REDISTRIBUTION


Mr. GEORGE BLACK (Yukon):: Mr. Speaker, I present to the house the petition of upwards of 400 Canadian and British subjects residing in the district of Mackenzie in the Northwest Territories, and in Yukon Territory. The petition reads:
To the Honourable the House of Commons in parliament assembled-


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order. I would call the attention of the house to citation 713 of Beau-chesne, 2nd edition:
Whilst a member has clearly a right to ask that a petition be read, it is a privilege, like many others, subject to the approval of the house itself. In case of opposition, the Speaker will put a motion formally to the house.
Is it the pleasure of the house that the hon. gentlemen shall have leave to read the petition?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.


George Black: The petition reads: To the Honourable the House of Commons
in parliament assembled
The petition of the undersigned Canadians and British subjects residing in Yukon Territory humbly sheweth
That parliament is now considering Bill No. 18, which if enacted, will be The Representation Act 1947.
That it is proposed by said legislation to include with Yukon electoral district the district of Mackenzie and the electoral district so created shall elect one member of the House of Commons.
That in the opinion of your petitioners it is not desirable to include the district of Mackenzie with the electoral district of Yukon for the reason that it will create a constituency of the enormous area of over seven hundred thousand square miles in extent, unwieldy and impracticable in every respect.
That Yukon territory and Mackenzie district have nothing in common, no community interest of any sort. They are separated by ranges of high mountains. They have no direct intercommunication and are entirely foreign to each other.
Your petitioners therefore pray that the Mackenzie district be not included in or with the electoral district of Yukon and that the words in section 2 of Bill 18 "including the Mackenzie district of the Northwest Territories" be struck out; and your petitioners will ever pray.
I have a similar petition from residents of the Yukon, the signatures to date running upwards of 400. I should like to inform the
Inquiries of the Ministry

house through you, Mr. Speaker, that many more similar petitions to the same effect are on their way to Ottawa.



EAST MALARTIC MINE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Labour in a position to give the house any information with regard to the Malartic mine disaster? Will an investigation be made, with particular reference to the effectiveness of the safety devices in use in that mine and other mines of the area? I regret I did not send notice to the minister.


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Much as I am personally
interested in the disaster at the Malartic mine, the hon. member probably knows that the question of safety measures in mines is under provincial jurisdiction. I have no doubt the provincial government concerned will make the necessary investigation.



STRAIT OF CANSO


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister of Transport two questions arising out of numerous inquiries I am receiving? Is he in a position to make a statement to the house as to when his department may be expected to proceed with the project of bridging the strait of Canso?


Mr. FRASER:: After the budget.


Clarence Gillis: You fellows have been
laughing at that since 1906; it is becoming serious. My second question is this:	Have
any companies or firms in Canada or the United States made proposals with regard to the bridging of the strait?


James Horace King: Order. I really believe
that is a question-


Clarence Gillis: I have completed the question.


James Horace King: -which should be put
on the order paper.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon.

member for Yorkton (Mr. Castleden) asked if there had been other arrangements for specific employers to bring labour from Europe to Canada, apart from the Dionne spinning mill at St. Georges, Quebec. I promised to give the information. It is as follows:
Under P.C. 371, dated January 30, 1947, provision was made for the admission of farm labour. As a result of this order, various sugar beet companies sought the admission of workers going to sugar-beet growing farms. Approval has been given for the admission of 571 men who will work for sugar farms under contract with the Dominion Sugar Company, Chatham, and 169 men who are destined to farms having contracts with the Manitoba Sugar Company. Application for the admission of a further 450 men has yet to be dealt with. In addition, it is believed that there will be applications for the admission of another 400 men to work on sugar beet farms in southern Alberta.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: I should like to ask a supplementary question. Are these persons coming in as regular immigrants for permanent residence, or under contract with the companies? If tlie latter, what are the terms of the contract?


Humphrey Mitchell: They are coming in as permanent residents. I have no knowledge of the contract that might be made with the companies.


Clarence Gillis: The same old story.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I should like to ask the Minister of Labour a question in connection with bringing immigrants to Canada. On April 22 he said, at page 2279 of Hansard, he would give his consent to the immigration of other people from any country in the world. Did the minister mean from enemy countries also?


Humphrey Mitchell: If I can say this to my hon. friend-


Gordon Knapman Fraser: In a kindly way.


Humphrey Mitchell: -just a minute now;
we have had speeches on both sides of the house advocating immigration, and as soon as we set the policy in motion, you understand, there is a slight reservation on the part of some hon. gentlemen-some. I want to correct, if I said that-


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It is right here in Hansard.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Humphrey Mitchell: I know that "the world" covers a lot of territory, but my hon. friend can rest assured of this, that discretion and judgment will be used by this government in the question of immigration.


Mr. HOMUTH:: I trust your discretion, not the government's.



REQUEST FOR REESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAMME TO SALVAGE FATS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. HAROLD W. TIMMINS (Parkdale): Mr. Speaker, since soap is in such short supply, and hospitals and housewives are protesting such shortage, and since there is a vast wastage of fats in every household, will not the minister reestablish the organization for the salvage of fats in Canada?
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance):: On April 15 I made a statement in connection with the alleged shortage of soap. It is true that during the war an organization for the collection of fats from domestic establishments did function under the Department of National War Services. We have in effect in Canada an order, which is not in force in any other country, requiring packing houses to defat carcasses before they are sent to butchers. In that way a very substantial amount of animal fat is obtained.
It was found that the practice of collecting fats from domestic establishments or houses did not produce a great deal of fat. The difficulty is that in large centres adjacent to soap manufacturing plants the collection is feasible, but in smaller places, where it is collected in tins and all kinds of odd receptacles and then turned in to butcher shops, the condition of the fat and the smell after it had been in process of collection for a short time brought forth violent protests from people who were asked to collect it. In the result it accounted for only a fraction of one per cent of the amount of fats we use.
While I am glad the hon. member has brought up the question, I think better results can be accomplished by individual householders conserving as much as possible their use of fat, and I take this opportunity of appealing to housewives to do this. But from the point of view of effecting any substantial increase in the amount of animal fats available for the production of soap, collection would not be worth while.



PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. NORMAN JAQUES (Wetaskiwin):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to correct a statement which appears in today's press, as follows:
The C.C.F. party voted solidly for the amendment. They were supported by four Liberals, two members of the official opposition, several independents and-strangely-Norman Jaques, *Social Credit member for Wetaskiwin.
May I make the correction, Mr. Speaker? I did not vote, because I was paired with the hon. member for Matapedia-Matane (Mr. Cote). Had I voted I would have voted with the Social Credit group against the amendment.



CIVIL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Finance. On February 17 the house was informed that the government was giving consideration to the request of superannuated civil servants for a cost of living bonus or other supplement. Can the minister indicate what progress has been made in connection with this matter?


Douglas Charles Abbott: This matter has been brought to my attention several times, particularly by the hon. member for Ottawa West (Mr. Mcllraith). The matter is still under consideration, but I am not in a position to make a statement at this time.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. R. KNIGHT (Saskatoon City) :: I should like to ask the Minister of Labour if he is contemplating the transfer to Winnipeg of the employment offices now located in Saskatoon. In view of the inconvenience to the public and employees generally will he reconsider this move?


Humphrey Mitchell: The public will not be inconvenienced by the transfer. The transfer of the division of the unemployment insurance commission to which my hon. friend refers is being
Inquiries oj the Ministry

made on the basis of efficiency and economy. If there should be any inconvenience to the public at Moose Jaw-


An hon. MEMBER:: Saskatoon.


Humphrey Mitchell: I am sorry; I did not mean to cast any reflection on Saskatoon. My hon. friend can rest assured that there will be no inconvenience to the people of Saskatoon. When the move is made we shall be glad to consider the situation in the light of our experience, and if it is found necessary to make a further change, it will be done.

NEW CLOCK AT SOUTH END OF CHAMBER On the orders of the day:
Mr. DONALD M. FLEMING (Eglinton): I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. I notice we have a new clock at the south end of the chamber, but it seems to be smaller and harder to see than the one that was there before. I should like to ask the minister if this clock will go as fast as its predecessor.


Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works):: I suggest that we give it a trial.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. E. MATTHEWS (Brandon):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In the early days of the war a hospital was erected in Brandon by the Department of National Defence. It was operated for some time and then it was turned over to the Department of Veterans Affairs. Recently that department has transferred it to the Department of National Health and Welfare. Since the situation is urgent I should like to ask the minister what immediate steps are being taken to complete repairs and replace equipment destroyed in a bad outbreak of fire that occurred in the hospital a few weeks ago.


Hon. PAUL MARTIN (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Arrangements have been completed between the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of National Health and Welfare for the transfer of the Brandon military hospital in order to look after the hospitalization of tubercular Indians. The terms of the transfer have not yet been completed but it is expected they will be within a short time.
[Mr. Mitchell.)



RADIO BROADCASTING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. J. McCANN (Minister of National Revenue):: Yesterday the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) and the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) asked questions with reference to the Regina chamber of commerce broadcasts. The station which carried the broadcast about which the question was raised is the privately-owned station CKCK at Regina. The question involved is not one of C.B.C. regulation, but of whether these programmes offend section 22, subsection 3 of the Canadian Broadcasting Act, which prohibits dramatized political broadcasts. On receiving the scripts of the series the corporation has found that it already has a legal opinion on the first five when broadcast at another point. According to the legal opinion, these scripts are not dramatized political broadcasts in the meaning of section 22(3) of the act. In view of this, the corporation is not considering making any request to stop the series.
The corporation has also asked for legal opinion on the rest of the scripts of the series. It will take no action unless the opinion on the remaining scripts is different from the opinion already given.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: That was in the newspapers this morning.


James Joseph McCann: I did not know you could read.



EMERGENCY POWERS


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, April 24, consideration in committee of Bill No. 104, to provide for the continuation of certain orders and regulations of the governor ini council for a limited period during the national emergency arising out of the war-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On P.C. 1609.
Mr. HAROLD W. TIMMINS (Parkdale): Mr. Speaker, P.C. 1609 was enacted' in war time. In the beginning, regulations with respect to construction materials were passed in the interests of the war effort. The government decided to curtail the amount of material which might be used in building construction, as well as the amount of labour which could be made available. In the same way the types of houses and the cubical content were

Emergency Powers
rationed, so to speak, to fit the national war economy. That was the purpose for which these regulations were passed.
During the war we had in Canada a priority system with respect to building materials. It did not work very well, because it was tied in with the regulations in the United States and some of the commodities which it was sought to regulate could not be regulated. As a matter of fact the priorities system broke down and was practically discarded.
The priorities officer who regulates construction materials was appointed in 1942, so as a matter of fact we have had almost five years of experience under this order in council, to know whether it works in the interests of the people of Canada, or not.
At the present time P.C. 1609 is being used for the purpose of channeling building materials under a priorities system to certain special groups of government controlled housing. No provision is made for the control and regulation of construction materials for any other purpose. In opening the debate in respect to P.C. 1609 my purpose is to say to the government, that it must show cause as to why these regulations should be continued.
The minister has told us on many occasions, that there are five groups of government controlled agencies which get priorities on building material. We know those groups to be Wartime Housing Limited, Integrated Housing, Veterans Land Act, Housing Enterprises Limited1, and Emergency Housing. I propose to analyse these various housing groups to show what purpose they serve in the national economy, having regard to the regulation of construction materials.
I have before me a return brought down by the minister in reply to a question of mine in respect of housing in Canada in the year 1946. I had asked how many houses were completed under these several housing groups. I have given these figures before, but for the purpose of this discussion I should like to give them again.
Under Wartime Housing there were completed in Canada 6,816 units; under integrated housing, for the whole of Canada, 566 units; under Veterans Land Act, 2,599 units; under Housing Enterprises, 28 units; and emergency shelters, 1,643. That makes in all 11,652 units. That was the total of all the houses that were completed in Canada in 1946, according to the minister's own figures, by housing agencies with which the government had direct connection.
During that same year, 1946, according to the bureau of statistics, there were created in Canada 59,846 housing units. It is clear there-83166-154
fore that the housing units built through government agencies amounted to only a small part of the over-all housing picture for 1946-about nineteen per cent.
It is evident that so far as building materials and their regulation are concerned the end does not justify the means when only 11,652 housing units were built under the priority system, while 48,000 houses were being constructed by 'builders and private owners who had to compete in the open market and get their materials where they could.
The 566 housing units created under integrated housing is not very much of a showing in a whole year-1946. In the Toronto area only 9 builders out of 450 are building under the integrated housing plan. It seems to be the attitude of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation that these are the only builders who are entitled to consideration. In fact the minister himself has said on more than one occasion that if you want to build you should get into one of these government priority groups. Otherwise he is not very much concerned whether you get the materials you need. I will read his statement on that in a moment.
Under the integrated housing plan the intention was that the houses in the first instance should be sold to veterans and at ten per cent below the market price. The builder gets a priority to enable him to get his construction materials, and he is protected by the government in case his house does not sell. I have a clipping here from the last issue of the Financial Post a day or so ago, to the effect that already the integrated housing plan is not working out in the interests of the veterans. I am told that in the city of Toronto a builder is required to advertise the house only once in a newspaper, and then if it is not bought by a veteran within ten days, the builder is allowed to sell it to a civilian. The Financial Post says:
The official Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation in recent days has lifted its "veterans' preference" restriction from larger houses (in a few centres of declining demand) under the government's "integrated" construction programme. Under this plan, builders are selling to veterans at 10 to 15 per cent below the general market, in return for supply priorities and a sale guarantee.
_ This, the first official recognition of a break in the market for veterans housing, is considered by many in the building industry as forerunner of possible complete withdrawal of the "veterans' preference" stipulation from "integrated" contracts by next fall.
I presume that that means that this integrated housing plan was first and foremost for the veteran. But apparently the veteran is not taking advantage of the plan and is not in
[Stage Direction]
Emergency Powers
[Stage Direction]
sympathy with it, as it does not meet his ideas in acquiring a house for himself. So the veterans are dropping away from the integrated housing plan, and the government is now telling the builder under that plan that he does not have to sell to the veteran, that he can sell to the civilian. The answer which I received in respect to this particular housing group was to the effect that it was to help the veterans first and foremost, and it seems to me that the department must now consider whether this integrated housing plan is going to succeed in the interests of the veteran, or whether it should be dropped. As I have said, in the Toronto area only nine builders are building under the integrated housing plan, as compared with 450 builders who are building under other plans.
Housing Enterprises Limited is an organization which is being carried forward by the loan companies of Canada. I know from having sat in at some of the earlier meetings some years ago that the loan companies did not go into this plan just because they wanted to. They got a considerable amount of prodding to go into it, and it was good business on the part of the government to see that the loan companies bore their share of the responsibility in respect to constructing housing units in Canada. The price and the rentals of these houses are subject to the control of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. But Housing Enterprises has caught up with the same conditions facing all other housing groups, that cost prices and rents are getting too high to suit the pocketbodk of the veteran.
im satisfied that in the city of Toronto, and more particularly in Montreal, rentals of housing units in this group are going to be beyond the reach of the veteran, and under these circumstances I see no reason why Housing Enterprises should have a priority over the ordinary builder, who as a matter of fact is building most of the houses being built in Canada today. According to a recent departmental statement, some 48,000 houses were built by ordinary private owners in Canada last year.
Furthermore, Housing Enterprises Limited is entitled to a ninety per cent loan, so the company has only ten per cent of an investment in the project. That is a very attractive proposition for a building corporation. In addition they are guaranteed some 2| per cent interest on the capital they put into the venture. That makes it an attractive proposition for a building corporation, and I am sure

that if the same opportunities were offered to the veteran who wishes to have a house built by a private builder the veteran would get a betteh deal all around.
I come now to emergency housing. I said a few moments ago that the emergency shelters built in 1946 numbered 1,643. So far as emergency housing is concerned I am satisfied that the government is doing all it can, and is entitled to do all it can, to help out this emergency situation throughout Canada. As a matter of fact emergency housing is a stopgap; it is only a beginning of things; it is only a hold-over in the meantime until we get better housing. Therefore when 1,643 emergency housing units were constructed in Canada in 1946 it added nothing to the overall picture; it was a temporary expedient.
We all know that building material is in desperately short supply in Canada. Lumber yards are working from hand to mouth to turn out the material. I have been in lumber yards and have seen the president of the company working at a lathe turning out the small bits of material which the builder had to take away to finish up small parts of his houses while the builder waited right there. They are desperately short of material, particularly trim, doors, sash, and all the material that goes into the woodwork of a house. In addition there is a great shortage of nails. Today I intend to refer to the question of nails, because I think we are in for a bad time and I should like the minister to help the people of Canada to solve this problem, which will stifle building in Canada during the next two or three months if we do not do something about it. Gyproc lath, window sash, doors, trim, bathtubs, hardwood flooring and sewer pipe are all in short supply. But the greatest cost of building is the loss of time. It matters not how high the cost of the material or the cost of labour may be; that is not the big factor in the cost of housing at all today. The big factor is the loss of time. A house which used to take four months to build now takes eight months to a year. The loss of time all the way through the picture is what runs up the cost of building in Canada.
From time to time during the session the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply has told us something about nails. In answer to a question of the hon. member for Vancouver South on March 4, 1947, the minister said, as reported at page 994 of Hansard:
I have not heard of a shortage of nails in any part of Canada during the past two months.

Emergency Powers
On March 6, having received letters from people in my own constituency, I asked this question, as reported at page 1061 of Hansard:
Is the minister not aware that in the Toronto area the shortage is so acute that the builders cannot complete the houses started in 1946, and will he make a statement in regard to the matter?
As a matter of fact the minister did not make a statement. I was not permitted to have the question answered. Following the asking of the question I did receive from builders in Toronto a large number of telegrams and letters which I offered to show to the minister. I wish to place on Hansard a record of the desperate position in which builders in Toronto find themselves in respect of nails. Having heard the hon. member for Peterborough West and the hon. member for Vancouver South say something about the matter, I am perfectly satisfied that the situation is general throughout Canada and has to be faced. The first telegram I received reads as follows:
Cannot start spring housing programme. Need nails to finish last year's work. Desperate dilemma. Please do something.
I happen to know that builder. He is building in the Etobicoke district. He has land on which to build some thirty houses. He is a progressive builder and is erecting a small type of house. He is stifled in respect of his building in 1947. In fact he has not yet finshed his 1946 houses.
I received a telegram from another builder in the Toronto district which reads:
I am roofing balance of twelve houses started last April with very slow progress owing to shortage of all materials. I intended starting fifteen more last fall but have been unable to do so. Very discouraging. Am I to quit or continue? Approximately 75 per cent of my business has been with veterans.
Mr. HOWE:: What was your reply?


Mr. TIMMINS:: I asked the minister for his reply. I offered to show him the telegrams.


Clarence Decatur Howe: He wired to the hon. member; I reply to mine.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: I have not replied to them. I am expecting that the minister has the matter under control because I have it on good authority that his department has made a survey of the whole situation. They must know what the answer is. I am expecting the minister to give me the answer this afternoon.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Nail the minister down.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: The next telegram is from the superintendent of a large building enter-83166-154J
prise which is being carried on in Toronto by no other than Connie Smythe, manager of the Maple Leaf hockey team. It is a big enterprise. The telegram reads:
Fifteen houses, six carpenters, one keg of nails; no sign of more.
Here is another telegram from a builder who says:
Have been to five hardware stores; could only secure five pounds of nails of any description.
Here is another one from a man who builds up in North York. He is a man who in ordinary times would build anywhere from ten to twenty houses. Last year he probably built ten. His telegram reads:
Have been to seven hardware stores today; cannot buy one keg of nails. Job held up.
Another telegram reads:
Jobs absolutely held up for nails. Brought three kegs home from Chicago while attending builders convention; otherwise will have to stop building.
I am not going to go through all these telegrams. They are almost all from men who are building small houses. They are almost all from builders who have been in the business for a number of years and most of whom are building 75 per cent for veterans. They are building small homes which the veterans can buy, but they are not able to make delivery. Here is another:
Have eight houses under construction. Have no nails or plumbing. The situation is serious.
Here is what another builder, a returned man, has to say:
I wanted to start ten in February. All staked ready to go. Cannot buy nails. Project abandoned until situation clarified. Nine out of last thirteen houses built for veterans. Shall we build houses or close up shop?
I have given enough of the telegrams to indicate to the committee that the shortage of nails is desperate. I wish to have you understand, Mr. Chairman, that I am not holding any brief for the private builder in this matter. I do not act for any of these people, though I happen to know a number of them. I am speaking in terms of houses for Canada. Here is a letter I have received from a man who is really heart and soul in the house-building business. He is building a large number of houses in the Toronto area, and he says:
We have found_ it impossible to obtain nails throughout Ontario. We normally employ upwards of one hundred men, and because of the nail shortage, we have found it necessary to stop jobs and lay off valuable men.
Emergency Powers

Here is another from a man and his sons who build a number of houses in the east end of the city:
. . . situation in nails is terrible. It is no worse than other items such as plumbing, heating, lumber and doors. Frankly, building is not worth the headache that you get these days, but we are sticking to our guns in the hope that some day, someone, will do something about it. We seem to be powerless.
I will not read more of these, but I shall be glad to let the minister or his department have the file to look through, if he wishes to satisfy himself that the people are telling a story which is true and which would indicate that building throughout Canada will be stifled if something is not done about nails.
What worries me is the fact that the minister seems to think that if you are not a builder under any one of the five government groups you are not doing essential building. In my view these independent dealers are doing much the better job in building houses in Canada; but the answer which the minister gave to the hon. member for Peterborough West (Mr. Fraser) on March 18 last would indicate that if you are not in one of these groups you are not doing essential building. Let me quote what the hon. member for Peterborough West said, together with the minister's reply, at page 1471 of Hansard. The hon. member said that hardware stores, contractors and carpenters in his riding had not been able to get nails, and he said he would like to ask the minister where they could get a few kegs of nails because there were none in the Peterborough district. The minister replied:
The production of nails is high as compared with any previous year. Hon. members are well aware that during the steel strike stocks of nails became exhausted, and, at present all pipe lines have not been filled up. I realize that Peterborough may be pretty well out on the pipe line; nevertheless I can assure my hon. friend that there is no real reason why any builder, for priority construction particularly, should have any trouble in getting nails. If my hon. friend refers to so-called non-essential building which hon. members opposite say should be stopped, then I am not particularly worried about whether nails can be had or not. But for any priority work, or for any essential purpose, nails are now available.
I say to the minister that the ordinary building of houses is essential work, and that there are no nails to be had for these men. Apparently, however, the minister is not too much concerned about whether these people who are outside the priority groups get nails or not.
So far as nails are concerned'-I have said this before-if we are going to continue this order in council, which regulates building
IMr. Timmins.]
materials in Canada, and if we found it necessary, in respect of soil pipe, to give an incentive bonus in order to keep the industry going [DOT]-because after all soil pipe is only a small though necessary part of building-then in the same way some incentive should be given the nail manufacturers so that they can produce a larger quantity of nails, in order that building may be kept going for the year 1947.
The minister was good enough to answer a question of mine with respect to the production of nails. I have given these figures before, but I will give them again. He indicated that there were seven firms who produced nails in Canada, and in 1946 production by the ton was 58,843, while in 1947 the estimate was 70,170 tons. Apparently we are coming to a bottleneck, and I suggest to the minister- I hope he has already done it; perhaps he has-that some incentive should be given to the manufacturers in this industry to see that the production of nails is stepped up. It may be the same in the steel industry as it was in the soil pipe industry, that being unable to produce and make enough money out of nails, the manufacturers have turned to other lines in which more money could be made.
I do not think an increase of 20 per cent in production of nails in 1947 is sufficient to take care of the needs of the country, and I know, from clippings I have from newspapers and from the minister's utterances on the subject, that he too is seized of the necessity for stepping up the production of nails in 1947.
One of the things that I find bothersome in these regulations is the fact that industrial building seems to have stepped! away ahead of house building, in 1946, and is still going ahead. If we are to have regulations controlling construction materials in Canada, and if one of the most desperate needs at the present time in Canada is housing, then we should be doing something about the fact that industrial construction is outstripping the building of dwellings.
I have here a clipping from the Ottawa Citizen of January 24, 1947, which reads:
MacLean building reports, which are accepted as authoritative by the construction industry in Canada, indicate that whereas the dollar-volume of residential building in Canada increased in 1946 by only 8-8 per cent over the 1945 figure, business construction soared by 116 per cent, this despite the fact that countless thousands of Canadians, including those who have money to build reasonably-priced homes, are without accommodation. Under these circumstances, whose is the responsibility for controlling non-residential building?

Emergency Powers
I have another clipping from the Globe and Mail in which the minister is quoted as follows:
Resistance in some cities to low-cost housing was cited by reconstruction minister Howe today as one of many handicaps under which the department had been working in its housing programme.
And later on:
Mr. Howe declared the government could not afford not to capitalize on the present enthusiasm in industry for expansion. The objective at the moment was to keep both industrial and housing construction going at the same time.
I agree that it is necessary to keep industrial and house-building construction going at the same time, but I say that the ratio of 8-8 per cent increase in 1946 for residential housing as against an increase of 116 per cent for business construction is away out of line. If we are to have these regulations continued then it is time that the department which has control of the situation through the priorities officer did something about it.
I am not unmindful of the fact that the director of Central Mortgage and Housing is seized of the situation, because he said on March 20 last:
Non-housing construction may be a "restraining influence" on residential building this year, D. B. Mansur, president of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, declared in his 1946 report, tabled in the Commons today by reconstruction minister Howe.
That brings us back to the crux of the situation, that as a matter of fact the department does realize that industrial construction is out-stripping home building in Canada. The minister speaks of 80,000 houses for 1947. I do not see how Canada will reach 80,000 or anything like that number because, if the government touched only 11,000 housing units in 1946 under the circumstances that obtained, it shall certainly not touch more than 11,000 in 1947.
Now all this business of priorities is governed and controlled by the priorities officer. He has been in the job since June, 1942, and so he should know his job. The fact is, I suggest, that the priorities officer has too many jobs. He is timber controller, steel controller and priorities officer. I am not criticizing him, but I am not so sure that he has a grip of the situation, and I say that for this reason. At a meeting of the National House Builders' Association, held some time ago, one of the officers of the priorities branch had the temerity to tell the National Builders' Association that they need not be worried in the year 1947 about the amount of priorities they would get; as a matter of fact, he said, if
they were building under the integrated group they would get their priorities off the top shelf. And he said, "In order to show you just how we are able to give you priorities off the top shelf I want to tell you that in one month this year"-that was in 1946-"we were able to pass on to integrated housing builders 91 per cent of the total material available of a scarce article". That is hardly playing the game, with 91 per cent of all the material available in Canada going to one small group of builders. This national association of house builders is a small group spread across Canada in various centres. As I said, in Toronto there are probably nine who belong to the association; there are a number of them in Hamilton, and so on across the country. They are building under this integrated housing plan, or a good number of them are, but apparently they are not satisfied because here is what they have to say in an extract from the minutes of a meeting of the National House Builders' Association held in Winnipeg last December:
The priorities officer, Mr. Uren, announced that there probably would be 30,000 priorities for housing in Canada for 1947, and Mr. Mansur stated that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation would do its utmost to develop housing under the integrated housing plan.
Present indications are that construction proposed under the integrated housing plan will fall far short of meeting the country's needs. Many builders were so dissatisfied with the priories last year that they hesitated to attempt -any more houses than that built last year and many are very sceptical about the priorities system as a whole.
These are the people who are building under the integrated housing plan; these are the people who are saying that they are skeptical of the ability of the priorities system to keep them going in the year 1947. As a matter of fact I asked a question of the department some little time ago with respect to priorities. It occurred to me, having had something to do with the building industry for a matter of twenty-five years, that if there was a priorities system working in Canada, I might ask the department how these priorities were working out, and how much material was passing under them, and might be able to get some information that would be useful to the house and to the construction industry generally. So on March 6 I asked this question:
How much building material was moved under priorities in 1946, in respect to the following groups:	Wartime Housing Limited, integrated
housing. Veterans' Land Act, and Housing Enterprises Limited, of: lumber, nails, building hardware, roofing, soil pipe, tile, plumbing material-
I need not give the whole group of materials, but this was the answer:
The information desired is not in the possession of the dominion government. Priorities for
Emergency Powers

building materials are issued for government sponsored projects designed to provide primarily homes for veterans and their families. Priorities for building materials are issued to contractors and home owners for selected building material items essential for the completion of government approved projects. In order to assemble the information it would be necessary to survey several thousands of contractors who have made use of 25,788 priorities issued during 1946. Although the survey would take several months its results would be uncertain because of the incompleteness of the records kept by some contractors.
So in the first place apparently the priorities system is unscientific, since proper records are not kept. As I understand it, these priorities certificates are for the minimum requirements of those building particular groups of houses and I suggest to the government that as a matter of fact some of these groups who are getting materials, though of course they have to pay for them, are getting more than their share. There has been a bootleg market in existence. I have heard of many cases of nails being bought on the black market in various districts surrounding the city of Toronto. We all know that nails disappear from warehouses, where, as I suggest, too many nails have been stored for the specific projects. It seems there is a great deal of hoarding going on. I know this because six or seven months ago I had in my office an official of Wartime Housing who told me they were stockpiling then. He said they were not going to get caught in 1947 as they did in 1946, and I do not think that is the proper way to carry on. I see no reason why all other building should be stifled until some of these groups have built up their stocks. This priorities system is unscientific; it does not give us a picture of what is going on in Canada, and apparently that picture is not in the hands of the government.
Then, quoting further from the minutes of the meeting of this association in Winnipeg last December, I find this:
Mr. Mansur said that the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation was not only willing but anxious to do anything to help build more houses on an orderly basis. He also said that he was making a survey of occupancy in Canada and that the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has a fairly good knowledge of the housing needs of Canada. When the survey is finally completed they will have some information along these lines.
That was in December of 1946. Probably that survey has been completed long before this, so now the government should know the needs of this nation for 1947. They must know the great bulk of the building is going to be done by the private builders, but at the moment I am sure I do not know how those private builders are going to get the
['Mr. Timmins.}
material with which to carry on. Some little time ago, as many hon. members know, a group of fruit growers came down here from British Columbia. Some of them were in to see me. I said to one of them, "You people package all your fruit out there, and you must need nails for that packaging. How do you get on for nails?" He replied, "Oh, we have that all arranged. We can get all the nails we want. We get a commitment in respect of nails." I don't know where they get their commitment; perhaps the minister can enlighten me. There is nothing in this order in council with respect to nails for fruit growers. It is a regulation in respect of construction material only. If the return that has been brought down showing the production of nails in 1946, has to do with nails for the furniture industry, for the fruit growers and for many other industries, then of course this picture does not help us very much in respect to nails for the building industry, because it indicates quite clearly that the amounts shown are not at all sufficient to meet the needs of Canadian builders and the Canadian people.
The minister has suggested to me, not only in the house but also in a letter, that builders should be using aluminum nails, which are available in certain quantities. I followed up that suggestion to the best of my ability. I found there were some aluminum nails in Toronto, but they were expensive and the builders felt they were beyond their reach in respect of building. Further than that, however, they found that as the wet lumber began to dry out and shrink, these aluminum nails popped right out. Apparently they do not have the bond or bind they should have, in wet wood. The result is that, having put up a panel of wood with aluminum nails, it was not very long before they were springing out, and of course for this reason they were unsatisfactory. Having regard to the fact that industrial building far outstripped residential housing in 1946, and is going to outstrip it in 1947, if the government intends to continue these construction regulations, something will have to be done to give more direction to the building industry.
I have been reading reports respecting building in Canada, and without making a survey in other cities I have looked into the situation in Toronto. According to the Daily Commercial News of April 22, tenders are being called for a skating and hockey arena in North Toronto, at a cost of $300,000. I do not know that that work is to be undertaken immediately, but whether it be this year or next, I see no reason

Emergency Powers
why permission should be given to build hockey arenas in these days when our people need houses.
As I walk through my own district, out through Sunnyside, I see an expensive and ornamental refreshment booth which has been built recently. A large amount of lumber was required for the building of that place, I suggest that this building was not necessary, having regard to the great demand for houses. There should be some sort of permit system as previously, so that only essential building would be permitted. A directive could be sent out by the minister under his authority, because if he has authority under emergency legislation to pass these construction regulations he has authority to direct the provinces and the municipalities as to the kinds of buildings which shall be constructed. A directive that such and such construction is essential and such and such are non-essential would fit the picture. Commissioners of building in cities and towns, with such a directive before them, could chart their way fairly well in 1947.
While I cannot say which building would be essential and which non-essential, I am sure that if a group of builders across Canada were to meet for two or three days they could frame such a directive. I know perfectly well that a skating rink or hockey arena is not essential. And I do not see any reason why the Toronto Transportation Commission should begin their $800,000 project in 1947-until we have more houses for our people. These are factors which occur to me and which, I am sure, must also occur to the minister.


The CHAIRMAN:: I must inform the hon. member that his time has more than expired.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: I should like a minute more. The epitome of what I have said appears in Maclean's Magazine of March 15, 1947. I am sure the minister has read the article. It says that "the real problem of housing in this country has not yet been faced, and there is nothing to indicate the government has any intention of facing it".


William Ross Macdonald: I would draw the attention of the committee to the fact that when considering other orders in council we have considered at the same time those which have been related. We are now discussing the orders in council which come under the Department of Reconstruction and Supply, and it occurred to me that orders in council 1609, 9439, 7502, 245 and 1997 are directly related to the building industry.


Mr. LENNARD:: The steel regulations
would not be.


Mr. GREEN:: No.


William Ross Macdonald: The steel regulations could be related in connection with nails. I believe they would come directly under the steel regulations. The work of the committee would be facilitated if all these regulations could be considered at one time.


Howard Charles Green: I agree that orders in council 9439 and 7502, both of which deal with emergency shelter regulations, could well be considered together. But I suggest it would be impossible to consider properly orders in council dealing with construction materials with those dealing with steel. We should go through these orders in council one at a time, with the exception of the two dealing with emergency shelter. They might be considered together.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is difficult to discuss them separately. For instance nails, which come under the steel control regulations, are distributed under priority regulations. My suggestion is that the chairman might allow considerable latitude in the general discussion, provided that the subject being discussed is covered by one of the several orders in council. Then we can pass them separately, if that is agreeable.


William Ross Macdonald: I wanted to mention the fact that there was some relationship, so that I would not have to abide too strictly by the rules and call hon. members to order. It is the understanding, then, that an hon. member will be allowed to speak to any of the regulations, but that they will be passed separately.


Howard Charles Green: Which ones are to be
included?


William Ross Macdonald: When the regulations are called for approval, I shall call them individually. If, for instance, when considering regulation 1609 an hon. member discussed nails, I would not call him to order and tell him that he should reserve his remarks until we reached order in council 245.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The difficulty is that so far as order is concerned these are not well arranged. The two relating to emergency shelter are preceded by one relating to controls and regulations respecting construction materials, and are followed by two or three others having to do with construction materials. I believe they could be placed in two classifications. The two dealing with emergency shelter could be discussed together, as could the four others dealing with materials. I do not know that any formality is required, other than a ruling from the chair to the
Emergency Powers

effect that any of the four orders in council dealing with materials can be discussed without infringement upon the rules.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Timmins), who has just taken his seat. All hon. members welcome the addition to our assembly of a member who is vitally concerned with this problem of housing. It is my opinion that housing is still the number one domestic problem confronting the federal government.
I think it must be agreed that wartime conditions have seriously aggravated housing conditions in most of our metropolitan areas. The Minister of Reconstruction and Supply is very largely responsible for the dissatisfaction existing in Canada in respect of Canada's housing performance. It was under the minister's direction during the war that Canada established so many new records in the field of shipbuilding and in the construction of tanks, planes and all forms of armament. The leadership given by the minister in Canada's production performance at that time created the impression that when the war was over and materials became available, along with a sufficient supply of man-power, we would have similar leadership in the field of house construction.
The hon. member for Parkdale accurately described the situation which exists in all parts of Canada. People who fought to save their homes are finding that houses are not available. Any man who served in the air force knows that machines such as Catalinas were provided by the Department of Munitions and Supply. These machines cost S250,000, but if one was lost or destroyed and the young man escaped with his life, another was available. Some of the bombs used cost up to 810,000. Young Canadian airmen are now finding it difficult to understand how it was possible to use Canadian money and man-power to produce a bomb costing 810,000, ship it by boat and then drop it on Hamburg or Cologne, when in 1946 and 1947 we are unable to use the same Canadian labour and materials to drop $10,000 houses in Hull or Halifax or Sturgis.


An hon. MEMBER:: Do not forget Regina.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I suppose Regina
requires some too.


An hon. MEMBER:: Not bombs.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: We do not need bombs, but we do need houses. If the minister of reconstruction would use the same technique and the same imagination in peace time that

he used in war time, we would have an entirely different picture.
The hon. member for Parkdale made reference to the small percentage of our manpower and materials which were going into residential construction. I should like to quote some statistics from Maclean's building reports for October, 1945, and October, 1946. Residential construction in October, 1946, increased 42 per cent as compared with October, 1945. In the same period business construction increased 180 per cent; industrial construction, 266 per cent, and engineering, 391 per cent. In the first nine months of last year only $32.50 out of every $100 spent on construction went into housing.
Everywhere you go in Canada you find that materials and man-power are being made available for the building of theatres, billiard halls, bowling alleys and such buildings. I am not criticizing the proprietors of these enterprises for wanting to use some of their cash to build a money-making structure, but I am concerned about the minister of reconstruction allowing such a large percentage of our tight materials to be used in non-essential construction. If the minister of reconstruction would1 face the housing problem of Canada and guarantee a housing programme for the building of 100,000 new houses every year for the next ten years, he would capture the imagination of the Canadian people and would assure a market for our lumber manufacturers, our cement producers and those who are turning out the hardware and other things necessary for such buildings. If he took the trade union people into his confidence in connection with such a programme there would be no question at all about the outcome. There is sufficient additional personnel in Canada to undertake such a programme. An analysis was made some time ago to find out whether we had the labour and material available to carry out a programme of 100,000 houses per year, and it was found that we could carry out such a programme and still have left over some 73,000,000 bricks, some 2,000,000 barrels of cement, some two billion feet of lumber, a great deal of glass, and plenty of nails.
I think people in all parts of Canada will agree that the building of 100,000 houses would be a much more useful programme for the minister of reconstruction to promote than the building of new theatres in Ottawa, Vancouver or any place else that you go. I know the minister has given the local authorities the responsibility of deciding what is essential and what is non-essential, but I want to tell him that when a law-abiding citizen asks for a permit to build a store, the local authorities find it very difficult to refuse, because a

Emergency Powers
new store is going to produce tax revenue. They have nothing against the man, and although some members of the council may be in a similar business, they do not like to take a stand that would prevent someone else from going into it. I submit that since the minister gave the local authorities the responsibility of making that decision, the results have convinced most people that the local authorities cannot decide how tight materials are to be used.	,
In the part of Ottawa in which I have been living, two new hardware stores have been built. There were two hardware stores serving that particular community and now we have four where a year ago there were only two. I understand that two returned men are running one of them, and1 I know that most people in the community would like to see the returned men get a break. But, if we have a depression, as most people think we soon will, these young men will probably lose all they have. They will probably be unable to survive the crash.


Mr. McILRAITH:: What would you have
the young men do?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I think we have to provide something for the young people in addition to letting them go into fields which are already overcrowded.


George James McIlraith: Is the hardware business in Ottawa overcrowded?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: You cannot get nails
anywhere.


George James McIlraith: Just keep to the point:
is the hardware business overcrowded?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I should think so, judging by the amount of stock these particular hardware stores are offering. It would appear that you have more hardware stores in Ottawa than you require.


George James McIlraith: Just check up on the number of hardware stores in Ottawa since 1940. I do not think the hon. member is fully familiar with the hardware situation in Ottawa.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I am sufficiently
familiar with it to know that two new hardware stores have been built and they have not been able to get supplies of hardware and building materials. No doubt they are able to make a living now when prices are high and people have more money, but when the depression comes those who have not the right type of connection or have not been able to accumulate enough to see them through may lose all their money. Ex-service people who 83166-155
put all their worldly possessions into stores and other new businesses may be the first victims.
I think the minister of reconstruction and his assistants should have the responsibility of deciding what type of construction will be considered as essential, and they should retain this responsibility until greater progress has been made in solving our housing problem. When I was discussing the question of housing a year ago I made a number of suggestions which unfortunately were not taken very seriously by the administration. I suggested that the federal government should formulate an over-all housing plan for Canada, that they should take into their confidence the provincial and municipal authorities and work out such a programme around the table. This has not been done, and the trade recession is coming much closer. You cannot work out a housing formula in six days or six weeks or six months. You require enabling legislation to be passed by the provincial legislatures. You must enlist public opinion at all levels of government. The federal government is open to severe censure for having failed up to April 25, 1947 to call a conference of all authorities on housing in this dominion. Until the federal government gives that lead it is not going to be possible for the city fathers in a city like Toronto to make plans for the future development of the metropolitan area. They have no indication as to how much assistance, if any, they may get from the federal authorities.
The other day I mentioned one of the new booklets put out by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation entitled "Sixty-seven homes for Canadians." I was particularly interested in the results of the competition recently sponsored by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I think anyone reading this will feel that it has been a most disappointing performance, and there is a perfectly good explanation. The architect has no incentive to take up the planning of houses for people in the lower income brackets. Until some authority makes the necessary gestures, the architect who might do some planning for people in the lower income brackets will be able to sell his wares elsewhere. In the meantime he is only wasting his time. The government's own statistics indicate that in 1942 twenty per cent of the married men in Canada, exclusive of those in the armed services and in agriculture, had incomes of less than $1,000 a year. Taking into account the fact that the people in this income bracket have to have food and clothing, it will be seen that they cannot afford to pay more than $12 or 816 a month in rent

Emergency Powers


Clarence Decatur Howe: They are getting a bit more income now.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Yes, but not twice as much, and even if they were getting twice as much they could not go into the market now and rent a very attractive place for $24 or $32 a month. The only people to whom the federal government is giving assistance in housing are those in the top income brackets who can make provision for their own housing. For two-thirds of the people in Canada the present housing legislation is of practically no help. Nothing is being done in the way of slum clearance or to provide subsidized housing so that people who are getting only $1,000 a year and can afford to pay only around $12 a month for rent can have decent living accommodation with running water and electric light.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Can my hon. friend answer a question that I have asked before? What is the nature of a man's employment who earns only $1,000 a year?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I think I have the Dominion Bureau of Statistics figures-


Clarence Decatur Howe: Never mind the bureau of statistics. Just mention one trade.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: A great many people in the textile industry are getting less than $1,000 a year, and caretakers in our city schools, and carpenters-


An hon. MEMBER:: That is part time work, caretaking.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Carpentry is a full time job, but seasonal; you cannot get employment the year round. I checked only the other night the last report of the Department of Labour after the minister had raised this question, and I found that in the textile industry many people are getting less than $1,000 a year. One of our troubles is that our housing programme has been formulated by people who have never had to live on $1,000 a year but are more accustomed to thinking in terms of living on $1,000 a month. A great many people in the towns and villages in my constituency never receive $1,000 a year in cash, such as those clerking in stores or working in restaurants, or carpenters, plumbers, and tinsmiths.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Is that so in the province of Saskatchewan, with its minimum wage law?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minimum wage law does not provide employment twelve months in the year.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I am astonished that you have that situation in Saskatchewan.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: Many are engaged in seasonal work.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: It is not as bad in Saskatchewan as it is in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. The fact remains that two-thirds of our Canadian wage earners are getting less than enough to pay for a house under the Central Mortgage programme, and they cannot afford to pay the rents set out in this new booklet.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The rents of the wartime housing units run from $21 to a maximum of $32 a month.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The lowest one given on page 5 of this booklet is $25 a month, which of course includes taxes, insurance, water, maintenance and repairs. That $25 will buy a house on a fifteen-year mortgage with a building value of $2,150, and the maximum loan is $2,020. The minister is experienced in the construction business, and he would be performing a great service for the Canadian people if he would have one of his companies embark on the building of $2,500 houses in Canada in 1947. You cannot build such a house today and comply with the specifications of the National Housing Act, because the costs of plumbing and materials are too high. I have no quarrel with that, but with materials in short supply and building costs what they are you simply cannot build the type of house that is listed here under Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. The minister will agree that he is not getting houses built this year that will be available for $25 a month.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I am offering for sale thousands of houses, the wartime houses-[DOT]


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Built for sale?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, and they can be purchased on the basis of payments of from $21 to $25 per month. My hon. friend knows the rental scale of wartime houses, of which we have built 27,000 and are building 6,000 or 7,000 more. The rental runs from $21 to about $32 a month.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I have argued with the minister before on the whole wartime housing programme. In the first place I argued that he was constructing potential slums.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I know you did.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: At that time the minister promised that these houses would be demolished within six months after the end of the war. I predicted then that these houses would never be demolished so long as people were living in less desirable houses. I am not saying that these are slum houses now, but

Emergency Powers
they are potential slums and never should have been built as part of a long-term government housing programme. I am not saying that they should be torn down-not at all; but they were not the type of permanent house that the dominion authority should build-houses like peas in a pod, crowded together.


Clarence Decatur Howe: There is no wartime house now being built on a lot with less than a fifty-foot frontage. Is that considered crowding in your city of Regina?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I admit that wartime houses are a good deal better than those occupied by a good many Canadian citizens.


Clarence Decatur Howe: How wide should they be spaced so as not to be crowded?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: If any hon. member will visit communities where there are wartime houses I think he will agree that you have there a potential slum area.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I will agree with nothing of the sort.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The houses are all of the same colour, and built on the same plan, with their chimneys all in line.	.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is not a description of wartime housing. Has my hon. friend never seen wartime housing?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I have.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Where did he find the chimneys all in line and the colours all the same?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I have seen a number.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Tell us one.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: There is one at Wright-ville which I visited when it. was under construction.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We do not build them with the chimneys all in line.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: They are a pretty poor looking lot compared with what the minister was able to produce in the way of planes and munitions plants during the war. Apparently wartime housing is a permanent housing programme, and a great many of these houses will be here as long as the minister lives.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I was told only about two months ago by the top officers of the Legion that the only satisfactory housing being built for the veterans in Canada was wartime housing, and that the hope of the veterans depended on wartime housing. That is the other side of the picture. You might as well have both sides.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: If wartime houses are the best that Canada can build for the veterans of world war II, they are pretty cheap looking compared with the planes and munitions plants which the minister constructed during the war, when he built in an imaginative way.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I should like to have a view of my hon. friend's own town when he says that these houses are cheap looking. Compared with what are they cheap looking?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I hope the people of Canada are not always going to live in wartime housing. I was born in a log house and I do not apologize for it. But as soon as my father could afford it he wanted a better house for his children. A great many of my people lived in log houses. A great many of the ex-servicemen came from log houses, but they do not want to go back to them if they can avoid doing so. The housing programme of 1947 must be better than that which the minister has visualized in his wartime housing programmn
I am not going to enter into a discussion regarding the merits of wartime houses versus the veterans housing programme. The veteran* are being compelled to pay outrageous prices for the property they will have, but it is a matter of getting a house and they have to pay what is demanded. The fact is that at the present time the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply is failing to give leadership which will result in a housing programme being worked out to make use of the raw materials we have in this country and which will ensure employment for the workers in the building industry over the next five or ten years. It is true that more houses were built last year than were built ten years ago, but the houses that are being built do not take into account the needs of the people or the population. I find that in the Toronto area, for example, around Forest Hill 116 permits were issued last year for houses having a total value of $2 million, or an average of 818,035 each. There are not many veterans who can take advantage of a house costing $18,000. One of my^ quarrels with this type of housing in this period when we are so short of many materials is that there are two or three bathtubs going into these luxury houses. If the minister had acted on the advice I gave last year he would have continued the responsibility he had of deciding what was essential housing.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps my hon. friend can tell me what is essential housing. He complains about wartime housing being too cheap
Emergency Powers

and of substandard construction. He quarrels about the $18,000 house being too good. What does he require as a reasonable house?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: That is a fair question. I think somewhere in between the two would be a reasonable one. Before one house has four bathrooms every house should have one.


Clarence Decatur Howe: An $18,000 house does not usually have four bathrooms.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: According to my
information, quite a few of them have. I saw some houses built in Regina last year and I understand that they were not able to get bathtubs for many of them.


An hon. MEMBER:: Do you want four?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: No, I do not. If we are to grant half a million dollar production subsidy to Crane's, then the taxpayers of Canada have some interest in knowing where these bathtubs are to go.


Mr. FULTON:: In bathrooms.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Some should go to Regina. They should not go to Forest Hill and Toronto, because the people there are able to pay, on the average, $18,000 for their houses. I suggested last year that the minister should formulate an over-all plan. He should convene a conference of people who are interested in the problem of housing on the provincial and municipal level as well as on the federal level. That conference should be called immediately. It is the minister's responsibility to make sure that subsidies are provided for all those municipalities or provinces which will go along with him in providing housing for the people in the lower income groups. No private builder, no life insurance company, no group of philanthropic people is likely to go into the construction of housing in Canada with a view to providing houses for a third of the people who are living in the lower income groups or even the middle groups. The only housing that we are likely to get under our present programme is for the people in the upper third, who have a good deal of financial security and who, in all probability, would be able to build their own houses regardless of any help from the federal authority.
Before the order in council passes, the minister should make some commitment as to whether or not in the near future he will take the responsibility for calling together a conference to try to get an agreement and work started with a view to providing housing for the people in the lower income brackets.


Mr. McIVOR:: I like to speak about what I am sure of, and I am sure of certain things

about the wartime houses in Fort William. The committee will expect me to know something about them. Several hundred houses have been built. I visited many of them. When they were built the criticism was that, while we had these houses in the first year after the war, two years after we would be asking ourselves what was to be done with them. Many of the people who were living in these houses at the time they were doing war work now want to buy them. That is the finest argument in favour of the judgment of the minister of reconstruction in building these houses. Some of these people want to buy them and put a foundation under them. I visited over a hundred of these houses and I found only one individual who was not satisfied. He moved from a shed away out in the country. He had a large family. He said: "This house should be bigger." I said, "Yes, in the same way that your family should be bigger." But when he came to find out what his rent was as compared with rents in other places he was grateful.
I should like to say another word about the wartime houses in Fort William, and especially about the work which the contractors have done. There has not been one word of criticism. Instead of pulling to pieces the work which has been done by this department, we should at least say one or two kind words.


Mr. SINNOTT:: Courtesy is a splendid thing. If a little courtesy had been shown by the minister this afternoon I would not be on my feet at the moment. I asked him a friendly question about nails and what he was going to do about them, and he said: "Go away; do not bother me about nails." I said that I was going to bother him on the floor of the house this afternoon.
I wish to congratulate the hon. member for Parkdale. He covered the situation pretty thoroughly. The hon. member for Mackenzie has had a good deal to say on the situation and in many instances he was correct. I myself have visited a great many of these houses. In most cases the ones built by the minister are all right. There is a block of houses in Windsor which were built on wood blocks which do not meet with my approval at all. I also saw many houses in Vancouver and I saw quite a few houses which were built just west of the Red river. In most of these places the average returned man finds the cost of the houses too high.
The hon. member for Mackenzie was alert when he was asked a question by the minister about the cost of the houses, when he said that somewhere in between was the happy medium.

Emergency Powers
That is right. In order to purchase one of these houses, a man has to show that he has practically steady employment so that he can keep up his payments. I do not know how long the employment will continue but the payments run over a long period of time. Unless the veteran is assured of employment over the period that the payments run, he is not- in a secure position.
At the moment the whole problem is nails. For two months we have heard the hon. member for Peterborough West asking about nails, and he is right. In my town I do not think you could get twenty-five cents worth of nails. How is it possible to build eighty thousand houses if we have not the nails? The Minister of Reconstruction and Supply is still our guiding hand and we are still under war measures. Therefore I say that he has the right to instruct the companies which are making nails to increase their production and do nothing but make nails. If that were done the problem would be solved in a short time.
So far as people in the low income brackets are concerned, there are a number of people in Ottawa and in every other city in Canada who are in that position. I have been through the city of Ottawa and it is a disgrace to see where many of these people are living. We do not need to go any farther than across Wellington street to see it. These men in the low income tax brackets are working only part time, and they are certainly not going to be able to purchase homes such as many of those that are being built at the present time, and at their present cost. I would urge the minister to use his authority at once to see that the nail supply in Canada is increased one hundredfold, I would say, because if we do not have an increased supply of nails within the next month or six -weeks there is no possibility of building 80,000 homes this summer.


Mr. JOHNSTON:: A year ago when I brought up the question of housing we had a rather rough time, as I recall, just before the session ended; but, despite that fact we got some results, and since that time almost everything that I said on that occasion has been verified by other members who have looked more thoroughly into the question. I remember that, when speaking on this question last year, I drew to the attention of the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply some of the facts in connection with wartime housing. If I remember rightly-and I am speaking from memory now-I told the minister then that, while I had not seen any of the houses under construction, I did, a day or two before coming to Ottawa prior to the last session, visit the building plant where the Shoquist Construction Company was building parts of houses which would be transferred from there to the location, wherever it might be, where they would be required. I said that in my opinion, judging from the way the houses were being constructed, the sides and so on, they would not stand up very well under the conditions to which they would be subjected.
Today I wish to discuss some of these houses. Some time ago I put some questions on the order paper in regard to these houses and I wish to quote from the questions and answers. This was in reference to the Shoquist Construction Company of Calgary:
1. How many houses has the Shoquist Construction Company contracted to build and/or has built for the Department of Reconstruction and Supply, and/or Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation?
The answer was:
Three hundred houses for Wartime Housing Limited.
The next question was:
Where are these houses located?
The answer was, in Calgary. The third question was:
How many types of houses are there being built and/or have been built by this company?
The answer was:
Three types.
4.	What is the total amount of money paid to this company to date?
The answer was:
At February 10, 1947, $398,073.31.
Then under the (b) part of the questions:
What is the total amount of money yet payable under the contract?
The answer to that question was:
At date, $334,377.21.
That makes about three-quarters of a million dbllars and that is a lot of money, but that is the answer. The next question was:
5.	What is the contract price for each type of house ?
I am not sure about this and I would ask the minister to explain it. The answer is:
Four-room house (asbestos shingle siding), $1,900.41.
Am I to take it that the complete house with asbestos shingle siding would be $1,900.41? Then there appears in brackets "wood siding, $1,942.41". There must be something wrong there, or I am misinterpreting it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Certain materials were being supplied. The answer is correct. That was not the cost of the house. The hon. member asked for the amount of money we paid the contractor.
Emergency Powers


Charles Edward Johnston: The question was: "What is the contract price for each type of house?"


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is right.


Charles Edward Johnston: I take it that is the labour, the contractor's labour.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is the contract price, but
there was a certain free issue there that would not be in the contract price.


Mr. BENTLEY:: A certain what?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The hon. member asked
his question and we answered exactly in the terms in which he asked it. You cannot ask for more.


Charles Edward Johnston: I have learned that
unless one is very careful in asking questions he sometimes does not get the information he is after. I do not blame the department in that regard. They read the question carefully and they answered it, I would not say exactly to suit themselves.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The practice of the department is to answer exactly what is asked and that is what they did in your case. You could criticize us if we adopted any other policy.


Charles Edward Johnston: I accept that.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Why cast aspersions, then?


Charles Edward Johnston: I am not finding fault
with the minister; he does not need to get excited about the matter. I asked for information to clarify the question.
Then I find that a six-roomed house, asbestos shingle siding, is $2,443.56, and wood siding, $2,491.56; and a five-roomed house, asbestos shingle siding, is $2,307.13, and wood siding $2,355.13. This information is given in this connection:
The above contract calls for sheet rock, masonite, asphalt shingles, asbestos shingles, rough lumber, hardwood flooring, mineral wool insulation and paper and felts being supplied by Wartime Housing Limited.
6.	What provision is made in each type of contract for the payment of fair wages to employees?
7.	What provision is made in each type of contract for the payment of fair wages to subcontractors' employees ?
8.	What provision is made in each type of contract for the payment of fair wages in the case of piece work by (a) contractor; (b) subcontractor?
The answer to these three questions reads:
6, 7 and 8. In all cases, the main contract specifies that wages and working conditions shall conform to the requirements of provincial legislation and to current practice for the trades in the area. Subcontractors are bound by the labour requirements of the main contracts.

The next question:
_ 9. Does the contract specify that outside painting be done by brush or by spray gun or both?
The answer:
9.	Contract specified first coat-brush; other two may be sprayed.
I have not personally visited these houses that have been constructed but I have had some communications and personal interviews in the matter. One of the first complaints I had was in regard to the agreement of sale, and I wish to read a letter that I received in this connection, with a view to soliciting some information from the minister. Later on, I shall speak of other things that I know more about because of the evidence I have. I quote from this letter:
The enclosed is a cutting of an editorial in the Journal of yesterday's date. It speaks for itself and the subject matter is one it is thought should be brought up in the House of Commons. It is certainly a one-sided agreement and the price of the houses suggests the government is emulating the tactics of Scrooge-
He has not been very careful in his wording.
Fancy a five-roomed house-a none to elaborate one at that-costs the purchaser $9,370.
When you compare that with the price I quoted a moment ago, there is a discrepancy.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The government never sold
a single unit, so far as Central Mortgage or Munitions and Supply are concerned, for $9,000.


Charles Edward Johnston: I will go on and read it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Why read a thing as wild as that?


Charles Edward Johnston: This is from a man who apparently knows what he is talking about, or should.


Clarence Decatur Howe: What is his name?


Charles Edward Johnston: He says:
If the purchaser lives in the house for a full five years at first there is a reduction of $1,000.
Is that correct?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Charles Edward Johnston: He goes on:
If the tenant does not buy he may be in immediate danger of being turned out on a mere technicality in order to sell the house to some other-*
He has the words "poor sucker" here.
As a war veteran and tenant of one of these houses, the action of the government is most condemnatory.


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend has read the letter; now will he lay it on the table?

Emergency Powers


Charles Edward Johnston: Yes, certainly I will, and along with it I will send the clipping which is enclosed. I should like to read that clipping so that it will appear in Hansard, because to some extent it verifies the letter I have just read:
Tenants of wartime houses would be well advised to have a lawyer approve the agreement of sale before they decide to purchase. After reading one of these documents, which set forth the terms under which the Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation will transfer one of the wartime housing dwellings to tenants, the impression is left that the crown company is taking no chances.
One clause, for instance, stipulates that, if any of the terms of the agreement are not carried out, the purchaser will give up possession "without any notice to quit and without the vendor bringing any action for ejectment,"-
I think that is true in regard to the contract. I do not have the agreement of sale before me. but I have it upstairs, and as I recall it that is one of the clauses of that agreement.
-and that the purchaser is to be "without any recourse whatever . . . either at law or in equity" against the vendor, for the recovery of any moneys paid. Further, it says that in the event of any breach of the agreement all payments already made "shall be retained by the vendor as and for liquidated damages and not as a penalty."
That, too, I think is one of the clauses in the agreement of sale, as I remember it. I read this, subject to the minister's correction, but I looked up the agreement of sale when I read this article, and that is as I recollect it.
Another clause announces that in the event of any breach "the purchaser shall forthwith become a mere trespasser upon every part of the said lands, and may be forcibly ejected therefrom by the vendor or his agents without any of them being in any way responsible for damages."	*
These clauses appear to the layman to be harsh and arbitrary. In excluding any appeal to the courts of the land, they violate one of the fundamental rights of a Canadian citizen. Although the vendor is a crown company, it cannot be allowed to set itself above the law.
To represent such a document as "between His Majesty the King in the right of Canada" is to libel the crown itself. It has been charged that the bureaucratic mind is prone to arrogate to itself supreme power and authority. This agreement of sale certainly appears to be a manifestation of such a tendency.
I believe these references to the agreement of sale are correct, because I checked them when I received the article?


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I just get this clear? This was built as a wartime house; is that true?


Charles Edward Johnston: Yes.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Now being sold by the crown?


Charles Edward Johnston: Yes, that is what they are referring to.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Sold at $9,000?


Charles Edward Johnston: That was the amount stated in the letter.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Is this two houses the hon. member is talking about, semi-detached?


Charles Edward Johnston: The letter says:
Fancy a five-roomed house, a none too elaborate one at that, costs the purchaser $9,370 over a period of twenty years.
That would be the total amount paid over a period of twenty years in monthly instalments, and would include the interest.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Oh, this is a social credit transaction?


Charles Edward Johnston: No, these are the proposals of the minister of reconstruction to the veterans.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I didn't know what the hon. member was talking about. Now I understand.


Charles Edward Johnston: I am very glad the minister brought that point in, because he has referred many times to social credit as being a kind of screwy thing, but now he acknowledges that this is a screwy contract. Had I said that, the minister would have been a little irritated, but I am glad he has placed that interpretation upon it. I do not think the minister will deny that the clauses referred to as being in the agreement of sale are there, and it seems to me quite unfair that if a veteran has put money into a house; if he has paid for a certain period of time and then, for some reason or another, misses a payment, which violates a clause in the agreement, he should be liable to be ejected without any recompense in regard to the money paid in. It seems to me that, with the economic conditions under which we are living, it would be only fair for the agreement of sale to be modified to give the veteran a little leeway, in case he should lose his position, until such time as he might become reinstated in employment and be able to carry on. The minister may say, well, the company might agree to that, that no man would be kicked' out just because he happened to fail to make one monthly payment. But that is not in the terms of the contract, and, after all, when one is dealing with matters of this kind one must confine himself to the wording of the contract. That is the thing we should complain about now.
For a few moments I should like to speak about the construction of the houses. Referring to this matter a moment ago, I mentioned that I had visited the place down by the railway tracks in Calgary where the
Emergency Powers

Shoquist Construction. Company were putting together the sides of the houses, and so on. Young fellows were working there who, in my view, did not have any practical experience. I am not saying it takes men with practical experience to nail two by fours together; I do not think that is necessary, provided that they are under proper supervision. When I was speaking of wartime houses last year the Minister of Veterans Affairs said one of the reasons those houses were so poorly constructed was that they did not have first-class workmen. That was all so much tommyrot, because you do not require every man to be a first-class workman in order to build a house properly, provided that you have proper supervision. I think the minister will agree with that.
But I want to come to this clause I read a moment ago in regard to fair wages. This was brought to my attention about a day before I came to Ottawa. One of the labour unions in Calgary telephoned and asked me to come to their office to discuss this matter of labour relations with wartime housing. At that time I pointed out to them, as I want to state to the minister now, that I had not actually visited one of these houses; and, believe me, I do not go around looking for trouble, but when trouble is brought to me I have never run away from it. That was true in connection with these veterans' houses. I never went around snooping to see what I could find out. These people came to me and asked me to see these conditions, and I went. I visited this labour organization and talked to some of the men working on these houses. I have before me an affidavit to support what I am saying. I said to these men, "This is a swell time to bring this question to me. I have not even time to go down and visit the houses, to see whether what you are saying is the truth." Then I said, "I won't do anything in this matter unless you fellows will give me an affidavit that what you are telling me is true." They did so, and I have that affidavit here in my hand.
I put the question on the order paper in regard to fair wages, because I wanted to find out whether in the contracts with these companies there was a stipulation that the men working on these buildings should receive fair and decent wages. According to the answer I received from the department, that is so; under the contract they are supposed to pay decent and proper wages. What I am going to say is in relation to the Shoquist Construc-

tion Company; as far as I could find out the Bird Construction Company, which I believe is building wartime houses in Calgary-


Clarence Decatur Howe: I don't know.


Charles Edward Johnston: I believe they are. I have spoken to the men working on those houses, and they tell me the houses are being put up properly, so that I want to give credit where credit is due. But in regard to these other houses which I mentioned first, the condition is that when the contract is let the contractor does not necessarily do all the work himself. He sublets the contract, and in some instances it is sublet two or three times.
In this particular instance to which I would direct the minister's attention, I come to the place where a contract for hardwood flooring was being sublet. I am not sure whether it was sublet once or twice; but in the final analysis the men who were working on the job were getting three cents a square foot for laying hardwood flooring. My contention is that a man cannot earn decent wages, if he does a decent job, if he is paid only three cents a square foot. I do not believe it can be done.
Mr. HOWE; Did the hon. member ever look into that?


Charles Edward Johnston: I have laid quite a little of it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I can tell him that probably fifty per cent of all the hardwood flooring laid is laid under contract and, as I remember prices, three cents a square foot is the prevailing price.


Charles Edward Johnston: That might have been so a few years ago. Is the minister referring to recent times?	.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have not had the figures for some time, probably ten or twelve years.


Charles Edward Johnston: I agree that wages ten or twelve years ago were different from what they are today. And the cost of living was a lot different ten or fifteen years ago from what it is now.


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend maintains that
three cents a square foot is a substandard price, does he?


Charles Edward Johnston: Yes, I think it is.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Are you sure of it?


Charles Edward Johnston: It depends upon your-


Clarence Decatur Howe: You are entering a complaint in the House of Commons of Canada. I assume it is a serious complaint.

Emergency Powers


Charles Edward Johnston: I am saying this, that I do not think a man who lays hardwood flooring properly, if he nails it properly, and puts paper in between, can make decent wages at three cents a square foot.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is a matter of your opinion.


Charles Edward Johnston: It is a matter of my opinion, yes, against the minister's opinion. He said he thought it could have been done for that, and I think he said it was ten or twelve years ago. I say that under present-day conditions I do not think a man can lay flooring, and do it properly, at that price, because it is a different matter to lay hardwood flooring from laying softwood. I do not think he can do it at three cents a foot.
I have evidence to prove this. I was talking to men who were working for another company in Calgary at the same type of work, and who were getting five cents. These men explained to me that they could make fairly good wages at five cents. But. three cents is little more than half of that, and it makes a considerable difference.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I do not understand why the men would take a contract, if it were not profitable. Why did they not work at $1.20 an hour with the carpenters on the job?


Charles Edward Johnston: Because the contractor would not let the work out on an hourly basis. He let it out on a sub-contract basis, and therefore they could either take it or leave it. If the minister is sure that hardwood flooring can be laid at three cents a square foot, then what was the price in the original contract? What does the government allow for laying hardwood flooring, to the original contractor?
I may be wrong-and I admit it-but my estimate is ahout nine cents a square foot.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I made no statement. My hon. friend said it used to be the price. I do not know what the price is. But I would not think a price of three cents a square foot is prima facie evidence that it is unreasonably low; because it seems to me, prima facie, that if the men are anxious to take the work on that basis it must be more profitable than -working on an hourly basis.


Charles Edward Johnston: The point is this; when the subcontractor is able to put that out at three cents a square foot, what did the original contractor get?
My suggestion is this-and it it merely an assumption-that I believe the original contract must have called for something around eight or nine cents a square foot. If that is so, then there is too great a spread between the
price for laying the hardwood flooring, in the original instance, and in the sublet price. You have to see how it works out.


Clarence Decatur Howe: You are putting up a straw man and knocking him down. You say the price was nine cents?


Charles Edward Johnston: I know that every time a contract is sublet there is a profit made on it by the original contractor. That was proven all the way through veterans housing. In this particular instance, where I have evidence to support what I am telling the minister, in these houses in Calgary the flooring was being laid at three cents a square foot. Let me read part of it:
We the undersigned have made verbal statements to Mr. Charles E. Johnston as to quality of work being done on wartime housing by the Shoquist Construction Company Limited, Calgary, and we now make these statements under oath, and do declare that subfloors are improperly nailed, having in many cases boards with only one nail and many places none, where two nails are required. In laying hardwood floors many places have up to three boards laid [DOT]without nails in them, and some floors (hardwood) are laid without paper between.
That just means this, that when you are going to chisel on labour-and I do not mean the government in this instance; I mean the contractor-where they come to the point where they are chiseling on labour and are paying unfair wages, then you will get inefficient work.
I do not make any mistake about it; these men who are qualified carpenters are going to see to it that they do make a fair day's wages. It was pointed out to me that in some instances they would leave the job at night, and that there would be two or three rolls of paper left on the job. Then they would come back in the morning, ready to go to work-and, mind you, they were getting three cents a square foot. They said: "What would you do if, when you went back to work in the morning, there was no paper. Would you stand around a half a day, waiting for paper?" I said, "No, I would not." They said, "Neither did we. We laid- the floor, because we had to earn our money."
But the point is that the original contractor should now be responsible for this job. If this is true, and if these floors are being nailed so that three or four boards contain only one nail, where there should be three or four nails, then I say the original contractor should be compelled to take up that flooring. If the specifications call for paper between the floors, and that has not been supplied, then the original contractor should be compelled to lift the flooring and put the paper there, without any additional cost.
Emergency Powers

Mind you, it cost us $1,500,000 under veterans housing to recondition these houses, just because of such mistakes as are taking place in the contracts to which I have referred. Anyone who has had any experience in building must know that these floors will last for six months or probably a year and a half.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Unless dampness gets in.


Charles Edward Johnston: But when dampness
creeps in and the boards begin to dry out, then will come the squeaks and cracks in the floor, and the boards will pull up. That is when the veterans will have a complaint.
We have a logical complaint. I am pointing it out to the minister at this time, without any desire to be injurious to him, or to impede the work he is endeavouring to do. That was not my intention last year, either, when I brought this matter up before the veterans affairs committee in connection with veterans housing.
I am just pointing it out in this regard because, as was indicated in the letter, the returned men are being forced to pay high prices for these places; if so, they should be getting value for their money. And if these houses are being constructed in the manner in which I have indicated-and I do not think these men would take an oath to a false statement-then I think an investigation should be made.
If these suggestions are found to be true, then the proper place for the government to claim would be against the original contractor. I would object, and object most strenuously, if next year this House of Commons were asked to pay another million and a half dollars to replace the improper work that these contractors have done.
As I said in the beginning, I have not visited the houses personally. I made that clear to the minister. But I will also say that I am going to visit them this summer, because I want to see what they are like.
Then, in regard to paint, I have had information given me in regard to it, that the paint was being put on completely by spray guns.


Clarence Decatur Howe: In other words, my hon. friend now says that he is addressing this House of Commons in connection with houses which he has not seen; that he does not know whether these statements are true or not.


Charles Edward Johnston: I did not say that I did not know whether they were true or not.


Clarence Decatur Howe: How can you know they are true?


Charles Edward Johnston: Because I have affidavits to support them.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Does my hon. friend want to make a charge in connection with this? If so, we will certainly go in and take the paint off.


Charles Edward Johnston: That is the same kind of argument the Minister of Veterans Affairs gave me last year. I am not trying to find fault with the minister as the minister of reconstruction, I simply thought he would appreciate it if these things were pointed out to him. I assume, or I will make it as strong as to say that I do assume that the minister of reconstruction is endeavouring to build the best kind of houses he can under the circumstances. I would have thought he would1 appreciate having these matters brought to his attention.
Last year, when I brought this question before the Minister of Veterans Affairs he found, on investigation, that the things I had referred1 to were true. This year I could have brought statements and photographs of some of the veterans houses in Calgary to which I was referring and which were in worse condition than they were last year when I was talking. However I could see no use in doing that, because some repairs had already been made. Since I had been given no further complaints I let the matter drop. But I have the evidence in my office now in regard to those veterans houses.
I am pointing out these things to the minister so that he can take some precaution. He may say that there has been proper supervision, but may I say that I think the greatest defect in connection with veterans housing was the lack of proper inspection. I am inclined to think we are going to run into the same trouble in connection with wartime housing. I do not blame the minister personally for these floors being laid in the manner in which I have indicated, because I know he cannot run around and personally inspect all these buildings. He must have competent inspectors to do this job, and I think that is where the fault lies. If the work is not done properly the one who suffers is the returned man. I am sure the minister does not want that condition to exist, and neither do I. I hope the minister will look into the matter and see that proper adjustments are made.


Mr. MURPHY:: 
Clarence Decatur Howe: On a point of order, how does my hon. friend associate the Veterans' Land Act with the orders in council under discussion?


Joseph Warner Murphy: I am glad the minister raised that point and I think I can answer it. The priorities system we are now considering was set up under P.C. 1609, which covers construction materials regulations. This is listed under the Department of Reconstruction and Supply. My contention is this, that under this priority system which has been in vogue for some time, it would appear, as was explained this afternoon by the hon. member for Park-dale, that those who are engaged in building projects such as those under the Veterans' Land Act or under other government supervised schemes are able to get priorities and no doubt are able to build at a lower price because of their being able to get the materials more easily than can the ordinary contractor competing in the same field. Because of this material being more easily available to them, I want to enlarge upon the argument made by the previous speaker that they should have been able to build these homes at least at a fair price.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Chairman, I humbly
submit that these orders have nothing to do with building houses and certainly nothing to do with the building of houses by another department of government. The order under consideration has to do with the furnishing of materials under priority. But if my hon. friend proposes to discuss the subject of houses built under the Veterans' Land Act I must take exception, because I know nothing about that subject and have no reason to know anything about it.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, thus far
the hon. member has been discussing priorities.
Emergency Powers

He is citing instances where priorities have resulted in tying up material unnecessarily. I think the minister is being a little too hasty in asking that the member be ruled out of order. I submit that his remarks are in line with the very order in council we are considering, which deals primarily with priorities.


Clarence Decatur Howe: If that were all he was
discussing, the tying up of material unnecessarily, I would agree, but I understood he was going into a dissertation which we have heard him give several times before on the Veterans' Land Act.


Howard Charles Green: I think the minister had
better wait until the hon. member does go into a dissertation and then raise his point of order.


The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN:: I think the hon. member would be in order if he deals directly with the question of materials, but he would not be in order in going into details of building under the Veterans' Land Act.


Joseph Warner Murphy: I did not intend, Mr. Chairman, to deal with all features of the homes constructed under the Veterans' Land Act. I dealt with that subject on February 4, but I dealt with the defects and not with the prices. In this instance I purpose confining myself to prices upon various government projects while we have this priorities system in effect. In my opinion, because of that system the prices are excessive. When I spoke in the house on February 4, I mentioned the cost of the small homes, at page 107 of Hansard, and said that in Sarnia township eight homes were built, of four different types, two of each type. One was 18 feet, 9 inches, by 32 feet, one and a half storey with basement; the second was 24 feet by 30 feet, one storey; and the third one was 25 feet by 31 feet, 8 inches, one storey. These are all small homes. They are not in the class with the $18,000 homes mentioned this afternoon as being suitable for veterans. These particular homes, according to the answer I received in a return, cost two at $7,759.36 each; two at $7,928.57 each; two at $7,081.95 each, and two at $8,200.54. The figures which I have just quoted from the return are the cost of house construction only. They do not include the land or public services such as roads, hydro, water mains and so on.
My other point with respect to building under these conditions is that those who did get this contract were building under a handicap. 
Question No. 6-and this is very important-which I asked was:
What was the cost per unit of project overhead and how was the same made up?

The answer brought down in the return
was:
Average per unit at Sarnia $1,736.22.
That is an amazing figure. I am sorry I did not have these figures when I spoke in the house on February 4 and demanded a royal commission.


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I ask what controller under this bill is responsible for that? In other words, how does that relate to the item under discussion?


Joseph Warner Murphy: I am very glad that the minister asked that question, because the answer is, I think, found in this return. I want to be perfectly fair about this. I do not think any of us wants any more controls than are necessary, but here I think is the answer to the minister's question. It is given in the return:
Average per unit at Sarnia $1,736.22.
Project overhead includes the following items: temporary buildings, salaries of staff located on the project including superintendents, accountants, bookkeepers, stenographers, timekeepers, material checkers, first aid attendant, watchmen, and water boys. Miscellaneous expenses incurred at job office in direct relation to the project include travelling expenses, telegrams, and telephone calls.


William Henry Golding: I do not think the hon. member would be in order in discussing the items he has just mentioned on the item now before the committee, but if he confined his remarks to the cost of material I think he would be in order.


Joseph Warner Murphy: I appreciate your ruling, Mr. Chairman. My only argument has been that the cost of these homes has been increased because of the controls dealt with in these various orders in council which we are now considering. With respect to that type of home built under these restrictions, and with priorities as they were, the costs are, I would say, a great deal higher than they would have been if the material were more easily available and had contractors not had to contend with various controls and restrictions.
I had referred only to the cost of the houses in the Sarnia area. The ones in the Windsor area are in the neighbourhood of $7,000 to $7,891.96. The cost there enters into this particular picture. If we are to assume that the answer given to question No. 6 and the unit overhead at Windsor is the same as at Sarnia, then the cost of building these veterans homes in the Sarnia area would be around $9,900, and in the Windsor area, $9,500, on the house only. When the house is completed the veterans holdings would be in the neighbourhood of $12,000 each.

Emergency Powers


William Henry Golding: I do not believe the hon. member is in order in discussing the cost of veterans houses except in so far as it relates to material which is in the order before us. I should like to remind the hon. member that he will have full opportunity to go into the matter when the estimates of the Minister of Veterans Affairs are before the committee.


Mr. FLEMING:: May I remind you, sir, of one or two things in this connection? Before the committee left the consideration of the general order of the wartime prices and trade board on Monday last, a question was asked by the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard specifically with reference to the timber regulations which we are discussing in part along with this order. He asked if he might have the assurance of the Minister of Justice at that time that if the wartime prices and trade board general order were allowed to pass it might be on the understanding that questions of price would be open for discussion when we came to these later orders, particularly with reference to timber control. The Minister of Justice, who unfortunately is not in the committee at the moment, gave the explicit assurance that price controls might be discussed along with these other forms of control when we came to these orders. In the light of that, and with great respect, Mr. Chairman, I submit that it is perfectly proper for the hon. member to discuss the question of prices in relation to control. As a matter of fact, with great respect, I do not see how you can extricate one from the other; the two things are tied so closely together. If we are to try to hew a line and separate references to control of priorities from control in reference to prices under this order and on the timber control order or some other we shall be hopelessly bogged down. I think you should permit the discussion to proceed in keeping with the understanding assented to by the Minister of Justice on Monday last,


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I suggest to my hon. friend that there is no price qontrol on houses. Certainly I have no knowledge of veterans houses. We are not discussing housing; we are discussing priorities orders. This discussion might reasonably be in order on the bill to amend the Housing Act that I hope will succeed this discussion. Certainly the present order deals with nothing but priorities on materials.


William Henry Golding: The point the hon. member for Eglinton should keep in mind is that the hon. member for Lambton cited the costs involved in many things other than
materials. What we are dealing with specifically is the cost of materials. The Minister of Veterans Affairs is not in his place at the moment. His department has to do with veterans houses. I appeal to the hon. member to try to keep in line with the item before us.


Joseph Warner Murphy: I see the fairness of your ruling, sir, and I for one am not going to try to prolong this debate or try to debate something which should be discussed at some other time. While the Minister of Veterans Affairs is not in his place, there is no reason why we cannot discuss building which may come under his department or under the department of any other minister. In view of the fact that there will be opportunities later to discuss some other phases which I did not intend to bring up at this time, I shall not continue along that line.
In closing, I do think I have been fair in bringing consideration of these veterans houses to the attention of the committee, because the cost of these houses was increased considerably by reason of the controls and priorities.


Mr. PROBE:: I should like to confine my remarks to two paragraphs of P.C. 1609 which *have to do with priorities, namely, sections (a) and (b) of paragraph 2 of the office consolidation, which read as follows:
The priorities officer shall have power,
(a)	to prohibit, control and _ regulate the making of or dealing in construction materials;
(b)	to order or require any person owning or having power to dispose of or being in possession of or making or dealing in construction materials or having facilities for making or dealing in construction materials to make or deal in such construction materials in such manner as may be specified.
Through the medium of this order in council the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply has a wide and ample allotment of powers for his purpose. I think even he will admit that the construction of houses is a most desirable and necessary thing in Canada at the present time. I think too that it would be rather a bold person who, checking back over the minister's record as Minister of Munitions and Supply during the war, would say that the minister had been inefficient or was likely to prove inefficient in the administration of the construction of housing in Canada. It would be just as serious a charge to say that he was insincere or did not wish to go ahead with this most necessary construction. The minister's war record is an admirable one. I believe he is a respected engineer and administrator, but I wish to tell the committee that the minister is definitely on the spot now because of the fiasco that he has made of the powers which have been
Emergency Powers

allotted to him and to the officials under him in giving housing to the Canadian people. That is not a personal opinion; it is not an opinion confined to this group. I would say that it is the opinion across Canada, and I am sure that the minister himself would be the first to admit that there is some basis for that opinion.
The two sections which I read from P.C. 1609 describe all the powers that the minister needs to get on with the job. He has the details right there and it is up to him to proceed. From time to time in this house he has given us statistics which, I presume, are prepared by the admirable economic research group in the department of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, to whom I wish to pay a tribute, because they do prepare statistics in a form that I, as a layman and not a technical expert, as the minister is, can follow and understand. Unfortunately, however, one does not get all the information that one wants from the answers that are given to questions asked; for instance, the answer given by the minister to the questions asked by the hon. member for Bow River with regard to the cost of housing under certain conditions, and to the questions that I myself have asked with regard to certain items on which I wanted information. I do not blame the minister for sticking to the point of the question that is asked, but many of us are not lawyers and cannot see the implications of a question when we ask it, and we have received answers that do not give us the information we seek, though answers may be technically in accordance with the terms in which the questions are drawn up. I suggest, however, that the minister errs in not assisting us to get the information that we want.


Mr. SINCLAIR (Vancouver North):: How can he know if you do not ask the question properly?


John Oliver Probe: I will give an example of the sort of thing I have in mind.


James Sinclair: You say you got a proper answer.
_ Mr. PROBE: I got an answer technically in accordance with the wording of the question. I asked this question:
How much lumber of various kinds or grades was bought by or for any federal housing agency during each of the months of 1946 in each of the federal constituencies of Pontiac and Xipissing''
The answer is:
No lumber was purchased by or for Wartime Housing Limited during 1946 from any supplier m these two constituencies.

I am sure that question is answered in accordance with the way in which it was framed, but the intent of the question-


James Sinclair: You have to smarten up. That is your trouble.


John Oliver Probe: I am just as smart as the
hon. member for Vancouver South.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Mr. MacINNIS:: North.


John Oliver Probe: Vancouver North.


James Sinclair: I take it you are not as smart as the hon. member for Vancouver South.


John Oliver Probe: At the moment I will defer to seniority in stature or age over here, but that does not apply to the hon. member. I wanted information in all sincerity and it could have been furnished by a telephone call from the minister's department. They could have said, "Tell us exactly what you want and we wrill get it for you". I did not get that information, however, and the result is that the intent of the question remains unanswered. But that is the general situation in the Department of Reconstruction and Supply.
I do not think the minister is a lawyer; I understand he is an engineer; but he has under him people who are far more clever than a lot of the lawyers I hear carrying on dissertations in this house, especially when we are pressing for necessary information which we ought to have. From time to time, both in the house and outside, the minister has made statements about the building boom in Canada, and housing progress. We are told that the rate of building exceeds anything we have ever known in the history of Canada. But in his press releases there are suggestions that are not strictly in keeping with the statements that he should make as head of his department. Here is an example. In the report of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation there are some excellent tables, and the minister could have quoted from that booklet the statement that under part I of the housing act, for example, only 6,927 loans were made in 1947, or that there were loans made for the purpose of rental housing, by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, in 1946, for only 4,836 houses. These represent the two major classes of housing sponsored by his department on the lending basis. I am ignoring for the moment Wartime Housing Corporation. I have not the same criticisms to offer of Wartime Housing Corporation that have been expressed by some other members.

Private Bills
I was glad that the minister said we could now buy these houses in Regina. I fear the policy is a new one declared within the last day or two, because it was not in effect when I was home at Easter. The minister also spoke about the fifty-foot lots. If he is referring to fifty-foot frontage, that is not true of every house we have in Regina. However, on the whole I am happy that these buildings are there, and the veterans living in them are for the most part satisfied. To that extent, therefore, I wish to make my acknowledgments to the minister as head of the department.
At six o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair and the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock. PRIVATE BILLS



TORONTO, HAMILTON AND BUFFALO RAILWAY COMPANY

[Stage Direction]
The house in committee on Bill No. 73, respecting The Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway Company-Mr. Cleaver-Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1-Trust indenture confirmed.
Mr. CHURCH:: Perhaps the sponsor of the bill would give us an explanation. This is largely a matter of a trust deed given by the Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway Company in favour of the Royal Trust Company for $2,000,000 worth of notes of the railway company, which notes were issued under the deed. There seemed to be some doubt as to whether the railway company and the trust company had power to make the agreement, but the committee passed this bill the other day; they found this money was required for betterments, so that I have no personal objection to the bill.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
Preamble agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
The house in committee on Bill No. 106, to incorporate Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway Company-Mr. Rinfret-Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1-Incorporation.
Thomas Langton Church: At the meeting of the railway committee the other day I asked for an explanation of this bill, and I am far from satisfied that this parliament has power to pass it. In the first place, this is largely a power proposition. They do propose to construct a railway, as set out in the bill; and, mind you, I believe the gentlemen who are the proposed incorporators deserve a great deal of credit for what they have done in New Ontario. I have only a few observations to make about this bill.
The other day the Secretary of State for External Affairs announced that in the near future a conference would be held between representatives of this country and Newfoundland in regard to that country becoming part of Canada. In view of that fact, I think it is against public policy for us to liquidate any of our assets in that part of the country. While I appreciate what these gentlemen have done in other parts of Canada in connection with the development of our resources, still we as individuals have a public duty to perform.
The names of the incorporators are set out in the preamble. They propose to construct a railway to be known as the Quebec North Shore and Labrador railway, only part of which is to be in Canada. As you know, Mr. Chairman, a large part of the huge debt of this country was incurred in days gone by in connection with our railways. We have had overcapitalization, duplication and waste; branch lines were built all over Canada paralleling other branch lines, and private ownership made such a mess of the whole thing that a royal commission had to be appointed to recommend certain principles to be followed in future in connection with new railway construction. That was in 1917; and it was recommended that the board of railway commissioners, now know as the board of transport commissioners, should be consulted and should make recommendations before any more branch lines were constructed.
When our railways were built the companies came to the dominion government and were paid so much a mile to construct the lines. Then they were given rights of way, land, mineral rights and all that sort of thing right across Canada. Not satisfied with that, some of them went to the provinces and obtained1 further grants. For that reason, and in view of the conference to be held with Newfoundland, I believe that we should mark time until the cabinet has had a chance to look into the situation; then this bill might be brought in a little later in the session. This company proposes to construct a railway
Private Bills

from the St. Lawrence river in a northerly-direction to the southern boundary of Labrador, thence in a northerly direction to a point on the northern boundary of Labrador in the vicinity of Ruth lake, and even on the Ungava bay, Hudson strait and so on. The company is making provision to go through another country, because Labrador does not belong to Canada. Labrador was given to Newfoundland, and during the war the provisional government appointed by the British government for Newfoundland automatically looked after Labrador.
In view of the coming conference, I fail to see why we should give the terms asked in this bill. True it is that this company did apply to the Newfoundland government, and simply got permission to go on with the railway. We note the words, "provided that authority be obtained from Newfoundland." What power have the incorporators of a railway company to go to a country which is not part of Canada and negotiate, over the heads of parliament, for the building of a railway?
In addition to the railway, they are to have permission to issue securities, and other things besides. They are to have power facilities to develop. They are to be placed in control of aeronautics, something which is under the control of the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Howe), as he pointed out when the aeronautics bill was passed.	.
Then, they are to have power over certain amalgamations, and they are given power to generate, acquire, use, transmit and distribute electric and other power or energy, arising from the water power up there. That is a pretty wide departure fom the Railway Act. If it is to be a power corporation, and not a railway, why do they come under the Railway Act? Further, it is not for the general advantage of Canada, because no doubt when they come to parliament they will want a grant of so much a mile for the construction of the railway, despite the fact that it is through a first-class mining district.
Then, they will have to erect telephone andi telegraph poles, and they will require wharves for purposes of navigation on the ocean and on inland lakes and rivers. They will have the right to build docks and warehouses, and act as wharfingers. Many other things enter into this contract. They may construct, acquire, charter and navigate steam and other vessels for the conveyance of passengers, goods and merchandise; and may construct, acquire and dispose of wharves, docks, elevators, and so on.
It is an omnibus bill; they are given everything. Further, they are allowed to construct

hotels and parks, and all that kind of thing. They are given jurisdiction over motor buses and motor cars for collecting, carrying, transporting and delivering freight, goods and passengers, and may collect rates and charges therefor; but no rate or charge shall be demanded or taken until it has been approved of by the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada.
Another power they are given-and I have never seen this placed in a railway bill before -is that of building a pipeline for oil, so that they may transmit via pipeline right through a country which does not belong to Canada. Why, we might as well pass a bill here to do these things in the state of New York or the state of Maine.
We do not own Labrador; we have nothing to do with it. Yet, here, over the head of the cabinet and the government, there is a proposal to go through all this, to go through an outside country, with the authority of Newfoundland. While Newfoundland is in the empire, it is still another part of it, and is now placed under British trusteeship. I should think that would be the proper way to describe it, for Great Britain lias the responsibility.
I shall .point out one further fact, and then I shall have concluded, because, having said this, I have done my duty as a member of parliament. I have attempted to look into the situation to see that we are not guilty of giving certain things in a haphazard fashion. It will be noted this bill was initiated in the other end of this building. There were no reporters at the meeting, and what was said was not put on the record. As I said in committee, "You have money to spend, to take down divorce proceedings; but you have not money to spend to report the proceedings of the railway committee, when you are giving away a franchise, and all that kind of thing." I objected to it. We should have had a record of it, so that we would know what they are asking. But somehow or another, everyone ignored it.
We might as well be handing over the whole of Labrador, a place we do not own, to a lot of private people. Do not forget the mistake that was made in New Ontario. I would suggest that we look at "Moody's Public Utilities"-"Huston's" used to be the national financial book

and see who owns the natural resources of Canada. Look over the natural resources of this country, the gold, silver, copper, nickel and other minerals, from the Ottawa river to the Nipigon, and you will find who owns it-Americans and other foreign

Private Bills
capitalists. You will see who they are; they do not live in this country at all. And they are not Canadian citizens. I object to that.
I am one who has always supported private capital, because we owe a great deal to capitalists from all over the world who helped develop this country. But if you pass this bill to enable them to obtain this franchise, they will have the power to spend money. I do not object to these men personally; they are fine citizens of Canada, and have done a great deal for Canada and themselves. They have a good record in other places. But I believe that in the public interest it would be unwise for us in this haphazard fashion under this omnibus bill, to part with natural resources we do not own in another part of the empire.
We have squandered the natural resources of this country at a great pace and Canada is going to be a poor country with its debt. To a large extent we have given away our natural resources to mostly a lot of outsiders, and some insiders. The result is that rates for power are away up to a point three times what they should be. That is about all I have to say about the matter. These are good people; but I fail to see that this bill should pass, allowing them to receive this handout for largely nothing.
Another point I wish to make is that we are committed to a 99-year lease on bases, from Newfoundland to British Guiana, between Britain and the United States. That lease was given with the consent of Canada. We have given to the United States leases on all the bases in the Atlantic ocean, including some on the shores of Newfoundland and Labrador. The bases are not all out in the ocean, because some are on Greenland, Iceland and other places in the north country, including Newfoundland and Labrador, the territory under the joint defence board and the atomic board.
This proposed agreement is ultra vires of the dominion. At the end of the bill it is brought under the Railway Act by saying that it is declared to be for the general advantage of Canada. Let me say that it is for the general advantage of the promoters; that is what it is, and not for the general advantage of Canada by any stretch of the imagination. That is so, because of the decisions in the law courts. All these properties are not even in Canada. In this bill they are being handed everything from the heaven above, the earth beneath and the waters under the earth, in Canada, Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador.
They are being handed all this by parliament in a haphazard manner, and we have no power to do it.
That lease which was given for ninety-nine years is practically a freehold. In Washington, in congress and the senate, they are urging that Newfoundland and Labrador be given to America, although the lease for ninety-nine years was to protect United States shores in the battle of the Atlantic, and that it should be cancelled and charged up to lease-lend, because that is what it was for, to defend America's shores from invasion. When the enemy was threatening Newfoundland and Iceland, Labrador and all the Atlantic seaboard, and when they were right up the St. Lawrence we met in secret session, and the case was stated by a former able minister, who is now the premier of Nova Scotia.
For these reasons I believe the government should lay down a policy in connection with this bill. What is the government's policy regarding handing out this property? We have no power to do it, because if we go to the law courts it will be found that this is outside altogether, and not for the general advantage of Canada. We might as well put railways in Spain or Greenland, or any other part of the world, under our Railway Act, as to say that this property belongs to Canada, and it is for the general advantage of Canada. Take a look at this book, Who's Who, "Moody's Financial List of Mines and Natural Resources of the World". My hon. friends to my left used to look it up, years ago. Who owns the natural resources of this country? We had a big fight about that in Ontario from 1905 to 1914 when Sir James Whitney came into office. Our friends on the other side of the house gave the water power in the Niagara River to private owners, with the result that the rates were top heavy. The greatest mistake Sir James Whitney made was when he did not electrify the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario Railway in 1909 or 1910, so that they could have had cheap light and power in that part of new country. Gold production, silver production-the production of all the great minerals-could have been carried on with cheap hydro power. If Ontario men had electrified the T. and N.O. railway and brought the joy of cheap light and power to the great mines of all New Ontario and cheapened prospector and development costs as Sir Adam Beck wanted to do then, it would have been then $9 or $10 a horsepower instead of having to go up as high as $35 or $60 a horse-power at Cochrane and other mining centres under private ownership.
Private Bills

That is something we should consider when dealing with a bill like this. As far as I am concerned, it means nothing to me and I do not care a snap of the finger further if you want to pass such a handout under this bill as I might as well rather go home, if you do.
While I appreciate that these are great Canadians, that they have done a great deal for the country as well as for themselves, still I believe it is not the time for us to part with natural resources thus. I say this because of the statement made by the Secretary of State for External Affairs, that a meeting is to be held to consider a new province, Newfoundland. Newfoundland is badly enough off now with her debts because of the money that was squandered there and because of the way the natural resources were handed out. If Canada is going to pull them out of debt she will have to pay a lot of money out of her own pocket, especially with regard to Labrador. I am a member of the railway committee, and I consider it my duty as a member of the House of Commons to make that statement in the public interest and object to the bill, and having said this, that is all the objection I have to the bill.


Mr. MacNICOL:: I shall be brief because I do not want any remarks of mine to hold up the passage of the bill through committee. Some eight years ago I tried to persuade the commission government of Newfoundland to provide guides for myself and three engineers of the Hanna company of Iron River, Michigan, to permit us to go up what was then called Sawyer lake in Labrador. At that time the engineering journals were filled with glowing accounts of the iron content of the iron ore in that area and of the magnitude of the deposits. I have some good pictures of that area.
This bill does not call it Sawyer lake, it refers to it as Ruth lake. The maps of that time showed it to be some considerable distance inside Labrador whereas this bill says it is about on the boundary between Labrador and Quebec. However, that is neither here nor there. If this company goes on to develop the iron ore in this area I wish it every success. We can certainly do with a lot more iron ore in Canada and in the United States. We all know that the great Mesabi ore beds west of Duluth in the United States are being rapidly depleted, so much so that the United States government is setting aside I have read certain iron ore areas for future defence purposes. I hope there is a large bed of iron ore in Labrador and northern Quebec. We are in the iron age, and if the ore in this area is of good

quality and in a sufficient quantity it will be a grand thing for Canada. I have always been one who has advocated the opening up of the resources of this country.
The description in the bill is not clear as to whether the iron ore beds are near Grand falls on the Hamilton river.


Clarence Decatur Howe: About 300 miles away.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The map shows Grand falls to be about 150 miles from the location of the ore beds. I would hope that power could be developed at Grand falls in order that this ore could be smelted down to pigiron. They do that in Sweden and I do not see why it could not be done in Canada. That would obviate the necessity of taking large tonnages of coal into the country. There is alleged to be a vast power potential at Grand falls. The river is said to be only about 200 feet wide right at the falls, but the water drops 316 feet and there is a very large volume. All the reports I have read state that there is a potential of four or five million horse-power. Whether that is so, I do not know, but if the falls are no more than 150 or 200 miles from the ore deposit I would hope that power can be developed and used to smelt iron there. That would be a grand thing for Canada.
I do not know of anything that would tend to develop Canada more rapidly than the smelting of large tonnages of iron ore in this country. I have not any comment to make on the various sections of the bill. I just wish to say again that if. this bill goes through I wish the company every success. As the hon. member for Broadview has said, the promoters are all well known and successful miners and if anyone can develop this area they ought to be able to do so.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: This bill comes from the upper house and it was well examined by the people who are there to act as a check on hasty legislation. When this bill was before the committee there was no effort made to drive it through. Questions were asked from all sides and the hon. member for Outremont was not in any hurry. The dominion government is not running any risk, because the company is just asking for permission to spend money to develop these resources. This would provide a good deal of work.


Mr. COCKERAM:: I rise tonight to support this bill. In 1929 and 1930 I was connected with a company that sent prospectors into this area where the original discoveries of iron ore were made. I was surprised to hear the hon. member for Broadview refer to this as a branch line. This line will open up a com-

Private Bills
pletely new area in Canada, an area that has great promise. Section 20 of the bill provides:
The works and undertakings of the company are hereby declared to be for the general advantage of Canada.
I believe this bill is worthy of the support of every hon. member in this house. It will certainly open up a vast new mining area in Canada and provide employment in a part of the country which is devoid of opportunities for employment at the present time.


Mr. HAZEN:: Is there any dominion legislation which provides for the payment of a subsidy to a company that constructs a railroad declared to be for the general advantage of Canada?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: I know of no such subsidy paid under conditions set out by my hon. friend, At one time assistance was given for the construction of branch lines, but that was many years ago. That certainly is not the policy of the government today.


Douglas King Hazen: Is there any legislation on our statute books about it?


Lionel Chevrier: None that I am aware of.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 2 to 6 inclusive agreed to.
On section 7

Line of railway described.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Is either the minister, the hon. member who introduced the bill or the minister of reconstruction in a position to say whether it is the Marguerite, the Moisie or the Wacouno-


Mr. RINFRET:: The Moisie and the Wacouno.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is a tributary of the other river?


Édouard-Gabriel Rinfret: That is right.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Why is the Marguerite mentioned, because it is ten miles west?


Thomas Langton Church: I should like to ask a question of the Secretary of State for External Affairs. This section gives authority to the company to construct and operate a line of railway running into Labrador, which is not a part of Canada. I would ask the minister what is the meaning of these words: provided that authority be obtained from Newfoundland for the construction and operation of this section of the railway-
Note this:
-thence northwesterly to a suitable port on Ungava bay.
There is no port there at the present time. Will this interfere with the negotiations between Canada and Newfoundland as to the latter joining Canada, announced in the house the other day by the Secretary of State for External Affairs? And where is the port on Ungava bay? Do the words I have quoted mean that this company can negotiate with another government over the head of the government of Canada? Can a private company and private people do this? I should like to know from the Minister of Transport whether the Canadian National Railways has abandoned this territory on the St. Lawrence and in Labrador.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I will try to answer some of the questions involved in the request made by the hon. member. What is being done here has two aspects. One is the incorporation of a company which thereby gets the right to act as a person; the second is the grant to that company of the right to build a railway in Canadian territory. Under our system no one, neither a company nor an individual, can build a railway without a charter from the government of Canada if it is to be interprovincial or if it is to connect Canada with another country, or from a province if the railway is to be entirely within the province. This parliament can grant no rights to build a railway outside its territory, but it can give a company the capacity to receive such rights from the appropriate authority. That matter came before the privy council several years ago. One was a case concerning the John Deere Plow Company, and the other was a case concerning the Bonanza Creek Mining Company. The capacity to receive powers can be granted by this parliament in creating a corporation, and that is all that this parliament can do with respect to any portion of the railway that would be outside Canadian territory. It can have the capacity to receive a franchise from the sovereign of the territory outside Canada where it may operate. I do not think that would be dealing with a foreign government over the head of the Canadian government any more than it would in the case of a United States company that gets a charter here for the operation of a subsidiary in Canada. There does not appear to be any international conflict here. All states assert the right to give companies the capacity to receive powers from whosoever may be willing to grant powers to them.
With respect to the port on Ungava bay I have no information whatsoever. I do not know whether there is a port there or whether one can be developed there. But reading the bill I gather that the intention is to have a
Private Bills

railway that would go out of Canada, through Labrador, then come back into Canada and proceed through Canadian territory toUngava bay. But the company will not be able, under this charter, to do anything outside Canada without getting a franchise from the sovereign of the territory outside Canada where it may desire to operate.


Thomas Langton Church: We are a party to Great Britain's granting of a ninety-nine year lease, binding Canada with America, which is practically a freehold of all the Newfoundland bases, and that includes Labrador inland as well as on the ocean. In view of that agreement, have we the power as a parliament to go into Newfoundland and give away, not only the bases, but the land and the bay where they are trying to develop a port? Ungava bay is a big bay and they have no port there yet, and the bill is in the dark on it. Have we the power to do this in view of the ninety-nine year lease made by the British government with the United States for the use of all these bases in Newfoundland and right down to British Guiana, which is the size of Great Britain? You know, Mr. Chairman, that in the last war German boats came right up the St. Lawrence and we had a secret meeting of parliament in connection with that. I contend that Canada is bound by that ninety-nine year lease and that we have no power to part with this property.
These people told the railway committee that they had dealt with a former Newfoundland government before the war. I would ask the Minister of Transport, what was the nature of the arrangement, if any, the said company made with the old provisional government of Newfoundland? What form did it take? Was it just an act of the provisional government? If it was, no wonder Newfoundland went bankrupt. I think the committee is entitled to this information. Does not the agreement with the United States for a ninety-nine year lease of bases include not only the bases on the ocean but the bases on the land and in Newfoundland and all of Labrador, and all the inlets on the coast? In the last war German boats were up near Iceland and Greenland, off Newfoundland, and in the St. Lawrence and Hudson strait, and we had to send ships up there. It cost a lot of money and lives.
The House of Commons is passing this bill blindly, and we shall regret it in the days to come if we hand over all this territory to private ownership forever. It is not a work for the general advantage of Canada. It is

not even within Canada. So how can it be for the general advantage of Canada when the territory and inlets are not in Canada at all? We might just as well claim that inlets and coves in China are works for the general advantage of Canada. I should like to know if the legal department of the crown has been consulted about this bill. I do not like to worry the Minister of Justice. I shall not ask him for his legal opinion, but I think he should have been consulted as to whether this bill is worth the paper it is written on. It goes over the heads of the Canadian and British governments and over the head of the provisional government of Newfoundland. Great Britain had a temporary trusteeship over the whole country of Newfoundland while the war was on. I should like to know who drafted and recommended this bill. I think all that information should be on the table. So far as I am concerned I do not think it makes any difference. I feel that I have done my duty as a member of parliament in calling the attention of the committee to what is involved in this omnibus bill.
Most of the people are fine people. They are not being criticized personally at all. I do not blame them for coming to parliament and asking for this legislation, because this is a pretty easy institution which we have assembled here. Nobody would give away that property in this way if they owned it themselves. What we are dealing with here is the mining industry.


Mr. McKAY:: On first view this bill appears to me to be a virtual monopoly. If that is so I should like to ask the Minister of Transport whether it will prohibit the operation of any other railway company in that particular area. If it does not I cannot see that there should be any real objection to the bill. On the surface it does appear to me, though, that it would prohibit all other railways from going into that district.


Lionel Chevrier: I do not think there is any difficulty in answering the hon. member's question. This bill, no more than any other bill which is approved by a committee of the house, creates a monopoly. Any other corporation or company which seeks similar rights can apply to parliament in the same way as did this company, and its application will be dealt with by the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines. While I do not know what the answer would be, I am sure that the committee would want to give such corporation similar rights to these. The answer is, therefore, that this bill does not preclude another company from making application.

Private Bills


Clarence Gillis: I do not think the minister's interpretation is correct. This bill gives the company a lease on the whole area. It precludes any other company from going in there.


Lionel Chevrier: That was not the question of the hon. gentleman. He shakes his head now and agrees with me.


Clarence Gillis: The question as I understood it was, does not this bill preclude the possibility of any other company going in there and getting concessions similar to these?


Lionel Chevrier: The answer is, no.


Clarence Gillis: It definitely does, because the whole area is being leased to this company and precludes any other company from going in there. But worse than that-


Lionel Chevrier: May I interrupt the hon. gentleman? He says that the whole area is leased to this company. This parliament and the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines are not concerned with that. Parliament has the right only to grant certain privileges so far as the railway, docks and wharves are concerned. It has granted this company the right to build docks, wharves and a railway line extending from the north shore of the river to Quebec and Labrador. With reference to the resources, the deposits of iron ore, water power and the like, that is a matter which does not concern this parliament.
'-'Mr. GILLIS: Nevertheless, as I was saying when the minister interrupted me, this bill not only gives the company control over bus lines, transportation and all the rest of it which is included in the bill-if it is a provincial matter it should not be in the bill- but it definitely delegates these rights to the company. The worse feature of it, as I see it, is that the company is not obligated to begin operation of the road for five years, which can serve the purpose of keeping someone out if they want to go in and develop that territory in that time. If at the end of ten years the job is not completed, then, under the bill, the government has the right to rescind it. So far as the development of the resources and the railway line in there are concerned, it is definitely gone, because the company can do what they like with it for the next ten years. They are not obliged to do anything about it. The bill precludes anyone else from going in there and developing the area. This bill looks too much like the merger of Dosco in Nova Scotia.


Mr. McCULLOCH (Pictou):: Oh, oh.


Clarence Gillis: There the authority was delegated innocently. So far as I am concerned, the powers contained in this bill are too sweeping to be passed by this House of Commons without a more thorough explanation of what it means to the Canadian people in the future in the development of the resources in that territory. Not only does the bill do that, but it wipes out the Railway Act in two or three places. Two or three sections of the Railway Act are set aside to make provision for the rights and privileges which are being extended to the proposed company. Whoever is sponsoring this bill- the Minister of Transport has only a slight interest in it because of the functions of his department-should give a more thorough explanation of it than has been done up to the present time. The bill itself is, in my opinion, an iniquitous piece of literature, to say the least.


Édouard-Gabriel Rinfret: The hon. gentleman who preceded me got mixed up in the various companies that are interested in this project. It is true there is a company which has obtained a concession from the provincial government to make explorations, but it has no mining rights over the territory in the northern part of Quebec. There is another company which has obtained certain exploration rights from Labrador or Newfoundland, but has yet no mining rights. It is making explorations at the present time. These two companies have nothing in common with the company that is applying to build a railway from Seven islands to this territory. This company is asking only for the incorporation of a company which will have the right to build a railway from Seven islands, following the Moisie river and Waeouno river, and from there going to Labrador and coming back to the province of Quebec. By this bill we are not giving to a new company any natural resources which are ours. Whatever has been done so far as concession leases are concerned has been given away or leased by another government than ours. We are not here to discuss whether that was a good thing or not. We are now faced with one problem, namely, to give a company the right to build a railway.
Section 7 which we are discussing says:
The company may lay out, construct and operate a railway.
That is a permissive section only. It does not say, as it should have done, if my hon. friend is right, that the company will have exclusive right to build. It says, "the company may." That is a permission which is given to the company. Any other company
Private Bills

can ask for a similar bill to build another railway line one mile or two miles to the east or to the west.


Clarence Gillis: Running parallel to this one.


Édouard-Gabriel Rinfret: Yes.


Eric Bowness McKay: I should like to ask the Minister of Transport a further question. Is there any likelihood of the Canadian National being given rights to tap this area?


Mr. SMITH (Calgary West):: They are losing enough money now.


Eric Bowness McKay: The Canadian National needs operating revenue. From the information at hand we are told that the company which is developing the area is not prepared to go ahead with the projeot until it has laid out
300,000,000 tons of iron ore. That is a large quantity of ore, and it would seem to me that the railway should pay if it transports that ore to the St. Lawrence basin. In view of that fact, has consideration been given to the Canadian National Railways tapping that area?


Lionel Chevrier: Consideration has been given the suggestion that the -hon. member makes. The Canadian National Railways is not interested in the territory. When the Canadian National seeks -to build a line-and I presume the same applies to other railways- it looks, not only at the natural resources which exist in the territory, but also at the population. In this particular instance there is no population in that territory. However the Canadian National Railways might be interested in connecting its line from Murray Bay down along the north shore to make a line of junction with this line which will be built northerly into the province of Quebec. But there would be no purpose in the Canadian National Railways spending tremendous sums of money such as this, because I am informed that it will cost in the neighbourhood' of $100 million-, not only to build the line, but to set -up the plant and equipment, the terminal docks and boats required for this huge undertaking.
May I say a word with reference to the remarks of the hon. member for Cape Breton South? The Department of Transport is not interested in this bill, except -to say whether it has any objections to it, and it has already indicated, through its solicitor before the committee, that it has no objection to the bill. The departmental officials study applications such as this and when there are objections they raise them. In this instance they found that -there were no objections, except 
as regards section 16, which was amended at the suggestion- of the board of transport commissioners.
Speaking, not as the Minister of Transport, but generally, it would strike me that this undertaking is of such considerable importance to the development of the country that all hon. gentlemen should be in- favour of it, not because of this particular corporation-, but because of the development that will be consequent upon the undertaking.


Thomas Langton Church: I have not received an answer to the question I asked.


Thomas John Bentley: The words of the Minister of Transport now put a somewhat different construction on the policy of the Canadian National Railways today as he announces it, in comparison with what it was a good many years ago when it was the Canadian Northern railway together with a jumbled-up aggregation of others. He said that the Canadian National was not interested in going into places where there was no population. Am I correct in that statement?


Lionel Chevrier: I added something more. I said that the Canadian National Railways, when they decide to build a branch line or a main line into new territory, make a survey and determine whether or not the natural resources are such, the population is such, and the revenue which may be derived from traffic is such that it will make the line a revenue producing line. I have repeated that many times and I attempted to paraphrase it quickly this evening. I may not have put it in the same words as before; to summarize the situation briefly, that is the position.


Thomas John Bentley: That is a sound way of doing it. I am not arguing against what the minister said. Nevertheless, until the resources of the country are known and surveyed, it is hardly likely that population will be a factor.
I remember well working at -the time of the construction of the Canadian National Railways. I scowed on the old Fraser river from Tete Jaune Cache to what is now Prince George, and there was no population except the workers engaged in construction and the odd settlers in the Moose river area, and so on. It was the natural resources at that time that captured the attention of the Canadian National, as well as the potential earning power of the railway. This one may have an equal potentiality, and if it has, then the development of these resources will build up the population. If a private company such as this feels that its survey indicates the possibility of the undertaking being profitable, then it seems

Emergency Powers
to me that it is a proper thing for the Canadian National Railways and its owner, the Canadian people, to give careful consideration to the question whether it should not go into this development as a public enterprise, rather than leave it to private enterprise.


Mr. GIBSON (Comox-Alberni):: Cheaper for you to take them over when you are the government.


Thomas John Bentley: That is a possibility; we will keep that in mind. The hon. member for Comox-Alberni has given us an idea there, and we will write it down in our little black book and in a few years' time look into the question.


Mr. CASE:: Don't put it in the red book.


Thomas John Bentley: That is one of the things we should not like to do, to take over a $60 million or $100 million concern that is worth only $5 million in intrinsic value.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South made a good point when he suggested that the bill should not go through but be given further study. I attended one of the meetings of the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines. One of the witnesses was there-I have forgotten his name-but no record was kept of the meeting, and I asked the chairman if we could not have a written brief from the promoters so that we could examine the position. We were not given that brief. Whether we shall get it I do not know, but certainly there was nothing at that meeting to suggest that we would get it, and I have heard no more about it. I think it would be a good thing to supply the members of the house with a brief from the company so that we can understand the situation exactly and know what the known resources and possibilities are. If that were done we could give the matter more intelligent consideration and come to a better decision. I believe that would be the right thing to do.


Thomas Langton Church: The joint defence board and the atomic bomb board have been in this territory and I think we ought to know what the policy is. They have been roaming all over the territory, all over Labrador, Newfoundland, Ungava bay and Hudson bay, but we have no report from them. There is another board there, the atomic board, from which we have received no reports. Since it is nine o'clock now, Mr. Chairman, I suggest that further consideration of the question be held over until the next occasion when the bill comes up. This is not the first time I
have come to the relief of public ownership, to protect our natural resources, and it may not be the last.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Thomas Langton Church: Nine o'clock.
Progress reported.



EMERGENCY POWERS


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration in committee of Bill No. 104, to provide for the continuation of certain orders and regulations of the governor in council for a limited period during the national emergency arising out of the war-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Golding in the chair.
William Henry Golding: Before the house rose at six o'clock we were dealing with P.C. 1609 on page 6 of the schedule to Bill No. 104.


John Oliver Probe: As I indicated before the dinner recess, the order in council that we are discussing at the moment gives the minister of reconstruction wide powers, permitting him to look after the urgent needs of the Canadian people for housing. As I intimated this afternoon, I think it is the general feeling of the Canadian people that the minister, whose record as Minister of Munitions and Supply was so brilliant, has failed dismally in doing the job that we as Canadians expect of him, and in taking such steps as would render that job easier in the exercise of those powers that parliament has delegated, as contained in this order in council with respect to the construction of large-scale housing to satisfy Canadian requirements.
I just wish to indicate again that in 1946 the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, with all the fanfare that has accompanied the various bills and amendments, with the National Housing Act, which has been on the statute books for so many years, provided less than 12,000 housing units for ownership by the occupants or for rental. That figure wjas made up of 6,927 houses for ownership, on which the corporation gave loans, and 4,836 rental houses for which the corporation lent money. I am prepared to admit, of course, that there are other agencies working in this country to provide some measure of housing; but in view of the wide powers granted the minister under P.C. 1609 I think it is fair to say he is not only a super-optimist in his statements about housing but he is optimistic beyond all reason.
The two sections I read before the dinner recess indicate the power given the minister
Emergency Powers


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I ask my hon. friend which months those were?


John Oliver Probe: Yes. I know what the minister is driving at. They were the winter months; December of 1944, and January, February and March of 1945.


Clarence Decatur Howe: How is bricklaying in Regina in January?


John Oliver Probe: That is not an unusual situation in itself, but what was the situation in 1946? Since housing needs have not diminished, one would expect the picture to be a little different in that year. However I do not believe the minister has changed the balance between the number of houses needed and the number under construction by one solitary housing unit since he took office; I am quite convinced of that. In 1946, instead of four months during which there were more unplaced applicants than there were unfilled vacancies, the period was seven months: January, February, March, April, May, November and December. From this it would not seem that the minister has gone about his job in connection with housing with the vim and vigour with which he is credited with having undertaken Canada's war effort.
The cost of building material has gone up, as I have said, not only in connection with the kind of lumber for which I asked the minister to provide figures, but in connection with most of the other articles that go into the construction of houses. In that regard one would imagine the minister would use some incentive, other than the kind he gave Crane's recently, to increase the production of building materials, since there is going to be a demand for them for a considerable length of time.
I notice in the report to which I referred a minute ago, "Housing in Canada", we find at page 44 that the production of cement for 1946 is over that of any of the years from 1939 to 1945. The same applies to the

Emergency Powers
production of bricks, warm air furnaces, asphalt shingles and gypsum wallboard. But with respect to sawn lumber last year, despite all its requirements, there was less sawn lumber produced in Canada than in either of the years 1941 or 1942. Then, in respect of glass, which is an imported article, but which, nevertheless, I have no doubt the minister has sufficient power to do something about, in 1946 we secured less glass than we did in 1939, 1942 or 1944.
In connection with castiron soil pipe and fittings we dropped below the high record of 1941. Then, referring to steel pipe tubes and fittings, we were beaten last year by all six years from 1940 to 1945 inclusive. In wire nails and spikes, about which we have heard so much, we had the lowest record last year of any year from 1939 to 1945. Last year we produced 58-9 thousand tons, and the lowest previous year, during the war, was 1944, when we produced 64-9 thousand tons.
I should like to conclude by putting on record the approach to the housing problem in terms of a country which, I believe, does lead the world. Canada does not, despite what the Prime Minister and the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply have said. I should like to set out here the Swedish housing budget for the fiscal year 1946-47.


William Henry Golding: Order. I do not think the Swedish programme has anything to do with the item before the committee.


John Oliver Probe: I respectfully submit, Mr. Chairman, that the object of this debate is to give the minister power-


William Henry Golding: Order.


John Oliver Probe: May I not speak to the point of order?


William Henry Golding: The object of the debate is to deal with this item, and speeches in committee must be strictly relevant to it. I am sure the hon. member will not argue that the Swedish programme has any-think to do with this item.


John Oliver Probe: Right. We are conferring on the minister wide and sweeping powers to go ahead with the job of building his houses. We are extending those powers for another year.


William Henry Golding: Order. The plea the hon. member is now making is not one which deals with this specific item. The programme of housing is another thing. We will deal with this specific item, please.


Angus MacInnis: May I point out, Mr. Chairman, that, however right you were when you referred to the Swedish figures, when you last stopped the hon. member he was dealing with the powers conferred upon the minister by this order. Since that is the purpose of the order, I submit that what the hon. member was saying is strictly in order.


William Henry Golding: If the hon. member for Vancouver East was following carefully he would have seen that the hon. member for Regina City was dealing with the housing programme. We are dealing with construction regulations under this item.


John Oliver Probe: I am quite prepared to bow to your ruling, Mr. Chairman. I think you are always fair, and I just want one more minute to tell the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply that we are conferring on him powers he has possessed for some time to provide us with construction material, and all that goes into the job of housebuilding. I now ask him, through you, Mr. Chairman, will he please take off the gloves and get on with the job?


Mrs. STRUM:: Mr. Chairman, I am not
going to talk about veterans houses, nor am I going to talk about wartime housing. I wish merely to present the case of the small town. I think the private builder who wishes to build his own house, not for sale or rent but rather for his own occupancy, is the forgotten man in the housing programme. I have been trying to find out just where he fits in. I have been reading the minister's speech of February 7, in which he spoke about the new ruling in connection with housing. He points out rightly that we have not been able to construct as many rental units as we had hoped, and points out, further, that during 1946 seventy-five per cent of the completed residential units were built for sale. I think all will admit that most of those were built for speculative purposes.
I believe the minister is right in trying to promote the building of units for rental purposes. But in the small towns there does not seem to be any place for the priority of the man building his own house. If there is a large-scale building programme under way, and a contractor is building a group of houses for veterans or wartime housing, or on any other kind of project, there seems to be a way of getting materials. If you are building 100 houses you can get bathtubs, plumbing, flooring and finishing materials; but if you are only an individual in a small town you will find it difficult to secure materials.
I made a survey of the requirements in my constituency, and I shall set out some

Emergency Powers

of the replies I received to the questionnaire. The first one is from the town of Moosomin. The board of trade of that town states, through its secretary:
The housing situation in town is very difficult. I believe that there is need of from 30 to 50 new houses at least. If material were easily available, I am sure that there would be that many homes started almost immediately. _
And so on, right through the list, from all the towns in my constituency. Broadview is a divisional point on the main line of the Canadian Pacific railway. Many hon. members will remember it. The board of trade in that town tell me that not only are they short of construction materials for the building of houses, but they lack finishing materials, plaster board, Donnaconna board, masonite, ten-test and wall boards of all kinds, casings, baseboards and flooring. One further thing of which they are in short supply is nails. However I shall not touch upon that, because someone else has already done so.
Then, at Rocanville they have no community centre, except an old hall, which is in very bad condition. They have tried to raise money for a memorial hall. I submit that this is much more important than a new cocktail bar or a new bowling alley, because they have no other place in which to hold a community gathering of any kind. But they have been held up for over a year through lack of cement and lumber.
Then, the Grenfell board of trade, through its secretary, tell me that they have not been able to honour permits to veterans to build, because they have not been able to get the lumber to fill the permits.
And right through the whole catalogue of towns in my constituency we find the same story. Some need more than others. At Indian Head, for instance, the town in my constituency where the experimental farm is located, the situation is so bad that building of any kind has practically come to a standstill. The lumber dealer at this point was able to obtain only three cars of lumber during all of 1946, and only two cars so far this year. It goes on to say:
Those connected with the building trade in the town state that at least eight cars of lumber, including two cars of flooring and finishing lumber could be immediately disposed of to private parties wishing to build their own homes.
This is one of the few towns with running water and it is only because of their hook-up with the experimental farm that they have running water. They say that plumbing supplies and sheet metal are also in very short supply and difficult to obtain and that this shortage will have to be overcome before

normal building can take place. I am not suggesting to the minister how he is going to do this, but I understand that the priorities officer has jurisdiction. I again plead with the minister to give consideration to these people who are not carrying on large construction projects which might have a claim on the basis of great volume. I am sure, when he thinks about the matter, he will realize the handicap these people face in presenting their case in connection with supplies.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am sure the committee recognized in the speech delivered this afternoon by the hon. member for Parkdale a valuable contribution to the knowledge of this committee in deliberating on P.C. 1609. I should like to offer my congratulations to my colleague upon an outstanding and' valuable contribution to this dtebate.
The order before the committee confers wide powers upon the minister, which, by a later order, were transferred to the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Powers were conferred not only with respect to the distribution of construction materials but also with respect to their manufacture.
We have had reports from the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply from time to time concerning the manufacture of construction materials. It is perhaps only natural that, in view of the unsatisfactory situation which exists, the attention of the committee should be directed principally to the aspect of the distribution of these materials rather than to the subject of their manufacture. Actually some improvement has been shown in the past year in the rate of manufacture of building materials, although the steel strike of last summer created a disastrous set-back to the manufacture of certain building products. Whatever may be said about the improvement-it is not a great or general improvement -in the picture with respect to the manufacture of construction materials, the picture represented with reference to the distribution of construction materials is not a bright or happy one.
It is just over a year ago that the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply came into the house and sought to wash his hands of his responsibility for the channeling of construction materials into home building. On April 1, 1946, the minister announced1 that order in council P.C. 1184 had been passed on March 27, 1946. In the acompanying statement he referred to the fact that on December 5, 1945, construction control was abolished, but that subsequently a special committee from the Canadian construction association, as well as a large number of municipal and other organi-

Emergency Powers
zations, including veterans' organizations, had recommended that all types of construction other than housing be prohibited or controlled. In the face of that, the minister proceeded to announce an order in council, the effect of which was to divest himself andi the federal authority of all power of directing the use of construction materials by simply handing responsibility over to the municipal authorities.
Whatever might be said about the situation in normal times, what was done by the minister of reconstruction on that occasion was to part with the effective means of ensuring that the available supply of construction materials in Canada should be devoted to home construction. That kind of passing the buck offends the conscience of the Canadian people. Here we were with a limited and quite inadequate supply of construction materials, and the power rested in the hands of the minister to channel that supply, inadequate as it was, into home construction. But he publicly washed his hands of the problem and simply threw it over into the hands of the municipal authorities.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Is this the same hon. gentleman who, no later than last autumn, demanded that all controls be abolished?


Donald Methuen Fleming: I do not know to whom the minister of reconstruction refers when he says, "the hon. gentleman who, no later than last autumn, demanded that all controls be abolished". I do not know to whom he refers; he certainly does not refer to me.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I heard him state vehemently over the radio during the course of the Park-dale by-election that all controls should be abolished.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am afraid the minister is basing that statement on erroneous information. as is too often the case as far as he is concerned.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think I heard something like that said at that time.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I expect that the minister has obtained his information from a source he should not rely on.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I like the versatility of my hon. friend, who can denounce controls one day and ask that more onerous controls be put on, the next.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I have not any hope of emulating the ability of the minister of reconstruction to say one thing one day and then reverse himself the next.
83166-156*


Clarence Decatur Howe: If my hon. friend is so anxious to get controls, let us pass this bill and get on with something else.


Donald Methuen Fleming: If I may now proceed with my remarks, the minister had in his hands the power to channel construction materials into home construction.


Clarence Decatur Howe: He still has that power.


Donald Methuen Fleming: And he divested himself of that power. I am sure the committee would be interested if the minister were to announce now that he is going to revive the permit system. That is the one effective means of channeling construction materials into home construction. It is the one means that would work whereas the priorities system has broken down.


Clarence Decatur Howe: What, method is my hon. friend advocating? Will he please explain?


Donald Methuen Fleming: If the minister would be content to let me make my speech I think he will find the answer to his question.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Get on with your speech.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I will get on with my speech as soon as the minister ceases to interrupt. I do not mind his asking questions and I am quite prepared to answer them.


An hon. MEMBER:: Answer them then.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The answer will come; make no mistake about that. There was a means at hand.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Where?


Donald Methuen Fleming: The permit system; that was an effective means.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Permit for what?


Donald Methuen Fleming: If the minister is going to ask a question I hope he will ask it loud enough for me to hear.


Clarence Decatur Howe: For what does my hon. friend want to issue permits?


Donald Methuen Fleming: A permit plan would have helped greatly in seeing that construction materials were channeled into home construction, and that power was available to the minister at the time. The power was available at the time to see that construction materials were denied to projects which were postpon-able or not essential, in order that all available supplies might be used in home construction. The minister did not do that and the priorities system which he set up has since proven itself quite inadequate. A permit system would have provided a means which would have been effective for this purpose, but the minis-
Emergency Powers

ter passed the buck to the municipalities. As everyone knows, a municipal body is not equipped, nor is it a proper body to deal with this problem. As everyone knows, municipalities are competing with one another to attract industries. They are not going to refuse permits to concerns which wish to come in and build. The result has been that there is no effective control by the municipal permit system. Municipal councils have not been applying any selective method to channel construction materials into the building of houses. What has been the result of this washing of the hands on the part of the minister of reconstruction and divesting himself of his responsibility in the situation? Let us look at the number of permits granted in 1945 and 1946.
In 1945 the permit system was in effect for the first eleven months of the year, and here are the figures issued by the dominion bureau of statistics and to be found in Hansard of February 17 of this year. Let us just see how the proportion of permits for home construction bulks in the total of permits issued. In 1945 permits for house construction totalled, in round figures, $117,000,000 out of a total of $197,000,000 of building permits. In other -words, about sixty per cent of the permits in terms of value were for home construction.
What happened in 1946 when we did not have the permit system? 'Permits for home -construction totalled $200,000,000 out of a total -of $383,000,000. In other words, the percentage of construction materials going into non-residential construction is growing, and that is bound to be so. Every member of this house has seen for himself the effect of allowing industrial construction and all forms of post-ponable construction, non-essential construction, to compete with housing construction for the limited supply of building materials. Let me remind the committee of what Brigadier Storms, general manager of Housing Enterprises Limited, had to say about this matter. He was dealing with this very situation and with the excuses sometimes offered on behalf of the minister that industrial construction and other forms of construction do not take the same kind of materials as residential construction and do not absorb labour of the same kind. Here is the answer to that kind of talk. This is what Brigadier Storms is quoted in the Toronto Globe and Mail of October 10 last as having said on this subject:
Bricks, cement, plumbing, electrical fixtures and other materials which should be going into housing are being used for millions of dollars' worth of non-essential building. Douglas H. Storms, general manager of Housing Enterprises of Canada Limited, asserted yesterday in an interview.
(Mr. Fleming.]
"This country has gone berserk on building of the wrong kind." he said. "Everywhere you see plant extensions, theatres, garages, stores, summer cottages, dance halls and hot-dog stands under construction. You can't tell me those buildings don't take material away from housing because they do. What is more, they are absorbing thousands of workmen who should be building houses.
"At the same time, people are living in the worst distress for lack of houses. On one street of small houses in Xew Toronto, we found that each house was occupied on the average by 19 people. All this non-essential building goes on and we cannot get houses built for homeless people."
He added with reference to the subject of control by the municipalities:
"If you can show me a municipality in Ontario which is exercising the slightest selective control over building I'll buy you a new hat," Mr. Storms exclaimed.
During the war and the ensuing control period building was restricted, he said. Once the restrictions came off business corporations and individuals, all with money to spend, had rushed in to build. Firms were now building big plant extensions which, he said, would stand empty a few years hence "when the honeymoon is over."
The honeymoon is not yet over. It is going on full blast todays. On every hand you can see people proceeding with construction that might well have waited until the imperative needs of home construction have first been met. It is a sad commentary on the record of the present government that it has to some extent been participating in the honeymoon. In the city of Ottawa we had the remodeling of the Ottawa theatre of the national film board, a government agency-, and this was done at a time when people are living under conditions such as Brigadier Storms described- nineteen people to a house, veterans living in hovels, garrets and cellars, whole families housed in a room or two. Yet the government of Canada feels free to participate in this honeymoon of building.
These are not the only unhappy, deplorable results of the way in which the government has been mishandling the control of construction materials. A black market is flourishing today. Distribution has been disarranged; the normal channels have all been upset; stock-piling has been going on, as was related this afternoon by the hon. member for Park-dale, on projects which have enjoyed favour under the present priorities system, and the private builder, /who is still expected by the government to carry- the brunt of the load, must scramble for what is left.
Last year we were told by the minister of reconstruction that there were built in Canada, through original construction or reconversion, 60.000 housing units. We have been told, in a return filed recently in the house, that a

Emergency Powers
total of 10,009 of these housing units were built under various forms of government housing, most of them under Wartime Housing, some under the Veterans' Land Act, some under integrated housing, and a very few by Housing Enterprises Limited. The number completed in 1946 by Housing Enterprises Limited was, according to a recent return, only twenty-eight housing units. Housing Enterprises Limited started off in 1946 with an objective of 6,000 housing units. In the middle of the summer that objective was dropped to 3,600, and at the end of 1946 only twenty-eight had been completed. Subtract 10,009 from 60,000 and you will find that
50,000,	or five-sixths of all the houses that were built last year in Canada were built by private enterprise builders, The government is still counting on therp to carry the load. It would be difficult, after a year has gone by since the government passed this buck to the municipalities, to resume the permit system. But the present priority system has proven quite inadequate and quite unsatisfactory. The government divested itself a year ago of the means it had at its disposal of ensuring that the available quantity of building materials was channeled into home construction.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think I should say just a word in reply to the speeches we have heard this evening. The speech of the hon. member for Eglinton indicates the state of utter confusion in which the official opposition finds itself on the matter of controls. It spent six or seven weeks of this session demanding that all controls be removed, and now we have the hon. member for Eglinton insisting that new controls be put on, especially the one control which, throughout the war years, was found to be unworkable and exceptionally unfair under any administration we couldi operate. Hon. members suggest that, while cities insist on competing for new industries, they would be quite content to have the government decide that one should be built and) the other should not. It seems to hon. members quite simple for anyone to sit in Ottawa and decide what is essential. I perhaps might give an example. To my mind, the building of a plant in Saskatchewan to process horse meat would not be an urgent project, and yet I got not only a demand to grant a permit but a demand for priority assistance in doing so.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: You thought it was, did you not?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We granted the permit, but we did not give priority assistance. You can take as many projects as you like. What is one man's meat is another man's poison.
A great deal has been said about the scandalous waste in building bowling alleys. Yet we have had the most pathetic requests, during the period of controls, for permission to build bowling alleys in towns in northern Ontario, and elsewhere in Canada, where bowling is the one recreation of a considerable body of people in a small community.
We have looked into building control thoroughly and found that it was difficult of administration. We found that violations of the control were not punished in the area, because people in the area would say, "Nonsense; this is essential building. They can say it is not essential in Ottawa, but we know it is essential and we are not going to punish this man for violating the order." That is one of the reasons why building control was one of the first controls to be abolished. Nothing can be built in a city unless some civic body decides that it should be built in the interests of the city. Any city has the right to refuse to have anything built, and I may say that some cities have refused. For instance, the city of Kitchener have been most punctilious in choosing the type of construction that can be built in that town. The city of Regina has also cooperated in that regard. I could name other cities which have done their part to see that the material supplied to that area was channeled into housing construction.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Did Ottawa ask for permission for the Capital brewery to put up their new building?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I cannot say. My department does not issue building permits.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: They required permission to put it up. Did they have sanction for it?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The city?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I am sure I cannot say.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: They have nails, lumber and everything else.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That may be so. The control of priorities has been gradually relaxed, as have all controls. Starting two years ago. we had much more insistent demands than today to abolish controls and to get back to the normal law of supply and demand. It would appear that by the time we are ready to let go controls the opposition will be full out for a completely new system of controls. That is the only conclusion I can reach after listening
Emergency Powers

to their performance this evening. However we are maintaining controls on two basic commodities, lumber and steel,. and we do maintain a system of priorities for limited classes of house building; that is, buildings under government sponsorship, which includes wartime housing, integrated housing, veterans housing and Housing Enterprises Limited, the insurance company project which is supported by government finance. Furthermore we issue priorities to houses being built for individual veterans after the house is fifty per cent completed. The reason for the fifty per cent rule is to prevent the requirement for a priority for material which may be diverted into less essential types of construction. We feel that there is no great difficulty about getting the material which goes into the first fifty per cent of the building; that the need for priority really exists only in the second stage of building.
Reference has been made to the small number of houses built last year by integrated housing. The reason for that is that the plan was started only last year. A great many houses under the integrated plan were not completed at the end of the year and therefore did not appear in the 1946 figures. It is estimated that there will be at least 10.000 houses built under the integrated plan in 1947 and probably about seven or eight thousand houses under the wartime housing programme, which is about the same size as the programme of last year.
Reference has been made to the individual project in the small town. It is very difficult indeed to devise a priority system for that type of building. The builder buys at retail from the local hardware store. Of course, when material is supplied to that hardware store there is no way that we know of, of guaranteeing that it will go to housing rather than to the building of farm properties or less essential building. However we do try to see that each small town gets its fair quota of building materials. Constant study is being made to create efficient means for encouraging house building in the small town. I may say that government housing projects are available to small towns as they are available to larger towns and to cities and that no request for housing under government plan from the small town is being turned down.
The supply of building materials has been improved this year as against last year. Reference has been made to nails. The production of nails this year is the largest in recent years. They are being produced at the rate of 1,400.000 kegs, which is larger than any year since 1938.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Per month, or


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is for the year. Priority requirements for these nails are about 180,000 kegs, or approximately fifteen per cent. Eighty-five per cent of the nail production goes into non-priority construction; that is, outside of government priorities. The demand and supply are not far apart, really. Everyone gets nails after a little delay. Really I think production is ahead of consumption at the present time and the shortage is only a temporary one.


Mr. BROOKS:: Can the minister say what quantity of nails we export?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We export no nails and have not done so for some months.
We have been asked why we cannot make more nails. The reason we cannot make more nails is that we are using all the wire that the Canadian mills can produce in a way that seems to be the wisest way to use it. When discussing one problem people are apt to forget all other problems. If we use all the wire that Canada produces in this country to make nails, there will be no wire to make agricultural implements; there will be no wire for baling purposes on the farms and no wire for a number of essential uses for wire. We have cut the supplies to these other uses down to the finest point that we believe possible and are using the remainder of the wire to make nails.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Do we export any wire?


Clarence Decatur Howe: None at all.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The minister said no nails were exported in the last eighteen months. According to the bureau of statistics, last year we exported $300,000 worth.


Clarence Decatur Howe: To where? To Newfoundland, perhaps.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: They got a few, yes.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We have been taking care of Newfoundland.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: There are other places also, according to the bureau of statistics.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I expect some to historic
markets; but none are being exported at the moment. I do not know that I have any further points that should be mentioned. However we are trying to limit the extent of the controls as gradually as possible. We assume that hon. gentlemen do not want us to start expanding controls again. We are gradually working out of controls in an orderly way. and whenever a supply situation

Emergency Powers
becomes satisfactory the control is dropped. There are controls of two basic commodities we believe to be essential to permit industry to develop at a maximum rate, and the purpose is to continue to control steel and steel products, and to control timber until we can make the supply situation adequate in both these fields.
I said before that, through a tight control of steel, we are producing about twenty per cent more steel products in this country than would be possible without the control. We are taking excess raw products away from steel plants that have capacity for producing a greater supply of raw products than finished steel, and turning them over to other steel plants that have finishing capacity in excess of capacity to produce raw materials. We are bringing slabs and billets from Algorna into the Hamilton area; we are moving pigiron from Algorna into all foundries in Ontario and Quebec; we are moving billets from Nova Scotia into Montreal and Hamilton; we are moving pigiron from Dosco back into central Canada, a movement that was unheard of until the past year. We are using all the productive capacity of the steel mills and, by using all that capacity, we are keeping the finishing capacity of the steel mills and foundries going at full capacity, and have brought about a balance. That requires rigid control and a careful juggling of the raw materials.
As far as lumber is concerned, we find that the use of this commodity is exceeding the requirements of the last year, and we are taking orderly steps to decrease the proportion of exports of lumber and to divert greater supplies of Canadian production to the Canadian market. Further announcements will be made of progress in that direction within the next week or ten days.
It is difficult to administer controls at the present time, far more difficult than during the war years. In the first place, we have not the personnel available in peace time that was attracted to the government service during the war. We also find that people were much more amenable to instructions from government in war time than in peace time, which is quite understandable. However, such controls as we have left are reasonably effective and we believe they are amply justified by the results being obtained from them.


Mr. WRIGHT:: I wish to endorse what the hon. member for Qu'Appelle said earlier with regard to the desirability of channeling a little more of the material available toward the small towns and rural areas to encourage
building there. The minister will find that type of building will give him fewer headaches than almost any other type of building in Canada. We have a large number of veterans returning to towns in the rural areas and they are desirous of building homes for themselves. They cannot afford to build a five or six thousand dollar home but can afford to spend a couple of thousand dollars on a home, and to do that they must do a lot of construction work themselves. You will find that type of people in every small town across Canada.
I know of no better way that material can be used than to encourage these people to build and own their own homes, and they can do that only when material is made available to tihe small towns. The minister should give serious consideration to channeling a larger proportion of that material in that direction at the present time. I know there is a large demand in the areas in my constituency and through the northern parts of Saskatchewan, Alberta and many parts of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and there is one particular regulation which people have resented in these years. That is the regulation which was put into force eighteen months or two years ago, preventing the individual from going direct to the small mills to secure his building and other material. That had been customary through large areas, in the maritimes, the northern areas of the prairies and certain parts of British Columbia. The people in the rural areas and in the small towns have gone direct to the small mills to secure a large proportion of their building material direct from these mills, thus saving the retail commission on such materials. It is a real saving to many of these people.


Clarence Decatur Howe: There is no regulation against it.


Percy Ellis Wright: When was it withdrawn?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We never had a regulation.


Percy Ellis Wright: It was there until a short time ago. You could not go direct to a sawmill in Canada and purchase building material. All sawmill material had to be channeled through wholesale outlets to the retailer. If that is no longer so, I am glad to hear it, because that was one thing which caused a lot of dissatisfaction in certain areas in our part of the country.
With regard to the other matter of channeling as much as possible, or at least a fair proportion of material to the smaller towns, the minister should give it his consideration. In fact I know he is giving it consideration.
244S
Emergency Powers


Edmund Davie Fulton: I did not intend to get into the question of the merits of any of these controls, because I felt that would be more adequately handled by those who have been following these particular controls more closely than I have, but I cannot help making one or two comments on the minister's last statement when he dealt with the question of handing over to the municipalities the issuing of permits with regard to these building materials upon which priorities still exist.


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I set my hon. friend right. He is about the tenth man who has said that we handed over to the municipalities the right to issue building permits. The municipalities always had the right to issue building permits; they have had it since confederation. The only thing we handed to them was the right legally to refuse building permits, and we did that as a result of a case in Toronto where the city refused a building permit. The man to whom the permit was refused took legal action and the court ordered the city to grant the permit. But to say that we handed over the granting of building permits to municipalities is ridiculous.


Edmund Davie Fulton: If the minister wants to split hairs and enter into a fine argument we can go on with that for the next hour. But in effect what he did was this. Having taken to the federal government the authority to say that this or that building should be built and this or that building should not be built, he then gives back to the municipalities, if he prefers to use those words, the right of issuance. But he did not at the same time part with his priority system of controls with regard to building materials. The only point I am making here is that it is not proper; it is putting an unfair burden on the municipalities, and particularly the small municipalities, to do the one without doing the other. If the minister maintains, as he appears to, that priorities on building materials cannot yet be abandoned; if he is going to retain that measure of control, he should retain the other measure of control in order to make the whole scheme effective.


Mr. HOW E:: I should like to understand my hon. friend. Is he advocating that all priority controls be dropped? Is that what he is advocating?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Then what is he talking about?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I suppose* having listened to the argument all day, consciously or unconsciously the minister may be arriving at the {Mr. Wright.]
point where he may not wish to follow it farther, but the point I am making is that if you are going to maintain control over building materials by means of priorities, as the minister is doing, then it would be logical and fair particularly to the small communities if you would retain control over building permits. I know that in the case of a municipality such as the one I come from, where a small industry-wishes to become established it can bring tremendous pressure to bear on that municipal council. They come along and say, "We wish to get a permit to construct this building". The municipal council wish to give priority to housing, and they reply, "We are sorry, but we are giving priority to houses. We are giving all our permits to those who wish to build houses and for the moment are deny-ing them to those who wish to build garages, recreational centres and other types of buildings". Then the industry comes along and say-s, "We are sorry, too; we imagine we shall have to go down the valley and put up our plant somewhere else". So that the municipality is in an almost hopeless position. If it denies that permit it may lose an opportunity- to provide employment for its residents, while if it grants the permit it means that materials which otherwise might be used for the construction of houses will be denied, for the time being, to those who wish to build homes. So I say it is placing an unfair burden on the municipalities to put them in that position. As long as it is necessary to maintain priorities in regard to building materials-and at the moment I am not entering into the merits of that case-it would have been fairer to retain control over the granting or denying of building permits, because half a measure is worse than no measure at all.
When I rose this evening I said I had not intended to enter into that part of the discussion until the minister made the remarks he did in reply to the hon. member for Eglinton. Mv purpose in rising this evening was to draw attention to those provisions of this group of orders in council which are similar to the provisions in the wartime prices and trade board order, which the Minister of Justice indicated he would be prepared to amend in the same way that the other order was amended.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, I have an amendment for that.


Edmund Davie Fulton: If I may' summarize those provisions, they are paragraph 6 in P C. 1609, paragraph 9 in P.C. 9439. and paragraph 7 of P C. 245, to be found at page 149 of the consolidation. Then I would refer to P.C. 3, at page 139 of the consolidation, and I wonder

Emergency Powers
if the minister would consider an amendment to paragraph 15 of that order, which provides in subsection 6 that a person may be prosecuted for an offence at any place in Canada where he may be found. Carried to its extreme application, this would mean that a person who carried on business in Vancouver, let us say, and who was on a visit to Toronto, could be arrested and held in custody and prosecuted in Toronto, where he could not obtain his documents, his books and so on. This might have been necessary in war time, but it seems to me that it is an extreme power which is not necessary nowadays. So I wonder if the minister would consent to strike out the last words of subsection 6: "or is found or apprehended or in custody". If those words could be struck out it would go a long way toward meeting the views of those who think these powers are too wide.


Clarence Decatur Howe: There is no objection to the three amendments first mentioned by the hon. member, and we have those amendments prepared. I think the purpose of subsection 6 of paragraph 15 of P.C. 3 was simply to be able to bring the offender before a magistrate quickly. Usually speed in prosecution is effective in stopping an offence. I do not quite understand my hon. friend's objection to that clause.


Edmund Davie Fulton: As I say, carried to its extreme limit it would mean that a person carrying on business in one part of Canada, let us say in Vancouver, whom the board suspected of having committed an offence, while taking a holiday and visiting Toronto- and I should say that would be the only reason I could imagine a person from Vancouver going to Toronto-could be arrested there, and this provision gives them power to hold him in custody and prosecute him in Toronto, which would be putting him at an unfair disadvantage, inasmuch as all his books and records would be in Vancouver.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: He would be at an unfair advantage anyway if he were in Toronto.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I quite agree with my hon. friend, but this would be an additional disadvantage.


Mr. ILSLEY:: If the hon. gentleman had raised this question before, I could have given it some consideration. This same provision is in the other orders, and we shall get out of line with those other orders if we make this change. I am advised that there has never been any complaint of any hard 33166-157
ship under this provision, so that I do not think I could accept the amendment on the spur of the moment in this way.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I hesitate to disagree with the minister, but I have not noticed it in any of the preceding orders. I may have overlooked it.


James Lorimer Ilsley: You did. It is on page 26.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Had I noticed it. I would certainly have drawn it to his attention. Where is it?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is on page 26; paragraph
11(2).


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes, I see it now. I have to confess that it was an oversight on my part. What great disadvantage in the enforcement of these regulations would be involved if this were dropped at this stage?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not know. I would have to send for the enforcement officers and find out. Probably there is some good reason for its being there. The hon. gentleman does not point out any case where it has worked any hardship, and unless he does I think he is making a case against it that is purely theoretical. What I do not like to do is, on the spur of the moment, accept an amendment at this time without making some inquiry as to the usefulness of the provision.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The minister has said that I had not brought a case to his attention, and that he does not know of any instance of hardship. That is a fairly good argument upon which we could conclude that the section has never been used. If it has never been used, then presumably it is not necessary. And if it is not necessary, then I suggest that it might be dropped without doing any harm. The mere fact that it is a theoretical case is not sufficient ground to say that it should be kept; because, since it is there, it permits abuse of power by placing a person at an unfair disadvantage. Even though it might never be used, it is one of those excessive powers which I think should be got rid of at this time without actually imperilling the enforcement of the whole order. Perhaps this section might be allowed to stand.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: When the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply was on his feet he overlooked commenting on the suggestion I made this afternoon that he should take the initiative in calling a conference of representatives from the different levels of government. In some of the publications from his department I gather that he is depending a good deal upon housing to provide employment during

Emergency Powers

the next few years. I think he will admit that housing which is available at $70 a month is not going to meet the need. I suggest that it is important there should be some consultation between the federal government and provincial and municipal governments. Could the minister indicate what consideration he ha.s given to that, and what plans there are to confer with the different governments I have mentioned.	-


Clarence Decatur Howe: The department is conferring with cities every day. I think not a week goes by when some officer of the department is not conferring with almost every city in Canada. Some cities are more cooperative than others, but all have worked with the government to a greater or lesser extent in providing housing.
The attitude of the provinces is definite. They say, "The dominion has accepted the problem, and it is the dominion's problem. Just carry on. We are not interested." I might point out that the dominion is in the housing field simply as a result of the maladjustment of population which occurred as a result of the war. It is quite out of its jurisdictional depth, and it has no business in housing. Housing is in the field of the provinces and the municipalities.
However we have entered the field, first by making ample money available for privately built housing; and, further, we have sponsored certain government plans for housing, which are being helpful. But we should like very much to see the provinces show a little more enthusiasm. And if we can confer any more with the cities to advantage we would be very glad to do so.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: But I wonder if some agreement cannot be reached some day. The minister has said that housing is not a federal responsibility. I believe that the provinces in turn will say it is not a provincial responsibility. The municipalities stated, during the thirties, that they could not cope with the problem. I think, within the framework of the British North America Act, or by some device, we can manage to bring those three governmental authorities together and place the responsibility somewhere. We are going to go into another depression, and judging from the minister's comments no governmental authority will take any responsibility.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The purpose of building houses is to get houses; there is no other purpose at the present time. My hon. friend thinks, if we got a great many people at a meeting, it might build houses; but it does not work that way. If we knew of any way of meeting people

which would produce more houses, we would meet those people, and meet them very quickly. I believe, if my hon. friend stops to consider, he will agree with me that the dominion government is doing more toward creating houses in this country than any other governmental authority. We would like others to enter the field. If we can help them, as they have helped us, we would be glad to do so.


Mr. MILLER:: I should like to ask the minister of reconstruction, or possibly the Minister of Justice, a question, and possibly make a suggestion. However I would be more apt to be governed in the matter by what the Minister of Justice might say.
In most of the orders in council which are being considered here, the priorities officer or the controller, as the case may be, is given power to delegate his power. This is done, for instance, in section 5 of P.C. 1609. It seems to me that the wide powers these controllers are given should not be passed around like, for instance, hot cross buns, or something like that. These are important powers; they are extensive, and extend over the freedom of the people. There should be some limitation in the delegation of such wide powers.
Would the Minister of Justice say that it is essential for the proper carrying out of the duties of the officers in question that they should have the power to delegate the extensive powers they have. If this delegation of power is necessary, then I suggest to the Minister of Justice that the people to whom the powers can be given should be limited.
Another point I would raise, while I am on my feet, is one which arises under section 12 (2) of P.C. 3, at page 141. Perhaps it is because we do not like to see the ordinary freedoms which have been set up for years affected or infringed upon, but it does seem to me that a controller should not have the power he is given in that subsection. Where a controller believes that any person has failed to produce books and records, under this subsection he can authorize in writing a police officer, police constable or other person to go in and make seizure of the books. Such officer may enter by force, if necessary, and carry those books, not to a court, or to a place where they would be in the custody of the law, but he shall carry them before such controller.
It seems to me that, in 'the first place, the controller should have no licence whatsoever to give a warrant or order under his hand to authorize a police officer to enter the premises of a person. In the second place, if that power is necessary, and is given to such controller, any records seized should be placed in

Emergency Powers
the custody of the law, and not retained in the archives or under the control of some controller; because any lawyer knows that anything taken in that fashion, which might be used in evidence, should be kept in the custody of the law, if it is to be produced in a court of law against any person in any subsequent charge.


James Lorimer Ilsley: With regard to these amendments, I find that there are precedents in other legislation for the type of section objected to by the hon. member for Kamloops. In the first place, section 57 of the Foreign Exchange Control Board Act is as follows-
Mr. FULTON; Passed last session.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes.


Edmund Davie Fulton: We objected to that sort of provision then.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: That does not make it bad.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not think the hon. gentleman objected to this section, nor do I think it was objected to in this house, in the other house or before the banking and commerce committee. The section, which is identical with the one in question, reads:
For the purpose of the prosecution of a person for an offence under this act, the offence shall be deemed to have been committed either at the place where it was actually committed or at any place in Canada in which the offender resides, or is found, or is apprehended, or is in custody.
The Customs Act, which is an old act, provides for certain classes of offences by section 263, which reads:
If the amount of any such penalty or forfeiture does not exceed two hundred dollars, the same may also he prosecuted, sued for and recovered in any court having jurisdiction to that amount in the place where the cause of prosecution arises, or where the defendant is served with process.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: That was in connection with the smuggling of goods?


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is in the Customs Act. I should not like to agree to that in the absence of evidence of abuse. With regard to the other matter raised by the hon. member for Kamloops and the hon. member for Portage la Prairie, we had in mind proposing an amendment to the section giving the controllers rhe right to authorize police officers to enter and search. The words which we proposed to insert were these:
. . . with the approval of a judge of the Exchequer Court of Canada or of a superior or county court, which approval such judge is hereby empowered to give upon the ex parte application of the controller . . .
Perhaps we had better get the amendment before the committee.


Howard Charles Green: We have not passed the first order in council as yet.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Let us pass it.


William Ross Macdonald: We should consider all the orders in council relating to the Department of Reconstruction and Supply, and then an amendment could be moved to any one at this time.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I understood that they were being discussed together and that it was competent for any hon. member to move an amendment to any order.


William Ross Macdonald: It is agreed that we are discussing all the orders relating to the Department of Reconstruction and Supply.


Howard Charles Green: They are to be passed individually later.


William Ross Macdonald: If they are to be passed individually later I do not see how an amendment can be moved now.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I suggest that we pass P.C. 1609, and then we can pass on to the next.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I will defer that amendment until we reach the order.


Mr. ADAMSON:: I have something to say on this matter of priorities and the control of building material. I come from the constituency which was mentioned three times this afternoon, by the hon. member for Park-dale, by the hon. member for Eglinton and by another hon. member, as being perhaps the most congested area in the entire Dominion of Canada. There is probably more industrial and housing construction going on in that district at the present time than in any other in the country. There is a desperate need for houses in that district at the present time.
Private builders who are doing eighty per cent of the construction of small houses, small apartments, veterans houses, houses being built for the low income group of citizens, complain about one thing, that they cannot get building materials. Tile, nails, shingles, brick-the whole group of building materials comes into the picture. I do not wish to go into the reasons for this shortage or to reargue the case that was presented so ably this after-noon by the hon. member for Parkdale, but I want to give the committee some information because I have some first-hand knowledge of the matter. A year ago tomorrow I had the misfortune of having my own home burned to the ground. I am now in the position of trying to obtain building material. The con-
Emergency Powers

tractors come to me and say, "We can get you building materials but we must charge you the imported price." They do not use the word "black market price"; they say the imported price.
I should like to give the committee two or three of the prices that were quoted to me over the week-end. I understand that the ceiling price in Canada for gyproc lath is $30 per
1.000	feet; it was offered to me at $47.75 per
1.000	feet. I understand that the Canadian ceiling on metal lath is forty cents a yard; it was offered to me at fifty-four cents a yard. I was offered cement at $1.25 a bag and nails at $20 to $25 a keg. I was informed that the supply was abundant and that I could get materials at those prices.


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I suggest to my hon. friend that he try dealing with somebody on the other side of politics and he m;ght get the right prices.


Howard Charles Green: That is pretty cheap.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I am dealing with two contractors, but unfortunately I have not inquired into their politics. All I wanted to know was whether they could build a house. Here we have an apparent abundant supply of building materials, abundant at what they call the imported price. It is reported to me that these building materials have been imported from the United States, but I do not know whether that is so because I have not examined into it personally. I am simply taking the word of my contractor, who is a large contractor and knows what he is doing.
This is the story I get not only from my own people but from other contractors throughout the district ; they can get the material but they have to pay these extra prices. The building industry tells me that these extra prices are the result of the priorities system imposed on the building trades by the government. In other words, they say that if the Canadian building material industry were allowed to ration or sell on a completely open market without having to meet certain government priority commitments, the prices the average man is now asked to pay would not be charged because there would be a greater supply of building materials. There are many hundreds of houses being built. Not only do they take four or five months longer to build than they should under normal circumstances, but some take even a year longer, and I am told by the same builders quoted by the member for Parkdale this afternoon that that is entirely because they cannot get building materials since they are held up by the priority system imposed bjr the present government.
[Mr. Adamaon.l
I do not want to quote my own case and I do so merely because I happen to have specific information. I know, because I am interested in the building business, exactly what people are up against in the city of Toronto todaj'. Material is simply not available unless the builder or the owner is prepared to pay extortionate prices. Perhaps these prices that have been quoted to me are the proper prices to pay. But then why go through the fantasy that control and a priority system do exist? Why not free the whole thing and let the building industry do its own rationing of materials? Here we have hundreds of houses in a semi-finished state, over sixty per cent finished. They may or may not be finished this summer because of the inability to get materials. When you have a house under construction the time element is infinitely more important in many ways from the point of view of cost than any other. When you have a gang working and they are held up for two or three days waiting for materials the cost of labour soon goes up.


Mr. GLADSTONE:: If you have to wait for materials it is because you are building so many factories in your riding.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I do not think that is the reason at all. It is true that industrial development has been great, as it has been throughout Canada. As was stated this afternoon, the industrial development is several times the domestic house development in dollar value. If, as the government says, the main problem is the building of dwelling houses, why does it allow industrial construction to exceed domestic construction by several times? That was one of the problems which was discussed this afternoon by the hon. member for Parkdale.
But my point is not the question of industrial development versus domestic housing. My point is this. How is it that material can be obtained at these excessive prices or above the ceiling prices and cannot be obtained at the ordinary prices? Either the government by its policy has thrown a monkey wrench into the production of building materials, or something in the economic system is very wrong, and I suggest through you, Mr. Chairman, to the government that serious consideration and study be given to this business of producing building material. Either the building material industry in Canada cannot produce the building materials required, or the government by its action is stultif3'ing the production and distribution of building materials. Building materials are simply not available for private building.

Emergency Powers


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The hon. member who has just taken his seat has just mentioned lath and sheeting. I have a memo here from the Department of National Revenue regarding export permits. I notice that export control was imposed on gypsum wall board, lath and sheeting on April 3. How much of it was shipped out before that date?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I could not say.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: After export control comes in, the permits issued before that date still run for another six months. Is the minister allowing these permits on building material to run for an extra six months? On nails, export control was imposed on February 2, 1946, but the permits which had been issued before that date were allowed to run for a further six months. The minister suggested that the hon. member try to deal with other people besides those of his own party. On March 31 the hon. member for Middlesex East asked a question regarding nails and I said a couple of words on the subject. I was out in the hall here a few minutes after and was offered ten kegs of nails at $14 a keg, and I refused. The man who offered me them was not of our party.


An hon. MEMBER:: That happened in this building?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have the figures here on nails for 1946. They show that we exported 25,410 hundredweight, practically all to Newfoundland and the British West Indies. We imported in the same period 13,605 hundredweight, chiefly from the United States. I would say that that is a very tight control, having in mind our historic obligation to look after the West Indies.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: That was wire nails. You also exported iron nails to the amount of about $500,000.


Eric Bowness McKay: After listening to the minister and others taking part in this debate, I am more convinced than ever that if we are to provide homes for the Canadian people controls of building construction must be not only maintained but extended. I note, under "Powers of Priorities Officer", that he has power to order any person in possession of or dealing in construction materials or having facilities for making or dealing in construction materials to make or deal in such materials in such manner as may be specified. I would suggest that in this respect, "in such manner as may be specified", more restriction should be applied. I think most members of the house and most right-thinking Canadian citizens will agree that the production of homes for Canadians is an urgent matter, and particularly so because so many young veterans are looking for homes. We do not have to go very far afield to find them. I think it is much more important to provide for the construction of homes than for the construction of theatres, despite what the minister said tonight. It is much more important to provide houses for our people than to provide theatres, bowling alleys, hot-dog stands, breweries and luxury hotels such as are being built in Montreal at the present time.


An hon. MEMBER:: Where are they being built?


Eric Bowness McKay: You do not have to go very far. I was there the other night and I saw it. There is a lot of building material in that one hotel which, if spread around, would provide houses for hundreds of veterans.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is housing also.


Eric Bowness McKay: If there is insufficient building material to meet the demands for house construction it is quite unfair to permit the building of structures such as I have named. Furthermore it is a bit unfair to place the onus upon the municipalities to decide what type of construction should be permitted. The reason is that there may be areas in Canada where the housing situation may not be as serious as in others. In such cases the municipal authorities may feel quite justified in authorizing the construction of buildings which would use up the available supplies of materials. That is why the federal authorities are the ones best able to assess the situation throughout the country and the only authorities able to channel the material into the type of construction that is most needed. It is the governing body which should exercise that control. Restriction should definitely be placed at this time on non-essential building if we are to provide the houses that are so badly needed.


Clarence Gillis: A few moments ago the hon. member for York West made a serious statement, particularly with the Minister of Justice listening. The hon. member for York West said quite definitely that there is a black market in building materials operating in Ontario. He also said that the contractor with whom he is dealing in the purchase of lumber knows where to secure lumber on the black market. If that is true it should be investigated by the government. I am not sure whether it is true. I have another opinion on it. I know there is a shortage of materials across Canada. The minister will remember
Emergency Powers

that I wired him last November about eight veterans houses which were tied up for some months because of lack of certain materials. The contractor was a veteran. He could not get materials. These houses were standing for months. Across the street from him another contractor who was building luxury houses had all kinds of material. There was no difficulty, but the veteran contractor told me that the reason for that was that those who were building the luxury houses were paying black market prices. At that time I tried to find out who operated the black market, where the material came from and so forth. I did not succeed in running it down. If the hon. member for York West knows who is operating that market in Ontario, or his contractor knows, it should be checked up.
Perhaps something else is happening. We may find out that all our weeping about material shortages may be caused by a holdup. There may be a hold-up by manufacturers and lumber dealers in Canada to make building materials unavailable, for the purpose of breaking price ceilings. If there is lumber available for a black market that lumber is in Canada and should be on the market. That lumber can come only from legitimate *dealers in this country and they know where it is. If it is held up for a squeeze in order do break price ceilings so that they may get *whatever price they want for the lumber, the chances are, if the ceilings are taken off, you will not be able to buy that material, the cost would be so high.
As regards this fellow that we are crying about, the veteran and the chap who wants to build low-priced houses and the contractors who want to build low-priced houses for rental, which today they may be able to build under the ceilings for S3,000 or $4,000, similar houses will cost $10,000 with the ceilings off. If that takes place the fellow who is making lumber available on the black market will be able to charge whatever price he wishes. On the other hand, if you remove controls altogether the chances are there will be no lumber in Canada at all if they will pay higher prices for it in the United States, in South Africa or in some other countries.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Will the hon. member permit a question? Does he know of any place today where you can build a house for three or four thousand dollars? I have been trying to find one.


Clarence Gillis: Yes, I know of a number of places. The first determining factor is the kind of house you want.
[Mr. Gaiis.J


George Alexander Cruickshank: He wants a luxury house.


Edmund Davie Fulton: In Kamloops?


Clarence Gillis: I can take the hon. member to a section of the country that is quite a distance away from here and show him many cooperative housing projects that were set up under a provincial government act where you can get a seven-roomed house with a good basement, complete radiation, all modern conveniences for $1,800.


Edmund Davie Fulton: When?


Clarence Gillis: In 1938 and 1939.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I mean today.


Clarence Gillis: Today that same house could be built for about $2,500.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Is it being built?


Clarence Gillis: A contractor would not build it. A private enterprise contractor would charge about $6,000 for the same house.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Can you build them for that today?


Clarence Gillis: That is the thing we are trying to avoid.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The question I asked the hon. member was, can you get them built today for three or four thousand dollars?


Clarence Gillis: I said that under the same scheme, the cooperative housing groups, you can build them for about $2,500.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Today?


Clarence Gillis: Certainly you can, but, as I said, you would be eliminating free enterprise. That would be the people working for themselves. Under these circumstances I do not think the hon. member would ever get a home.


An hon. MEMBER:: Or a carpenter.


Clarence Gillis: What I am trying to find out, Mr. Chairman, is whether the accusation made by the hon. member for York West is correct or not. If it is not correct I am suggesting that perhaps the minister should probe the field of where lumber is available at certain inflated prices and find out whether the private enterpriser and lumber dealers in this country are putting on the squeeze in the building of houses. I feel sorry for the minister in this matter of housing. It is pretty bad in the end of the country from which I come. Perhaps lumber is in shorter supply in that part of the country than in any other part of Canada.

Emergency Powers


Mr. BOUCHER:: You are lucky if you can get them built for three or four thousand dollars.


Clarence Gillis: I said, under certain circumstances. A moment ago I said that lumber is short there. I realize that in the maritime provinces, if it were not for the control of lumber, there would be no lumber in that part of the country. At least we are getting some kind of quota, because there are some regulations on it. I suggest that in this matter of controlling lumber and maintaining ceilings in this country the government should carefully consider the proposition from our free enterprise friends. They all have good houses. They are not worrying. This crying on your shoulder about veterans not having homes and all that sort of thing is so much bunkum.


Howard Charles Green: We are just as much interested in the veterans as you are.


Mr. HARKNESS:: We are not so much interested in veterans' politics as the hon. member is.


Clarence Gillis: They have not fooled me for one minute. I have seen these salty tears and I have seen section 98 passed and all that kind of thing the minute they got in power.


Howard Charles Green: We have done much more for veterans than you have.


William Ross Macdonald: May I remind the committee that it is almost eleven o'clock. There is an order in council before the committee for consideration.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Could I wind up some amendments tonight?


Clarence Gillis: I am about through, but I intend to follow this up, because an investigation is due on the part of the government into the accusations made tonight by the hon. member for West York. If there is a black market and he knows where it is operating it is up to the government to find out, and if a black market is not functioning, then it is a disgrace to break the price ceilings. Where is this lumber coming from which is available for a black market? It is produced by the legitimate industry of the country and it must be coming from there. If it is coming from there, then there is a squeeze to smash the price ceiling and get back to free enterprise.	,


Clarence Decatur Howe: The department takes great interest in low-cost housing for people of small means.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: When the people of
Canada agreed to price controls with regard to
building materials they were under the impression that the government itself would carrj' out a housing programme to provide houses at the lowest possible figure. In my particular section of the country, if I may be permitted a personal reference, Wartime Housing started operating in the city of Yorkton and in September, 1945, there was a contract for the construction of ninety houses, but after eighteen months there are still about twenty-five of these houses to be finished. The people are told that it is a matter of supplies of materials. During the winter there was a small fire in which the contractor lost some material. At any rate, these are not low-cost houses; because some six-roomed houses cost up to $5,000, and they are built without basements. After eighteen months there are still many houses not ready, and veterans in my constituency have been living in trailers all winter. Some people told me that one had to go to a contractor on the other side of politics. That is a rotten state of affairs. The people of Canada expected that government controls would provide houses, hut we still find that there are those who cannot get houses, though materials are available for building hotels and similar structures. Hotels in the city of Montreal have been mentioned. That sort of building does not go down very well with people who cannot get homes. They are looking to the government for action, because it is the government's responsibility, and when the people do not get action they feel peeved about it, particularly when they find that contractors can get materials for building theatres and the other kind of buildings that are being put up. What does the government intend to do? Does it intend to tighten up, or is it going to throw the whole thing over the wall?


Clarence Decatur Howe: How long has that contract been going? It sounds as if there should be a change of contractor.


George Hugh Castleden: The contracts were signed in September, 1945.


Clarence Decatur Howe: For 125 houses?


George Hugh Castleden: No; ninety.


Clarence Decatur Howe: And how many have been built?


George Hugh Castleden: They have moved into sixty-five now, I believe. That was the situation at Easter when I vras at home. The rest are not yet occupied.


Mr. GARDINER:: Why did the Saskatchewan government not build them instead of making boxes?
Emergency Powers


James Lorimer Ilsley: I move:
That the following be inserted in the schedule to the act in the column entitled "Amendments" so as to pertain to order in council P.C. 1609 of 23 April. 1946, as amended:
"Section 6 is revoked."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
William Ross Macdonald: Shall the order in council carry?


Calvert Charlton Miller: What about section 5 in the same order in council, with reference to delegation of powers? I think the minister should consider an amendment to that.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We cannot consider an amendment to that.


Calvert Charlton Miller: Will the government give a reason? I cannot see why the great powers given to the controller should be delegated without even designating to whom they are delegated.


Clarence Decatur Howe: One man cannot give decisions from coast to coast. He must delegate power to outside officers. That has been necessary over a period of several years, and we could not operate without it for the rest of the time the order operates. The office would be meaningless if we did.


Calvert Charlton Miller: Could not the minister at least limit the people to whom these powers may be delegated? Could they not be limited to responsible senior officers, instead of being made applicable to "any person or persons"?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I move, Mr. Chairman, that the following be inserted in the schedule to the act in the column entitled "Amendments"-


Howard Charles Green: The hon. member for Portage la Prairie asked a question and he should receive an answer.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We cannot operate without the power to delegate. That is self-evident. It does not require an elaborate debate at this stage of the evening. It has always been in the act. The power to regulate involves the power to delegate.


Howard Charles Green: May I point out that this is a very wide power.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is a power we have always had.


Howard Charles Green: It says that the priorities officer shall have power to delegate from time to time, to any person or persons, any power vested in the priorities officer under these regulations, including any power involving the exercise of a discretion, and any' order made 
in the exercise by any such person of a power so delegated shall be final and binding unless and until it has been varied or vacated by the priorities officer. The hon. member for Portage la Prairie has asked if it would not be possible to restrict to senior officers the group of people to whom the power might be delegated. The way it is worded, the power could be delegated to any employee at all, and that is going much too far.


An hon. MEMBER:: Even for a Tory.


Clarence Decatur Howe: What officer would my hon. friend suggest? Would he want to select them?


Howard Charles Green: The minister has mentioned that there will have to be officers in different parts of the country. I can see the need for delegating powers to the man in charge in Vancouver or in Halifax. Why not say that? Why is it necessary to take power and delegate it to the newest clerk? The minister does not contend that a wide power of that sort is necessary.


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend realizes that the controller has responsibility' as well as authority, and he must exercise both. I do not think hon. gentlemen opposite would attempt to lay down rules for the exercise of his responsibility.


Howard Charles Green: This is power of a sort that should not be put in any legislation passed in this house or in any other house in the British empire. We have no objection to having the order in council go through tonight, but I would ask that the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply' and the Minister of Justice over the week-end see if there cannot be some more definite description of the officers to whom that power is to be given.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I can assure my' hon. friend that care is exercised by all concerned before power is delegated to any officer; we make sure the officer is capable of administering that power. That statement is supported by the fact that since 1941, when many of these powers came into existence, committees of this House of Commons have examined the work of these controllers, and they have never brought to light any misconduct on the part of anyone to whom power has been delegated.


Calvert Charlton Miller: Some fif the officers under these different boards, administering these controls in Winnipeg and other cities, have a great idea of power. I do not think some of them ever had any' power before, and that is the type of people to whom I do not believe such power should be delegated. If that is the

Emergency Powers
type to which it is going to continue to be delegated, then I shall not cease to object every time I possibly can rise in my place. When you delegate these powers to people who have never had responsible jobs before, they certainly exercise them. I do not consider it fair that the rights and almost the freedom of the people of this country should be dealt with in such loose fashion.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Can we get these amendments through, or shall we stop now? I thought I would try to have the technical amendments cleaned up tonight.


Howard Charles Green: There is no objection, if the order in council is not being carried.


James Lorimer Ilsley: The first amendment is:
That the following be inserted in the schedule to the act in the column entitled "Amendments" so as to pertain to order in council P.C. 9439 jf 19th December, 1944, as amended:
"Section 9(1) is deleted and the following substituted therefor:
9(1) No member of the board, administrator or other person employed or appointed by the board or acting under the authority of the board shall be liable for any act or omission in the exercise or performance or purported exercise or performance, in good faith and on reasonable grounds, of any power, discretion, authority or duty conferred or imposed by or under these regulations."


Stanley Howard Knowles: This applies to P.C. 9439?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
James Lorimer Ilsley: The next amendment is:
That the following be inserted in the schedule to the act in the column entitled "Amendments" so as to pertain to order in council P.C. 9439 of 19 December. 1944, as amended:
"Section 9(2) is deleted and the following substituted therefor:
9(2) No proceedings by way of injunction, mandatory order, mandamus, prohibition or certiorari, shall be instituted against any member of the board, administrator or other person employed or appointed by the board or acting under the authority of the board for or in respect of any act or omission of himself or any other person in the exercise or purported exercise of any power, discretion or authority or in the performance or purported performance of any duty conferred or imposed by or under these regulations or otherwise heretofore conferred or imposed by the governor in council."


Edmund Davie Fulton: Were not the words "in good faith and on reasonable grounds" to be inserted there?


James Lorimer Ilsley: No, not in this one. This follows the others exactly.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
James Lorimer Ilsley: The next amendment is:
That the following be inserted in the schedule to the act in the column entitled "Amendments" so as to pertain to order in council P.C. 3 of 4th January, 1944, as amended:
"Section 7(2) is deleted and the following substituted therefor:
7(2) No controller, deputy controller, deputy priorities officer or other person acting on behalf of or under the authority of a controller, deputy controller or deputy priorities officer shall be liable for any act or omission in the exercise or purported exercise, in good faith and on reasonable grounds, of any power or authority conferred by the governor in council or any order."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
James Lorimer Ilsley: The next amendment is:
That the following be inserted in the schedule to the act in the column entitled "Amendments" so as to pertain to order in council P.C. 3 of 4th January, 1944, as amended:
"Section 12(2) is deleted and the following substituted therefor:
12(2) Where a controller believes that any person has failed to produce books, records or documents, or to give full and complete information as required by such controller under the authority of any regulation, he may, with the approval of a judge of the Exchequer Court of Canada or of a superior or a county court, which approval such judge is hereby empowered to give upon the ex parte application of the controller, authorize in writing under his hand a police officer, police constable or other person employed for the preservation and maintenance of the public peace, together with any other person named therein, to enter and search, if necessary by force, any building, receptacle or place, for books, records or documents which may contain information required by such controller, and to seize the same and carry them before such controller or such other person as such controller may direct, to be held at the discretion of such controller for such uses as he is authorized by any regulation to make."


Howard Charles Green: I would suggest that the
minister let this stand. It is not like the other amendments and does not go as far as the hon. member for Portage la Prairie requested, in that it does not require that the books and other documents seized must be taken to the court. We would like to have further time to consider the amendment.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Very well.


William Ross Macdonald: Amendment stands.


James Lorimer Ilsley: The next amendment is:
That the following be inserted in the schedule to the act in the column entitled "Amendments" so as to pertain to order in council P.C. 245 of 23rd January, 1946, as amended:
"Section 7 is revoked."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Emergency Powers
James Lorimer Ilsley: The last amendment is:
That the following be inserted in the schedule to the act in the column entitled "Amendments" so as to pertain to order in council P.C. 1997 of 21st March, 1944:
"Section 6 is revoked."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
William Ross Macdonald: Is the committee prepared to carry the orders in council as amended?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


William Ross Macdonald: I shall call the first
one. Does order in council 1609 as amended
carry?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


William Ross Macdonald: Carried. Does order in council 9439 and order in council 7502-


Donald Methuen Fleming: I have just a question to ask.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Could we not call it eleven o'clock?


Donald Methuen Fleming: I just want to give the minister notice so that he might bring before' the committee a statement of the areas declared to be congested areas and the dates on which they were so declared.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Very well.


William Ross Macdonald: Shall I report progress?


Alan Cockeram: I rise to a question of privilege. There is a gentleman in the official gallery of this house, I presume an official of the department whose affairs we have been discussing this evening, who has been acting in a manner which I do not think is becoming to anyone sitting in the official gallery. I merely want to draw this to your attention, Mr. Chairman.


William Ross Macdonald: I have noted what the hon. gentleman has said, but I did not notice anything out of place myself, and it was not brought to my attention previously.


Alan Cockeram: When the hon. member for West York was speaking, this gentleman in the front row of the gallery was performing great antics and certainly was not observing the decorum that should be observed in the galleries of this house.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


William Ross Macdonald: All I can say is that the hon. gentleman should have brought that fact to my attention at the time. However I have noted his remarks.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. St. Laurent the house adjourned at 11.12 p.m.

Monday, April 28, 1947