life stations to distressed ships of Canadian register in recent years on the great lakes?
Clarence Decatur Howe: Return tabled.



MAIL CONTRACTS AND SUBSIDIES

Mr. FAIR:: 1.	What amount was paid to the Canadian National and the Canadian Pacific Railways respectively for the carrying of mails in Canada during the fiscal years 1930-31 to 1937-38 inclusive?
2.	Has any subsidy been paid to shipping companies during the above years for carrying mails in addition to contract rates, and, if so, what were the companies and the amounts paid to each?


Mr. RINFRET:: Return tabled.



GRAIN AND GRAIN TRADE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. E. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):: Before the Easter recess 'the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Euler), assured the house that we might expect the report of the Tur-geon grain inquiry commission soon after the house reassembled. Can he now inform the house when we may expect that report? Also, I notice a report in the press that the government propose to have a general revision of the Canada Grain Act this session. Will the minister inform us whether we may expect to get that measure soon?


William Daum Euler: I hope to be able to table the grain commission report this week, perhaps to-morrow.
As far as the revision of the grain act is concerned, I cannot speak positively, but it has been and is still the intention to introduce an amendment to the grain act this session.


Mr. CRERAR:: But not a general revision.



UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, May 3, consideration in committee of Bill No. 105, to assist in the alleviation of unemployment and agricultural distress-Mr. Rogers-Mr. Sanderson in the chair.
On section 4-Agreements with provinces and others.
Mr. HEAPS:: I want to make a special plea to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Rogers) in regard to the position of many of the municipalities in Canada. This has been repeatedly drawn to the attention of the government, but so far without result. We all realize that the government is carrying a great financial burden in connection with unemployment, but the burden is falling far too heavily upon many of our municipalities. Yesterday an hon. member from Montreal gave some figures in regard to the metropolis of the east. I wish to draw particular attention to the position of Winnipeg, mainly as a result of the great load it is bearing as a result of the unemployment situation.
The figures I quote were supplied to me recently by the city clerk of Winnipeg. In 1929, when we were not troubled with the unemployment problem as we are now, Winnipeg spent on unemployment relief $25,914. In the succeeding years Winnipeg has been obliged to bear an almost unbearable load. In 1937 the total cost of unemployment relief in Winnipeg was $3,711,331. Of that sum the city had to pay $1,530,015, approximately forty-one per cent of the total cost. I believe a similarly large figure could be quoted for any other large industrial centre in Canada. So bad has the financial situation become in Winnipeg as a result of unemployment relief that the' city is on the verge of bankruptcy, even though it can show an excellent balance sheet as far as its general financial situation is concerned. But the load she has been compelled to bear through no fault of her own is almost breaking the back of the city.
I believe all hon. members recognize, as it is recognized outside of the house, that unemployment is not a result of the activities or policies of our municipal bodies; therefore it is most unfair that municipalities should be called upon to bear the greatest part of the burden of unemployment relief. As has been already pointed out by myself and other hon. members, the present policy of the government in dealing with unemployment is no different from that of seven or eight years ago, no different from the policy of 1930 and succeeding years. If the government have no other policy than that of dealing with the relief problem from the purely administrative standpoint, instead of trying to do something from the legislative standpoint, the municipalities should not be burdened with this unbearable load by reason of the shortcomings of the federal government.

Relief and Agricultural Distress
The wording of the preamble of the present bill is somewhat different from that of bills of former years. The words used are:
Whereas it is in the national interest that the dominion should continue for a further period to support and supplement the measures of the provinces and other bodies. . . .
The government, instead of assuming responsibility for the unemployment situation, say in this preamble that they will "supplement the measures " of the municipalities and provincial governments. I should expect any government under the circumstances of the present time not to supplement the efforts of the municipal and provincial governments but to initiate measures which the municipal and provincial governments might perhaps supplement. But the government is reversing that situation and going back to the old theory that unemployment relief is entirely the responsibility of the municipalities and provinces. If the municipalities or provinces were in any way responsible for the unemployment situation I would say that the responsibility for relief should rest upon them. But I think it is admitted by all that unemployment is the result of policies over which our municipalities have no control whatever, policies for the most part initiated and carried out by the federal government; and such being the case the federal government ought to assume a much larger share of responsibility, and cease driving many of our larger municipalities into bankruptcy. I appeal to the minister and the government to do something to alleviate the situation of our municipalities and relieve them of the burden of bearing over forty per cent of the cost of unemployment relief.


Ernest Edward Perley: Mr. Chairman, you have allowed considerable latitude in the discussion which has taken place on this bill. Practically every line of industry in Canada has received some attention. Some of the discussion I think was not altogether relevant; therefore I trust that if I should transgress a little you will be lenient with me. I do not think I can be accused of unduly taking up the time of the committee, and certainly I have not tried to hold up any measure of importance.
I might remind you of the fact that when the seed bill, No. 78, was before the house, it was introduced and given first reading on March 25 and it passed before the end of the fiscal year. Of course the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning) asked us to permit it to pass quickly, assuring us that we would have opportunity later, on some item in the estimates, to get the details which we no doubt would have asked for then if he had not given us that assurance. Also the supplementary

estimates passed, I think, at one sitting of the house, in which were included some $14,000,000 for relief to Saskatchewan. These also were permitted to pass with the understanding that at some future time or on some other estimate we would have an opportunity of discussing certain details.
On Monday last, in reply to the hon. member who has just taken his seat (Mr. Heaps), the minister stated that the administration of relief in the drought area of Saskatchewan rested with the Department of Agriculture. Subsection (a) of section 4 of this bill provides that the governor in council may enter. into agreements-
-with any of the provinces respecting the alleviation of unemployment conditions and of agricultural distress therein, and to assist those in need.
I therefore desire to bring to the attention of the government the very serious situation of the farmers of Saskatchewan, particularly with regard to the lack of power and machinery of all kinds with which to carry on their farming operations, both now and during the summer. There is no doubt that there will be a great deal more summer-fallowing this year than usual, owing to the policy adopted by the Department of Agriculture last fall, for which the minister is responsible, with respect to not supplying the feed and fodder necessary to winter the horses in that district. As a result of this policy the farmers will not be able to continue their spring and summer work as they ought to, which is a very serious matter. On Friday last, dealing with the report of the farm implements committee, the minister stated-


James Garfield Gardiner: Might I ask the hon.
gentleman whether he is speaking of the provincial or the federal minister of agriculture?


Ernest Edward Perley: I said the Minister of Agriculture, speaking in this house on Friday last


James Garfield Gardiner: I am referring to the
previous statement, that the Minister of Agriculture was responsible-


Ernest Edward Perley: I meant the Minister of
Agriculture in this house.


James Garfield Gardiner: Then I should say that the Minister of Agriculture in this house had nothing whatever to do with that.


Ernest Edward Perley: I have a statement, which
I can produce, to the effect that the Minister of Agriculture approved of the rules and regulations drawn up by the government of Saskatchewan, so it was with his approval that those regulations were carried out.

Relief and Agricultural Distress
* Mr. GARDINER: Those regulations have nothing whatever to do with the sending of horses to the Carberry pasture.


Ernest Edward Perley: The first regulations had
to do with the quantity of feed and fodder that would be supplied to the farmers to carry them through the winter. Then there was a further regulation issued by that government dealing with the shipment of horses to pasture in Manitoba. I think the minister must agree that he had something to do with providing those pastures and permitting horses to be taken there. Certainly he is responsible for what happened there and the condition of those horses when they were returned to Saskatchewan.
As I was about to say, Mr. Chairman, on Friday last the Minister of Agriculture in this house made a speech dealing with the report of the farm implements committee, in which he expressed some concern for the farmers of the west and in fact for the farmers of all Canada in regard to the high prices they are called upon to pay for implements. He appeared to be indefinite in regard to how he proposed to remedy that condition or what he proposed to do about it. I would judge that perhaps he had some concern as to how his speech would be received in Saskatchewan and what use might be made of it in the provincial campaign that is now pending. At any rate, his remarks received considerable publicity in the west. I have before me the Regina Leader-Post of the day following, in which there is a heading in block letters, as follows:
Machine Firms Warned Tariff Cut, Price Curb Threats Made Gardiner Speaks Bluntly to Farm Implement Companies
Hon. J. G. Gardiner received unanimous applause of the house Friday night with the exception of a handful of high protectionist Conservatives, and warned the farm implement industry what the government contemplates.
1.	Price control of farm implements.
2.	Removal of the tariff on farm implements.
3.	Control of farm implement company organization.
As far as the tariff goes the farmers of the west know that there has been a considerable reduction already, from. 25 per cent to 7i per cent. They also know that since that has taken place there have been two substantial increases in the prices of farm implements. I think perhaps the minister was taking more or less of a bold chance, in the hope that the inquiry now taking place in the United States into the agricultural implement industry might result in some control of prices there, and that Canada might follow suit.
Now I wish to suggest some immediate ways of assisting the farmers with respect to power and machinery. Under this act I think arrangements might be made with the provincial government to assist the farmers to finance their cash payments on tractors and other machinery. This is important in view of the lack of power in that area at the present time, in order that the farmers may be kept on the land and the acreage not seeded this year kept cultivated, free of weeds and so on. There is no doubt that there will not be a normal seeding this year, with a consequent increase in the acreage to be summer-fallowed. If this could be arranged it would create employment in the implement industry. There would be a certain amount of freight carried into that province, which would also help the unemployment situation, and if the farmers could be assisted in carrying on their work, as they will have to be, many thousands of men would be employed as farm labourers this summer. This would be of very considerable assistance in relieving unemployment.
There is another matter which I think is important. I refer to the live stock industry. The policy adopted last fall by the provincial department of agriculture, with the approval of the federal minister of agriculture, resulted in the depletion of the herds in that province. As you know, under the regulations anyone who wanted assistance in regard to feed and fodder had to reduce his herd to not more than four cows. Certainly that will mean a restriction of production. The other evening the hon. member for Melfort (Mr. McLean) made a speech in which he charged the late government with being responsible for a policy of restriction of trade. Then he launched an attack on the stabilization operations of the late government under Mr. McFarland. I might tell the hon. member that if it had not been for those operations, and a certain amount of grain which accumulated under that system, the province of Saskatchewan would have been in a sorry plight this spring, because there would not have been any seed. On July 31 last they had seven million bushels left, which was held for seed purposes; and it was that wheat that had been accumulated by the previous government that made it possible to supply seed wheat. A little later I may have something more to say with respect to what has happened in that connection. However, that has been the policy of the present government with respect to the distribution of feed, fodder and seed. Then, the policy carried out last fall with respect to the

Relief and Agricultural Distress
cattle industry, when the farmers were forced to reduce their herds, has meant a compelled restriction of production.
While I was home representations were made to me on behalf of twelve or fifteen farmers in the Alexander district of Saskatchewan. They stated they had formed themselves into a group and had made application to the provincial government to secure a bull, under the bull loaning policy. They were advised to take the matter up with the federal authorities. Upon doing so they were informed that the federal government could not consider their application. I was asked to bring the matter to the attention of the government when I came to Ottawa, and upon doing so I received the following reply:
I regret very much to have to advise that it is not possible to encourage the farmers in the Alexander district to organize an association to apply for the loan of a pure bred bull from this department this year. We have already received from Saskatchewan applications greatly in excess of the number of suitable bulls which it will be possible to purchase, and have been under the necessity of refusing consideration to nearly two hundred inquiries received from Saskatchewan alone.
Certainly the department was not exercising a policy of foresight when it permitted those animals to be shipped out as they were last year. I would impress upon the minister the necessity of paying attention to this serious situation, and to make a statement with respect to it. Surely there are sufficient animals in Canada to supply the need. This is a matter which should be attended to immediately.
I believe under the section it is permissible to discuss the present situation in the province with respect to seed, feed and fodder. In his statement to the house on April 26, and again on April 28, the minister said, in effect, that he expected seed would be released for seeding in the middle of that week. That is not an answer to the question as to what has really been the delay in the release of the seed. For the last two months this matter has been a live one in the province. The farmers were looking for seed in March, because in some parts of the province they were ready to seed by April 5.
I have a clipping from a weekly paper dated April 28 which states:
Local farmers are still waiting for their full allotment of seed grain. There was apparently a sufficient supply of wheat, purchased by the wheat board and held in local elevators for the past six months, but for some reason much of this was shipped out during the past couple of weeks, and now, wheat will have to be shipped in to meet the local requirements.
It goes on to say that on April 28 a number of farmers were still looking for their
fMr. Perley.l
seed. In March the provincial minister of agriculture made a statement in Saskatchewan, as did the premier of the province, to the effect that wheat was then moving to points where it would be required. It was stated that out of 1,100 points 900 had received wheat.
Then we have the statement on April 23 in which the provincial minister of agriculture stated that the farmers could not understand why at Radville wheat was sitting on the track in cars for four days and could not be released. The statement goes on to say that every time a train went by the station the farmers would go to town to see if any wheat was ready for release. The situation became desperate, and the delay was serious. It means a very serious reduction in what the farmer will realize next fall from his crop. Wheat which should have been seeded three or four weeks ago will, if seeded now, run a great danger of being frosted. It will be more subject to rust, too, and as a result there may be a further extensive loss taken by farmers in the fall.
At this time I am not going to discuss the question of the quantity of seed being released. It is my intention to-day more particularly to find out why there has been delay in the release. I do not believe the excuse given by the provincial minister of agriculture, that it was due to the wheat board, is sufficient. We know the wheat board have efficient experts and accountants who could handle several millions of bushels of wheat easily, and in a very short time. We know, too, that wheat was accumulated last October. For instance, an order in council was passed by this government on December 15 last authorizing the board to convert their futures into cash wheat. We have proof-I have it right here-of cash brokers' notes, dated even in October, where the option was exchanged for wheat, and giving the points in the province in which the board took delivery in exchange for options.
Then, the municipalities were asked last December to make a survey of their requirements. We have reports from municipalities where surveys were made and sent in to the government. Applications were made and the amounts required in the municipalities indicated. On April 23 I had a statement from the reeve of one municipality in which he stated that the wheat had not been released.


James Garfield Gardiner: What date is that?


Ernest Edward Perley: April 23.


James Garfield Gardiner: It is likely all in the ground now.

Relief and Agricultural Distress


Ernest Edward Perley: It is not all in the ground yet. We can produce a statement right here that wheat has not yet been released in certain parts.	[DOT]


Mr. McLEAN (Melfort):: There has been too much rain and cold weather to put it into the ground.


Mr. STIRLING:: The minister says it is in.


Ernest Edward Perley: The government has tried to place responsibility upon the municipalities and upon the wheat board. Certainly that responsibility cannot be placed on the municipality, so far as the distribution of feed and fodder is concerned. We understand that the winter allotment expired on March 5, and the spring requirement was supposed to be distributed. I have a statement from a reeve of a municipality showing that on April 22 they were short by thirty per cent the amount of their seed allotment.
I say we cannot accept the statement from the Minister of Agriculture, when he charges that the responsibility is that of the wheat board or of the municipality. I have before me a statement by Mr. Taggart, the minister of agriculture in the province. This interview dated April 23 is very interesting because he makes the following statement:
The farmer finds it hard to understand why there should be grain in the elevator right next door, and yet he cannot have it released.
Tlie article goes on to say:
He did not have knowledge-
Said the minister of agriculture, Mr. Taggart:
*-that down in the northeast corner of the province more than 35,000 bushels of grain were ordered moved out by the wheat board to another point, when that grain was definitely needed in the area where it was to supply requirements. He explains this by stating that it may have been a clerical oversight due to limited knowledge of geography of that area.
What a lame excuse for a responsible minister of any government to make, when asked to give an explanation that there had been an oversight on the part of some official who did not know his geography. We want to know the reason for the delay. It may be that the wheat has not yet been paid for and the grain companies who sold it to the board were not prepared to release wheat this year until the provincial government had paid for it.


James Garfield Gardiner: It may save time if I say to the hon. member that there is no possibility of my answering that question in connection with this bill. Special legislation to provide for seed and feed and fodder went through this house and these matters were
all discussed during the debate on that bill.
I do not think it would be proper for me to enter into another discussion on this bill.


Ernest Edward Perley: The minister should have knowledge of this because a similar bill was passed last year guaranteeing to the provincial governments what was required in order to supply seed. Surely he has some knowledge of that.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not saying I have no knowledge of it. I am saying that the rules of the house prevent -my discussing it.


Ernest Edward Perley: When I visited the grain exchange last October I had a conversation with three or four of the members. Another member came up to our group and I was introduced as having come from Ottawa. Evidently this gentleman thought that I was a supporter of the government, because he said to me, "When are you fellows going to pay us for the seed we gave you last spring?". I said. "Oh, have they not paid you for that seed?" He said, "No, they have not, and we are getting pretty well fed up with it." I said, "You ought to see about it; the money was voted and you should have been paid." He said, "The government owes our company $17,000 for seed supplied last spring, and I am only one of many here." If that is the situation prevailing this year, it might be possible that that is the reason for some of the delay.


Malcolm McLean: What was the amount that was claimed to be owing?


Ernest Edward Perley: He said $17,000 for that one firm alone. I have before me an article which appeared in a paper which has just come to me from the west, in which the secretary of the municipality of Perdue takes exception to the fact that the premier of Saskatchewan and the provincial minister of agriculture have charged the municipalities with responsibility for the delay. He states that that particular municipality made the requisition in good time. They had made a survey last fall, which was followed up in February and March, and requisitions went in in .plenty of time. Even at that late date, April 28, he said that the seed had not been distributed.
I shall not delay any further the passing of this measure. However, I think it is due to the committee that we should have a definite statement from the minister. I trust that he will give consideration to the two or three proposals that I have made, because there is a serious situation existing. I think he should make some statement, and see that

Relief and Agricultural Distress
the farmers have sufficient power and machinery with which to carry on their farming operations during the next season.
The leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) referred last night to the fact that the roads in Saskatchewan are in a very poor state of repair. There should be a lot of road work done. It may seem funny to the government that I am advocating this with an election pending, but the work is necessary. I would suggest that No. 1 highway from McLean east to tihe Manitoba boundary should be hard surfaced this year. This work is needed very badly. If the cross roads leading into that highway from the United States boundary were properly gravelled it would encourage tourist traffic from the states. I make these suggestions to the minister and I trust he will give them favourable consideration.


Malcolm McLean: Mr. Chairman, I missed the early portion of the remarks of the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley). I think it is only fair to tell the committee of some of the conditions that exist in Saskatchewan at the present time. The hon. member was lamenting the possibility, on account of the delay in distribution of seed, of frost and rust damaging the crops in the fall. Only last Wednesday I passed through the constituency represented by the hon. member, and not only was seeding not possible at that time, but no preparatory work on the land was being done because of the wet condition of the soil. Frost and rust are always to be feared, but these things could not occur because of delayed distribution of seed. There has been considerable snow and cold weather during the last couple of weeks and it has not been possible to do much seeding.
A few days ago a press dispatch stated that not more than five per cent of the wheat land in Saskatchewan had been seeded. That was not due to the fact that no seed had been distributed; it was due to the existence of conditions that prevented farmers doing their seeding. The hon. member said that the minister of agriculture of Saskatchewan had said that he was not aware that 35,000 bushels of wheat had been shipped out of northeastern Saskatchewan at a time when it was needed there. I do not think there would be
5,000	bushels of wheat needed by government distribution in northeastern Saskatchewan. The farmers in that part of the country had a fair crop of wheat last year and the most of them have made their arrangements. There was a small area where the farmers had to get wheat locally. During the time I was at home farmers were coming into the municipal 
office and getting orders for seed. Those orders had to be sanctioned by the rural council. The reeve and the secretary of the municipality were appointed a committee by the council and they were carrying on negotiations with the farmers up to the time limit which had been established for giving out these orders. I met many farmers going into and coming out of the municipal office and not one of them had any complaint to make about any delay. Some might say that the municipality was a little hard on them; that they were not getting enough seed, but most of them were satisfied that they were getting reasonable treatment.
The hon. member said that he heard a complaint on the grain exchange that an amount of $17,000 was still unpaid out of the total assistance voted by this parliament last year. That is small potatoes when we consider the amount voted for the assistance of farmers in Saskatchewan.


Ernest Edward Perley: That was just one of many.


Malcolm McLean: There were not very many firms on the grain exchange who sold seed to the government. A tremendous amount of assistance was given and apparently this is the worst case of which the hon. member heard. I do not imagine he would give us the least troublesome case that came before him. He probably knows of the large amounts that were owing to elevator and* oil companies when his friends went out of power four years ago. I did not hear his voice raised at that time in complaint about their negligence or lack of business acumen or business efficiency. They left about $17,000,000 of unfunded debts floating around, which has made it more difficult for the people of Canada and of Saskatchewan to assist the farmers in that province.
What the hon. member says about the roads being in desperate condition during the past few days is quite true. However, this condition has been brought about by the large amount of rain and snow that we have had this year. I have no doubt that not a single farmer will disagree with me when I say that the finest thing that could have happened to the country was that this moisture should be present at this time. I am sure the farmers were quite willing to put up with a little discomfort. It would be far worse if the roads to-day were in the condition in which we would expect to find them in July, if there were not sufficient moisture in the ground to germinate the seed that might be planted.


Mr. COLDWELL:: The hon. member for
Melfort (Mr. McLean) said that in fairness

Relief and Agricultural Distress
to the committee certain corrections should be made, but I am going to say that I think the criticisms made by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley) with regard to the delay in the distribution of seed are justified in part.


Malcolm McLean: In part.


Major James William Coldwell: In part. I was not
going to mention this as the minister was good enough to say yesterday that he would rectify the situation. However, I have received a message from Surbiton in my constituency stating that on April 30 there was no seed and that none was in sight. There were over twenty farmers in that community who were dependent upon this seed grain. So there has been delay. I am not laying the blame at the doorstep of the Minister of Agriculture in this house because I believe it is largely a matter of provincial responsibility. But the criticism is justified to that extent. Moreover, it does jeopardize the early sowing of the crop and jeopardize the reaping of the crop in the fall because of the danger of frost and rust.


Malcolm McLean: How could it
jeopardize early sowing when weather conditions had made the land unfit to seed?


Major James William Coldwell: I think the hon. member will understand that all parts of the province are not in the happy position of having had the large amount of moisture that the districts to which he refers have had.


Malcolm McLean: Rosetown-Biggar has probably had more moisture so far this year than northeastern Saskatchewan.


Major James William Coldwell: I think the hon. member is perhaps to some extent misinformed, because in Rosetown-Biggar we happen to be just a little bit short of moisture this year.


James Garfield Gardiner: Around Surbiton.


Major James William Coldwell: Yes. As a matter of
fact, they could have seeded around Surbiton. But perhaps neither my statement nor that of the hon. member for Melfort is true for the whole province of Saskatchewan. It is with the desire of speeding up the distribution that these matters are being raised in this chamber, because, after all, we guarantee the funds that are being used for this particular purpose. I rose to make these remarks in order that we might have before the committee at this time all the information available.


Ernest Edward Perley: I should like to answer the hon. member for Melfort. If the seed had been
there we would have had it all in the ground in the eastern part of the province before the fine rain and snowstorms which the hon. member has been telling us about came along. Last Sunday we had an excellent rain, and, the Sunday before, snow and rain. The reeve of Indian Head municipality had all his wheat in the ground on one farm of 500 acres on April 22, and a lot of wheat was seeded on my farm on April 23. In the Indian Head and Wolseley districts, had the farmers had the seed, they could have had it in the ground between the 10th and 20th of April. I never saw the land in better condition to receive seed than on the day I arrived home and drove over my farm. I drove down to Whitewood, in which district they were all working on the land, and many of them had seeded on the 12th of April.


James Garfield Gardiner: Is the hon. member's farm seeded?


Ernest Edward Perley: Yes, sir. I told them to get the seed in. That is the only policy-get it in the first day you can in order to derive the benefit of the splendid rains we have had.


James Garfield Gardiner: It is not the only policy.


Ernest Edward Perley: I say that seventy per cent of the land that will be seeded to wheat could have been seeded before the 25th of April had the seed been available, and I stake my experience in that regard certainly against that of the hon. member for Melfort.


Malcolm McLean: On the 10th or lltth of April, in passing through the territory represented by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle, I saw not a sign of any work having been done on the land anywhere in the Qu'Appelle or Wolseley district. I bow to my hon. friend's superior knowledge of sopae phases of farming but not in my desire to present a true picture to the committee. I would say that it is not yet too late to sow seed. In the next thirty days plenty of seed will be sown in Saskatchewan if other conditions are satisfactory and likely to produce good crops.


Ernest Edward Perley: Why were the farmers not on the land?


James Garfield Gardiner: Because it was not fit to go on.


Ernest Edward Perley: Because they had not any feed to feed their horses. Fifty per cent of the farmers in the district I speak of had not enough feed to give their horses two good feeds of hay; the horses were not in a condition to go on the land until they did get feed and fodder, and in that district it was not released until about the 15th of April.

Relief and Agricultural Distress
Mr. MoLEAN (Melfort): Not even on the gravelled highways were many cars running on that day, and it was a very fine day.


An hon. MEMBER:: Hire a hall.


Malcolm McLean: The people who sent me here have paid their share of this hall for me to speak in, but I really think my hon. friend's remarks were addressed to his colleague behind him (Mr. Perley).


Ernest Edward Perley: I have not taken up as much time as you have.


Malcolm McLean: The hon. member has taken up three times as much of the time of the house as I have, and he has used up a good deal of paper in putting partisan complaints on the record, which I think everyone will admit is something of which I have not been guilty. But when, even in fine weather, cars cannot run on the highways because of too much moisture, it is certain that implements cannot work satisfactorily on the land.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weybum):: The hon.
member for Melfort is going from the particular to the general. He cannot say that seeding has been delayed in Saskatchewan generally because of weather conditions. From the 11th to the 23rd of April I travelled by car through the southern part of the province from Moosomin to Swift Current, and the horses were not in fit condition. That is why thejr were not on the land.


Malcolm McLean: What about tractors?


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: But even if we assume that snow and rain had kept the farmers off the land, the seed should be available so that the moment they can get on the land they can put the seed in. I went through most of the constituency of the minister, through Wood Mountain and Swift Current districts, and not more than half a dozen towns had the seed in the town ready for distribution. In the other towns the seed was not there.


An hon. MEMBER:: Did you have seed in Swift Current?


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Yes, but it had not been released.


Malcolm McLean: Perhaps the
horses had not been able to go for the seed because they were so thin.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The hon. member for Melfort says that orders for seed had been given. They had been given for a

month in my constituency, but there is not any seed. You must have seed; you cannot sow the orders.


Malcolm McLean: In the distric* of which I spoke there was plenty of seed for which orders had been given out.


The CHAIRMAN:: I think this discussion is taking in too wide an area. It is concerned with local conditions in regard to seeding, and while considerable latitude has been allowed, as I think it should be, I would ask hon. members to confine their remarks to the bill and not to continue to discuss local conditions in regard to seeding.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I am quite
agreeable, Mr. Chairman, but I think the minister might make a statement.


Mr. HARRIS:: Now that we have the
bread-basket of the world, our west, all seeded down and the grass has become green and the horses are out to pasture, another recommendation might be that we send out to pasture all those who are taking up so much time in this house on the problem out west, which I understand has already been more or less solved, so that some of us who have a real problem which is not merely local may have an opportunity to say a word or two.
I am a little concerned whether section 4 is wide enough to include the problem which I should like to discuss in two or three short sentences, namely, the problem facing all municipalities due to the dearth of employment in the construction industries. If there is to be an expenditure of money under this bill, I hope the minister will see to it that the construction industry is stimulated in order that all the other industries which are part and .parcel of it may also be stimulated as a result of the passage of this measure and the voting of the necessary moneys later.
I have in mind one or two distinct problems which I should like to place on record, and in doing so I wish to make this reservation. In the consideration of these particular problems -and they concern Toronto more especially- the government should be very careful to see that whatever is done does not too greatly involve the taxpayers of Toronto who are at present overtaxed, particularly those who are unfortunate enough to own real estate. Let me state the points I wish to bring up.
First, we have a real problem with regard to our sewage. There are many millions of gallons of raw sewage going into lake Ontario within two miles of the water supply of Toronto, the sewage going out at Morley avenue and the city water supply coming in at Victoria Park avenue, a distance of less

Relief and Agricultural Distress
than two miles. Hon. members who have had the privilege of being in municipal life know something of the sewage problem, and they must be well aware of the gravity of the situation when a statement is made in this chamber that a very considerable portion of the sewage from 750,000 people is finding its way into a body of water from which is drawn the water supply of a city. The municipality of Toronto realizes the difficulty and the danger, and so does the provincial government; the danger from this particular condition is recognized on all sides. The municipal government have charged their department of health with the responsibility of seeing to it that the water supply is chlorinated. Some days, depending upon the wind, it is chlorinated to such an extent that the water itself is not palatable; indeed, it is scarcely potable. They are ready to go on with a work which will bring relief to the situation, but they have not the money. It is work of a kind which, I think the minister will agree with me, would absorb a great deal of unskilled labour. The cost of the original plan was $25,000,000, but that was revised and brought down to $20,000,000. A study of the plan has been going on for five years. They can give relief for the next ten or twenty years without undertaking the $25,000,000 plan, which is a fifty year undertaking. They can give relief for the next ten years by an expenditure of some $13,000,000. I expect that in due course the representatives of Toronto, who discussed the matter with the provincial representatives on Saturday last, will be making representations through the province to the dominion, in the hope that they can come within the confines of Bill No. 105 in this particular regard. I merely put these few observations on record for the minister's consideration, and I hope he will see his way clear, when he makes his reply, to say a word or two in regard to a problem of this kind. There would be considerable construction work.
I come now to the second point I had in mind, namely, the possibilities of absorbing labour in the construction industry. The city hall in Toronto was built some forty years ago. I am not one that wants to see too much government, too many city hall employees, too many provincial government employees. As some of the older members will recall, some fifteen years ago I rose in my place in the back benches and suggested to the Prime Minister that even this chamber should be reduced to one hundred members and that each one of us at that time should represent 100,000 constituents, each one of us going to work and doing a job instead of half loafing as now. I am still of that opinion, and it applies not only here but
right down the line, as far as the municipality of Toronto is concerned. However, I approach this problem of a new city hall for Toronto from another angle. The building is more than thirty years old and it is not safe. I say to the mayor, the board of control, and the people of Toronto that in my opinion the present city hall, from the standpoint of fire hazard, is not a safe place in which to house employees. I know this is a local problem; I inject it into the discussion with your permission, Mr. Chairman, in order to approach the general problem, and I suggest that the city of Toronto, in taking some action to give its employees a safe building in which to do their work might be assisted under the provisions of this bill. In the building there are wide corridors; it is not fireproof, and there are great open stairways. Any hon. members who have been in the building will agree with me when I say that if a fire ever started there we would have to have a new city hall. The employees are housed in the attic. There is a sprinkler system there, but no sprinkler system down below, and I do not know how the employees would get forty or fifty feet to the ground level if anything happened. I cite this as affording an opportunity of spending to advantage $5,000,000. It would assist the construction industry.
The third point I wish to mention is this. We have in the city of Toronto a home for incurables. I do not think there is anything that touches our civilization so much as for people to know that for friends of theirs who are only incurables, but also indigent, no place can be found. At present there are 380 on the waiting list for admission to the home for incurables. The institution must be extended. As I stand here I am thinking of certain indigents in my riding. I know of one couple, both of whom are seventy-four. They live in East Toronto. I have known them for forty years. The lady is mentally unbalanced but not dangerous. The husband is paralyzed on one side from the hip down, but is able to drag himself around. The daughter is a good, Christian girl who some ten or fifteen years ago was struck by infantile paralysis but who drags around through that home and manages to look after the parents. I visited them last Sunday; I was in the little, wee parlour about eight by eight, and the wife was in the dining room holding the door against me, owing to her mental condition. We citizens there have to provide for that and other families because we cannot get them into the Home for Incurables. If a request should come to the minister by way of the province for aid in building an extension to that institution, there is another opportunity

Relief and Agricultural Distress
of spending some money, not in the backwoods but right in a centre, where it is necessary, at the same time giving considerable work to the great construction industry which we all admit is in need, perhaps to a greater degree than any other.
Let us consider our hospitals. Some say the hospitals have empty beds. I had a canvass made in Toronto a week ago Saturday; there were not enough empty beds available in Toronto at that time. One hospital in the eastern part of the city had a waiting list of eighty-three. On Sunday five people were injured on Dawes road and taken to that hospital; there were only two emergency beds available, and the other three people had to be transported across the city some fifteen miles, two others being put in the Women's College Hospital and another having to be taken to St. Joseph's on the western edge of the city. On the same night two others were injured in accidents, one with a fractured hip and the other with a fractured skull, and no bed accommodation was available. The emergency department, in a room some sixteen feet square, is trying to handle emergency cases which come from a surrounding population of about 150,000 people. The men charged with the responsibility of the institution to which I refer are ready and willing to go out and raise from their friends and the people of the district at least one-third of the cost of an extension. A project of that kind, giving service to the community, might quite properly be the subject of a request to the minister. This would be a work in the general interest of Canada, as the bill 105 reads here. Inasmuch as the labour cost in the construction of the half million dollar building planned would be a large proportion of that sum, money might well be voted under this bill, provided the project had the approval of the municipality and the province. In order that it may be on record, the project I refer to is the Toronto East General hospital, presently housing 160 patients; although it was built to accommodate 110, it has many more in it than it should have. Whether or not we are able to get any assistance by way of this measure, a body of men and women of the district east of the Don river are going to raise that money and put the enlargement through. Twelve years ago, starting without i dollar, they gathered together $800,000 in assets and have kept the institution out of debt. In 1932, they found themselves operating that institution with some seventy undergraduate nurses housed here, there and yonder in the district, and out of control. Recognizing their responsibility, notwithstanding the difficult times, they built a nurses' home at

a cost of $110,000 and properly housed these young students. In like manner, realizing the problem facing them now, the same body of something over 100,000 people are going to see that this half million dollar extension is put through. I put this on record so that the minister can give consideration to such a work.
I come now to the next problem which faces us. I preface my remarks by expressing appreciation to this chamber for the assistance given with regard to the elimination of the Victoria Park avenue level crossing. You will soon have before you the Jones avenue level crossing, in the riding represented by the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Massey). It was my privilege to represent that riding in this house in 1922; I know it very well, and I expect the minister will be receiving representations with regard to the necessity of eliminating that very dangerous level crossing on the main line of the Canadian National Railways right down in a thickly populated section of Toronto.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 5 and 6 agreed to.
On section 7-Orders and regulations.
Mr. HAYHURST:: 
Major James William Coldwell: This section has to do with regulations approved by the government in regard to the alleviation of unemployment relief. I have before me a telegram concerning a matter about which I have no personal knowledge, but I would ask the minister to look into it because it deals directly with regulations. The telegram states that in order to break a strike the city of Calgary is imposing a penalty of $3 per week per family, which means the withholding of dominion and provincial grants. This telegram is signed by E. C. Hopper of the central

Reliej and Agricultural Distress
council of the unemployed. Since we are dealing with legislation for the alleviation of unemployment, if steps of this kind are taken to discipline, shall I say, the unemployed, thereby penalizing their families, I think it is a suitable matter for the department to look into. Therefore I am taking this opportunity of bringing it to the attention of the minister, in the belief that he will investigate and see whether or not this charge is justified. I may say that I do not know anything of the circumstances. .


Mr. GREEN:: The reports of the Department of Labour and of the dominion commissioner of unemployment relief show that the federal government has been helping in the construction of the trans-Canada highway in every province of Canada. I wonder if the minister could give us an idea as to what progress has been made; how many miles remain to be completed and when the highway will be finished.


Mr. ROGERS:: I wonder if my hon. friend will be willing to wait for that information until the supplementary estimates are before the house. I do not have it before me at the present time and I am quite certain that it would have to be secured from the provincial governments in order to bring it up to date. As I recall it this information was brought up to date about a year ago; as my hon. friend realizes we have contributed to the provinces for the construction of certain sections of the trans-Canada highway, but we do not have that highway constantly under view and are not always aware of just what stage of completion it has reached at a given time.


Howard Charles Green: The minister will obtain that information for us?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall make a point of having that information available if possible when the supplementary estimates are before the house.


Howard Charles Green: Then has the minister any information as to the trends of transiency in Canada, both for families and for single men? I understood information of that type was being secured by the national employment commission and also by the Department of Labour.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall be glad to make a note of that question also. I have not the information available at the moment.


Mr. CHURCH:: I want to ask the minister a question with respect to section 7. Last year in returns to orders of the house I noticed a list of works undertaken in the various provinces, authority for which was given by the governor in council. Sir Robert Borden

used to describe the governor in council as a political body. In my opinion there is altogether too much regulation by that body. In every bill brought down we find authority given to the governor in council. I suggest that the minister should himself take the responsibility for making these rules and regulations. That used to be done.
An applicant asks for relief. He may have to go to a provincial authority, and then he is referred to municipal authority or the federal authority, and goes round in a circle. For example, an application for relief was made by a widow in Sudbury. For the last three weeks, the press say, she has been unable to get relief and cannot get a loaf of bread. Outside the city of Toronto there are similar cases of the difficulty of municipalities getting proper aid. In my opinion the governor in council is a political body, and the minister should himself handle these proposals. Why should this parliament hand over its power to some political body known as the governor in council? The most important part of the work of parliament is done in that way. This is what Lord Hewart refers to in his book, The New Despotism. We are simply taking control from the hands of the committee of supply and giving all control to an outside body; we have no check over these expenditures.
To-day I received four or five letters from Long Branch with respect to relief, along the same lines as the complaints my leader referred to. More workmen could not be taken on because of some local rules with respect to membership in some political organization before relief work demolishing a camp there can be got. I do not say the minister has anything to do with that; in fact I think he has not. But there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with the cumbersome procedure to be follow'ed under the measure, right down to section 7.
As I pointed out the other day there are no orders in council in the United States. One man, Mr. Hopkins, draws up his standard plan, and through that plan he has distributed to the
15,000,000 on relief and spent 8 billion dollars. There is no doubt the present measure will pass. If as I suggested the other day the minister had power to make agreements with the larger municipalities where there are emergencies the condition would be far better. It would rid him of all this political work, if there is any.
Section 7 states:
The governor in council may make all such orders and regulations as may be deemed necessary or desirable to carry out the purposes and intentions of this act.

Relief and Agricultural Distress
The last list of returns brought down in the house showed many public works which were not at all necessary. Some of them-roads- *were up near Hudson bay, where there is very little need of them.
I should like to learn from the minister if the section is broad enough to give him power to deal with an emergent case in a municipality, or will he continue the old policy of referring those cases to the provinces?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I believe the question put by the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church) is summed up in his closing observations. As a matter of fact the dominion government from the beginning has never dealt with individual applications of municipalities for relief. Obviously those applications must be dealt with by provincial governments. In saying that I am in no way suggesting that the dominion government should evade its proper responsibility. In connection with the administration of relief, municipalities deal directly with the provincial governments. The federal authority gives grants in aid to the provinces to assist them and the municipalities in connection with the administration of relief.
Recommendations with respect to the regulations which may be issued under section 7 would be made on the authority of the minister. But in order to give them the requisite authority under the proposed legislation, they would be dealt with by the governor in council. Although some exception may be taken to the governor in council functioning in that regard, I believe that procedure is clearly preferable to leaving the matter of regulations entirely in the hands of a minister who, at some time, might be tempted to act in an arbitrary way.


Mr. DONNELLY:: As I understand the situation, the care of those needing relief is entirely a municipal matter, and has been looked upon as such by the present government and the preceding one. When relief burdens become so great that the municipality cannot look after them, those burdens are referred to the province. When the province is unable to look after them, then I understand application is made to the federal government which, in turn, gives relief or grants in aid, as has been done in the past number of years.
Last year many municipalities, unable to look after those who needed relief, applied to provincial governments, and practically all the provincial governments applied to the federal government for help. The federal government in turn gave grants in aid in order that those who needed relief might be
cared for. At the end of the year we find that after giving grants in aid this government has a deficit of something like $70,000,000, while on the other hand Ontario has a surplus of $6,000,000. I wonder on what grounds Ontario can come to this government and ask for grants in aid when it has a surplus of that amount. Surely if a surplus is declared they are able to look after their own needy, without applying for help or assistance from the federal authorities. I want to know on what authority or why the government finds it necessary to give Ontario grants in aid, or why Ontario thought it was necessary to ask for that assistance, in the face of a surplus of $6,000,000 in the province, and a deficit of $60,000,000 or $70,000,000 in the dominion.
The difficulty in western Canada in connection with relief is the difference between the schedules for city and country relief recipients. The city schedule is out of all proportion larger than the schedule for the people in the country. The result is that many people living on farms are desirous of leaving the farms and going to the cities. Some of them have sold their machinery and their horses to get money to go to the city. They look after themselves for a year and in that time qualify for relief. After going on relief some of them never come off. I know men in my own constituency who have sold their horses, their machinery, their household effects and everything they could get hold of to get enough money to move to the city and live there for a year so as to qualify for relief. Some of them have been living in the cities for the past five or six years and have not done a tap of work.
If that condition is permitted to continue, the people will keep on leaving the country; they will be driven from their farms to the cities. I have looked through the report of the employment commission. I have been endeavouring to find some information which would show what the men on relief in the cities were earning for the period of five or six years before they went on relief. That is important information with respect to a man drawing relief in a city or anywhere else; we should know what his income has been for the previous five years. I am told that many of the people in the cities who are now getting $70, $80 or $90 a month never earned more than $50 or $60 when they were earning their own living. If we had information as to what these people had earned for the four or five years before they went on relief, it would give us some measure of the extent of the relief which should be given. I should like to ask the minister if



Relief and Agricultural Distress
he has any information or if anyone has collected any information bearing upon this phase of the subject.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I do not know at the
moment of any information that is available for the country as a whole, although there may be some municipalities that could provide it. If so, I shall be glad to obtain it and make it available when the supplementary estimates are under discussion. As to the relief scales in Saskatchewan and other provinces and the disparity between relief paid in the cities and in the country, that is wholly a matter of provincial administration. From this distance we could not suitably control a matter of that kind. We could not lay down relief scales to apply in the many municipalities of Saskatchewan.


Mr. STEWART:: Is not the explanation
to be found in the fact that relief includes fuel, shelter, food and clothing?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Undoubtedly that would
be an important factor.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: In most cases the man
in the country would have his fuel.


James J. Donnelly: The man in Saskatchewan has to buy his coal just the same as the man in the city.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Many of them have
wood lots.


James J. Donnelly: There are no wood lots in our district.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Perhaps not. and perhaps not much of anything else. But he would likely have his shelter, he would not have to rent a house. He woidd also have some of his food.


James J. Donnelly: Where would he get his food?


Hugh Alexander Stewart: He would probably produce some of it.


James J. Donnelly: There has not been any produced.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Not in the dried out area, but on the average farm a man would produce some of his food.


James J. Donnelly: I am talking of conditions in my district.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I think the explanation would be found in the basis of relief and the different conditions that prevail.


James J. Donnelly: Could the minister give us any information as to the basis upon which the grant in aid is made to Ontario?


Norman McLeod Rogers: The grants in aid to all the provinces have been affected by two factors, the extent of unemployment and the financial position of the province concerned. No mathematical formula has been worked out which could be applied to the conditions in the various provinces in order to determine just how grants in aid should be allocated among the various provinces. Broadly speaking, those are the two factors that have deteirmined what has bpen paid by the dominion government to the provinces.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 8 and 9 agreed to.
On section 10-Appointment of officers, clerks and employees.
Grote Stirling: I notice that under this section the minister keeps in his own hands the appointment of officers, clerks and employees. The civil service commission does not come into the picture at all. In connection with the appointments that the minister will make, can he assure the committee that there will be no reference to the principle that to the victor belongs the spoils? I am. referring particularly to the remarks of the Prime Minister the other day when he said:
I would say that the government would deplore moneys appropriated by parliament being used, directly or indirectly, for political partisan purposes, no matter for what purpose they have been appropriated.
Could the minister tell us how these officers, clerks and employees will be selected, and if it will be necessary for them to have their names on particular lists? As he is not using the civil service commission, from what source will he get the names? Perhaps the minister would consider also the remarks made yesterday by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) with regard to the increased cost of administration.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall be very glad to deal with	both	these	points. The staff ofthe unemployment relief branch of the Department of Labour has been beyond the scope of the Civil Service Act from the beginning. It was so arranged by the administration of which my	hon.	friend	was	a member and ithas been	continued	on	the same basis.Although	that	staff	has	always been a
temporary staff, there have been no dismissals of any kind from the staff in Ottawa since the present administration came into office. There have been certain changes made in the outside staffs, referring particularly to the inspectors in the various provinces. There

Relief and Agricultural Distress
have not been many additions to the staff, but it has always been my desire to secure the best man available to do the work in view. I shall not suggest for one moment that all the positions have gone to those who were opposed to the present administration, but I will say that that has not been the determining consideration in every case. As a matter of fact, I have had a long list of applicants for any vacancy that might occur in the unemployment relief branch and a considerable number of these vacancies have been filled with those who were previously unemployed.
The hon. member referred to the statement made yesterday by the leader of the opposition as to the increased cost of administration of the unemployment relief branch. The statement made by the leader of the opposition was substantially correct, but the inferences he drew were substantially incorrect. I would point out that for the last year for which the previous administration was responsible, namely, the fiscal year ended March 31, 1936, the total cost of the branch was $140,067.67. Next year it rose moderately to $179,031.80 and the next year it had increased to $225,488.43. The increased expenditure was due to the fact that services which had been rendered formerly by other departments of government, or which had not been rendered at all, were carried out by the unemployment relief branch of the Department of Labour.


Grote Stirling: Would the minister
indicate what services?


Norman McLeod Rogers: There is one service in particular with which my hon. friend is familiar. The relief camps were previously under the Department of National Defence and, as my hon. friend knows, the administration cost of those camps was very high. I think it would be useful to have the administrative costs placed on Hansard. They are as follows:
1932		$ 25,031 18
1933	
509,179	041934	
726,844	541935	
988,394	18


Grote Stirling: What would that include?


Norman McLeod Rogers: That is the cost of the administrative staff. Those figures were obtained from the adjutant general's office of the Department of National Defence. I think the statement has been made before that the administrative costs reached a figure of about $80,000 a month. I am not suggesting, at this time at any rate, that that figure was in excess of what was reasonable, having regard to the particular organization of the camps, but I do say that if the leader of the opposition refers to the increased costs in connection
51952-162i
with relief he should make due allowance for the fact that a portion of the expense has been taken from the Department of National Defence and placed under the Department of Labour. In other words, our organization to deal with farm placement and forest conservation plans in connection with transients and single homeless men is an additional expense on the unemployment relief branch.


Grote Stirling: If I may interrupt, surely no part of that item goes into the figure for 1937 where the biggest increase was.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am coming to that. I am dealing with the points one by one.
Then there is the youth training branch. We have set up what I regard as an extremely economical branch to deal with training projects for unemployed young people, but that again has involved some addition to the expenditures of the branch.
Then finally we have increased the number of inspectors in the different provinces owing to the fact that the work done under joint works programs has covered a wider field than previously. I am sure that the hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Stewart) will appreciate the fact that under the late administration the bulk of the work was concentrated on the trans-Canada highway. We later changed that policy in order that the work should be done so far as possible near the centres of population where unemployment was most severe. There were more projects undertaken, in other words, in a greater number of places, and that required a larger inspectional staff.
These are the items which account almost wholly for the additional expenditure of the unemployment relief branch, and when that increase in the expenditures of this branch is compared with the elimination of the administrative costs of the relief camps, amounting to some $900,000 in 1936, it will be appreciated, I think, that the work of the Department of Labour with respect to unemployment and relief is being done in a very economical way.


Grote Stirling: It would appear to me to make the increase more glaring if in 1937 there is no expenditure for relief camps included.


Norman McLeod Rogers: In the figures I have given there is no expenditure for relief camps, but our substitute plan for dealing with single homeless men and transients under the farm placement plan and the special forestry conservation work in particular has necessitated a small staff being attached to the Department of Labour to deal with that aspect of the unemployment problem.

Relief and Agricultural Distress


Grote Stirling: What has been the total cost of the national employment commission?


Norman McLeod Rogers: My hon. friend will find this information in the report itself. I think it is in the neighbourhood of $300,000, including the registration.


Mr. McLARTY:: Mr. Chairman, I have no
desire at all to delay the passage of this section of the bill and I shall be brief, but I do not know that the few remarks I wish to make could be more appropriately made in connection with any other section of the bill. The suggestion I am going to make has to do with the home improvement legislation, which is one of the acts that was dealt with by the national employment commission in its report It is not necessary for me to go into facts and figures in that regard, but I may say that I had the opportunity of considering the extension which was recently made to the United States act to include loans up to $2,500 for the purpose of building new homes. Has the minister given any consideration to that?
Largely responsible for the success of our home improvement plan has been the voluntary work of many committees in various municipalities in Canada. Those committees, while they have not actually dissolved, have necessarily ceased to function as a result of the dissolution of the national employment commission. In connection with the staff contemplated under section 10, would it be possible to establish some department, not an official department of the government, which might as a permanent proposition encourage and extend the use of the home improvement plan? I suggest that for the consideration of the minister.


Norman McLeod Rogers: As my hon. friend is aware, the administration of the home improvement plan is with the Department of Finance, and I believe that consideration is being given by officials of that department to the suggestion which he has just made.


Norman Alexander McLarty: I am not at all critical of the consideration that is now being given to the matter, but may I suggest that the effort should be rather to promote and stimulate the use of the plan than merely to give information to those interested enough to ask for it.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 11 and 12 agreed to.
On the preamble.
Norman McLeod Rogers: I should like to refer very briefly to a matter that was raised before adjournment last night by the leader of the

opposition (Mr. Bennett). I had hoped to make this statement in his presence, but at the same time I feel that it should be made without delay. At page 2527 of Hansard the leader of the opposition is reported as follows -and the reference is to the work that was done in the restoration of Fort Henry, and his statement that the contractor for that work, the Frid Construction Company, had for one of its associates the president of the Liberal association of Kingston. The statement of the leader of the opposition is as follows:
It is all very well for the minister to say that he asked the provincial government that there should be no discrimination. But the contractor, the Frid Construction Company if I remember aright, had as one of its officers, according to the letterhead I have, the president of the Kingston Liberal association.
I have made the necessary inquiry and am able to say to the committee that there is no basis whatever for the statement made by the leader of the opposition. The president of the Kingston Liberal association has no connection whatsoever with the Frid Construction Company. That applies equally, I am informed, to any other member of the executive of the Kingston Liberal association. I felt that I ought to deal with that question at once, in order that there might be no misunderstanding whatsoever.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Just to clear the matter up, is the minister referring to the present president of the Liberal association or does he mean president at any time?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Or his predecessor; I know that. I did not feel it necessary to go further back because the leader of the opposition referred specially to the president who now holds office. In any event the statement is absolutely without foundation.


[Stage Direction]
Preamble agreed to.
Bill reported.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Departmental administration, $112,655.
Grote Stirling: What is the increase
for? There is an increase of $15,234.75 as shown in the statement, and on page 54 the details are given with regard to the different expenditures. It is shown there that the increase is the amount set out in the item under discussion.

Supply-Agriculture-Publicity


Mr. BARBER:: Is this due to the reorganization of the department? The minister might give us some details with regard to the set-up.


James Garfield Gardiner: It is due in part to reorganization.
The number employed this year is twenty-five as compared with twenty-three last year, or an increase of two. There are also the ordinary statutory increases which rake place from year to year; they account largely for the increase. The reorganization of the department can be best described by taking the estimates as they have been prepared and reversing the order of them. In the estimates themselves marketing services come first, production services next, then experimental farms and science services. The basis of the reorganization is largely this. In our opinion the logical way in which to consider the activities of the department is to take research work as the beginning; experimental work as the next; promotion of production as the third activity, and marketing as the fourth. We believe that the activities of the department proceed logically along that line, and the department has been reorganized on that basis. We have placed in charge of the science services a director of science services ; in charge of experimental farms a director of experimental farms; in charge of production a director of production services; and in charge of marketing services a director of marketing. These four report directly to the minister or to the deputy minister, and all branches of the department are organized under one or another of these four heads. That, generally speaking, is the reorganization of the department


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Publicity and extension division, $133,620.
Grote Stirling: Will the minister elaborate this other question? There is a small increase and I notice that under the publicity and extension division the estimate for supplies and materials is 841,000.


James Garfield Gardiner: The publicity and extension division of the administration branch undertakes the responsibility of servicing the whole department. The work is divided into administration, editorial, exhibits, press and publicity, and lantern slide services. These are the different services given in connection with publicity work. Under administration and editorial is included general administration of the division, editing and proofreading of publications, distribution of publications, duplicating, mailing lists, assembling and mailing of duplicated material, including market
reports, and directing postal and express services for all departmental offices located in the confederation building, which is the main office in Ottawa. The statistics covering 193637 indicate in round figures that 83,000 personal requests were received for publications;
1,036,000	publications were mailed on written request; 353,739 publications were mailed in bulk; 1,542,410 copies of marketing reports were mailed on request-that is, reports which go out daily with regard to prices; 149,120 copies of press notices; 74,560 clip sheets; L3,480 farm notes; 7,903,075 copies of miscellaneous articles; 9,148 stencils cut for mimeographing; 6,140,847 copies printed from mimeograph stencils; 657 multigraph jobs; 2,564,271 copies printed on multigraph; 1,904,194 envelopes addressed. These are the activities in connection with publicity work. During the year one hundred new publications were revised and proofread, consisting of twenty-nine farmers' bulletins, eleven household bulletins, five technical bulletins, twenty-three circulars, thirty-four reports, acts, orders and regulations. That covers largely the publicity work. There were exhibits carried on, press publicity, lantern slide services, and general publications sent out in response to personal requests, which increased 21-6 per cent.


Grote Stirling: An admirable film was shown in British Columbia last winter in connection with the annual meetings of the fruit growers associations. It shows what happens to the apple in England, the production of apples in England, and so on. I do not know whether that came under the minister's jurisdiction. Perhaps it was under the Department of Trade and Commerce.


James Garfield Gardiner: It may have been.


Grote Stirling: The minister has referred
to such films, and I suppose they are informative. Can he tell us the range of subjects covered and how they are made available to the public? Is it possible to borrow or hire them for use in various parts of Canada?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not sure that I can give detailed information with regard to the different films available, but the information I have is to the effect that sets of lantern slides are supplied on request for use at agricultural meetings and short courses and in high schools and horticultural societies. Last year 308 sets were lent, and at the meetings where they were shown the attendance was 39,000. Requests for these films are received from all provinces. They are available for exhibition in the different parts of Canada.
Supply-Agriculture-Publicity


Grote Stirling: Free for the use of the
public?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, I think they are exhibited free. I do not think there is any charge.


Grote Stirling: But are they sent out to western Canada express paid?


James Garfield Gardiner: That is my impression.


Grote Stirling: And the user undertakes to return them.


Thomas Langton Church: I should like to find out something about this publicity campaign. It seems to- me that since the present minister took control of this department there has been a large increase in publicity for agriculture. Every little new improvement is spread on bill-boards, films, photographs and advertisements in the papers. There must be some overlapping with the provinces. When you look at the details of this item on page 54, with an increase of $7,000, you see that there is nothing less than a standing army in the department. There is a director, an assistant director, a chief of the administration and editorial division, a chief of the exhibits division, an assistant chief and a publicity assistant, an exhibits decorator, clerks, stenographers, office appliance operators, and so on. This overlapping in departments was referred to the other day, where the dominion and the provinces have concurrent jurisdiction, by witnesses before the Rowell commission. There is considerable overlapping between the extension and publicity work done by the federal department and the provinces; I have seen it myself at the Winter fair, and man}' summer fairs as well.
This department is costing a very large sum, ten times the amount spent on the health of the community. Next summer and fall we are likely to have another poliomyelitis epidemic, and nothing done about it by this parliament, but we sit here and vote increases for t'he Department of Agriculture and health of animals, spending some $3,500,000, and about $400,000 for health of humans All the improvements I can see se'em to have been largely done in England in this publicity and extension campaign. The minister went over there and got a good deal of publicity in the papers; he was going to show the farmers of England how to farm, and to sell our produce. Almost every minister we have in this department immediately gets a small standing army of officials around him. No wonder the estimates go up. If we want to vote increased money, let us vote it for public health and let this other stand until the Rowell commission makes its report.

I can tell the minister that there is as much suffering among the farmers of Ontario as in his own province of Saskatchewan. Ontario seems to get very little of this publicity and extension work; it is largely devoted to the other provinces. I ask for some equality of treatment. Last session the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Spence) complained about lack of equality of treatment of all provinces in regard bo the expenditures of this department. The Minister of Finance desires to cut down controllable expenditures; but if we are going to increase all these votes for this department, how can the tax rate be brought down? Is there no other province than Saskatchewan where the farmers are suffering? They are suffering all over the country; so are the industrial workers. There is no publicity department to tell us about the poor industrial worker driven out of his home or how he suffers without any aid at all. I am always glad to vote assistance to the agricultural people, but the details given on page 54 show that instead of some retrenchment in these expenditures this publicity expense is growing.
Every year in almost every mail the members get heaps of literature regarding live stock and other matters. I fail to see any coordination with the provincial departments. I think this increase should be struck out, and the department given the same amount as last year. The time is coming when we shall have to change the method of considering these estimates, there should be an estimates committee to meet with departmental officials, as under the municipal system, and where there is an increase in the vote the department heads should be there to justify it. I would not mind this increase if times were good; but having seen the line-up of people the other day who had to pay income tax, and could ill afford to do so, I protest against this increase in this item.


Mr. McIVOR:: I wish to say that the Minister of Agriculture has been doing something. In my constituency, at the request of the chamber of commerce, a service club and a young farmers' club, we have had an experimental substation established. Also in our district we have been trying for years to get a test of our cattle for tuberculosis. This test was put through this year, with splendid success. These are two things I know of that have been a splendid success for the Department of Agriculture.


Ernest Edward Perley: I should like to have an understanding with the minister. He has opened up the estimates rather suddenly; I do not think the committee was really prepared

Supply-Agriculture-Publicity
for it; there are very few hon. members around. When, the supplementary estimates with respect to relief in Saskatchewan were passed before the end of the fiscal year, an understanding was given that when we came to the minister's main estimates opportunity would be afforded for discussing the whole administration of relief in that province. If the minister will state under what item that may be taken up on another day, I am quite prepared to allow this item to pass. In reply to something I said earlier this afternoon the minister stated that the legislation providing for feed, seed and fodder went through this house and these matters were all discussed during the debate on that bill. I hope he did not think that was conclusive. I think we should have a statement from him now on what item we shall have an opportunity to discuss this matter at some other sitting.


James Garfield Gardiner: The proper place to discuss it will be on the supplementaries, when money is being provided for that purpose. I did not intend to infer this afternoon that there could not properly be further discussion of the question of seed. The proper place to discuss feed and fodder and relief matters of that kind is when the items for that purpose are going through. This will come in the supplementary estimates, not the general estimates; there is nothing in these estimates which has anything to do with relief.


Mr. BROOKS:: In connection with this item I would understand from the minister's remarks that a great many publications are sent out. I should like to ask how these lists are made up throughout Canada; whether these publications are distributed generally in all the provinces; what revisions are made, and at what periods.


James Garfield Gardiner: The figures I gave a few moments ago indicate fairly well the way in which the lists are made up. I might just give an illustration again, and what I said a moment ago will be found in Hansard tomorrow. There were 83,182 personal requests received for publications. That list will contain the names of individuals scattered from one end of Canada to the other. There were 1,036,398 publications mailed on personal request and 353,739 publications mailed in bulk. Those would be to organizations of one kind or another. We have on our mailing lists members of parliament and senators, for example; members of provincial legislatures, agricultural organizations of one kind and another, from one end of the country to the other. You can enlarge upon a list of that kind and pretty well make up the mailing list of the department.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The point I wished to make was this: In connection with dairying, for example, has the department a list of the dairy farmers in this section and a list of the potato growers in another section, and so on? Does the department send out this literature on these particular branches of agriculture to these various sections? I want to know whether there is a list in the department or whether they wait for personal requests.


James Garfield Gardiner: All the lists they have are in this particular branch. The first explanation I gave with regard to this expenditure was that this division undertakes the responsibility of servicing the whole department. All the lists that are compiled, for the dairy and other branches, naturally would be in this particular branch, and they would be made up from those who have made personal application and also from official organizations that are known to the department from one end of the country to the other.


Mr. SENN:: I am sorry I was not in the house when the minister made his explanation about these publications. For instance, I am not sure whether he said how many publications there were.


James Garfield Gardiner: I did.


Mark Cecil Senn: Then are all these publications free on application? I imagine there are some that have to be paid for by private individuals who desire to obtain them. While I am on my feet I should like to ask one more question in this regard. What method is followed by the department to inform the public that these publications are available? I know there are a good many farmers who would like to get the information if they knew that it was available, but unfortunately very often they are not aware of that. I think a good deal of the usefulness of the publications is lost by reason of the fact that farmers and others who would like to obtain them do not know just what publications are available and the matters with which they deal. I should like to ask if any method is followed to acquaint the general public with these up to date circulars, dealing with new matters, as they are published.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not in a position to state offhand just what proportion of the publications is paid for, but - in connection with a certain number of them a charge is made. Information as to what publications may be available is usually given by means of publicity such as was criticized a moment ago; that is, announcements in the press, particularly in the agricultural press, and also by sending out copies to official organizations.
Supply-Agriculture-Publicity

This information is also given when officials of the department may be addressing public gatherings of one type or another in which they happen to be interested. For example, if one of the men from the dairy section should be speaking to the dairy farmers naturally he would mention the different publications that were available to those individuals, dealing with certain subjects with which he himself might be dealing at that meeting. Every legitimate method is followed in placing the information before the public.


Mr. MALLETTE:: A moment ago the
hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley) said the Minister of Agriculture was bringing his estimates on rather suddenly. I just wish to point out that on April 27, referring to the matters to be taken up the following day, the Minister of Justice said:
If we get into supply we will take up agriculture.
Then on April 28, the Minister of Justice again said:
. . . and if it should so happen that we reach supply, agriculture.
Again on April 29 the Prime Minister intimated that these estimates would be taken up. I think sufficient warning was given so that parliament should not be under the impression that the minister is trying to railroad his estimates through the house.


Mark Cecil Senn: In reply to that statement
may I say that it just goes to prove what was stated by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle. Each evening the business for the next day is stated, but last night nothing of this sort was indicated; no supply was to be taken up to-day. Had I known these estimates were coming up I would not have been out of the house, because I did want to ask some questions on an item which I think has been put through already.


James Garfield Gardiner: That is quite proper;
I would not object to any questions. I might say that this is the first item to be taken up apart from administration.


Mark Cecil Senn: It was the matter of administration about which I particularly wanted to ask the minister. He will recall that last year a statement appeared in the press indicating that there was to be a thorough reorganization of the Department of Agriculture. It was to be divided into new divisions, with an official at the head of each. The first time the estimates were up after this statement appeared in the press I asked the minister to give us some idea of what was contemplated and what reorganization was to take place. At that time he told me he

would rather have the question brought up under another item, having to do with marketing. Unfortunately that item did not come up until the dying days of the session, when it was impossible to discuss it or get any information from the minister. It seems to me that this is a most important matter, which the minister should explain to the committee right now. This year the estimates appear under entirely different headings, which -would indicate that there is an entirely new set-up in the department, and I think the committee should be made acquainted with that new set-up, why it was brought about and just how far the minister has gone in his reorganization.


James Garfield Gardiner: I regret that this was
one of the matters with which I dealt before the hon. member came in. The question was asked by another member of the committee and I answered it just a few moments ago. However, I have no objection to repeating the answer, if the hon. member so desires.


Mark Cecil Senn: If the minister has given the explanation, that is sufficient. Had I known that I would not have asked the question.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Advisory committee on agricultural services, $5,000.
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: What persons are on the committee?


James Garfield Gardiner: The executive is constituted according to the resolution that was adopted at Regina on July 22, 1933, at the second national conference on agricultural services. The resolution reads:
Moved by Mr. F. H. Auld, seconded by J. H. Evans, that the national advisory committee on agricultural services appoint an executive of nine.
That executive of nine is then appointed, composed of Doctor Barton, Deputy Minister of Agriculture, Doctor G. I. Christie, Reverend Father Leopold, Doctor W. J. Black, Mr. J. B. Fairbaim, Doctor E. S. Archibald, Doctor J.
A.	Grenier, Doctor R. Newton and Mr. H. L. Trueman. The appointment of the chairman was left to the members of the executive. I presume the chairman is the deputy minister of agriculture. This conference was composed of provincial and federal representatives.


Grote Stirling: Do they give their
services?


James Garfield Gardiner: These are nearly all members of the public service, either provincial or federal.


Grote Stirling: Is the $1,320 for payment of a secretary?

Suppl y-A gricu Iture-Empire Bureaux


James Garfield Gardiner: It is for work carried on Dy the organization.


Grote Stirling: What is the meaning of the item of $1,320 for temporary assistance? There is also the sum of $3,680 for " miscellaneous services including travelling expenses."


James Garfield Gardiner: The temporary assistance would be for temporary secretarial work and activities in connection with the matter.


Mark Cecil Senn: What are the functions of the committee and the matters with which they deal? Are they matters affecting the provinces and the dominion jointly? While the minister is answering, would he name the secretary of the committee, and tell us whether or not the committee has met in the past year, and if so how often?


James Garfield Gardiner: The following is a resolution moved at the conference setting forth the functions:
(a)	It was also moved and carried at Regina that "the executive committee of the national advisory committee on agricultural services be asked to nominate for the approval of the national committee such special standing committees as they may deem necessary to study conference matters in their several fields, and to aid the executive in the preparation of conference agendas, and that each such special committee consist of three members, who shall be empowered to add to their numbers.'
(b)	Discussion of relation of executive to subcommittees. The following set-up is suggested:
(1)	"Standing committee" as specified in the resolution above should be small committees assigned to regional or sectional problems, and should be responsible to the executive of the national advisory committee.
(2)	It should be the function of these standing committees to coordinate the activities of problem committees now in existence and to arrange for the appointment of additional problem committees where needed.
That work of course, in the first instance will chiefly concern all these special committees, discussing activities which might be undertaken in different parts of Canada, and so far as possible seeing that there is no overlapping as between provincial and federal activities, where one department is taking care of one line of work. There will be an effort to see that there is no overlapping on the part of the federal body where a provincial body is undertaking the work.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: How often does the committee meet?


James Garfield Gardiner: Twice a year as a rule.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Contributions to empire bureaux, $32,337.
Grote Stirling: Where are the bureaux situated?


James Garfield Gardiner: The following is a list of the bureaux and the points at which they are situated:
The Bureau of Soil Science, located at Rothamsted Experimental station; Bureau of Animal Health, located at the Veterinary Research Laboratory, Weybridge; Bureau of Animal Nutrition, located at Rowett Research Institute, Aberdeen, Scotland; Bureau of Animal Genetics, located at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland; Bureau of Plant Genetics (crops other than herbage), located at the Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge; Bureau of Plant Genetics ('herbage crops), located at Aberystwyth, Wales; Bureau of Fruit Production, located at East Mailing Research station and Bureau of Agricultural Parasitology, located at the Institute of Agricultural Parasitology, Winches Farm Drive, St. Albanas.


Mr. ROWE (Dufferin-Simcoe):: Is a similar sum contributed to each of these bureaux?


Grote Stirling: The bureaux the minister has named are not indicated at page 55. At that point I find reference to Farnham House Laboratory, Imperial Agricultural Bureau, Imperial Bureau of Entomology and the Imperial Bureau of Mycology.


William Earl Rowe: And they make up the full amount, too.


James Garfield Gardiner: The proposals were accepted by empire governments in 1928, and the bureaux I indicated were organized to deal with the special subjects. Those are the Imperial Agricultural bureaux set-up to which the larger grant may be made, and the other ones indicated in the estimate are associated with the Imperial Agricultural bureaux.


Grote Stirling: They are branches of the other bureaux?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes.


Grote Stirling: What benefits have we received from these contributions?


James Garfield Gardiner: The object of the contribution is to make available to the Department of Agriculture here the research activities of the bureaux at these different points. Because of the nature of our agriculture, it has not been thought wise to set up similar bureaux here. It would not be economical to do so in view of the fact that the activities in connection with these bureaux are centralized and the results are made available here. The countries of the empire held their meeting and determined upon this line of activity. The' benefits we receive take the form of access to all publications and information made available as a result of the
2558	COMMONS
Supply-Agriculture-Empire Bureaux
research work carried on. It is cheaper to do it in that way than to try to do it ourselves.


Grote Stirling: Do we receive similar
information from any world bureau? Do we receive information from the United States and France for instance?


James Garfield Gardiner: That would come under the next vote dealing with the International Institute of Agriculture.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Are any Canadian scientists employed by these empire bureaux, or are they all English?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not in a position to state definitely. In all probability some of those engaged would claim Canada as their birthplace.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Were they sent over to
England to take part in this work?


James Garfield Gardiner: Meetings are held from time to time. In 1936 we sent over three or five representatives of our department to take part in the discussions. They brought back to the department all the information obtained.


Grote Stirling: There is an interchange
>f scientists. Scientists come from England ,o Canada, and scientists go from Canada to England.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Would the minister explain shat is covered by the bureaux of mycology.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am sorry, but I have not that information with me.


William Earl Rowe: The minister was not quite clear as to the benefits we might expect from this expenditure.


James Garfield Gardiner: 
William Earl Rowe: The minister has mentioned tropical and sub-tropical fruits. What contribution has our own research made to the main bureau, and what application has been made by Canadian agriculture of the results obtained by the empire bureaux? We are living in a different zone from many of the countries in which research is being carried on and I should like to know what benefits have accrued to Canada, or what benefits may be expected from the application of the knowledge obtained. There are in this country

Supply-Agriculture-Empire Bureaux
many agricultural districts that might be termed late agricultural districts, due to cold climate, and early maturing varieties are most essential. In my opinion this amount of money would permit research to be made here that would be of great benefit to the dominion. I think we should have some indication as to the general application of this information to Canadian agriculture. I realize that from the technical standpoint an application can be made of the general knowledge that might be secured, but I am more concerned about what has been done so far as Canadian research is concerned, in cooperating with the other countries and disseminating the information obtained.


James Garfield Gardiner: The question of what results have been obtained by Canadian research might better be discussed under science services administration.


William Earl Rowe: Probably I have not made my point quite clear. Do we contribute anything besides our cash contribution? Do we do anything along this line in order that special knowledge obtained in connection with our climatic conditions might receive due consideration?


James Garfield Gardiner: All research work done here is available to these bureaux to be distributed elsewhere, and the research work done in other parts of the empire is available to us here through these bureaux. My statement of the activities of the bureaux indicates that all research work is tabulated, divided into different classes and distributed to the different countries of the empire that contribute toward this set-up. Our own research work is not provided for under this vote. This vote simply provides for the distribution of information gathered.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I notice this contribution is an odd amount, and I should like to know upon what basis the amount is arrived at.


James Garfield Gardiner: I would assume that the amount of the contribution is based upon the value of the service we obtain.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A division of the cost is made?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Is it on a
percentage basis?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not in a position to state upon what basis the division is made.


William Hayhurst: I referred to an indexing system. This is needed so that students in Canada may know what is being done in other parts of the world with regard to agricultural investigation and experimentation. Consequently in western Canada they know practically nothing of what is going on in other parts of the world with respect to these matters, and there is a need for this type of work. I think it should be further extended, to bring knowledge to all the people from all sources. Proper bibliographies should be prepared by the Department of Agriculture so that we in Canada would be able to get information as to what is being done in other parts of the world, whether it be in forestry, horticulture or any other field. The publications should be properly indexed so that we should be able to tell immediately what book we wanted, and publicity should be given to the index, to lead to the dissemination of the different pamphlets.


James Garfield Gardiner: Mycology, by the way, is the study of fungus.


Mark Cecil Senn: Mr. Chairman, hon. members are asking these questions not for the sake of criticism but to find out what the value of this vote is. I can appreciate what the hon. member for Vegreville (Mr. Hayhurst) has just said, that the information may be very valuable, but I can see no reference in the report of the Minister of Agriculture to what is being done under this vote in the interests of agriculture in Canada. I suggest that if in the future some explanation of this vote were made in the annual report it would be in the interests of everybody.


William Earl Rowe: May I ask if this information is made available simply to the Department of Agriculture, or also to the provincial departments and the universities? Just what are the advantages we receive? The minister said that the publications were sent out, but I do not suppose there is sufficient money to make a very wide distribution. Who receives these publications?


James Garfield Gardiner: What I intended to convey when I said they were sent out was that they are sent out by the bureaux to the different countries that have joined the organization and are contributing towards it. The information is available then to our research men here and is applied in our experimental work and elsewhere. Any information that would be of assistance at the agricultural college in Ontario, for example, would be made available to it and to experimental stations throughout the country, and through our list of general publications would be available to people who receive them.


Mr. LOCKHART:: Our junior farmer organizations are becoming very active, particularly in Ontario, and are anxious to learn more about the things with which this vote is con-
2560	COMMONS
Supply Agriculture-International Institute
cerned. I think it would be of advantage to them and to the older established groups to learn more of what is going on in world markets, in the United Kingdom, and that should be stressed in connection with this vote.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
International Institute of Agriculture, $12,000.
Grote Stirling: Is this just the foreign version of the imperial bureaux, the item we have just passed?


James Garfield Gardiner: It is similar to it.
The International Institute of Agriculture held its organization meeting at Rome in May, 1905. At this meeting about forty countries were represented. The representative of Great Britain was present but Canada had not then been invited either to join the proposed international institute or to send a delegate. This invitation was transmitted to the Canadian government some weeks previous to the first annual meeting, which was held in May, 1906. Canada has belonged to the organization from that time down to the present. I have here the different donations that have been made from 1907 onward, running all the way from $579 in 1907 to $2,322 in 1908, and rising gradually until it was $7,730 in 1934, $21,535 in 1935 and $11,510 in 1937.


William Earl Rowe: This seems to be one of the largest amounts ever contributed by Canada. The institute meets once a year, does it not?


James Garfield Gardiner: The general assembly
meets every two years.


Mark Cecil Senn: Just what information does
this type of institute furnish? Is it along research or statistical lines, having to do with the production of wheat and other farm products, and who reaps the benefit? If statistics are sent out, who receives them? Are they sent abroad or to the dominion Department of Agriculture


James Garfield Gardiner: Answering the question
previously asked, the general assembly is held every two years, and it has been held every second year from 1908, with the exception of the war years. I have here the list of those who have represented this country at the different conferences, but I do not think the committee would wish me to read it. During the years prior to the war a considerable number of publications was furnished free of charge and distributed widely among Canadian readers, but after the war, owing to

financial difficulties, the institute required that each publication sent out be paid for by the government. As a consequence the list of readers supplied with free copies in Canada was reduced to a minimum and the persons to whom such publications were sent were carefully selected in order that proper dissemination of the data might be made to those most directly interested. The publications subscribed for include the following: International Year Book of Agricultural Statistics; Annuaire International de Legislation Agricole.
Item stands.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, May 5, 1938