PEACE TREATIES


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretaiy of State for External Affairs): Today in Paris treaties of peace will be signed between Canada and four of her former enemies. From July to October of last year, Canada was represented at a conference in Paris which was called to consider draft peace treaties with Italy, Roumania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Finland. These treaties have now been completed, and in the ceremony of signature in Paris, Canada will be represented by the Canadian Ambassador to France, Major General Vanier. The treaties are subject to ratification and will come into force with respect to Canada when they have been approved by parliament and when an instrument of ratification has been deposited. The treaty with Bulgaria will not be signed by Canada; we were not at war with that country.
The Canadian delegation to the Paris conference was led by the right honourable the Prime Minister. The other members of the delegation w:ere the Minister of National Defence, who at that time was minister of national health and welfare; the Canadian Ambassador to France and the Canadian Ambassador to the U.S.S.R.; the head of the Canadian military mission to Germany; Mr. N. A. Robertson, at that time Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs, and Mr. Arnold Heeney, clerk of the Privy Council. These representatives were accompanied by several advisers from the Department of External Affairs. When the Prime Minister returned to Canada during the latter part of August, my colleague the Minister of National Defence assumed the leadership of the delegation.
The conference at Paris wras restricted, through the terms of reference given it by the council of foreign ministers, to the function of examining draft peace treaties which had been prepared by the council and to making recommendations on these draft treaties for the further consideration of the four foreign ministers. No assurance was given to the seventeen states which joined the four great powers at Paris that the recommendations of the conference would be accepted by the council of foreign ministers which was to prepare the final texts of the treaties. On the contrary, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, the Soviet Union and France came to the Paris
Peace Treaties
[Stage Direction]
conference committed to support those articles of the draft peace treaties on which previous agreement had been reached. It was only in respect of the unagreed articles, therefore, that the states attending the Paris conference were allowed any real freedom of action.
In these circumstances the opportunity given us to influence the settlements under discussion at Paris was not great. The Prime Minister in his opening address made known to the conference Canada's misgiving over procedures which permitted so limited a participation in the work of peace-making. Canada, he said, had a vital interest in these treaties and desired to see them established on principles of justice and equity which would lead to a lasting peace.
In spite of the limitations imposed on the conference at Paris, it was nonetheless possible for the Canadian delegation to make a valuable contribution to the drafting of the peace treaties, particularly in respect of articles which had not previously been agreed upon by the council of foreign ministers. The Paris conference was able to adopt, by the necessary two-thirds majority, a number of recommendations which were subsequently used in the New York meetings of the council of foreign ministers as a basis for discussion. The principles of these recommendations were in many cases adopted and incorporated in the final texts. Such important questions as the establishment of the free territory of Trieste, the freedom of the Danube, the settlement of disputes arising out of the interpretation or execution of the treaties, and the settlement of the amounts of reparation payable by the ex-enemies to the allies, were all of this category. The conference also did useful work in clarifying and improving the text of many articles in both agreed and unagreed sections of the treaties. In this connection, the present Minister of National Defence, in his capacity as chairman of the legal and drafting commission, made a particularly useful contribution to the conference.
I should like now to table the final texts of the treaties with Italy, Roumania, Hungary and Finland as signed today in Paris. I wish also to table a statement prepared by the Minister of National Defence, which will supplement the few remarks I have made on this subject. For the convenience of the house, I would ask that this statement, which covers some eight pages of single-space typewriting and which would be rather lengthy to put on

Hansard, be printed as an appendix to Votes and Proceedings. It would then be available to all hon. members.
The final texts of the treaties will be published in the Treaty Series by the Department of External Affairs, and copies will be made available to all members in due course and before the matter is brought before the houses of parliament for ratification.
Mr. BRACKEN:: Can the minister indicate when this matter will be brought before parliament for ratification?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: The leader of the opposition can be assured that we will lose no time in bringing these treaties before parliament for ratification. There are perhaps other matters which may have to be dealt with first as being more urgent, because of the time limit placed upcn some of the legislation of last session.


John Bracken: I was only asking for information.


Mr. COLDWELL:: If I may ask a supplementary question, will these treaties be referred to the external affairs committee? That, it seems to me, would expedite discussion, restrict to some extent the discussion in the house, and make possible a more thorough understanding of the treaties.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Of course, it is for the house to determine what matters coming before it for consideration shall be referred to committees. If after copies of the treaties have been distributed and hon. members have had an opportunity to give them consideration they still feel it would be desirable to have them referred to the committee, that situation can be dealt with at the time.



INCOME WAR TAX ACT


[Stage Direction]
Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 15, to amend the Income War Tax Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, this bill would add to the appropriate section of the Income War Tax Act the following words, which will be underlined in the printed bill:
Provided that nothing in this subsection shall operate to prevent a minister of the crown from communicating to the Senate or to the House of Commons any information obtained under the provisions of this act.

Introduction of Bills
The purpose of the amendment is to remove the ironclad, restrictions as to secrecy now imposed by subsection 1 of section 81, which in my view have the effect of denying, to the house information which at times ought to be readily available. This amendment would also affect the Excess Profits Tax Act, by virtue of section 14 of that act.
Mr. SPEAKER:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



PATENT ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. COLIN GIBSON (Secretary of State) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 16, to amend the Patent Act, 1935.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the main purposes of the bill are to provide for extensions of time, limited under the Patent Act, where circumstances arising out of the war prevented compliance with the provisions of the act; also to provide for secrecy when it is considered to be in the interests of the safety of the state. There are also minor amendments to other sections and an adjustment of the tariff of fees, to provide sufficient revenue to defray the expense of printing patents.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to present a measure to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act and to make provision for matters presently provided for by regulation under the National Emergency Transitional Powers Act, 1945, including provision for the guarantee by the Minister of Finance of loans made to the Canadian wheat board on security of grain acquired by the Canadian wheat board and the payment of other expenses incidental to the operations of the board.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. COLIN GIBSON (Secretary of State) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the continuance of certain of the regulations respecting trading with the enemy, following the time fixed for the expiry of the National Emergency Transitional Powers Act, 1945, and for implementing provisions in any treaty which may be executed on behalf of Canada and ratified by parliament with respect to the disposition of enemy property or compensation respecting property in enemy territory.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk).

Mr. STIRLING:: 1.	How many Japanese have been sent back to Japan?
2.	How many of them were (a) nationals; (b) naturalized; (c) Canadian born?
3.	How many of them were (a) men; (b) women; (c) children under 16?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	3,964 persons of Japanese origin, have gone to Japan.
2.	and 3.
Japanese Naturalized Canadian
Nationals	Canadians	Born	TotalMen ...	887	398	374	1,659Women..	457	230	284	971Children.	11	2	1,321	1,3341,355	630	1,979	3,964
Note: In the above table, men and women are those 16 years of age and over, children are those under 16 years of age.


JAPANESE IN CANADA
Mr. STIRLING:: 1.	How many Japanese are there in each of the nine provinces, in the northwest territories and in Yukon?
2.	How are these divided into (a) nationals;
(b)	naturalized; (c) Canadian born?
3.	How are they divided into (a) men; (b) women; (c) children under 16?
4.	How many Japanese now remain in British Columbia, and where are they located?
2 32
Questions


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	At January 31, 1947:
British Columbia	 6,750
Alberta	 4,144
Saskatchewan	 491
Manitoba	 1,206
Ontario	 6,710
Quebec	 1,254
Nova Scotia	 1
New Brunswick	 10
Prince Edward Island	   6
Northwest Territories	 0
Yukon Territory	 31
Canada	 20,603
2.	Japanese nationals	 4,432
Naturalized Canadians	  2,586
Canadian-born	 13,465
U.S. and inter-wed	 120
20,603
3.	Men 16 years and over	 8213
Women 16 years and over	 6,195
Children under 16 years	 6,195
20,603
4.	(a) In New Denver-departmental project	 949
(b)	Elsewhere in the interior of
B.C	 5,727
(c)	In the coastal restricted area..	84
6.750


EMPLOYMENT OFFICES
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Have any employment offices been closed since July 1, 1946? If so, where were they located and what was the number employed at each office?
2.	Are any employment offices to be closed in the near future? If so, where are they located and how many are employed in each case?
3.	Have any employment offices been opened since July 1, 1946? If so, where are they located and how many are employed in each ease?
4.	Are any new employment offices to be opened in the near future? If so, where are they to be located, and how many will be employed in each case?
5.	What areas are served by each of the offices referred to in questions 1, 2, 3 and 4; what, industries^ are in these areas and what is the population in each of these areas?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	The Unemployment Insurance Commission has had occasion to review the situation respecting certain employment offices which were opened during the war to serve war industries. Many of these war industries have reduced their operations or discontinued same and in consequence the service required from

the employment office is not as great and the Unemployment Insurance Commission is moving in the direction of rearranging the chain of offices to a peacetime basis.
The offices in question, depending on the circumstances in each cast, will be continued with reduced staff or will be substituted by an itinerant service for a certain number of days per week.
Nine employment offices are under immediate consideration as follows:-
Number
Location	employed
Digby, N.S	 8
Roberval, P.Q	 5
Baie St. Paul, P.Q	 5
Cowansville, P.Q	 5
Acton Vale, P.Q	 3
St. Paul l'Ermite	 3
Orangeville, Ont	 3
Paris, Ont	 3
Selkirk, Man	 4
2.	The whole question is under review by the Unemployment Insurance Commission and I understand no definite decision in regard to offices other than the above has been made.
3.	No.
4.	No.
5.	Digby, N. S.
Area: Annapolis Co. Townships of Annapolis, Bear River, Clementsport, Deep Brook, Parker Cove, South Milford, Young's Cove; Digby Co. All except Townships of Meteghan.
Industries: Canning and preserving of sea foods, wholesaling of fish products. Also sawmills, logging and fuelwood cutting.
Population-male, 761; female, 896; total, 1,657.
Population of area served-18,782.
Roberval, P.Q.
Area: Roberval Co. Part south and west ol Ashuapmouchouan River.
Industries: Logging, pulp and paper, sawmills. Manufacturing of wooden and paper containers.
Population-male, 1,459; female, 1,761; total, 3,220.
Population of area served-20,358.
Baie St. Paul, P.Q.
Area: Charlevoix Co. That part west of Murray Bay, De Sales and Lacoste Townships, and west of line drawn north along Malbaie river to border of Chicoutimi County.
Industries: Pulp and paper mills. Sawmills and manufacturing of spoolwood. Logging and fuelwood cutting.

Questions
Population-male, 1,714; female, 1,786; total, 3,500.
Population of area served-9,653.
Cowansville, P.Q.
Area:	Brome Co. Township of Famham
east, excepting Village of Brigham, Townships of Brome and Sutton; Missisquoi Co. Township of Dunham.
Industries: Cotton, rayon and silk textile mills; manufacturing of wooden products, grain mill products, footwear and leather products.
Population-male, 1,788; female, 1,698; total, . 3,486.
Population of area served-15,069.
Acton Vale, P.Q.
Area: Bagot Co. Acton Township; Drummond Co. Durham Township, excepting parishes of Trenholm and Ulverton; Shefford Co. Roxton and Roxton Falls.
Industries: Leather-tanning and finishing. Rubber footwear and shoes. Woollen and silk textile mills. Sash and door manufacturing.
Population-male, 1,148; female, 1,218; total, 2,366.
Population of area served-11,487.
St. Paul 1'Ermite (sub-office of Montreal).
Area: St. Paul 1'Ermite and immediately surrounding area, under the direction of the Montreal Local Office.
Industries: Saw and planing mills. Centre in agricultural community.
Population-male, 492; female, 480; total, 972.
Orangeville, Ont.
Area: Dufferin Co. Townships of Amaranth, East Garafraxa, East Luther, Melancthon, Mulmer and Mono; Peel Co. Township of Caledon.
Industries: Knitting mills. Woollen and worsted textile mills. Grist mills and grain mill products. Box manufacturing and printing.
Population-male, 1,275; female, 1,443; total, 2,718.
Population of area served-17,111.
Paris, Ont.
Area:	Brant Co. Township of South
Dumfries.
Industries: Knitting mills. Woollen and worsted textiles, dyeing and finishing. Cabinet and door manufacturing. Machinery, cement and gypsum products.
Population-male, 2,189; female, 2,448; total, 4,637.
Population of area served-7,256.
Selkirk, Man.
Area: Part Census Div. 5-Municipality of St. Clements; Part Census Div. 9-Municipality of St. Andrews; Part Census Div. 12- Municipalities of Gimli & Bifrost.
Industries: Steel works-rolling mills. Iron and steel foundry products.
Population-male, 2,604; female, 2,311; total, 4,915.
Population of area served-25,842.


WARTIME PRICES AND TRADE BOARD-MAIN AND BRANCH OFFICES
Mr. HOMUTH:: 1.	How many main or branch offices of the wartime prices and trade board were there on March 1, 1946?
2.	What was the total number of staff in these offices ?
3.	How many main or branch offices were there on January 15, 1947?
4.	What was the total number of staff in these offices January 15, 1947?
5.	How many of staff that were let out were re-employed by other departments or transferred to other government work?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	Thirteen regional offices; eighty-two local offices; two sub-local offices.
2.	3,156.
3.	Thirteen regional offices, sixty-eight local offices, two sub-local offices.
4.	2,984.
5.	Unknown.


IMPORTS OF CANARIES
Mr. LENNARD:: 1.	How many canaries were imported into Canada during the year 1946?
2.	What countries were they imported from?
3.	How many from each country?
4.	What were the values?


Mr. MacKINNON:: Information not available. Canaries not separately classified in Canadian trade statistics.


CIVIL SERVICE-REFRESHER COURSE FOR STENOGRAPHERS
Mr. LENNARD:: 1.	How' many members of the civil service availed themselves of the opportunity to take the refresher course for stenographers during the year 1946?
2.	How many typists or clerks were reclassified as stenographers and what transfers took place?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: 1.	In the refresher courses in stenography and typing, commenced September 19, 1946, under authority of order in council P.C. 21/3727, and under the supervision of the civil service commission, 309 employees throughout the government service were enrolled for training up to December 31, 1946.

Questions

Of these, 241 were trained as stenographers, and 68 as typists. By the end of 1646, 181 had graduated; the rest continued training when classes reopened January 6, 1947.
2.	Of the graduates, 96 were clerks, 50 typists and 20 stenographers who were not doing stenographic work. Of the 96 clerks, 63 were reclassified as stenographers and 33 as typists; of the 50 typists, 49 were reclassified as stenographers and one up-graded as a typist. The 20 stenographers, on completion of the refresher courses, were reassigned to positions as full time stenographers.
The reassignment of 12 graduates has not yet been effected for reasons beyond our control. Three others resigned their positions.
Of the 181 graduates, only 33 were transferred to other departments; the rest were reassigned to positions within their own department where requisitions were outstanding.
VETERANS LAND ACT-APPLICATIONS FOR SMALL .	HOLDINGS AND FARM LANDS


Mr. McKAY:: 1.	How many applications have been made by veterans of world war II for settlement under the Veterans' Land Act for (a) small holdings; (b) farm lands, up to December 31, 1946?
2.	How many of these applications have been approved?
3.	What number of veterans have actually been settled on (a) small holdings; (b) farm lands, in (i) Canada; (ii) Saskatchewan, up to December 31, 1946?


Mr. MACKENZIE:: 1.	75,789 applications for qualification. 29.471 applications for financial assistance-
(a)	12,942; (b) 16,529.
2.	Applications for qualification approved-fa) 23,787; (b) 26,282. Applications for financial assistance approved-(a)9,940; (b) 12,552.
3.	The answers given in second part of No. 2 is as close an indication as can be given of the number of veterans actually settled. For Saskatchewan the figures are as follows: small holdings 217; full time farming 3,183.
All figures given are "net" after deducting applications or loans withdrawn or cancelled since approval.


WHEAT-SALES FOR DOMESTIC PURPOSES IN 1945 AND 1946
Mr. McKAY:: 1.	Was any wheat sold by the Canadian wheat board in 1945 at $1.55 per bushel basis number one northern, Fort William?
2.	If so, how many bushels?
3.	What number of bushels of wheat was used for such domestic purposes as flour and feed in (a) 1945; (b) 1946?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	Yes.
2.	175,126,270 bushels.
3.	Used for domestic purposes including flour and feed: (a) 76,920,218 bushels; (b) 79,593,653 bushels (subject to revision).


VETERANS BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL LOANS
Mr. McKAY:: 1.	How many loans have been made to veterans under the Veterans' Business and Professional Loans bill up to December 31, 1946?
2.	What was the total amount of the loans granted?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	None.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
The Veterans' Business and Professional Loans Act was proclaimed in force on January 15, 1947.


JAPANESE IN CANADA
Mr. STIRLING:: 1.	Have all the Japanese, who left British Columbia, entered the eight provinces under agreements which entailed their removal at the request of the government of that province?
2.	How many of the provincial governments requested their removal?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	No. An agreement was entered into by the British Columbia security commission with the Alberta government at the time of placement in southern Alberta of Japanese evacuated from the protected area in British Columbia. The agreement contained provisions relative to the removal, upon termination of the state of war with Japan, of Japanese temporarily placed in the province, if requested by the province.
2.	None.


PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE-ADMINISTRATIVE AND OTHER COSTS
Mr. McKAY:: 1.	What have been the administrative costs of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act branch of the Department of Agriculture for the years 1945 and 1946?
2.	What have been the total disbursements under the act since its inception?
3.	What amounts were paid out under the act during 1945 and 1946?


Mr. GARDINER:: 
FEDERAL EXPENDITURES IN PROVINCES ON WAR PROJECTS
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	What capital expenditures were made by
the dominion government on war plants during the war years in:	(a) Prince Edward Island;
. (b) Nova Scotia; (c) New Brunswick; (d) Quebec; (e) Ontario; (f) Manitoba; (g) Saskatchewan; (b) Alberta; (i) British Columbia?
2.	What capital expenditures were made by the dominion' government during the war years to develop electric power in: (a) Prince Edward Island; (b) Nova Scotia; (c) New Brunswick;
(d)	Quebec; (e) Ontario; (f) Manitoba; (g) Saskatchewan; (h) Alberta; (i) British Columbia?
3.	What amounts were expended during the war years by the dominion government to assist mine development in: (a) Prince Edward Island;
(b)	Nova Scotia; (c) New Brunswick; (d) Quebec; (e) Ontario; (f) Manitoba; (g) Saskatchewan; (h) Alberta; (i) British Columbia?
4.	What amounts were spent by the dominion
government on (1) army; (2) air force and (3) navy establishments during the war years in:	(a) Prince Edward Island; (b) Nova
Scotia; (c) New Brunswick; (d) Quebec; (e) Ontario; (f) Manitoba; (g) Saskatchewan; (h) Alberta; (i) British Columbia?
5.	What was the total value of war contracts awarded by dominion government departments or crown companies during the war years in: (a) Prince Edward Island; (b) Nova Scotia;
(c)	New Brunswick- (d) Quebec; (e) Ontario; (f) Manitoba: (g) Saskatchewan; (h) Alberta; (i) British Columbia?
6.	What amounts have been spent by Wartime Housing Limited, and how many housing units have been provided in: (a) Prince Edward Island; (b) Nova Scotia; (c) New Brunswick;
(d)	Quebec; (e) Ontario; (f) Manitoba; (g) Saskatchewan; (h) Alberta; (i) British Columbia?


Mr. HOWE:: Mr. Speaker, this question is difficult to answer as it stands. It would take many months and involve a great deal of expense to obtain the information. The reason is that neither the Department of Munitions and- Supply nor the National Defence Department kept books by provinces. We shall be tabling, in response to a motion by the leader of the opposition, a list of all capital expenditures made in the dominion, and we can, of course, easily answer question No. 6, but as I have pointed out previously, many tenders are called by Ottawa for expenditures not made in the province of Ontario, and that is true of other sections of Canada. I suggest that my hon. friend consider reframing his question. Perhaps we might have a word together as to what could be answered and thus satisfy his requirements in part at least.


Mr. HAZEN:: Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the question stand for the present.
Question stands.
83166-16J


INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS-ATTITUDE OF CANADIAN REPRESENTATIVES ON THE FRANCO GOVERNMENT
Mr. DORION:: 1.	Since the end of hostilities, what were the international meetings in which Canadian representatives took part and in the course of which the question of the Franco government was brought up?
2.	What questions concerning the Franco government were brought to the attention of the representatives of the nations?
3.	What was the attitude of the representatives of Canada on each of such questions?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	The question of the Franco government was brought up at the San Francisco conference, at the first part of the first session of the general assembly of the United Nations, at the second part of the first session, at the sessions of the economic and social council, at meetings of a number of its commissions and committees, and at meetings of specialized agencies.
2.	At these meetings proposals were made ranging from a break in diplomatic and economic relations with Spain to condemnations of the Franco government.
3.	The general attitude of the Canadian government was set forth in the statement made by the representative of Canada on December 3, 1946, to the political and security committee of the general assembly. This statement includes the following passages;
We abhor the record and the present policies of Franco dictatorship.
We earnestly hope that the Spanish people may be able to rid themselves of Franco by peaceful means and establish a democratic responsible and enlightened administration.
We are not prepared to support at this time outside intervention in Spain which might impede European recovery, or revive in Spain the horrors and sufferings of civil war.
A new civil war in Spain is not likely to result in the establishment of a moderate and democratic regime. We do not wish to be instrumental in substituting one form of despotic or totalitarian rule for another. We want the Spanish people to enjoy the blessings of freedom-freedom from dictatorships whatever their form, by whatever name they may be called . . .
We feel that the question of the participation of any state which is not a member of the United Nations in any specialized agency should be decided on one basis only-the practical advantages to the peoples of the United Nations of the government of that state being committed to the obligations of membership in that agency. This is the position which the. Canadian government has consistently maintained in the meetings of the economic and social council and of the specialized agencies. In our opinion no useful purpose is served by limiting the scope or weakening the effectiveness of the specialized agencies in order to debar the Franco government from the obligations of membership in them.
Questions

The complete text of the statement will be included in the report of the Canadian delegation to the second part of the first session of the general assembly which will be tabled in the near future. This report will also contain a record of the votes cast by Canada on the eight main proposals placed before the general assembly and the text of the resolution adopted by the general assembly on December 12, 1946. The Journal of the United Nations (No. 50 of December 5, 1946, pp. 245-6) contains a summary of the Canadian statement of December 3, 1946. The text of the general assembly's resolution of December 12, 1946, is given in the Journal (No. 75: supplement A-64, add. 1, pp. 825-6).


REPATRIATION OP JAPANESE
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: Is the expense, including the cost of transportation, of repatriating Japanese from Canada to Japan borne by Canada?


Mr. MITCHELL:: Yes.


IM MIGRATION-POLES
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	How many Poles did the Canadian government bring to Canada during 1946?
2.	How many of these men were placed on farms?
3.	How many of them are at present in sana-toriums, or hospitals, throughout Canada?
4.	How many of these Polish ex-soldiers on being examined in Canada were found to have (a) tuberculosis; (b) other diseases; (c) what were these diseases and how many of each?
5.	How many of them found to have tuberculosis are in an advanced stage of the disease?
6.	Is the dominion government paying for the cost of hospitalization of these Poles? If so, is any of the cost of hospitalization being borne by the provincial governments or municipal governments?
7.	Were these Poles X-rayed for tuberculosis before they were allowed to enter Canada?
8.	If not, were they X-rayed on admittance to Canada?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	2.876.
2.	2,779.
3.	97, of whom 73 are suffering from tuberculosis, 17 from arrested pulmonary tuberculosis, 4 from hernia, 1 from bronchiectasis, 1 from neuro-syphilis and 1 from a fractured right humerus.
4.	97 are requiring hospitalization, for details see answer to question three. 191 others, it was found necessary to hold temporarily for observation or short periods of treatment for miscellaneous complaints. Most of these men were released within a few days.
5.	Of the 73 cases of tuberculosis, 21 will be fit for discharge within three months. The remaining cases, of which a very small per-

centage are considered to be in an advanced stage, will probably require treatment for a longer period.
6.	Arrangements for sharing the cost of hospitalization of these Polish veterans with the United Kingdom are under discussion. The provincial and municipal governments are not being asked to share this expense.
7.	No, because no equipment was available.
8.	Yes.


NATIONAL HARBOURS PORTS-FORM OF PAY CHEQUES
Mr. ISNOR:: Is the same style of pay cheque-form used by all National Harbours Ports? If not, why not?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: Standard form of comptroller of the treasury cheque is used for payroll purposes at all national harbours ports with the exception of Montreal, where, by reason of the number of employees, special comptroller of the treasury cheques in continuous form are used, and at Churchill where employees are paid during the summer season by warrant.


NATIONAL HARBOURS BOARD-EMPLOYMENT AT PREVAILING RATES IN MONTREAL
Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	How many men are employed under the Time-keeper's Department at the port of Montreal ?
2.	How many men were employed by the National Harbours Board, Montreal, on prevailing rates during the months of July and August, 1946, January and February, 1947?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1. 22.
2.	On July 15, 1946, 883; on July 31, 1946, 888; on August 15, 1946, 875; on August 31, 1946, 849; on January 15, 1947, 652; on January 31, 1947, 650.
The figures for February 1947 are not yet available.


NATIONAL HARBOURS BOARD-BLUE CROSS HOSPITAL FUND
Gordon Benjamin Isnor: .1. When did the port of Montreal first make application to have deduction made to Blue Cross hospital fund?
2.	When was permission granted by national harbours board?
3.	When did the port of Halifax first make application to have deduction made to Blue Cross hospital fund?
4.	When was permission granted by national harbours board?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	Port of Montreal made no application to board.

Questions
2.	On June 13, 1946, all port managers and elevator superintendents were given permission.
3.	February 13, 1946.
4.	June 13, 1946.


INSPECTION OF IMPORTED BULBS
Mr. PEARKES:: 1.	Is there any official bulb standard for (a) bulbs grown in Canada; (b) imported bulbs?
2.	Is there any inspection of bulbs entering Canada ?
3.	What steps are taken to prevent diseased bulbs and bulbs infected with mites entering Canada?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	(a) No official bulb standards nor any regulations pertaining to the production of bulbs in Canada have been established. However, in the case of British Columbia particularly, plant pathologists attached to the Dominion Plant Pathological Laboratory at Saanichton, B.C., have devoted a good deal of time during the past few years in assisting bulb growers of that province in the propagation of bulbs, the detection of bulb diseases and pests, and methods of control.
1. (b), 2 and 3. Bulbs imported into Canada are subject to the provisions of Regulation No. 1 (Foreign) Destructive Insect and Pest Act. It is required that a permit to import be obtained in advance from the plant protection division; that all shipments must be accompanied by a certificate of inspection issued in the country of origin covering freedom from injurious insects and plant diseases; that all consignments be routed through one of the established ports of importation, and all importations are subject to reinspection by the plant protection division before final release to the consignee. This requirement, as applying to bulbs, has been in effect since 1928.
In carrying out reinspections in Canada, no specific standards apply with respect to size as importations are dealt with on the basis of freedom from injurious insects and serious plant diseases. In the case of common diseases, tolerances are allowed which vary according to the kinds of bulbs and the diseases involved. In some cases, importations may be released with a minor tolerance; in others, resorting to eliminate the hazard may be authorized and in still others, particular lots of bulbs in the consignment may be refused entry.


BOARD FOR ADMINISTRATION OF CITIZENSHIP
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1. Has a board for the administration of citizenship been set up in the Department of External Affairs? If so, when did it commence and how many employees are there?
2.	What are the names of such employees and what are the annual salaries payable to each?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


WHEAT-PARTICIPATION CERTIFICATES, 1943-44-45 DELIVERIES
Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1.	Has the Canadian Wheat Board disposed of the 1944-45 wheat crop?
2.	If so, when will payments be made on the participation certificates held by the producers for their 1944-45 deliveries of wheat?


James Angus MacKinnon: I should like to combine my answer to this question with the answer to one which was asked orally in the house on January 31 by the member for Battle River (Mr. Fair) which I quote:
May I ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce whether payments of the 1943 participation certificates have yet been concluded, and if so when we may expect commencement of payment of the 1944 certificates?
The Canadian wheat board has disposed of the 1944-45 wheat crop. However, at the present time the Canadian wheat board is engaged in making up and sending out cheques covering the 1943 crop payment. Although this payment was commenced some time ago there is still a large number of certificates being held by producers that are being sent into the board's office for payment daily. Certificates covering approximately one-third of the number originally issued are still to be surrendered for payment by the producers. Many producers' certificates covering the 1940 crop as well as the 1941 and 1942 crops are still outstanding. A further 30,000 cheques will have to be issued covering certificates for these crop years that have not yet been surrendered by the producers.
The delay in sending in these certificates by the producers for the various payments as authorized necessitates the board keeping the various account records open and making continuous payments against the various accounts and greatly complicates the work of the board in making payments. The board is also involved in the adjustment payment of 10 cents per bushel, raising the initial payment covering the 1945 crop deliveries from $1.25 per bushel basis One northern, to $1.35 per bushel. On account of this situation it is difficult for the Canadian wheat board at this time to advise when the 1943 payment and other payments referred to will be sufficiently advanced to allow commencement of the 1944 payment, but it is hoped that this operation can commence some time this coming summer.
Questions


CANADIAN FOOD BOARD-PRICE RECEIVED FOR EGGS SHIPPED TO BRITAIN
Mr. ROSS (Souris):: What price does the Canadian food board receive basis eastern Canadian sea board from the United Kingdom for: (a) large eggs; (a) medium eggs; (a) pullet eggs?


Mr. GARDINER:: The price the special products board receives from the British Ministry of Food for Canadian eggs, delivered sea board, effective February 1, 1947 to August 31, 1947, is: A large, 41 cents; A medium, 39 cents; A pullets, 35 cents.


AIR SERVICES-MANITOBA AND SASKATCHEWAN
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What are the names of all companies, persons or other bodies operating air services in Manitoba and Saskatchewan?
2.	What services, both scheduled and non-scheduled, are operated by each?


Mr. McILRAITH:: Manitoba
1 and 2.
Name of Operator-Type of Service Operated Non-Sched.uled Designated Base
Johannesson Flying Service Ltd., based at Winnipeg, Man. (Stevenson Airport).
Johannesson Flying Service Ltd., based at Channing, Man.
Thomas Lamb, based at The Pas, Man.
Sherritt Gordon Airtransport Ltd., based at Sherridon, Man.
Aircraft Services (Western) Ltd., based at Winnipeg, Man. (Stevenson Airport).
Arrow Airways Limited, based at Sherridon, Man.
Arrow Airways Limited, based at Flin Flon, Man.
Canadian Airways Limited, based at Winnipeg, Man.
Canadian Airways Limited, based at Lac du Bonnet, Man.
The Pas Airways, based at The Pas, Man.
Trans-Canada Air Lines, based at Winnipeg, Man.
Hudson Bay Air Transport Ltd., based at Channing, Man. (Contract).
Scheduled Services
Trans-Canada Air Lines, trans-continental service through Winnipeg, Man.
Northwest Airlines Inc., Winnipeg, Man.- Fargo, N.D., U.S.A.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Flin Flont

Gurney Gold-Elbow Lake-North Star Lake -Herb Lake-Reed Lake, Man.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Flin Flon- Sherridon-Pukatawagan, Man.

Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Flin Flon- Cranberry Portage-Cormorant Lake-The Pas,	Man.-Cumberland	House-Sturgeon
Landing. Sask.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Flin Flon, Man.-Pelican Narrows-Island Falls, Sask.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Flin Flon, Man.-Southend-Halfway	Island, Sask.-
Brochet, Man.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Winnipeg- Lac du Bonnet-Bird Lake-Maskwa-Diana- Wallace Lake-Beresford Lake-Wadhope- Halfway Lake, Man.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Winnipeg- Lac du Bonnet-Bissett, Man.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Winnipeg- Lac du Bonnet-Little Grand Rapids-Berens River, Man.-Deer Lake-Favourable Lake- Northwind Lake-Sandy Lake, Ont.-Island Lake-Gods	Lake-Norway House-Cross
Lake-Oxford House, Knee Lake-Ilford, Man. -Sachigo, Ont.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Winnipeg, Man-Cole-Golden Arm-Red Lake-Madsen-McKenzie Island-Minaki-Kenora, Ont.
Saskatchewan
1 and 2.
Name of Operator-Type of Service Operated Non-scheduled Designated Base
Department of Public Health, Saskatchewan, based at Regina and Prince Albert, Sask.
Grest Motors Flying Service, based at Humboldt, Sask.
M & C Aviation Co. Ltd., based at Prince Albert, Sask.
M & C Aviation Co. Ltd., based at Big River, Sask.
Austin Ingham, based at Yorkton, Sask.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., based at Regina, Sask.
Scheduled services
Trans-Canada Air Lines, Trans-continental service through Regina, Sask.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Regina- Moose Jaw-Saskatoon-Prince Albert-North Battleford, Sask.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Flin Flon- Cranberry Portage-Cormorant Lake-The Pas,	Man.-Cumberland	House-Sturgeon
Landing, Sask.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Flin Flon, Man.-Pelican Narrows-Island Falls, Sask.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Flin Flon, Man.-Southend-Halfway	Island,	Sask.-
Brochet, Man.
Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd., Goldfields- Fond du Lac-Stony Rapids, Sask. served from Edmonton, McMurray-Chipewyan, Alta.
M & C Aviation Company Ltd., Big River- Dore Lake-La Plonge-Beauval-lie a la

Questions
Crosse-Buffalo Narrows-Lac la Loche- Meadow Lake-Pine River-Clear Lake- Buffalo River, Sask.
M & C Aviation Company Ltd., Prince Albert-Montreal Lake-Lac la Ronge-Stanley-Sulphide	Lake-Dog	Lake-Hepden
Lake-Souris River-Rottenstone Lake-Foster Lakes, Sask.


FILM BOARD-INFORMATION SERVICE-REPRESENTATIVE IN MEXICO CITY
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Does the national film board and/or the Canadian information service maintain a representative at the Canadian embassy in Mexico city?
2.	If so, who is the representative; what are his qualifications; what is his salary and what expenses is he allowed?
3.	Does such representative possess the Spanish language?


Mr. McCANN:: 1.	Yes. Mrs. Irene Baird jointly represents the national film board and the Canadian information service.
2.	Mrs. Irene Baird is an experienced author, lecturer and journalist. She has had five years experience as a member of the staff of the national film board. Her duties included work in respect of the distribution of the board's films in Canada, especially for conventions and women's organizations. On September 1, 1944, Mrs. Baird was appointed the board's representative in Washington where she acted as the film officer with the embassy and was responsible for maintaining liaison with diplomatic missions and departments of the United States government in respect of the distribution of Canadian films. On March 17, 1945, Mrs. Baird was transferred from Washington to Mexico city to perform similar functions with respect to the Canadian embassy and to the government of Mexico and in order to negotiate agreements for the distribution of the board's films in Mexico and other countries of Central and South America. Her salary is $330 per month and her living allowance $8.50 a day. In consideration of the work that she does on behalf of the Canadian information service, a proportion of Mrs. Baird's expenses are recovered from that department.
3.	Yes.


GOLD EXPORTS AND PRICES
Mr. CASE:: 1.	Is Canada exporting gold at the present time? If so, to what countries?
2.	What is the price received per ounce for gold exported, Canadian funds?
3.	What is the price per ounce paid mining companies in Canada?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	Yes; to the United States.
2.	Gold shipped by the dominion government to the United States is in the form of mint bars -995 fine or better, bearing the stamp of the Royal Canadian Mint, for which is received $35 per fine ounce less express and insurance charges, assay charges, United States handling charges, etc., resulting in a net of S34.8551 per fine ounce.
3.	Gold shipped to the Royal Canadian Mint by the mines is in the form of rough gold deposits of 20 per cent fine gold or better. After the gold is refined by the mint the government pays to the mines $35 per fine ounce, less the following charges-
(a)	for melting and assaying-one dollar for the first four hundred ounces or part thereof and twenty-five cents for each additional one hundred ounces or part thereof;
Ob) for refining-when the deposit contains not more than 5 per cent base metal, 3 cents the ounce; over 5 per cent but not over 10 per cent base metal, 34 cents the ounce; over 10 per cent but not over 15 per cent base metal, 44 cents the ounce.
On deposits which contain over 20 per cent base metal or which require toughening or other special, treatment in order to obtain concordant assays, a charge not exceeding 10 cents the ounce, to be determined by the cost of treatment;
(c)	handling charge of 20 cents the ounce.


UNRRA-CANADIAN EXPORTS AND IMPORTS
Mr. CASE:: 1.	What was the gross value of exports from Canada for the year .1946 exclusive of the agreement with UNRRA?
2.	What was the gross value of imports into Canada for the year 1946?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	$2,312,215,301. This includes the value of UNRRA shipments but does not include gold. The values of UNRRA shipments are not recorded separately in trade statistics.
2.	$1,926^66,751 (preliminary-subject to revision).


CROWN CORPORATIONS
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	What crown corporations have been established pursuant to the provisions of the Government Companies Operation Act?
2.	Who are the directors and senior officials of each such corporation?
3.	What salary, fee or other emolument is paid to each such director or official?
4.	What is the purpose or object of each such corporation?
5.	What is the capitalization of each such corporation?
Questions

6.	What factories, plants or other similar physical properties are owned by each such corporation and where are they located?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	None. The Government Companies Operation Act does not provide for the establishing of crown corporations.
2,	3, 4, 5 and 6. Answered by 1.


FAMILY ALLOWANCES-ONTARIO
Mr. DANIEL:: 1.	Have delays occurred in the issuance of family allowance cheques in the province of
Ontario?
2.	If so, for what reason?
3.	What steps have been taken to correct any deficiencies in organization responsible for these
delays?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1. No.
2 and 3. Answered by No. 1.


* CABINET COMMITTEES
Mr. DANIEL:: 1.	How many committees of cabinet have been established ?
2.	What is the name of each committee?
3.	Who are the members of each committee?
4.	What are the functions of each committee?
5.	How many times during the calendar year 1946 did each committee meet?
6.	Who acts as secretary or clerk of each committee?
7.	What salary is he paid?
8.	Are secretaries or clerks of each committee instructed to review and pass on all reports made by senior civil servants to the committees?
9.	If so, what are the qualifications of each such secretary or clerk to undertake such work?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: Mr. Speaker, I shall give an oral answer to this question. The question relates to the proceedings and organization of the cabinet. Because of the general principle of collective responsibility of the cabinet it has always been recognized that matters of the kind referred) to are necessarily secret.
In this connection I would refer hon. members to Campion's "An Introduction to the Procedure of the House of Commons, 1929" at pages 129-130, in which it is stated that among questions deemed1 out of order as infringing constitutional propriety are those- -seeking information about matters which are in their nature secret, such as decisions or proceedings of the cabinet (including the committee of imperial defence and other committees of the cabinet).
If further authority is required I might refer the house to an extract from an address on the machinery of government made by the Right Hon. Sir John Anderson in May of last year, from which I quote the following brief extract:

It has been the general practice of governments to refuse to disclose in public the functions or the composition of cabinet committees. This practice, which will no doubt be maintained, rests upon the theory that decisions are those of the government as a whole, and that the internal arrangements which may be made by ministers for discussion among themselves are essentially a domestic matter and no concern of parliament or the public.
This quotation is taken from the "Machinery of Government" by the Right Hon. Sir John Anderson, the "Romanes Lecture", May 14, 1946, pages 17-18.
In replying to a similar inquiry by a member of the United Kingdom House of Commons in November, 1945, as to the names of the chairman and members and as to the functions of the manpower committee of the United Kingdom cabinet, the Right Hon. Herbert Morrison replied as follows:
Mr. Garry Allighan asked the prime minister whether he will state the names of the chairman and members of the manpower committee.
Mr. H. Morrison:	No, sir. The arrangements made by the cabinet for the discharge of the business for which it is collectively responsible are matters for the cabinet itself and are not customarily disclosed.
Mr. Garry Allighan:	Will the lord president
of the council say whether this committee is entirely advisory, or can take decisions in regard to matters?
Mr. Morrison:	To answer that would be a
breach of the doctrine to which I have just referred.
The quotations I have just read may be found in the United Kingdom House of Commons Debates of November 12, 1945, column 1744.
While this aspect of the collective character of the cabinet's responsibility to the House of Commons is quite clear, it is open to the government in its discretion to give such information and make such explanations as may be deemed advisable from time to time. For example, during the war I had occasion to inform the house of special wartime committees of the cabinet which had been set up to deal with the peculiar problems of the war period and to assist ministers in discharging the especially heavy and complicated duties which then fell to their lot.
At present there do exist a number of committees of the cabinet, for the preliminary examination of different questions of policy coming before the government for decision. Some of these are standing committees, such as that which has to do with defence and that dealing with reconstruction problems. Others are of a temporary ad hoc character. The responsibility of the cabinet, however, remains a collective responsibility and organization into committees is merely a matter of procedural convenience. The membership of

Questions
such committees is designated from time to time by the Prime Minister, or the cabinet, according to the subject matter under consideration.
As to the hon. member's inquiries concerning secretaries or clerks provided to cabinet committees, this is a duty normally performed by members of the staff of the privy council office, or occasionally by officials assigned for the purpose from other appropriate departments of government. The remuneration of such officials is determined in the usual way in relation to the duties which they perform in the privy council office or in such other department. The functions of such committee secretaries are secretarial only and in no sense executive. They prepare agenda under the direction of committee chairmen, make such records of committees' proceedings as may be deemed appropriate, and perform such other related tasks as the committees may direct.


John Bracken: May I ask a question with respect to the answer given by the Prime Minister? He has drawn upon a certain precedent with respect to procedure to justify denial of the answers to the questions asked. My question is this. Does the Prime Minister wish that decision to apply to every question asked in that list? Some of us thought that we should not be denied the details of the construction of the executive council and committee connected therewith, but there are several other questions. Does not the Prime Minister wish to deny information in connection with, say, 6 and 7-who acts as secretary or clerk of each committee, and what salary is he paid?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I have stated the position with regard to the collective responsibility of the cabinet and with respect to the proceedings in the cabinet. That is a fundamental principle of cabinet government. There may be questions that hon. members may wish to ask in regard to particular matters. They will be considered in the light of the general statement I have just made. It may be they can be answered without any question arising. If, however, they invalidate the principle that has been laid down, the answer will have to be that the information is not to be disclosed.
My hon. friend asks who acts as secretary or clerk of each committee. I should not think that was information that should be given to the public. The committees of the cabinet are confidential committees. They are there for the purpose of assisting the government in reaching a decision. Many of them are advisory. Who is chosen for one committee or another is a matter for cabinet decision and should be so regarded. My hon. friends asks, what salaries are paid. All questions of salary will be public in the statement which appears with respect to salaries of officials. The house is of course free to ask for information in regard to any salary of any official. That will be given as such and not as part of a disclosure of proceedings of the cabinet.


John Bracken: Can the Prime Minister say whether any of these secretaries are paid salaries? What is the salary of the secretary of the cabinet committee?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am glad my hon. friend has asked that question. He knows that the clerk of the council also acts as secretary of the cabinet. Where the clerk of the council is also secretary of the cabinet, he does receive a larger salary than he would receive as clerk of the council. In regard to all other secretaries of committees, they receive simply the salaries attached to the positions which they hold in the diffeient departments of government concerned. They do not receive extra salaries as secretaries.


OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT-ROYAL COMMISSION
Mr. BOUCHER:: X. What was the total cost of the royal commission on espionage?
2.	What was the total amount paid to each of the commissioners?
3.	What was the total amount paid to each counsel engaged therein?
4.	What was the total amount paid to members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, covering the period during which such members were engaged in the work of the commission or work preparatory thereto.


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	$47,744.74.
2.	Nil.
3.	To date: E. K. Williams, $16,500; G. Fauteux, $16,000.
4.	Nil.


Mr. BOUCHER:: 1.	What are the names of all counsel retained for prosecutions resulting from the royal commission on espionage?
2.	What is the total amount paid to each such counsel for fees, living or travelling expenses or for any other reason, indicating in each case whether accounts in full have been rendered by and paid to each such counsel or whether additional accounts are anticipated?
3.	What is the total expenditure to date on prosecutions resulting from the royal commission on espionage?
4.	Has any compensation been paid to any of the provinces or municipalities for expenditures necessarily made by them in respect of such prosecutions?
Questions


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	J. R. Cartwright, Lee A. Kelley, Byron W. Howard (Ewart, Scott, Kelley, Scott & Howard), J. J. Robinette, Philippe Brais, J. J. Connelly, H. C. Kingstone, W. C. J. Meredith, Oscar Gagnon.
2.	To date: J. R. Cartwright, $16,500; Lee A. Kelley, $8,000; Byron W. Howard (Ewart, Scott & Co.), $8,500; J. J. Robinette, $5,104.77; Philippe Brais, $14,000; J. J. Connelly, $125; H. C. Kingstone, $600.
3.	$56,769.32.
4.	No.


Mr. HENDERSON:: 1.	How many persons were charged with offences as a result of the report of the royal commission on espionage?
2.	Of these, how many persons have been tried?
3.	Of the number tried, how many have been
(a)	convicted; (b) acquitted?
Mr. ILSLEY;
1.	Twenty.
2.	Sixteen.
3.	(a) Convicted, 10; (b) acquitted, 6.
The number of convictions is given as ten,
but I am informed that that does not include the conviction of Doctor Nunn May in England. If that were included the number would be eleven.


RETIRED CIVIL SERVANTS IN RECEIPT OF $20 TO OVER $100 A MONTH
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	How many retired federal civil servants are receiving pensions of amounts within each of the following brackets (a) $20 per month or less; (b) $20.01 to $30 per month; (c) $30.01 to $40 per month; (d) $40.01 to $50 per month; (e) $50.01 to $60 per month; (f) $60.01 to $70 per month; (g) $70.0.1 to $80 per month; (h) $80.01 to $90 per month; (i) $90.01 to $100 per month; (j) over $100 per month?
2.	How many veterans of world war I are included in the figures given in each bracket indicated in question 1?
2.	Name and Rank


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1. (a) 374; (b) 595; (c) 705; (d) 796; (e) 728; (f) 681; (g) 626; (h) 693; (i) 492; (j) 1,953.
2.	No information.


CANADA-UNITED KINGDOAf CHEESE AGREEMENT
Mr. BOUCHER:: 1.	Has the United Kingdom modified in any way in 1946 the terms of the agreement for the import of cheese from Canada?
2.	If so (a) in what month was it modified;
(b)	what are the changes in the agreement?
MR. GARDINER:
1.	No
2.	Answered by No. 1.


ROYAL COMMISSION ON CIVIL SERVICE
George Russell Boucher: What was the total cost of the Gordon Royal Commission on the Civil Service?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 


Mr. BOUCHER:: 1.	Has the government taken action to carry out any of the recommendations of the Gordon Royal Commission on the Civil Service?
2.	What are the names of all officials who have received an increase in salary consequent upon the report of the said commission, indicating in each case the previous salary and increased salary?
3.	Has the government given consideration to the implementation of recommendations of the commission other than those which affect the salaries of deputy heads?
4.	If so, when may an announcement be expected?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	The government has by order in council P.C. 5099 of December 30, 1946, implemented those recommendations of the royal commission on administrative classifications in the public Service that are contained in sections 11 and 12 of Part II and in Appendix C.
Previous Salary	Increased Salary
$10,000	$15,000
10,000	15,000
12,000	17,500
10,000	10,000
10,000	15,000
10,000	12,000
Agriculture
G. S. H. Barton, Deputy Minister	
External Affairs
L. B. Pearson, Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs Finance
W. C. Clark, Deputy Minister	
Insurance
G. D. Finlayson, Superintendent of Insurance	
Justice
F. P. Varcoe, Deputy Minister	
Labour
A. MacNamara, Deputy Minister	

Questions
Name and Rank
Previous
Salary-
Mines and Resources H. L. Keenleyside, Deputy Minister
	 10,000
(Dr. Camsell)
National Defence
W. G. Mills, Deputy Minister (Navy)	
Alex. Ross, Deputy Minister (Army)	
H. F. Gordon, Deputy Minister (Air)	
National Health and Welfare
G. D. W. Cameron, Deputy Minister (Health)	
Geo. Davidson, Deputy Minister (Welfare)	
National Research Council
C. J. Mackenzie, President	 lo.uuu
10,000
10,000
8,000
9.000
9.000
National Revenue
David Sim, Deputy Minister (Customs and Excise).
F. H. Brown, Deputy Minister (Taxation)	
Parliament
A. Beauchesne, Clerk of the House of Commons	
L.	C. Moyer, Clerk of the Senate	
Post Office
W. J. Turnbull, Deputy Postmaster General	
Privy Council	.
A. D. P. Heeney, as Clerk of the Privy Council	
__as Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet.
Public Works
E. P. Murphy, Deputy Minister	
Secretary of State
E. H. Coleman, Under-Secretary of State	
Edmond Cloutier, King's Printer	
Gustave Lanctot, Dominion Archivist	
Trade and Commerce
M.	W. Mackenzie, Deputy Minister	
Transport
C. P. Edwards, Deputy Minister	
Veterans Affairs
Walter S. Woods, Deputy Minister.
(C.
10,000
10,000
Fraser Elliott)
7.500
7.500
9,000
Increased
Salary
12,000
10.000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
17,500
12,000
15,000
9,000
10,000
8.000
8,000
8,000
12,000
10,000
9,000
10,000
8,000
12,000
10,000
15.000
12.000
10,000
10,000
10,000
15.000
12.000 12,000
3 The government is continuing to give consideration to the other recommendations of the royal commission.
4. In due course.


AIR TRANSPORT-PRIVATE LINES-PICKING UP PASSENGERS
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Are there any regulations governing private air lines in connection with picking up passengers (prospectors, trappers, etc.) ?
2.	If so, what are such regulations, or any regulations relating to this matter?
3.	Are there any regulations obligating private air companies to pick up patients at isolated locations in the areas served by said companies in cases where said patients require immediate transportation to a hospital centre?
4.	If so, what are such regulations, or any regulations relating to this matter?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	Yes.
Note: It is assumed that by "private air lines" is meant a privately owned "air carrier" as defined in section 6 of part II of the Aeronautics Act.
2.	Air transport board regulations respecting commercial air services, section 5 (1) (a)- "Every air carrier shall provide and furnish transportation upon reasonable request therefor in accordance rvith the terms and conditions of its licence; shall provide reasonable through service in connection with other air carriers; and shall provide safe and adequate service, equipment, and facilities in connection with such transportation".
3.	No.
4.	Answered by No. 3.
Questions


IMMIGRATION-POLES
Mr. GAGNON:: How many Poles admitted into Canada as immigrants under order in council P.C. 3112 dated July 23, 1946, have asked to return to their country?


Humphrey Mitchell: None.


DOMINION-PROVINCIAL FINANCIAL AGREEMENTS
Mr. GAGNON:: 1.	When agreements respecting fiscal or other relations were concluded between the provinces and the dominion government, from January, 1946, to date, did the dominion government remit to any province part of the debt due by reason of loans or otherwise?
2.	If so, what were such provinces and what was the amount for each?


Robert Wellington Mayhew: The dominion government has not remitted to any province any part of the debt due, by reason of loans or otherwise, to the dominion government by such province. However, it has agreed to recommend to parliament a programme of refunding, with certain adjustments, the treasury bill indebtedness of the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, arising out of loans made by the dominion to the said provinces for relief and other purposes during the depression of the thirties. At a later stage in the session it is proposed to give full details in regard to this proposal and to ask parliament for authority to enter into the necessary agreements with the provinces concerned. The general principles underlying the proposed debt settlements and present calculations of the amounts involved in the case of each province are shown in the correspondence relating to the tax agreements with the provinces, which was tabled as a white paper on January 30, 1947, and distributed to the members-see pages 39 and 40.


SUGAR AND SUGAR BEET INDUSTRY
Mr. HACKETT:: 1.	What was the price or prices paid by Canada, in sterling per long ton, for raw sugars from the 1946 crop of British West Indies f.o.b. the islands?
2.	What increase, if any, in sterling per long ton, is being paid by Canada to the British West Indies over 1946 for their 1947 crop, f.o.b. the islands?
3.	What is the estimated Cuban price of raw sugars for the first quarter of 1947 based on the escalator clauses of the Cuban-American contract?
4.	Has the total allocation of raw sugar for Canada been set for 1947 and, if so, what is the total quantity and what proportion will be drawn from (a) Cuba, and (b) San Domingo?
5.	What is the cost of refined sugar at Montreal, based on the laid-down cost of Cuban raw sugars purchased at the price of the fourth

quarter of 1946 under the Cuban contract, including the levy of 29 cents and the cane refiner's operating margin?
6.	Will the Canadian beet industry be given the lull benefit of their 1947 production of the increase in price for Cuban and San Domingo raw sugars being paid in 1947 over the base price ot the Cuban-American contract of $3,675, plus freight, insurance and exchange?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 
Lionel Chevrier: I should like to answer this question orally. Consideration has been given by way of (a) carrying out borings in the strait and (b) conducting certain engineering surveys, both of which were a necessary preliminary to a detailed study of the different proposals put forward, which study is now being proceeded with.
As regards question No. 2, the policy of the government will be made known in due course.


R.N. OFFICERS AND RATINGS SERVING WITH CANADIAN NAVY
Mr. LENNARD:: How many officers and ratings of the Royal Navy are at present serving with the Royal Canadian Navy (a) ashore; (b) afloat?

Questions


Mr. LAPOINTE:: Officers (a) ashore, 6; (b) afloat, 2.
Ratings (a) ashore, 4; (b) afloat, 40.


AIR TRANSPORT-CAN.4DA-BERMUDA
Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	Has an air agreement been entered into whereby regular passenger service will be carried on between Canada and Bermuda?
2.	If so, what are the points at which passengers will be picked up and landed?
3.	Is Halifax, Nova Scotia, included in the regular schedule?
4.	If not, why not?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	Agreement in principle has been reached
with the governments of the United Kingdom and Bermuda but no formal agreement has yet been signed.	,
2,	3 and 4. The route has not yet been determined.


BUTTER FAT-PRICE TO NEW ZEALAND FARMER
Mr. WHITE (Middlesex East):: What price does the New Zealand farmer receive for butter fat (a) in New Zealand currency; (b) in Canadian currency?


James Angus MacKinnon: Last October the price paid to the farmer for butter fat for creamery butter production was 1/9 New Zealand currency per pound, or 28.35c Canadian.
"farmer's day" as national holiday


John Bracken: Will the government give consideration to the enactment of appropriate legislation, designating June 21 in each year a national holiday to be known as "farmer's day" in accordance with the suggestion of organized associations of agriculture?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The government's policy with regard to further statutory holidays will be announced in due course.


INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Mr. McMASTER:: 1.	Is it the intention of the government to allow the industrial development bank to extend its capital to the $25,000,000 allowed by the industrial development bank board?
2.	Does the government or any responsible minister of the government have knowledge of the loans which are advanced by the bank other than what is shown in the annual report to the minister of finance?
3.	What, if any, control does the government exercise in deciding what enterprises should be assisted by the bank?
4.	Is the rate of interest charged to borrowers a uniform rate, and if so, what is the rate?
Mr. MAYHEW . 1, 2 and 3. The Industrial Development bank is a subsidiary of the Bank of Canada which was established under authority of an act of parliament, chapter
44 of the Statutes of Canada, 1944. The provisions in regard to its capital, its administration and management, its business and powers, and the reports it should make in regard to its operations, are laid down in that act. The bank is being administered in accordance with the provisions of the statute; as the bank i3 not a branch or department of the dominion government, it is not appropriate that the government should intervene in its day-to-day operations but the Minister of Finance maintains liaison with the bank through the Deputy Minister of Finance who is a member of the board of directors and of the executive committee of the bank. Annual reports on the bank's operations in such form as the minister prescribes and in addition a report by the auditors appointed by the government again in such form and scope as may be prescribed by the minister must also be submitted to the minister and through him to parliament.
4.	In regard to interest rates, it is understood that while the bank normally charges 5 per cent interest, variations may be made in these terms if. in the view' of the management and directors of the bank, such variations are warranted by the particular conditions surrounding the credit.


Mr. CLEAVER:: 1.	How many industries have been assisted by loans from the Industrial bank?
2.	What is the total amount of loans made by the Industrial bank as of January 1, 1947?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	The Industrial Development bank is not a branch of government but a subsidiary of the bank of Canada.
The annual report of the Industrial Development bank for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1946, tabled in the House of Commons on January 31, 1947, shows that as at that date there were 205 authorized credits outstanding. The report also shows that loans had been made to or investments made in the following industrial enterprises: Foods and beverages; primary textiles; finished textile products; pulp and paper products; primary lumber products; furniture and woodenware; agricultural and industrial machinery; automotive equipment; miscellaneous metal products; builders' supplies; ceramics, glass and plastic products; chemical products; refrigeration.
2.	The monthly report of the Industrial Development bank at December 31, 1946, shows loans and investments (excluding Dominion government securities) at $6,439,774.58.
Questions


WHEAT-SUMMER-FALLOWING SUBSIDY
Mr. FULTON:: 1.	Is any subsidy being paid for summerfallowing wheat lands?
2.	Is there any subsidy being paid on the growing of coarse grains?
3.	If so, what amounts are being paid per acre or per bushel, and in what areas does this policy apply?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	No.
2.	No.
3.	Answered by Nos. 1 and 2.



HOUSING-MIDDLESEX COUNTY, ONT.-VETERANS' LAND ACT

Mr. WHITE (Middlesex East):: 1.	What is the total cost to date of all drainage installations for Veterans' Land Act homes in Westminster township, county of Middlesex?
2.	How many Veterans' Land Act homes have been sold in that township? ,


Mr. MACKENZIE:: 1.	$16,732.27 has been expended for the drainage of 114 lots.
2.	71 houses have been constructed or are under construction; 47 have been completed; 11 have been allocated and occupied. Twelve more will be ready for occupancy by end of present month if water installations completed. No sales agreement has been signed.



PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE-CABINET SECRETARIAT

Mr. HODGSON:: L Is there a group of employees in the privy council office known as the cabinet secretariat?
2.	If so, what are the names of such persons?
3.	What, in detail, are the duties of each such person?
4.	W'hat are the qualifications of each such person to perforin such duties and what experience has each had in government service and outside government service?
5.	When was each such person first employed in his present position?
6.	What salary is each such person paid?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	There is no formal or official body known as the cabinet secretariat. Employees of the privy council office perform duties of a secretarial character in connection with committees of the cabinet and committees of officials established by the cabinet.
2.	The following employees of the privy council office perform duties of a secretarial character: A. D. P. Heeney, Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet,

and A. M. Hill, Paul Pelletier, J. R. Baldwin, E. W. T. Gill, W. E. D. Halliday, Mark McClung.
3.	A. D. P. Heeney, Clerk of the Privy Council, in his capacity of secretary to the cabinet, performs the following duties under the direction of the Prime Minister:
(a)	the preparation for the approval of the Prime Minister of such agenda of cabinet meetings, as may be required;
(b)	the keeping of such notes of cabinet meetings and conclusions thereof, as may be required ;
(c)	the preparation and submission to members of the cabinet, in advance, of such information and material as may be necessary for its deliberations;
(d)	the communication to ministers, departments and others concerned, of decisions of the cabinet;
(e)	the maintenance of liaison between the cabinet and committees thereof; and
(f)	such other duties as may from time to time be assigned to him by the governor in council.
(Order in council of appointment, P.C. 1121, March 25, 1940).
The other employees of the,privy council office mentioned in paragraph 2 hereof perform similar functions in relation to the business of various committees of the cabinet and committees of officials appointed by the cabinet as directed by the Prime Minister and other ministers concerned.
4.	A. D. P. Heeney, Clerk of the Privy Council and. Secretary to the Cabinet; academic duties, McGill University; practice of law, Montreal, 1929-38; Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister, 1938-40; Secretary to the War Committee of the Cabinet, 1940-45; present position 1940 to the present.
A. M. Hill, Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council; Privy Council Office (excluding war service) 1915 to the present.
Paul Pelletier; Privy Council Office (excluding war service) 1936 to the present.
J. R. Baldwin; academic work; National Secretary Canadian Institute of International Affairs; Secretary, Canada-United States Joint Economic Committees; Privy Council Office, 1942 to the present.
E. W. T. Gill ; engineering and business prior to 1939; Staff experience Canadian army; Secretary, Chiefs of Staff Committee; Privy Council Office, 1946 to the present.
W. E. D. Halliday; Department of Mines and Resources 1926; Privy Council Office, 1941 to the present.

Questions
Mark McClung, Naval Staff, Washington, 1943-44; Privy Council Office, 1945 to the present.
5.	Answered by 4.
6.	A. D. P. Heeney, $15,000; A. M. Hill, $4,800; Paul Pelletier, $3,000; J. R. Baldwin, $7,000; E. W. T. Gill, $6,000; W. E. D. Halli-day, $3,900; Mark McClung, $3,600.



PAYMENTS TO LIEUTENANT-GOVERNORS

Mr. CARDIFF:: 1.	Since September 1, 1939, were any payments made to Lieutenant-Governors of any of the Provinces beyond those provided for by Statute?
2.	If so, to whom?
3.	What was the total amount paid in each year to any such person?
4.	For what reasons were such payments made, and upon whose request and upon whose recommendation ?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: 1.	Yes.
2.	Lieutenant-Governor of Nova Scotia; Lieutenant-Governor of Quebec.
3.	Lieutenant-Governor of Nova Scotia, $4,000 per year from 1941-42 to 1945-46 inclusive. Lieutenant-Governor of Quebec, $4,000 per year from 1943-44 to 1945-46 inclusive.
4.	Reason payment made: To cover the cost of extraordinary expenses incurred by these lieutenant-governors d*ue to war conditions. Payments recommended: By the Secretary of State at the request of the Department of Finance.



DEPUTY MINISTERS

Mr. CARDIFF:: 1.	Have any Deputy Ministers been appointed since September 1, 1946, at a rate of salary higher than that recommended for such position by the Gordon Royal Commission?
2.	If so, what are the names of such Deputy Ministers?
3.	What was the salary recommended and what is the salary being paid to each such Deputy Minister?
4.	Who was the predecessor in office of each such Deputy Minister, what was his length of service as Deputy Minister, or equivalent rank, and in the Department, and what salary was he being paid upon his retirement?
5.	What was the reason for the appointments at a salary higher than recommended by the Royal Commission?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1. No.
Note-The report (paragraph 11) contains a special reference to the position of the Deputy Minister (Taxation), Department of National Revenue (and to that of the Deputy
Minister of Mines and Resources) indicating that both or either of these positions "might well be placed in the $15,000 class instead of the S12,000 class." The present Deputy Minister of National Revenue (Taxation) was appointed at a salary of $15,000 per annum.
The report also recommends (paragraph 12) "that a special category carrying a salary of $17,500 be created in recognition of highly meritorious services or of particularly onerous responsibilities." The commissioners recommended that the present Deputy Minister of Finance and the present President of the National Research Council be placed in this special category "together with such other officials as (might) be designated by the government from time to time." The government have acted upon this recommendation.
2.	Answered	by	No.	1.3.	Answered	by	No.	1.4.	Answered	by	No.	1.5.	Answered	by	No.	1.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

Mr. HATFIELD:: On January 31, 1947, how many persons, by provinces, were in receipt of unemployment insurance benefits?


Humphrey Mitchell: Figures for January, 1947, are not yet available. Live registers at December 31, 1946, show the following as in receipt of unemployment insurance benefit, by Provinces:
Prince Edward Island	 521
Nova Scotia	 5,495
New Brunswick	 2,347
Quebec	 26.738
Ontario	 25,767
Manitoba	 5,156
Saskatchewan	 3,200
Alberta	 3.668
British Columbia	 11,482
84,374



INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEES

Mr. MENARY:: 1.	How many interdepartmental committees are now in existence?
2.	What are the names of such committees?
3.	What is the function, in detail, of each such committee?
4.	Who are the members of each such committee?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Interdepartmental committees are established by the government from time to time as a means of facilitating the dispatch of
Questions

public business and, in particular, to enable the cabinet more readily to reach decisions upon the basis of reports and advice submitted by such bodies.
Certain interdepartmental committees are established by order in council, others by informal decision of the cabinet, others again by the Prime Minister or other ministers.
While certain of these interdepartmental committees are of a "standing" character, the majority are created on an ad hoc basis for the examination of some particular question. Committees of the latter type normally go out of existence when their reports are submitted.
The number of such committees varies from day to day according to the government's requirements. At the moment the more important standing interdepartmental committees number some twenty.
2.	Thre are standing interdepartmental committees on the following subjects at present: Awards Coordination, Air Surveys, Atomic Energy, Crown Assets Allocation, Enemy Patents, External Information, External Trade, Food Requirements, Immigration, Merchant Shipping, Meteorology, Professionally Trained Persons, Public Records, Rehabilitation and Reestablishment, Reparations, Security, Shortwave Broadcasting, Statutory Rules and Regulations, Telecommunications, and University Training (ex-servicemen).
3.	The functions of these committees are as set out in paragraph (1) above, in relation to the subjects set out in paragraph (2) above.
4.	These interdepartmental committees are composed of officials from the departments and agencies of government having administrative or other responsibilities relating to the subjects referred to. The actual members are named by the minister responsible in each case and vary from time to time according to the phases of these subjects under consideration.



GOVERNMENT FILM COMMISSIONER

Mr. HODGSON:: 1.	What is the name of the government film commissioner?
2.	When was he appointed and by what authority?
3.	What previous positions has he held in the
government service?
4.	\\ hat experience has he had and what positions has he held outside government service?
5.	What is his salary?
6.	What was the total amount received by
him in the calendar years 1945 and 1946 for: (a) salary:	(b) other remuneration; (c)
travelling expenses; (d) living or other expenses in Ottawa, including taxis?


Mr. McCANN:: 1.	Ross McLean.
2.	January 9, 1947, by order in council P.C. 124 in accordance with section 8 of the National Film Act 1939.
3.	Two and one-half years as private secretary to the Canadian High Commissioner in the United Kingdom; seven years on the staff of the National Film Board-18 months as Assistant Government Film Commissioner; 20 months as Deputy Commissioner and 15 months as Acting Commissioner.
4.	Nine years of university studies at Universities of Manitoba (B.A. 1926; M.A. 1927) and Oxford (B.A., 1929, B.Litt., 1931); 18 months with Bank of Toronto and Canadian Bank of Commerce; two seasons as tour manager, Franco-Belgique Tours, Paris, 193031; editor with Unemployment Relief Commission of Northern Illinois, Chicago, 1932; National Secretary. Association of Canadian Clubs, 1932-1935; Ottawa Correspondent Saturday Night, Canadian Forum, etc., 193435, and contributor to other publications; Editor, National Liberal Federation, 1935; member of Canadian Secretariat, Institute of Pacific Relations, Banff, 1933, and unofficial British Commonwealth Relations Conference, Toronto, 1933; member of Canadian Secretariat, League of Nations Assemblies, Geneva, June, 1936, and September, 1937; Observer, Conference of International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, Havana, Cuba, November, 1941; Director of Film and Photo Information Services, Conference of Allied Leaders, Quebec, September, 1943; Director of Motion Picture Operations, Photographic Section, International Secretariat, United Nations Preparatory Conference, San Francisco, May 1945.
5.	$8,000.00.
6.	(a) 1945: $4,500.00; 1946: $4,500.00.
(b)	1945: $999.96; 1946: $1,549.98.
(c)	1945: $1,334.04; 1946: $466.14.
(d)	1945 :nil; 1946: nil.



CARLF.TON COUNTY, N.B., POST OFFICES

Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	Have the post offices at Argyle, Foreston, Beaufort and Biggar Ridge in Carleton County, N.B., been closed?
2.	If so, has a rural route survey been made?
3.	Wben will the service be in operation?
4.	If not, what provision is being made to get mail to the people in this district?


Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):: 1.	Foreston, Beaufort and Biggar Ridge post offices have been closed as no one would accept the position of postmaster. Argyle post office is still in operation.

Questions
2.	Yes.
3.	No action taken-conditions not favourable.
4.	Until such time as someone is willing to take charge of a post office at a central point in the district at the authorized remuneration postal patrons should use neighbouring post offices.



CENTREVILLE, N.B., RURAL MAIL SERVICE

Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	Were tenders called for the carrying of the mail rural route No. 2, Centreville, N.B.?
2.	If so, what was the lowest tender?


Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):: 1.	Yes.
2.	The lowest competent tenderer was Abram Robert Hawkins to whom the contract was awarded at the rate of $900 per annum.



CUSTOMS PORTS WITH REVENUE IN EXCESS OF


Mr. PROBE:: 1.	What Canadian ports of entry had total revenues from import duties, excise taxes and excise duties of $1,000,000 or more during the calendar year 1946?
2.	How many customs house brokers were licensed at each of these ports?
3.	Who is the customs house broker for Regina port of entry?
4.	What general qualifications are required of an applicant for licence as customs house broker ?


Mr. McCANN:: 1.	The information for the calendar year 1946 is no-t available. The ports at which revenues from import duties, excise taxes and excise duties amounted to $1,000,000 or more during the fiscal year ended March 31, 1946, are as follows:
Nova Scotia: Halifax, Sydney.
New Brunswick: Fredericton, Moncton, Saint John.
Quebec: Drummondville, Granby, Hull, La-colle, Montreal, Quebec. Rock Island, Sherbrooke, Sorel, St. Hyacinthe, St. Johns, Three Rivers.
Ontario: Amherstburg, Belleville, Bowman-ville. Brantford, Chatham. Cornwall, Fort Erie, Fort William, Galt, Guelph, Hamilton, Kingston, Kitchener. London, Niagara Falls, North Bay, Oshawa, Ottawa, Peterborough, Prescott, Sarnia, Sault Ste Marie, Stratford, Sudbury, St. Catharines, Toronto. Walkerville, Welland, West Toronto. Windsor.
Manitoba: Winnipeg.
Saskatchewan: Regina, Saskatoon.
Alberta: Calgary, Edmonton, Lethbridge.
British Columbia: New Westminster, Pacific Highway, Vancouver, Victoria.
Name of Port	No. of Customs House Brokers Licensed
Halifax, N.S			 7
Sydney, N.S			 0
Fredericton, N.B			 1
Moncton, N.B			 1
Saint John, N.B			 5
Drummondville, Que. ..		 1
Granby, Que			 2
Hull, Que 			 0
Lacolle, Que			 3
Montreal, Que			 42
Quebec, Que			 3
Rock Island, Que			 1
Sherbrooke, Que			 1
Sorel. Que			 0
St. Hyacinthe, Que			 1
St. Johns, Que			 2
Three Rivers, Que			 1
Amherstburg, Ont			 1
Belleville, Ont			 1
Bowmanville, Ont			 0
Brantford, Ont			 1
Chatham, Ont			 1
Cornwall, Ont			 1
Fort Erie, Ont			 8
Fort William, Ont			 2
Galt, Ont			 5
Guelph, Ont			 2
Hamilton, Ont			 4
Kingston, Ont			 1
Kitchener, Ont			 1
London, Ont			 2
Niagara Falls, Ont			 3
North Bay, Ont			 1
Oshawa, Ont			 2
Ottawa, Ont			 4
Peterborough, Ont			 1
Prescott, Ont			 1
Sarnia, Ont			 2
Sault Ste. Marie, Ont.		 1
Stratford, Ont			 2
Sudbury, Ont			 2
St. Catharines, Ont. ..		 2
Toronto, Ont			 39
Walkerville, Ont			 7
Welland, Ont			 2
West Toronto, Ont. ...		 14
Windsor, Ont			 9
Winnipeg, Man			 9
Regina, Sask			 2
Saskatoon, Sask			 3
Calgary, Alta			 4
Edmonton, Alta			 3
Lethbridge. Alta			 1
New Westminster, B.C.		 2
Pacific Highway, B.C.		 2
Vancouver, B.C			 10
Victoria, B.C			 3
1. Fisher Bros., F. C. Love.	
Questions

4.	Following are qualifications requisite in the applicant before a licence to transact business as a broker is granted,-
The applicant including each partner or member of a firm, and the majority of the directors of a corporation, shall,-
Be a British subject resident in Canada; Be of the lawful age of twenty-one years; Be of good character and in good repute; Have an adequate education and such knowledge of the laws and regulations relating to customs matters, and the procedure in transacting business at customs, as will enable such applicant to render to clients proper and efficient service, or in the case of directors of a corporation, to exercise control and responsible supervision over the business;
Have financial credits adequate to protect the interests of the crown and of clients, and commensurate with the volume of business expected;
Not have been an employee of the Customs or Excise Divisions of the Department within two years prior to the date of the application for licence, except with the consent of the Minister;
Undertake to establish and maintain a suitable Customs brokerage office.



HOSPITALS FOR THE INSANE

Mr. ASHBY:: How many people in Canada have been committed to insane asylums in the years 1930, 1935, 1940, 1945?
Mr. MacIvINNON: Number of persons committed to insane asylums: 1930, 9,321; 1935, 10,869; 1940, 9,823; 1945, 12,268.



LOANS OR CREDITS TO OTHER COUNTRIES

Mr. WINTERS:: 1.	What amounts have been authorized as loans or credits to each country under the authority of the Exports Credits Insurance Act and the United Kingdom Financial Agreement Act of 1946?
2.	How much of each loan and/or credit has been expended or contracted for to date in Canada?
3.	What amount of each loan and/or credit has been expended or contracted for in each province of Canada?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.
Country	Amount authorized
United Kingdom	 $1,250,000,000
BelSium	 100.000.000
Chma	 60,000,000
Czechoslovakia	 19,000.000
France	 242,500900
Netherlands	 125.000.000
Netherlands Indies	 15.000,000
Nor'W	 30,000,000
Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics	 3,000,000

2.	Amount	Amount
	advanced	encumbered
	to	to
Country	Jan. 31,1947	Jan. 31,1947United Kingdom.	$540,000,000 00	SBelgium 	51,000,000 00	China 	17,634,646 00	4,739,519 21Czechoslovakia .	3,875,448 00	1,407.899 83France 	145,400,000 00	Netherlands 	66,973,321 84	Netherlands	Indies 	5,400.000 00	N orway 	16,406,000 00	Union of Soviet	Socialist	Republics ....	2,866,098 69	
3. Records of orders placed by these governments are not maintained on a geographical basis.



PENITENTIARIES-SENTENCES OF TWO YEARS OR MORE

Mr. ASHBY:: 1.	How many people were sentenced in Canada to jail terms of two years or less in each of the years 1930, 1935. 1940, 1945?
2.	How many people were sentenced to penitentiary terms of two years or more in each of the years 1930, 1935, 1940, 1945?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	Criminal statistics are based on convictions, not persons. Number of sentences (not persons) to jails for two years less one day or a shorter period: 1930, 21,597; 1935, 21,767; 1940, 25,978; 1945, 24,747.
2.	Number of sentences (not persons) to penitentiary for two years or more: 1930, 3,013; 1935, 2,656; 1940, 3,610; 1945, 2,950.



LABOUR CONDITIONS-TRANSFER OF WORKMEN FROM NOVA SCOTIA TO CENTRAL CANADA

Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	Has the government taken any steps to bring about the transfer of workmen from Nova Scotia to Central Canada?
2.	If so, from what localities is it proposed to transfer them and in what numbers?
3.	What wages will such workmen be paid and who pays their transportation expenses?
4.	To what industries or mines are these men being assigned?
5.	Have provisions been made for the return of these workmen to Nova Scotia?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	Yes.
2.	From any part of Nova Scotia, with a maximum of 1,000 men.
3.	Wages by gold mines range from 65 cents to 85 cents per hour for beginners; base metal mines-83 cents per hour for beginners; hydro electric power-60 cents to 70 cents per hour

Questions
according to location. The unemployment insurance commission pays transportation expenses.
4.	To gold and base metal mines and to Ontario Hydro Electric development work.
5.	No.



WHEAT-SHIPMENTS TO UNITED KINGDOM- DEMURRAGE

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	During the period beginning July 1, 1946 and to date have the departures of any ships whose cargo was in whole or in part to be wheat destined for (a) The United Kingdom or tb) elsewhere, been held up by reason of delays m the arrival of wheat shipments from terminals or from other storage?
2.	If so, (a) what was the total amount of such demurrage incurred during said period by reason of such delays; (b) what are the names of each of the said ships and the amounts charged for demurrage on each of
them.
3.	How much has been charged to or paid by the Canadian Wheat Board in respect of such demurrage on said ships?
4.	Will such demurrage be chargeable as an expense to (a) The Western Producers Participation Pool due in 1950, or (b) generally to expenses of operation of the Board?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	Yes.
2.	No information available because any demurrage would not be for wheat board account.
3.	Answered by No. 2.
4.	Answered by No. 2.
2.	Bennett & White Calgary, Limited.
3 W. C. Wells Construction Co. Ltd., $2,081,700, Bird Construction Co. Ltd., $2,182,500; Western Construction & Lumber Co. Ltd., $2,192,900; Tomlinson Bros. Ltd., $2,333,000; the Tomlinson Construction Co. Ltd., $2,993,600; Standard Gravel & Surfacing Co. Ltd., $3,090,500; Bennett & White Construction Co. Ltd., $3,318,885.
4.	W. C. Wells. Construction Co. Ltd.



VETERANS AT CANADIAN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES

[Stage Direction]
Mr. BRADSHAW;
1.	How many disabled veterans are presently studying at Canadian universities and colleges?
2.	How many of these veterans are in receipt of pension?
3.	Has any action been taken to reduce the amount of the educational allowance made to such veterans by the amount of pension received ?
4.	If so, for what reason?
Mr. MACKENZIE;
1.	This information is not available to the department.
2.	1,188.
3.	No; but educational allowance is reduced by a proportion of any pension in payment.
4.	The act provides that educational allowance may be reduced' because of income from other sources and a portion of the pension is regarded as such income.	[DOT]

Mr. WEBB:: Who are the members of the Board of Trustees of the National Gallery of Canada?


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: H. S. Southam; Right Hon. Vincent Massey; Jean Chauvin.



ST. MARY RIVER IRRIGATION PROJECT

Mr. MENARY:: 1.	What were the names of the firms who submitted tenders for the construction of the diversion and irrigation tunnels in the St. Mary river irrigation project and what were the costs of each individual tender submitted?
2.	To which firm was the contract given for the construction of the two tunnels?
3.	What were the names of the firms who submitted tenders for the construction of the St. Mary dam, and what were the costs of each individual tender submitted?
4.	To which firm was the contract given for the construction of the dam?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	Bennett & White Calgary, Limited, $798,916; Assiniboia Engineering Company Limited, $1,140,521.70; Northern Construction Companv and J. W. Stewart., Ltd., $1,329,020.


Frank Exton Lennard: In view of the substantial increases in salary granted to some senior civil servants, are private business concerns now allowed to grant like increases without being penalized under the provisions of the Excess Profits Tax Act?


Mr. McCANN:: The wartime salaries order has been repealed, effective December 1st, 1946. Private business concerns may now grant increases to their employees in respect of periods subsequent to the 30th November, 1946, without the necessity of obtaining any approval such as was provided for under the wartime salaries order, but the provisions of The Excess Profits Tax Act still apply under which any expense which the Minister in his discretion may determine to be in excess of what is reasonable and normal for the business carried on by the taxpayer may still be disallowed as a deduction.



INDIANS AND ESKIMOS-RIGHTS OF CITIZENSHIP

Mr. CHURCH:: What has been done since last session of Parliament to grant Indians and Eskimos in Canada full rights of citizenship, including a vote at federal elections?
Questions


Mr. GLEN:: Nothing. The subject will probably be considered by the special joint committee of the Senate and House of Commons to be reappointed to examine and consider the Indian Act.



ALUMINUM COMPANY OP CANADA

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What use has been made and what use is now being made by the Aluminum Company of Canada or by others of all aluminum producing facilities in Canada and British Guiana on which the company was allowed during the war one hundred per cent depreciation by the government?
2.	What use has been made and what use is *'>w being made by the Aluminum Company of Canada or by others of the Aluminum Company s power facilities at Shipshaw on which the company was allowed during the war sixty per cent depreciation by the government?
3.	What proportion of the capacity of each of these aluminum producing and power facilities has been and is being used for peace time production?
4.	What is the price per pound for aluminum now being produced by the Aluminum Company of Canada?


George James McIlraith: As will be seen from an examination of this question, the information being sought does not relate to public affairs and is not in possession of the department.


Mr. KNOWLES:: It ought to be.


James Horace King: Answered.



VETERANS AFFAIRS-VOCATIONAL TRAINING COURSES

Mr. FULTON:: 1.	What is the total number of veterans who have commenced vocational training courses under the Department of Veterans Affairs to date?
2.	Of this number, how many have discontinued their courses before completion (a) voluntarily; (b) at the direction of the department ?
3.	Of those who have completed their courses, how many have found employment in the work tor which they trained?


Mr. MACKENZIE:: Return at December 31, 1946:
1.	Total of individuals: 64.528; Total cases including reinstatements: 74,656.
2.	(a)	14,911;	(b)	1,500 (approximate
figures.)
3.	Of 26,347 who have completed their courses, district surveys indicate that approximately 60 per cent are employed in the type of occupation for which they were trained and approximately 80 per cent are employed in occupations where training made a substantial contribution to their efficiency.



JAPANESE IN CANADA

Mr. STIRLING:: Have any steps been taken to implement the statement of the Prime Minister on August 4. 1944, relative to Japanese:-"they should not be allowed once more to concentrate in British Columbia" (Hansard p. 5916) ?


Humphrey Mitchell: The placement policy followed has been to encourage and assist the movement of persons of Japanese origin from British Columbia to other' areas across Canada, with a view to their resettlement in'such areas on a self-supporting basis.



UNITED KINGDOM FINANCIAL AGREEMENT, 1946

Mr. FLEMING:: What are the amounts advanced by Canada by way of loan or credit to the United Kingdom under the United Kingdom Financial Agreement, 1946, by months to date?


Robert Wellington Mayhew: May, 1946 			 $ 40,000,000
June 		
July 		
August 		
September 			 40,000,000
October 		
November 			 80.000,000
December 		
January, 1947			 Nil



$540,000,000 WAGE INCREASES FOR WOMEN CLEANERS

Stanley Howard Knowles: Is consideration being given to wage increases for women cleaners in federal public buildings?


Humphrey Mitchell: The wage rates of prevailing rate employees in the service of the government of Canada-that is employees who are exempt from the provisions of the Civil Service Act and engaged at hourly prevailing rates of pay-are recommended by my Department.
My understanding is that the rates of pay of women cleaners in the federal buildings at Ottawa have been increased during the war and subsequently by the cost of living bonus. This cost of living bonus was recently consolidated with the rate of pay of these employees.
The Department of Labour has undertaken a survey to ascertain whether on the basis of prevailing rates of pay this particular group of employees is entitled to an increase in remuneration.

Orders for Returns



SUEZ CANAL AND CAIRO MILITARY BASE

Thomas Langton Church: Has the government been consulted or advised by either the government of Great Britain or any of the dominions on the abandonment of the Suez canal and Cairo military base by Great Britain?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	Commonwealth governments keep each other informed on matters of foreign policy in accordance with the practice described by Mr. Attlee, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, in the House of Commons in London, on May 8, 1946, as follows.
It is our practice and our duty as members of the British commonwealth, to keep other members of the commonwealth fully and continuously informed of all matters which we are called upon to decide, but which may affect commonwealth interests. The object is to give them an opportunity of expressing their views in confidence, if they so desire. These views are taken fully into account, but the decision must be ours, and the other governments are not asked, and would not wish, to share the responsibility for it. Dominion governments follow the same practice.
This practice has been followed with respect to United Kingdom policy in Egypt.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. COLD WELL:: 1.	How many copies of the report of the royal commission to investigate the facts relating to the giving of confidential information to the agents of a foreign power were printed?
2.	How many copies have been distributed?
3.	How many copies remain in the possession of the king's printer, or of any government departments?


PUBLIC SERVICE-EMPLOYEES PERMANENT, TEMPORARY AND ON LOAN FROM ONE DEPARTMENT TO ANOTHER
Mr. BOUCHER:: 1.	As of January 1, 1947, how many persons were employed by the dominion government on a temporary basis in the city of Ottawa?
2.	How many such persons employed by the government had, or have now, permanent status under the Civil Service Act?
3.	How many civil servants holding permanent status under the Civil Service Act, on loan from one department to another have not returned to the department they were employed in at the outbreak of hostilities in 1939?


CROWN COMPANIES-EMPLOYEES PERMANENT, TEMPORARY AND ON LOAN FROM PRIVATE INDUSTRY
Mr. BOUCHER:: 1.	How many persons are employed in Ottawa by crown companies as officers and as employees?
2.	How many of these in each case have permanent status under the Civil Service Act?
3.	How many are on loan from private industry and how many of these are drawing salaries in excess of $3,000?



CROWN COMPANIES-EMPLOYEES-SUPERANNUATION AND BENEFITS UNDER CIVIL SERVICE ACT

Mr. BOUCHER:: 1.	How many employees and how many officers of crown companies have been given superannuation rights similar to those given civil servants under the Civil Service Act or Civil Service Superannuation Act?
2.	Do persons employed by crown companies having previously been permanent civil servants under the Civil Service Act retain their status, rights and benefits under the Civil Service Act while in the employment of the crown companies?



CIVIL SERVANTS-EMPLOYEES ON LOAN FROM ONE DEPARTMENT TO ANOTHER

George Russell Boucher: How many civil servants in Ottawa loaned from one department of government to another or to a crown company during the past six years have not returned to their former departments due to their former positions having been abolished or their duties having been transferred to another department or agency of government?



PUBLIC SERVICE-TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES- SALARIES AND WAGES

Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: 1.	What is the total number of employees of the government of Canada, including employees of boards, commissions and corporations appointed by the federal authority as of the thirty-first of December, 1946?
2.	What is the total amount of salaries, wages and allowances paid to such employees in the month of December, 1946?



PUBLIC SERVICE-GOVERNMENT OWNED OR CONTROLLED INDUSTRIES

Mr. FRASER:: 1.	How many people were in the employ of the dominion government on (a) September 1, 1946; (b) January 1, 1947?
2.	On each date, how many of these were permanent employees?
3.	On each date, how many of these were employees were (a) male; (b) female?
4.	On each date, how many of the employees were temporary?
5.	On each date, how many of the temporary employees were (a) male; (b) female?
6.	On each date, how many (a) permanent;
(b)	temporary employees were employed in Ottawa ?
7.	On each date, how many of those employed in Ottawa were (a) permanent; (i) men, (ii) women; (b) temporary (i) men, (ii) women?
8.	On each date, how many people were employed in dominion owned or controlled industries?
9.	On each date, what were the names of each company and what number of people were employed by each of them, showing (a) number of males; (b) number of females?
Orders jor Returns

10.	Are the employees of the dominion-owned or controlled industries on the civil service list?
11.	If not, what are the names of companies whose employees are not on the civil service list?



CONTRACTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SHIPS

Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	Has the government placed any contracts with ship 'building concerns in Canada this year for the construction of vessels to be operated by the government or any of its departments?
2.	If so, what companies have received such contracts, what is the size of ships being built and what will they he used for?
3.	Has the government taken any action toward calling for tenders for the building of other ships this year?
4.	If so, for what size and for what use?
5.	Is the government replacing this year any obsolete vessels owned by it?
6.	If so, what obsolete vessels will be replaced and where are they registered?



HOUSING-WINNIPEG AND DISTRICT

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What are the names of contractors and sub-contractors engaged at any time in the building of wartime houses and V.L.A. houses in Winnipeg and district?
.2. What was the total amount paid per dwelling unit?
3.	In the case of houses that have been sold, what was the total price per unit?
4.	What are the names of contractors and sub-contractors now engaged in maintenance of these dwelling units?
5.	What is the cost per unit of repair and maintenance ?
6.	What is the nature of the repair and maintenance work being done?



CANNED MILK

Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	What is the estimated supply of canned milk in Canada?
2.	What amount of canned milk is being exported by Canada and to what countries?
3.	What amount of canned milk is being released for domestic consumption?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: Return tabled.



PUBLIC SERVICE-EMPLOYEES AT DAWSON, YUKON TERRITORY

Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: 1.	What is the name of each person employed at Dawson in Yukon Territory by each department of the government of Canada?
2.	In what capacity is each employed and at *what remuneration?
^ 3. When did the employment at Dawson, Yukon, of each such employee commence?
4.	Which of such employees are veterans of Canada's armed forces?
rMr. Fraser.]



PRAIRIE FARM REHABILITATION-COMMUNITY PASTURES

Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1.	How many community pastures have been constructed under, the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act in each year in each of the prairie provinces?
2.	What was the average size in acres each year of these community pastures?
3.	In the construction of the community pastures how many farmers were actually moved out of the community pastures? -
4.	What was the total cost to move and relocate these farmers?
5.	How many cultivated acres actually being farmed were turned into grazing lands when the community pastures were constructed?
6.	(a) What is the total cost to date of constructing the community pastures in operation; (b) What is the total area?
7.	In 1946:	(a) How many P.F.R.A. community pastures -were in operation; (b) what is the total area of: (c) what is the total stock carrying capacity; (d) how many head of (1) cattle and (2) horses were using these pastures; (e) what was the total cost of construction of community pastures in operation; (f) what was the total revenue and expenditure; (g) what was the average charge per head for pasture use to the farmer; (h) how many farmers or y^\nCiTers had stock in community pastures; (i) how many dominion government owned bulls are being used in community pastures?



UNITED STATES MILITARY ESTABLISHMENTS IN CANADA

Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1. What price did Canada pay the Government of the United States for military establishments at:	(a) The Pas, Manitoba; (b)
Churchill; (c) Baffin Island; (d) Southampton Island?
2. How much has been realized by War Assets Corporation on sales for buildings and equipment at each of the above establishments?



CONDENSED AND EVAPORATED MILK

Mr. PEARKES:: L Are there any areas in British Columbia which are classified as restricted areas for the sale of condensed or evaporated milk?
2.	If so, where are these areas located?
3.	Are there any restrictions against the advertising for sale of condensed or evaporated milk?
4. Are such advertisements, if any, carried over the C.B.C. network?
5.	Are there adequate supplies of condensed and evaporated milk, to meet domestic requirements?


Colin William George Gibson: Return tabled.



IMPORTS OF BUTTER

Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1. What quantities of butter have been imported into Canada during 1946?

Orders for Returns
2.	Have the government agencies of Canada purchased dairy butter from other countries during this period? If so, what price was paid for it, and what quantities were purchased by months and from what countries?
3.	What quantities of dairy butter were exported from Canada during 1946; to what countries was it exported and what was the price obtained?



WHEAT-FREIGHT RATES

Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1.	What is the winter rail freight rate per 100 lbs. of wheat from Fort William to eastern Canada sea board?
2.	What is the water freight rate per 100 lbs. of wheat from Fort William to eastern Canada sea board?
3.	What rates do the Canadian Wheat Board pay for rail transportation and for water transportation?



FOURTH MEXICAN GOVERNMENT BOOK FAIR- CANADIAN PARTICIPATION

[Stage Direction]
Mr. KNOWLES;
q. Did Canada participate in the fourth Mexican government book fair which was held in Mexico City during 1946?
2.	If so, what was the total cost thereof to Canada ?
3.	Did Canada erect a pavilion at the aforementioned fair?
4.	If so, what was the cost of said pavilion?
5.	What disposition was made of said
pavilion?
6.	Who were the Canadian representatives at this fair?

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: .1. Has Canadair Limited been sold?
2.	If so, who was the purchaser and for what price and terms?
3.	When did Canadair commence to manufacture or assemble aeroplanes?
4.	How many 'planes, giving name and type of each, have been manufactured in each month since manufacture commenced?



INSPECTION BOARD OF CANADA

Mr. LENNARD:: 1.	How many people were in the employ of the inspection board of Canada on January 1, 1947, and what are their salaries?
2.	Who is the chairman of the board; who are the directors of the different departments of this board and what are their salaries?
3.	What are the duties at the present time?
4.	Have any new appointments been made to the board since July 1, 4946?
5.	If so, had these appointees seen overseas service?
6.	What was the total cost of operating this board from July 1, 1946 to January 1, 1947?



CANADIAN REPRESENTATION ABROAD

[Stage Direction]
Mr. FRASER;
1. In what countries has Canada established (a) embassies; (b) legations; (c) consulates; (d) high commissioners' offices?
2.	What is the name of each (a) ambassador; (b) minister; (e) consul-general; (d) high commissioner?
3.	What is the total (a) salary; (b) living or other allowance, paid to each such person?
4.	What was the total amount paid during the year 1946 to each such person as (a) travelling expenses; (b) removal expenses?
5.	What is the total number of employees in each such embassy, legation, consulate or high commissioner's office?
6.	What was the total expenditure made during .1946 in respect of each such embassy, legation, consulate or high commissioner's office?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Return tabled.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. FRASER;
1.	How many information offices are maintained outside of Canada?
2.	Where are they located?
3.	What is the function, in detail, of each office?
4.	What are the names of all employees engaged in such offices?
5.	What salary or other remuneration, including living allowances is paid to each such employee ?	.
6.	What was the total amount of travelling expenses paid to each such employee in 1946?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Return tabled.

Mr. DANIEL:: 1.	What was the amount of fee originally fixed for a certificate of Canadian citizenship?
2.	By what body and under what authority was this fee established?
3.	Wliat was the reason for the fixing of this fee at its original level?
4.	When was a change made in the fee?
5.	By what body was the change made?


Colin William George Gibson: Return tabled.



ST. HONORE, QUEBEC, AIRPORT

Mr. GAGNON:: 1.	What was the cost of the airport at St. Honore, county of Chicoutimi, Quebec, including buildings, landing grounds, etc., built by the dominion government during the last war?
2.	Has this airport been declared surplus asset ?
3.	If so, has the government disposed of same?
4.	To whom?
5.	At what price?
6.	Were tenders called for?
7.	If so (a) what were the names of the tenderers; (b) what was the amount of each tender?



LEGAL SERVICES

Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1. What are the names of the legal firms and solicitors in the province of _ Manitoba (a) receiving fees from the dominion government or any of its commissions from the 1st January. 1945, to date: (b) to whom any fees are still due and payable?
Orders for Returns

2.	What amounts have been paid to each of them, in what year and for what service?
3.	What amounts are still due to each, and for what services?
4.	What are the names of the legal firms and solicitors at present employed by the dominion government or any of its commissions in the province of Manitoba?



IRRIGATION PROJECTS

Mr. THATCHER:: During the calendar year 1946, how much money was actually spent by the federal government for: (a) Surveying and engineering; (b) Construction, on (1) The St. Mary's river irrigation project; (2) The Red River irrigation scheme; (3) The South Saskatchewan irrigation project?



COMMISSION ON REVOCATION OP NATURALIZATION CERTIFICATES

Mr. AYLESWORTH:: 1.	Is the commission on revocation of naturalization certificates still functioning?
2.	If so, who are its members?
3.	What salary and/or honorarium are they paid?
4.	What is the total paid to each member for travelling expenses since his appointment?
5.	What, in detail, are the functions of the commission?
6.	How many naturalization certificates have been revoked on its recommendation?


Colin William George Gibson: Return tabled.



MINISTERS OF THE CROWN-TRAVEL OUTSIDE CANADA

Mr. DESMOND:: 1.	Since January 1, 1946, what ministers of the crown have travelled outside Canada on government business?
2.	By whom was each such minister accompanied ?
3.	What, in detail, was the purpose of each such trip?
4.	What were the dates of departure and return from each such trip?
5.	What was accomplished on each such trip?
6.	What was the total amount paid for
travelling or other expenses in respect of each such trip to:	(a) each such minister;
(b) each accompanying official?



INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES-CANADIAN DELEGATES AND ADVISERS

Mr. CARDIFF:: 1.	What international conferences, at which Canada has been represented, have been held since January 1, 1946?
2.	What are the names of the Canadian delegates and advisers sent to each such conference?
3.	What was the total cost to Canada of sending each such delegation?



PUBLIC SERVICE-NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ON CERTAIN DATES

Clayton Wesley Hodgson: What was the total number of persons employed in the civil service of Canada, and associated boards, commissions, agencies, or crown corporations on the following dates (or the nearest date for which statistical information is available); (a) October 23, 1935; (b) September 1, 1939; (c) May 16, 1945; (d) August 18, 1945;	(e) January 1,



REGINA ORDNANCE DEPOT

Mr. PROBE:: With reference to the civilians employed at the Regina ordnance depot as at December 31, 1946,-1. How many are classified as (a) permanent employees; (b) temporary employees
(c)	casual labour?
2.	How many, if any, in October, November, or December, received pay at a rate below the Saskatchewan minimum wage of 118.50 per week ?
3.	In what employment classification, if any, were wages being paid below the rates recommended to the civil service commission?
4.	What increases have been allowed in rates of pay in any of the employment classifications since the opening of the Regina ordnance depot?
5.	How many civilian employees are being trained at the depot as apprentices?



NATIONAL REVENUE-EMPLOYEES OF TAXATION BRANCH

Mr. ASHBY:: 1.	How many people in Canada owned their own business in the years 4930, 1935, 1940, 1945?
2.	How many people in Canada were wage earners outside the civil service or other government offices in 1930, 1935, 1940, 1945?
3.	How many civil servants were employed by all governments in Canada in 1930, 1935, 1940, 1945?
4.	How many people were employed by the taxation branch of the Department of National Revenue in 1930, 1935, 1940, 1945?
5.	Are any of these employees of the taxation branch paid on a commission basis? If so, what is the rate of commission?



MINISTERS OF THE CROWN-ALTERATION, REFURNISHING, ETC., OF OFFICES

Mr. WEBB:: 1.	What Ministers of the Crown have had offices altered, remodelled, refurnished or redecorated for their use or the use of their personal staffs, during the year 1946?
2.	What was the total cost, in each case, of such alterations, remodelling, refurnishing or redecoration?



LOAN AND SAVINGS BOND CAMPAIGNS

Mr. DROPE:: 1.	What was the total amount raised in each of the Victory Loan Campaigns?
2.	What was the total cost of each such campaign?

Orders for Returns
3.	What was the cost of (a) advertising; (b) radio; (c) pamphlets; (d) other forms of publicity, used in each such campaign?
4.	What is the total amount raised in the Canada Savings Bond Campaign?
5.	What is the total cost to date of such campaign?
6.	What is the cost of (a) advertising; (b) radio (c) pamphlets; (d) other forms of publicity, used in each such campaign?



GOVERNMENT AGENCIES-TELEPHONE CALLS

Mr. DROPE:: 1.	During the year 1946, what was the total amount paid by each department or agency of the government, including crown corporations, for long distance telephone calls?
2.	What control or supervision exists, in each department, over the use of long distance telephone calls?
3.	During the year 1946, what was the total amount paid by each department or agency of the government, including crown corporations, for telegrams and cables?



FIRST WORLD WAR-OFFICIAL HISTORY

Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	What has been the total cost up to December 31, 1946, chargeable to writing, editing and printing of the official history of the Canadian expeditionary force of the first world war?
2.	How many writers and editors have been employed on this task since the history was authorized by the government?
3.	What has been their total pay in each case?
4.	What have been their travelling expenses in each case?
5.	What publications have been actually produced?
6.	How many copies were printed and how many distributed?
7. Since a halt has been called to these historians' activities as from March 31, what further publications will they be prepared to issue on the history of the Canadian Expeditionary force in the first world war by that time?
8.	What are the estimated additional costs from January 1 to March 31, 1947, of the preparation of this official history?



TURCHASE OF MOTOR VEHICLES

Mr. KIDD:: 1.	How many motor vehicles were in the possession of the Department of National Defence and war assets in Canada on January 1, 1945?
2.	How many motor vehicles have been purchased by the Department of Veterans Affairs since that date?



STRAIT OF CANSO BRIDGE OR CAUSEWAY

Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	Have the borings and engineer surveys of the strait of Canso, N.S., been completed looking to the construction of a railway bridge or causeway across the strait?
2.	What is the engineer's report with respect to the feasibility of this undertaking?
3.	What is the estimated cost of (a) causeway; (b) bridge?
4.	Has the government reached any decision as to whether a railway bridge or causeway is the more feasible and desirable?
5.	1 lave there been any negotiations with the province of Nova Scotia regarding the utilizing of this bridge or causeway for highway traffic?
6.	Has the government of Nova Scotia intimated their willingness in sharing the cost and to what amount?
7.	When is the initial work of construction expected to commence?



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-GRADE IMPROVEMENTS, ETC.

Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	Has the government or Canadian National
Railways reached any decision respecting the elimination of curves, improvement of grades and double tracking on the Canadian National Railways between Sydney, N.S., and Moncton, N.B.?	*
2.	Have surveys and estimates been made for a direct line as part of this route between Pictou and Moncton?
3.	Has an estimate of the cost of this work been prepared; and if so, what is it?
4.	What is the estimated saving, yearly and in percentage, on freight and other traffic, over such modernized railway having the use of bridge or causeway over the strait of Canso?
5.	Does the government or Canadian National Railways contemplate proceeding with this improved service at an early date?



SALE OF BUILDING IN CALGARY

Mr. HARKNESS:: 1.	Has the Department of Public Works or
any other department or agency of the government sold the Trades building at 1st street west and 12th avenue. Calgary?
2.	If so, (a) who is the purchaser; (b) when was the sale made; (cl what was the price;
(d)	was the sale made by open tender; (e) if not, what was the method used?



CANADIAN REPRESENTATION IN INDIA

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Does the government recognize the All India Congress of Nehru, in view of the serious civil war now going on in that land?
2.	What diplomatic and commercial government departments are now located in India, and at what cost?



WORLD TRADE CONFERENCE

[Stage Direction]
REPORT OF CANADIAN DELEGATION On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, might I be allowed to answer a question that the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) asked the Minister of Trade and Commerce the other day. The question, was:
I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Will he lav on the table, as soon as possible, the report of the Canadian delegation to the preparatory world trade conference? At the same time, will he
[Stage Direction]
25S
World Trade Conference
[Stage Direction]
indicate what instructions were given to the Canadian delegation and what attitude was taken by that delegation? Who will be the Canadian representatives to the next trade conference, and what instructions will they be given by the government?
The answer is as follows:
The Canadian delegation did not prepare a separate report because of the arrangements made by the united nations for publishing the proceedings of the first session of the preparatory committee of the united nations conference on trade and employment. This report has now been issued by the united nations, and I table a copy. Copies are. available in the parliamentary library and the Department of External Affairs is endeavouring to obtain additional copies from the united nations for the use of members. Copies in the French language have not yet arrived but are expected shortly from London.
The proceedings of the first session held in London in October and November 1946, were exploratory and did not involve any commitments on the part of the governments concerned. The character of the deliberations is made evident in the following excerpt from the report:
Before attempting to outline the work accomplished at the first session, it is desirable to emphasize that this is a "preparatory" committee, the task of which is to prepare an annotated agenda for an international conference and that it is only at the final stage, that is, at the conference, that governments will enter upon binding commitments. However, it is clear that a thorough discussion by the officials of a large number of the world's principal trading nations in advance of the conference will greatly facilitate the work of the conference itself. This conception of the task of the preparatory committee is essential for a full understanding of the nature and significance of the report which follows.
The Canadian delegation accordingly was not given detailed instructions but was given the general responsibility of exploring on the official level ways and means of overcoming barriers to world trade and of otherwise expanding the volume of world trade on a multilateral basis.
The second session scheduled for Geneva in April will be a continuation of the work of the preparatory committee. The Canadian delegation will act under the same general terms of reference, with a view to preparing for the united nations conference. Included in the work of the second session will be negotiations looking toward reciprocal and mutually advantageous tariff concessions.
The Canadian delegation will be headed by Mr. Dana Wilgress, Canadian. Ambassador to the U.S.S.R., with Mr. H. B. McKinnon chairman of the tariff board as alternate head.
All members of the delegation have not yet been named, but I expect the delegation will consist of substantially the same personnel as attended the first session with, possibly, an additional member and several additional advisers.
John Bracken: May I ask a question with respect to the statement just made by the minister? He has laid on the table a report of the preparatory committee. Can he say whether that is a report of the preparatory committee of the international trade organization, or a report of the Canadian section of the committee?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: It is a report of the preparatory committee. As I stated, the Canadian delegation did not prepare a separate report on its participation in the work of the preparatory committee.


John Bracken: Is it the report which goes to all the nations taking part?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Yes, it is a report which goes to all the nations and contains the draft which was submitted by the United States delegation and such modifications as arose out of the discussions of the preparatory committee.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Justice):: I should like to make a brief statement with regard to the resolution on the order paper concerning the extension of certain measures, as to which a request for information was made on Friday by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken). The resolution is to this effect:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the continuation of certain orders and regulations of the governor in council for a limited period-
And so on. On Friday I was asked if I could supply the house promptly with a list of the numbers of the orders in council the government will ask the house to extend. I am doing that today. An office consolidation of these orders in council has been prepared. It is not in final form for distribution to hon. members, but I have a few galley proofs, of which I can send one copy to the leader of each of the parties and groups in the house, and I will lay one copy on the table so any hon. members who wish to get information as to the orders in council the government will ask the house to extend will be in possession of that informa-

Business of the House
tion as of this date, even though the resolution may not come before the house for a few days yet.
It will be appreciated that this procedure is somewhat irregular and perhaps should not be resorted to without the consent of the house, but I anticipate there will be no difficulty in getting that consent. After all, these orders in council are now the law of the land, and I think have all been either tabled or must be tabled very shortly. The statement I am making now simply amounts to this, that the government will seek extension of these orders in council for a limited period.
I think I should go further and make one fact clear; that the government is not asking for any extension whatever of powers to legislate by orders in council. The extension that is being asked is not of powers but of measures. It is proposed to append to the bill which will be placed before the house a list of these orders in council. They will be subject to revocation by the governor in council, but they will not be subject to amendment or extension by the governor in council. Where disposition of the matter otherwise than on those principles is required, legislation is being brought before the house. The principle upon which these orders in council were selected was that where measures in the judgment of the government need to be continued for a limited period of uncertain duration, the sensible thing seemed to be to do it by an extension of the orders themselves rather than by carrying them into a relatively large number of statutes. Where, however, the period required is longer, and the subject matter is one which in ordinary times is within the jurisdiction of the dominion parliament, separate bills are being introduced.
I should say that among these orders in council are three which are in a different category from the rest-those relating to the veterans' preference, old age pensions and what is often referred to as the national labour code. Those orders in council will appear in the schedule to the act to be placed before the house only because legislation which is to be introduced this session relating to all three matters cannot, for various reasons which I need not give now, reasonably be expected to be introduced in time to be passed before March 31. For instance, in regard to the national labour code, negotiations are taking place with the provinces and there will need to be concurrent legislation in the provinces. In the matter of old age pensions, negotiations with the provinces in regard to the tax agreements are going on; and as to the third order in council I mentioned, con-83166- 17J
cerning the veterans' preference, legislation will be introduced this session but only after the matter has been fully discussed by a committee of this house. Therefore those orders in council are being placed in the list of measures to appear in the schedule to the act only because legislation with regard to them cannot reasonably be expected to be enacted before March 31. It is the hope of the government that the legislation on all the other matters which continue the principle of certain orders in council, and this legislation itself which will be called the Continuation of Transitional Measures Act, will be passed by March 31; but of course that means a large amount of work for the house.
I should say that this list of orders in council, the numbers of which are found in the document I am going to table and distribute to the leaders of the other parties and groups in the house, may not be entirely in final form for this reason: that something as to what it contains may depend upon the disposition which the house makes of the legislation that is being placed before it. We are going to have about fifteen bills, and we have no assurance as to what the house will do with them; therefore what goes in this schedule may to some extent depend upon the disposition made of those bills.
The number of orders in council contained in this schedule will be about fifty-five. Not very 'long ago, of course, there were some thousands of orders in council, but a great many have lapsed, have become spent, have been rescinded, are being dropped or will be allowed to expire before March 31; and the number has been reduced progressively until it is expected that only a very small number will be appended to this bill.
Though it would be far more regular to convey this information to the house on the resolution or on first reading of the bill, I think possibly I should say also that we propose that the measures to be continued should remain in force until the 31st day of December, 1947, if parliament meets during November or December, 1947; but if parliament does not so meet, on the sixtieth day after parliament first meets during the year 1948, or on the 31st day of March, 1948, whichever date is the earlier, provided that if at any time while the act is in force addresses are presented to the governor general by the Senate and House of Commons respectively praying that the act should be continued in force for a further period, not in any case exceeding one year from the time at which it would otherwise expire, and the governor in council so orders, the act will continue in force for that further period.

Business of the House

When I say the government is asking that these measures be continued until that date, I mean continued subject to the power of revocation at any time, in whole or in part; and I have no doubt that just as orders in council have been rescinded from time to time in the past, so they will continue to be rescinded from time to time as the necessity for them ceases to exist; but the period of the bill is the period I have mentioned.
I think possibly that gives all the information necessary to enable hon. members to understand these office consolidations which, as I say, are merely galley proofs and not in final form, but which I wanted to give the house at the earliest possible moment so that hon. members would have the maximum notice of this legislation which, needless to say, has to be passed within a limited time.


John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, the statement made by the Minister of Justice answers in substance the request I made of him on Friday last. In view of his statement may I make two observations. He first indicated that it is somewhat irregular as a matter of procedure to give certain information before the resolution is dealt with or before the bill is given first reading. That is granted. However, I think the house will appreciate the desirability of having this information now, because one measure is coming forward which seeks to continue in effect some fifty odd orders in council, some of which the house may accept whole-heartedly and others it will not. I am sure the house appreciates the statement which the minister has seen fit to give today' and which he did not feel he could give the other day.
I am sure also that the house will be pleased to know from the minister's statement that no extension of powers is proposed but rather an extension of the time during which certain controls will continue, approximately a year, I understand. We will examine the measure very carefully with respect to the statement that there is not an extension of powers. I hope we will find that that is correct.
Is it the intention of the minister that all these other bills shall be dealt with before he proceeds with this omnibus measure?


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is the wish and intention of the government, but whether we can adhere to that remains to be seen. There are reasons which I will not take the time to outline why it is desirable to get legislation passed before this is passed, and we think they are good reasons. However, we want

to give the house at the earliest possible moment notice of everything that is to come before the house and then take the measures up in the way which will be considered most desirable. We thought at the moment it would be well to get through the legislation before we launched into this general bill.


Mr BRACKEN:: I was only asking for
information.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will a statement be
made at this time as to the official date of the end of the war? I ask the question because certain orders in council and acts of parliament depend upon that date.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I was not aware that there
was any necessity of legislative action to fix the date of the end of the war. The War Measures Act provides for a proclamation, but the necessity of that proclamation is superseded by the provisions of the National Emergency Transitional Powers Act. All I can do is to ask my hon. friend to bring to my attention the provisions of any orders in council which require action other than that which has already been taken. I was not aware of the necessity of any.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I do not recall an order in council at the moment, but as an example there is the Aeronautics Act, a section of which depends upon that date.


James Horace King: I would direct the attention of hon. gentlemen to the fact that the statement of the minister is not debatable.


John George Diefenbaker: I should like to address a further question to the Minister of Justice in regard to the office consolidation of the orders in council laid on the table today by the Minister of Justice. There are some fifty-five in number which are to be in- the schedule to the bill. It contains several wartime orders and regulations including price and rental regulations. What provision is to be made to enable parliament to amend any of these orders in council which have to do with rentals, for instance, while accepting the general principle that rental control be continued but believing that certain changes therein are necessary^? What powers are to be given to parliament to amend these orders in council incorporated in the appendix to the bill?


James Lorimer Ilsley: May I speak first, to one minor point. It is proposed to list the numbers, dates and a brief description of the orders in council in the appendix, rather than appending the orders themselves. My hon. friend seems to be under a different impression on that point, but it is merely technical and minor.

Inquiries o] the Ministry


John George Diefenbaker: But we come to the same conclusion.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes. With regard to the procedure for amendment, if the House of Commons desires to amend any provision of any of these orders in council it can be done in this way: a separate column can be provided for the amendments, as was done in the legislation in Australia and I think in Great Britain. That is, we can have a second column in the schedule. That of itself will be of no avail without a section in the act which will provide that the orders in council shall continue and be in force as amended in the second column to the schedule.
We do not invite amendments; we hope that the second column will not be necessary along with that extra section, but if it is desired by the house to make these amendments, that is the way in which they will be made.


John George Diefenbaker: Since the minister made this lengthy statement, he will not object to another question. Is the governor in council to have the power to amend these orders in council between now and1 December 31, after they have been incorporated in the schedule and passed by parliament?


James Lorimer Ilsley: No; the only power will be the power of revocation, not the power of amendment or extension. It is a difficult thing to arrange so that we can operate, but I think we have it now so that we can safely operate exactly under the orders in council as we are asking parliament to continue them in force.


John George Diefenbaker: Therefore they are to be completely rigid.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Completely rigid except for revocation either in whole or in part.



CADET SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Langton Church: I should like to ask the Minister of National Defence to table the order which has been sent out, effective March 31, eliminating cadet service in the public schools. There are 40,000 of these cadets in the public and secondary schools in No. 2 district, and since confederation they have been the backbone of the militia. Will the minister consider postponing the order?


Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Defence):: The hon. member is misinformed about the decision with regard to
the cadets. What has been decided is that cadet training will be made available for boys who are most capable of profiting by it, that is, those between the ages of fourteen and eighteen years. This will put the army in respect of cadet training on the same footing as the air force and navy in the case of boys from the ages of fourteen to eighteen years. What is being eliminated are the junior cadets.


Thomas Langton Church: The public schools in
Ontario are going to have the junior cadets whether the department wants them or not.


Mr. FULTON:: I should like to ask the Minister of National Defence a question arising out of the statement he has just made. Is a ceiling to be imposed on the numbers of cadets who may receive training in the different commands?


Brooke Claxton: I shall have to look into that.



COOPERATIVES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
James Joseph McCann: A few days ago the hon. member for Hastings-Peterborough (Mr. White) asked a question as follows:
Will the Minister of National Revenue in the near future make a statement in the house outlining the interpretation of the deputy minister of taxation of the 1946 amendment to the Income War Tax Act in regard to cooperatives in so far as the amendment applies to cheese factories in the province of Ontario which operate more or less on a cooperative basis?
In view of the fact that cheese factories conduct their affairs in varied manners, it is not possible to state specifically which sections of the 1946 amendments to the Income War Tax Act, in so far as they refer to payments to customers, would be applicable to any particular cheese factory. The manner in which a cheese factory would be taxed would depend on whether it was wholly a cooperative, partly a cooperative or a purely private operation. In the case of any particular company it would, of course, be possible to give a specific answer privately to the taxpayer.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):: Can the Minister of Labour add anything further to the answer he gavo last Thursday
Inquiries of the Ministry

to a question I asked the previous day about the implementation by the Steel Company of Canada of the recommendation of the special commissioner?


Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Hilton has consented to the reemployment on probation of the four men who were the cause of this dispute. I should like to point out that this was a purely voluntary act on his part. As my hon. friend knows, neither the report of a board of conciliation nor that of a commissioner is mandatory. I hope to be able to table tomorrow the order in council rescinding the appointment of Mr. Kilbourn as controller of the steel company.



P.C. 302-THREATENED STRIKE OF COAL MINERS IN NOVA SCOTIA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: Will the Minister of Labour advise the house if the terms of order in council P.C. 302, passed on January 30, 1047, with an effective date of February 15, 1947, will be made applicable to the present dispute between the coal miners in Nova Scotia and the operators, which dispute arose before the passage of the order in council?


Humphrey Mitchell: I think the most sensible thing to do, and what I always try to do, is to say that it will be applicable. Any machinery that we have in my department will be used to conciliate disputes. I think that is the reasonable and sensible thing to do.


Clarence Gillis: I am not concerned about conciliation; I am concerned about the penalties, if there is a resumption of the strike.


Humphrey Mitchell: I do not know; you had better ask the lawyers about that. Every man to his last. I have the job of conciliating disputes.
I would point out that the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Isnor) asked me a somewhat similar question, and perhaps at this time I might table the order, with an explanation which will not take over two minutes.
In connection with the questions asked by the hon. members for Cape Breton South and Halifax, I wish to table order in council P.C. 302 passed on January 30, 1947. It will be observed that this order in counci' has two main objectives.
The first objective is to meet a situation brought about by the termination of control of wages by the dominion. While wage control was in effect, the subject of wages was not one that was open to the usual collective bargaining procedures between workers and management. Since wage rates had to be fixed

by the appropriate war labour board up to November 30 last, P.C. 1003, the wartime labour relations regulations, providing for compulsory collective bargaining within dominion jurisdiction exempted the whole field of wage rates from the collective bargaining contemplated by the regulations. The present order in council now amends P.C. 1003 in such manner as to include the subject of wages among the other subjects open to free collective bargaining between employer and employees. The new order in council makes the changes in P.C. 1003 needed to meet this changed situation.
The second objective of the present order is to consolidate P.C. 4020 into P.C. 1003. P.C. 4020, passed June 6, 1941, was the order in council providing for the appointment of industrial disputes inquiry commissions to investigate disputes or differences between employers and employees, and also complaints of discrimination for union activity, and to report to the Minister of Labour. It is felt that at this time it is advantageous to consolidate where possible all existing procedures in relation to the investigation and conciliation of industrial disputes into a single instrument, namely, P.C. 1003.
The order also provides for the repeal effective March 31 next of schedule A to the regulations. This has the effect of returning to the provinces as of that date jurisdiction over certain industries enumerated in the schedule and described as war industry.


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: May I ask the minister whether a report has been received from Mr. Justice Carroll, who was appointed commissioner to report on and make recommendations for the settlement of the dispute in the coal fields of Nova Scotia?


Humphrey Mitchell: I have not yet received a report from Mr. Justice Carroll.


Percy Chapman Black: Will the report upon its receipt be made public or given to the house? There are many people who are concerned about settlement of this dispute.


Humphrey Mitchell: The usual procedure is first of all to place the report in the hands of the parties to the dispute. After that I see no reason why the report should not be made public.



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. SOLON E. LOW (Peace River): I should like to ask the Postmaster General if it has yet been made possible to send gift

Inquiries of the Ministry
parcels from Canada to addresses in the United States occupied zone of Germany? I spoke to the minister a few days ago about it, but did not send him notice of my question today; therefore he may not have the information to answer it. If not, would he take this as a notice and give me a reply later?
Hon. ERNEST BERTRAND (Postmaster General):: I shall be glad to do that.



RAIL TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. B. McKAY (Weyburn):: I should like to ask the Minister of Transport a question, of which I have given him notice. Will he inform the house of the present railway transportation situation in western Canada following the recent unprecedented weather conditions?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member was kind enough to send me notice of his question. I have here a report from the Canadian National Railways with reference to conditions in southern Saskatchewan at 5 a.m. today:
Weather past twenty-four hours part cloudy with southerly winds; temperature 20 above to 5 below zero. At present weather is clear, light southwest winds; 2 degrees above to 14 degrees below.
Relief train returned to north Regina last night from rotary plough stalled between that point and Zehner, and further attempt will be made to release plough this morning. As soon as this is effected, auxiliary will proceed to rerail a plough which was derailed yesterday between Frankslake and Zehner.
Main line between Wyley and Montmartre cleared on Saturday night and train operations resumed between Winnipeg and Regina.
Plough extra 2561 which was stalled at Wordsworth was released Saturday night; was brought to Carlyle and will operate this morning through to Estevan.
The Craik subdivision between Saskatoon and North Regina is clear with exception bad snow conditions at Disley hill. Plough now working there trying to break through. Expect that this line will be passable to-day.
So far as the Canadian Pacific Railway is concerned I am informed that its operations, which were stopped for some sixty hours in the west, have now been resumed.



PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, the junior member for Queens (Mr. McLure) on the orders of
the day on Friday asked if a decision had been reached by the board of transport commissioners respecting the charges for transportation of motor trucks on the Borden-Tormentine car ferry.
I have made inquiries and am informed by the board that judgment was rendered on February 5, 1947, and that an order was issued on February 7, the day the hon. member asked his question.
The hon. member also asked when the board's report would be available. I am advised that the judgment will be put in hand for printing immediately, but it may be some time before it is received from the printers.
As other hon. members from Prince Edward Island have indicated their interest in the result of this hearing, perhaps I should inform the house that the order of the board is to the effect that the charges for the truck ferry service will be $5 each way for motor trucks containing merchandise and $6 each way for empty motor trucks. The present rate in effect for trucks, either loaded or empty, is $6 each way. It is also ordered that no distinction should be made between a truck driven on to the ferry and a truck loaded on a flat car. The present charge for vehicles on flat cars is $10 each way, and this item in the tariff is to be cancelled.



ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY INQUIRY WITH RESPECT TO ACTION ON TREATY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, I should like
to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs with respect to the St. Lawrence waterways treaty. Is it anticipated that this treaty will be finally dealt with at the present session of congress, and if so, will the treaty be brought before this parliament?
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs):	Mr. Speaker,
the hbn. member would hardly ask me to state what action we might expect the present session of the United States congress to take any more than I could anticipate at this time what our own parliament will do at this session. The treaty will certainly be brought before parliament for its consideration just as soon as it is in a position to be ratified as an international agreement. I know it is intended to have the matter up for discussion before congress at this session, but I would not venture to say anything more than that.


John Bracken: Doe3 the minister say
that it is up for consideration by the United States congress this year?
Customs Act

Mr. ST. LAURENT:	We are informed
that it is intended to have it brought before congress for discussion this year.


John Bracken: That is the question 1
asked.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Veterans Affairs in connection with a matter to which I referred the other day, namely, the projected closing of the vocational training school in Prince Albert. I have had communications from the mayor and council of Prince Albert in regard to the matter, inquiring whether the instructions to close the school came from, the provincial government endeavouring to place responsibility on the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Right Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs): May I refer my hon. friend to my colleague the Minister of Labour?


Humphrey Mitchell: By the very nature of things there is a substantial reduction in the number of veterans enrolling for training, and of course it is important also to reduce the expenditures of public money. These considerations have made it necessary for the Dominion Department of Labour, acting in cooperation with the Department of Veterans Affairs, to close some veterans' training centres entirely and to close individual classes in other centres. This reduction will continue throughout the summer.
All prematriculation classes will close by September except for a few special centres, possibly one in each province, to take care of disability and other special individual cases whose enrolment was unavoidably dfelayed. The Prince Albert prematriculation class, with a present enrolment of about sixty, will finish on March 31, and arrangements for its closing have been made by our regional director. By that date most of the present group will have completed their courses.
In the vocational classes of Prince Albert, farm mechanics and agricultural classes are of a fixed length and will terminate on March 31. The sheet metal class, which has only one student, will terminate at the same time. The classes in carpentry, brick-laying, motor mechanics, welding and machine shop will

continue until about June 30, when the majority of the present students, about sixty in number, will have finished their courses.
It is expected that the whole centre at Prince Albert will therefore close about the end of June.



CUSTOMS ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. J. McCANN (Minister of National Revenue) moved the second reading of Bill No. 6, to amend the Customs Act.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1-No refund for alleged inferiority or deficiency.
Mr. GREEN:: Will the minister make a statement on this bill?


James Joseph McCann: The amendment to this bill is simple. Under section 124 of the Customs Act it is provided that:
No refund of duty shall be allowed because of any alleged inferiority or deficiency in quantity of goods imported and entered, and which have passed into the custody of the importer under permit of the collector, or because of the omission in the invoice of any trade discount, or other matter or thing, which might have the effect of reducing the quantity or value of such goods for duty, unless the same has been reported to the collector within fourteen (lays . . .
Under an order in council, P.C. 72/1280, passed on the 17th of February, 1943, to meet conditions as they existed at that time on account of the increased importation of goods, particularly war material, the period was extended from fourteen to thirty days in which the importer could make a claim for a refund or a remission of duties paid. That has worked so satisfactorily that upon the request of importers it has been decided to have this bill passed to extend the period to thirty days, as it was during the period of the war. It is merely a matter of convenience to business men in the country that they should have the extended time. That is the only change in the bill. We have been carrying on that practice under an order in council which, as hon. gentlemen know, will naturally cease to exist at the end of March of this year. It has been such a convenience to the importing public that we wish to extend it in statute form from fourteen to thirty days.

Militia Pension Act


Howard Charles Green: It is merely extending the benefit to the importer?


James Joseph McCann: Yes.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



MILITIA PENSION ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Defence) moved the second reading of Bill No. 5, to amend the Militia Pension Act.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1-When man promoted to rank of acting warrant officer deemed to be a man and not an officer.
George Randolph Pearkes: Does this amendment
apply only to warrant officers of the Royal Canadian Navy?


Brooke Claxton: That is correct; it applies to a limited group which we believe amounts to just fifteen officers. It is designed to protect the rights which we gave them during the war by order in council and which we should like to see them have. It improves their position and gives them the option of being considered either as men or as officers for the purpose of pension.


George Randolph Pearkes: If that is so would it not be advisable to say, "warrant officers of the Royal Canadian Navy"? There is a rank of warrant officers both in the army and in the air force. If this is designed particularly to apply to warrant officers of the Royal Canadian Navy, I suggest that it might be advisable to include that actually in the bill.


Brooke Claxton: To put that in the bill would not add or subtract anything from it. The words are unnecessary. The only acting warrant officers affected are in the navy and it would not help the position to include the limiting words.


George Randolph Pearkes: Are there not acting warrant officers in the army? Have there not been acting warrant officers in the army and in the Royal Canadian Air Force? If it is designed only for the small group in the Royal Canadian Navy-and I have no issue with the principle behind the amendment- I submit that it would make it clearer, if 83166-18
you want to limit it to the Royal Canadian Navy, to add the words "Royal Canadian Navy."


Brooke Claxton: There is no objection to having those words in, but they do not add anything. They are unnecessary. If we can get along without them, why not?


Edmund Davie Fulton: How will you get along without them? Without them, how do they apply only to the navy? If the minister could explain that it would remove our doubts.


Brooke Claxton: I do not know of any acting warrant officers of the permanent force in the army who are promoted in this way and might come under these provisions, but if there are they should have the same advantage.


George Randolph Pearkes: It does not apply only to the navy but to all the services.


Brooke Claxton: As the bill is drafted it would apply to all the services if there were any, but I am informed that there are only naval ranks affected.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 2.
George Randolph Pearkes: Do these provisions apply to cadets of the Royal Military College and naval cadets of Royal Roads? I ask that question because there was a group of young men who went through the Royal Military College during the first two years of the last war and who went in under special conditions. Their parents were asked to sign an agreement that they would enter the army. Later on, these particular young men, it has been found, were not made eligible for certain of the war gratuities. Their service in the Royal Military College does not count towards earning them the gratuity. Young men going through the universities of Canada, serving in the officers training corps of these universities, were eligible for these particular gratuities, and, I want to make certain that cadets of the Royal Military College, or young men going through the Royal Military College during the years 1939, 1940 and perhaps 1941, will be eligible for the benefits indicated here. I am not quite certain that cadets of the Royal Military College and possibly naval cadets of Royal Roads are considered as part of the reserve forces of the country.


Brooke Claxton: If the cadets at either Royal Roads or the Royal Military College were members of the non-permanent active militia, then their service would count. If they were not members of the non-permanent

Militia Pension Act

active militia their service would not count because the provision is limited to members of the non-permanent active militia.


George Randolph Pearkes: Then I submit that young men who have given up their time to serve the Royal Military College or the naval college at Royal Roads should be included in this and should be classified in the same way as young men who were serving in the C.O.T.C. of the various universities. One has given up a portion of his time and the other has given up all his time to preparation for the service of his country, and I should like to see that provision definitely added there.


Brooke Claxton: The purpose of the provision is to enable officers and men of the permanent force, who served in the non-oermanent active militia, to count one quarter of that service for pension purposes after -,hey have served the appropriate length of ;ime in the permanent force to qualify for such pension. The provision does not cover men at the universities or at the Royal Military College or Royal Roads unless they are members of the non-permanent active militia. In the latter event this service would count. If they were members of the nonpermanent active militia their service for pension calculation would include one-fourth of their service in the non-permanent force.


George Randolph Pearkes: Can the minister say whether a member of the Canadian officers training corps, university contingent, is a member of the non-permanent militia?


Brooke Claxton: My recollection is that they would all be members of the non-permanent active militia. They take an oath of attestation, That is my impression.


George Randolph Pearkes: I think the minister is
correct. Now, will he say whether a cadet at the Royal Military College is or is not.


Brooke Claxton: Some of them may be, but as a rule they are not, because they do not become attested on entrance into the Royal Military College. They are not liable to service.


George Randolph Pearkes: Is it not a fact that a lad joining the Royal Military College who has held a commission or has been a member of a non-permanent militia unit has to resign his commission or his membership in the unit on joining the Royal Military College? That was a condition which existed, before the war. I cannot say whether it has been changed,


Brooke Claxton: I do not think there has been any change, but the Royal Military College has not been in operation for its ordinary peacetime purposes since 1940.


George Randolph Pearkes: The point I am trying to make is this. The cadet at the Royal Military College is not a member of the reserve army or the non-permanent militia.


Brooke Claxton: That is right.


George Randolph Pearkes: And I am suggesting that he should be treated as such for the benefits included in this particular act, because he has given more time than a young man who is in the university, in C.O.T.C., and therefore a member of the reserve army, to preparation for his military services afterwards, and surely that time should count to his benefit just as much as the time that is put in by the young man in university.


Brooke Claxton: I do not think it is a question of time. The fact is that the man attending Royal Military College and Royal Roads is not liable to military service. He is not a soldier or a sailor.


Douglas King Hazen: Might I ask the minister about how many people this section will apply to? He told us that the first section applied to about fifteen.


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Douglas King Hazen: Is the number in this section as limited as that? Has he any idea of the number?


Brooke Claxton: The effect of this section is to give the men to whom it applies an option under the following section, and we do not know how many will take that option. Of course, this is intended to benefit the men, but it removes a doubt as to a date. It extends the benefit rather than limits it.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I should like to revert to this question in connection with the Royal Military College. While it is admitted that the cadet at the Royal Military College is not or was not a member of the forces while he was serving as a cadet, what is being requested is that, if he subsequently joins either the non-permanent or the permanent force, his time at the Royal Military College will be allowed to count in the same way as is done with regard to the man who attended the officers training corps at university. That is all that is being asked. Unfortunately, an amendment to this effect, which would involve an expenditure of public funds, would be out of order. We should like to crystallize our suggestion in the form of an amendment but are unfortunately not able to do so. In order that the matter may not be

Militia Pension Act
allowed to die, I would ask that the minister say whether that particular aspect had occurred to him, and if not whether he does not think it is perhaps fair to have the cadets put in the same position?


Brooke Claxton: This has been considered, and we simply cannot see on what principle the provisions should be extended to people who were not in fact in the service during the period. They are neither soldiers nor sailors. They are not members of the non-permanent active militia. Why this benefit should subsequently be retroactively extended to them, we cannot see.


George Randolph Pearkes: Is it a fact that the old regulations for the Royal Military College enabled a cadet who went into the permanent force to count his service at the Royal Military College toward pension after he was eighteen years of age? That is a condition which, to the best of my recollection, existed up to 1939.


The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Golding):: Shall the clause carry?


George Randolph Pearkes: No. I want an answer to that question, please.


Brooke Claxton: I will get an answer for the hon. gentleman. The answer will be here in a minute. I am informed, Mr. Chairman, the situation is as I have stated it with regard to R.M.C. With regard to naval cadets I understand it is possible that service might have counted while still in the naval college at ages subsequent to eighteen, but I am still trying to obtain that information for my hon. friend, and I shall be very glad to give it to him. In our submission, however, the test here is whether or not the soldier, sailor or airman is in one of the forces, in order to obtain the benefit of this service in the non-permanent active militia or the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve or the air force auxiliary, in order to have that count for his pension. To adopt the suggestion of my hon. friend would represent a substantial change in a provision which has been in effect for some years, which was in effect throughout the war and which of course has formed part of the understanding of these people as to their terms of service. So we submit that the provision should be left as it is, subject to the one change proposed in this bill, which makes it clear that a man who was in the active army at the 1st April, 1946, can exercise the option provided that he does so up to March 31, 1948.


Mr. MERRITT:: I am sorry I was not in the committee when this matter arose, but, as I understand it, the minister is saying that people who attended the Royal Military College are not entitled to have that period 83166-18J
taken into consideration for pension on the ground that they were not serving in the forces when, they were at that institution. Is that a correct understanding of what the minister says?


Brooke Claxton: That is correct,


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: In the first place, I think all hon. members will be aware that Royal Military College, as it wa9 constituted before the war, gave a completely military course of training in military matters, a course longer and much more exacting than that given in the militia or the C.O.T.C. or the reserves of the air force or the navy. It would be enough to surprise me to find the minister taking this stand, but I am much more surprised to hear him say that cadets at the Royal Military College are not in the forces. I just happen to have in my hand the Royal Military College Act, which is chapter 131 of the revise^ statutes of Canada. Section 13 reads:
Every person who enters upon a course of instruction in the college shall sign a roll of entry and shall be thenceforward for the period of his pupilage, subject to the King's Rules and Regulations, the Army Act, and to all other rules and regulations to which His Majesty's troops are subject.
So during his four years of service, whether he is at the college or not, whether he is in uniform or not, he is subject to the Army Act and the rules respecting His Majesty's forces. How such a person could not be in the forces, while a member of the non-permanent active militia, who is subject to the Army Act only at such times as be is in uniform or is proceeding to or is at a place of parade, is in the forces, is quite beyond my understanding. I am sure the minister must be mistaken, and before going on I would ask him to reconsider the question of whether or not these cadets were in the forces. From what I have before me, I am quite satisfied that they were.


Brooke Claxton: The situation is as I have described it. Gentlemen attending the Royal Military College and Royal Roads are not members of the non-permanent active militia, nor are they members of the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve or the air force auxiliary. They are not active force; they are not permanent force, and) they are not reserve force. They are not members of the forces, though, as the hon. member has said, while at the college they are subject to military law. They are not liable to service; that is the test.


George Randolph Pearkes: Is the minister able to answer my question as to whether cadets, when reaching the age of eighteen, previously
2fiS
Militia Pension Act

were able to count their service at the Royal Military College toward their pension in the permanent force?


Brooke Claxton: I am informed that is not the case, but I am having that information checked again. I am informed they only count their service from the time they are in fact attested.


George Randolph Pearkes: You mean when they are granted commissions, after leaving the college?


Brooke Claxton: That is right.


George Randolph Pearkes: If the minister is in doubt as to the accuracy of his information, as I am in doubt, will he let this section stand until he has checked it?


Brooke Claxton: I am in the hands of the committee, Mr. Chairman, but even if the information is incorrect-though I am sure it is correct-it would not alter the attitude we take, which is that cadets at Royal Military College or Royal Roads are not in the forces. They are not liable to service, and therefore attendance at these places should not count for pension purposes. I shall be glad to get my hon. friend the information, in any event, and give him full particulars; but I think this section should be carried.


Mr. COCKERAM:: I should like to come back to the question asked by the hon. member for St. John-Albert, as to the maximum number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men who will be affected by this provision.


Brooke Claxton: Any officer, non-commissioned officer or man who was enlisted in the permanent force on or before the 1st day of April, 1946, and who elects to come under part V before March 31, 1948, may have the advantage of this provision.


Alan Cockeram: But how many are affected? That is what I want to get. How many people in the service today can elect to come under this section?


Brooke Claxton: All those who were in the permanent force on or before April 1, 1946, and who make an election before the 31st March, 1948. as well as all those who were enlisted in the permanent force of Canada on and after April 1, 1946. That might be a very substantial proportion of those in the permanent forces today. They may make this election. We do not know how many will do so. The number covered by the amendment will be much smaller.


Alan Cockeram: But how many men are there in the service who served in the militia, the air force auxiliary or the naval reserve and can elect to come under this section of the act? You must have that figure.


Brooke Claxton: Anyone in the permanent force on April 1, 1946, and who makes the election before the 31st March, 1948, who had service in the non-permanent active militia before entering the permanent force may have the advantage of this provision. We do not know how many people there are in the permanent force who had service before in the non-permanent militia.


Alan Cockeram: Surely that information is available in the department?


Brooke Claxton: I suppose it could be traced through the attestation papers.


Alan Cockeram: I think we should have it. We are being asked to vote on something which affects a great many people, and I think we should have the information as to how many people who are in the permanent force of today come under this section of the act.


Brooke Claxton: If we were taking away the rights of any people, then I would think the hon. member's point was well taken, but we are merely making a drafting correction in a provision which already exists and therefore it seems to me the information is not relevant.


Mr. LOCKHART:: I listened attentively
to the arguments advanced by hon. members on this side. Perhaps I am not as well posted as they on this matter, but I feel that the history and tradition of the Royal Military College is such that we do not want to make any error at this time and possibly create discrimination. I think the minister should let this stand for the time being. There are some of us who come from parts of the country from which many Royal Military College students have come. These boys have served with great distinction, and I do not think this thing should be rushed through at the present time with the possibility of causing discrimination. I consider the presentations of the hon. members to my left extremely well taken and I suggest that the minister not try to rush this thing through.


Brooke Claxton: I am sure hon. members will appreciate that all this amendment seeks to do is to make a textual alteration in the provisions of the act which was enacted at the last session of parliament. Section 2 of this bill would have the effect of leaving out any person appointed to or enlisted in the forces on or before April 1, 1946, who elects to come under part V before the 31st March, 1948. Upon an examination of the law as it had been in effect during this last year, it was found that it should be made clear that not only did those people have who enlisted later come under the provisions of this part, but

Canada Grain Act
also those who were already in and exercised their right of election to come under this part before March 31, 1948. This change is proposed to make that clear. It does not take away anyone's rights. It makes it clear that they have the rights which parliament intended to give them at the last session.
Mr. PEARKE8:	I fully appreciate that,
but there is still the question of that certain group of young men who attended special courses during the first two years of the war at the Royal Military College. Their parents signed undertakings that at the conclusion of those courses they would go into the services. While there, those young men took the oaths which were read out to them and were attested in the manner described by the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. Merritt). To all intents and purposes they were in the service at that time. I contend that they were more in the service than the young man who was attending university and also taking training in the C.O.T.C. The young men taking these particular courses were serving under conditions quite different from anything which had occurred before, and I suggest that they were overlooked. I am just trying to protect their interests. I am thinking only of those young men who joined the services after passing their courses. I do not know how many, but there are likely some who have elected to stay on in the permanent force. I feel that these young men should be treated the same as the other young Canadians who were attending universities and training in the C.O.T.C.


Brooke Claxton: Those young men were not in fact liable for service and they were not within the classes intended to be covered. Consequently they were not covered by the legislation.


Douglas King Hazen: If a young man was attending Royal Military College for a year after war broke out and he is to be allowed only one-quarter of that year toward his pension, then it does not seem to me it amounts to a great deal. However, if it is extended to students who were at the college for four years it would make a considerable difference. The minister has said that these students were not liable for service and that is one reason he gives for the position that has been taken. However, I submit that they were liable to service in a limited sense. Were they not obliged to undertake to join a unit when they graduated from the Royal Military College? If they were required to do that, then they were liable for service. Perhaps they were not liable when they were at the Royal Military College but they were obligated to serve when they graduated.


Brooke Claxton: There is another bill ready and I will agree to allow this one to stand for a moment.
Section stands.
Progress reported.



CANADA GRAIN ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce) moved the second reading of Bill No. 4, to amend the Canada Grain Act.
John Bracken: Are we not going to have a statement from the minister with respect to this bill?


James Angus MacKinnon: I have very little to add to the statement I made on the first reading of the bill, although I might enlarge on it a little. The amendments cover four points. First, there is an extension of the requirements of insurance coverage in eastern elevators as there has been heretofore in western elevators.
Another amendment is the establishment of permanent bases of grades which had been developed during the war for oil seeds and peas.
Section, 4 seeks the continuation of authority to the governor in council to postpone the annual weigh-over of grain in elevators to meet situations arising from storage congestion, transportation difficulties or other tie-ups. This power was given during the war to meet emergencies and' is regarded as necessary to permit reasonable flexibility in future operations.
The transfer of carloading authority is a provision which speaks for itself and one which should have been in the act right along, to ensure the equitable distribution of cars at country elevators.
In committee I am prepared to make a more complete statement on each section as we reach it.


John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, the reason I asked the minister to make a statement at this time was this: I was going to ask him whether he would consent to having this bill go to the committee on agriculture.
He has outlined: that there are four points in this measure. With respect to three of them I think there will be no serious objection; certainly we have none. With respect to [DOT] the other, there is some question in our minds whether it should be passed without fuller con-
Canada Grain Act

sideration. That is the amendment to give the board power to postpone the weigh-over in the elevators. I think that is the important section, section 4 on page 2 of the bill, which would- amend section 138 of the Canada Grain Act. Section 138 of the Canada Grain Act imposes on the board the duty of weighing-over the grain contained in every terminal elevator within specified periods. During the war, under the wide powers that were given the government, that requirement was suspended, and the government now asks that this wartime procedure be continued. I am raising some question as to the propriety of parliament granting that power. The original legislation was designed to prevent malpractices or the possibility of certain malpractices ot the misuse of grain so stored in these elevators.
The reason given in the explanatory note for the amendment is that in times of acute storage congestion it may not be possible to carry out this requirement. But that condition does not obtain now. It probably did obtain during the war and may obtain again, but it does not obtain now, and my contention is that we should not amend the old section to give the board power to omit or defer a weigh-over without -being assured- that that is the wise course to follow. We think section 4 of the bill should be referred to the committee on agriculture, where the appropriate officials might be examined, where they could give evidence as to the advisability of enacting the new section in its present form. I do n-ot wish to embarrass the government in this matter, but I am sure that the government want, as all of us do, to get at what is right. I would therefore ask the minister if he would consent to having this bill go to the committee on agriculture for consideration of that particular clause and perhaps others if hon. members so desire.


James Horace King: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. gentleman, but I would call his attention to paragraph 759 of "Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms," second edition, which provides:
On the motion for the second reading, it is out of order to discuss the clauses seriatim.
It is not the practice on second reading to discuss the clauses of a bill. The only question before the house is the principle of the bill. When the bill is moved into committee there will be an opportunity for the hon. member to make any remarks about the different clauses.


John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure that I fully appreciate the purport of what you had to say. In order to point out one principle of this bill I have had to refer to one section of it, and that is all I have done. At the moment I am simply asking the minister if he will consent to having the bill referred to the committee on agriculture for the consideration of that principle of the bill.


James Horace King: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member again, but he will understand that I have a duty to do and1 that is to see that the rules are observed. It is not in order on the second reading of a bill to discuss particular clauses. What is before the house is the principle of the bill. The hon. gentleman will understand that if I permitted him to disregard the rule I should be obliged to do the same thing for any other member.


John Bracken: No one would wish to question any decision you might make, Mr. Speaker, -but with all respect I would point out that the minister himself said that there were four principles involved in this bill. Aside altogether, however, from the question raised by the Speaker, I asked the minister if he would refer the bill to the committee on agriculture for consideration. I proposed moving a motion that the bill be referred to that committee for consideration in view of the point I raise, but if the minister will say the bill will go before that committee I shall not bother to move the motion.


James Angus MacKinnon: If I have followed the remarks of Mr. Speaker correctly, I think the proper time to deal with that clause would be when we are in committee. I have a further statement to make on that very matter. If there is a strong feeling in. the house about this particular clause I am willing to consider dropping it when we reach it in committee, but it is a clause that has been asked for by the board, anticipating the recurrence at some time in the future of what did occur during the war, when we had a very heavy surplus of wheat in the country and the elevators were filled to capacity, and when it would have been most awkward to close down operations to permit of a weigh-over. I saw the very same objection that my hon. friend has raised when this matter was being discussed with the officials, but the clause was left in because of the strong desire of those administering the act in view of the possibility of a return to surplus wheat conditions, which they felt could be taken care of if they were granted this power.

Canada Grain Act


John Bracken: If the minister does not feel disposed to permit this bill to go to the committee of agriculture for consideration I wish to record our desire that it be so handled.


James Garfield Gardiner: May I suggest this: I understood the minister to say that he is quite prepared to consider dropping this if the discussion that took place in committee suggested that be the result. If that is so, it would certainly save a great deal of time and avoid sending it to the agriculture committee for discussion. If the house or committee is satisfied that it ought to be dropped I understood the minister to say that he is quite prepared to drop it.


James Angus MacKinnon: I am.


John Bracken: May I be permitted to finish my remarks, Mr. Speaker?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


John Bracken: The point is this: the house may or may not be inclined to recommend that it be dropped. What we want is the advice which we will get in committee from people who are familiar with the subject. I wish, therefore, to move, seconded by the hon. member for Royal (Mr. Brooks):
That the bill be not now read a second time but that the subject matter thereof be referred to the committee on agriculture and colonization.
This motion applies to the consideration of only one principle of the bill.


James Garfield Gardiner: On a point of order, I was under the impression when the discussion was taking place that Mr. Speaker was out of order and the leader of the opposition had the right end of the argument. But now that he has said what he really wants to do,
I think Mr. Speaker was in order and the leader of the opposition was out of order. The suggestion made by Mr. Speaker was that on second reading of the bill it was not proper to deal with a certain section of it. I understand the suggestion that is made now is that this one section be referred to the agriculture committee.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: The whole bill.


James Garfield Gardiner: In making his motion my hon. friend said that it applied to only one section.


James Arthur Ross: That is the whole bill.


James Garfield Gardiner: If it is only in regard to one section, that section can be dealt with in committee of the whole which includes all the members of the agriculture committee. If this committee is prepared to deal with it as the leader of the opposition thinks it ought
to be dealt with-in other words, got rid of altogether-why send it to the agriculture committee?


James Arthur Ross: On a point of order, I think this matter could be settled quickly. We are prepared to discuss the bill on second reading, and if it is desirable it can be referred to a committee for further discussion and reported back. That is all that the motion asks for. I shall have something further to say on the principle of the bill after Mr. Speaker makes his ruling.
Mr. MaeINNIS: Mr. Speaker, I, too, felt that your ruling in the first instance was not a correct ruling according to our procedure. If that ruling is to be applied then it will prevent any discussion on the second reading of a bill. Without mentioning any particular clause, in my opinion an hon. member when he is speaking on second reading can deal with the principle implied in the sections of the bill. To rule that that cannot be done would simply mean that there could be no discussion on second reading. If I were to take up the bill and go through it section by section, perhaps I could be ruled out of order, but if I were mentioning a principle in a section without mentioning the section itself, surely I would be dealing with the principle of the bill.


Mr. BENTLEY:: Many of us in this group look at this bill in the same way-


James Horace King: Is the hon. gentleman speaking on a point of order or on the bill?


Thomas John Bentley: On the bill.


James Horace King: There is an amendment before the chair. So far as the point of order is concerned, hon. gentlemen will permit me to say that it is a well known fact that on second reading hon. members have not the right to discuss sections of the bill. That is why we go into committee. We go into committee to discuss the bill section by section. On second reading of a bill I understand that an hon. member may mention what a section contains. He may say, "I am against the bill because of such and such a section, and if such and such a section is amended I may be for the bill." Hon. members will admit that it is against the rule to discuss a bill section by section. I believe I have been very generous so far as the bill is concerned because some hon. members were out of order.
There is another thing that we should not forget. An hon. member has no right to speak more than once on the second reading of the bill. I have permitted the leader of the opposition to speak on the bill more than once.
Canada Grain Act


John Bracken: I was interrupted before my remarks were finished.


James Horace King: The following motion is before the chair:
That the bill be not now read a second time but that the subject matter thereof be referred to the committee on agriculture and colonization.
I am sorry to say that I have to declare this motion out of order since it asks that the bill be referred to a committee which does not exist. Until the committees are organized, actually there is no committee on agriculture and colonization; therefore I cannot accept the amendment.


James Angus MacKinnon: I think it is fair to make the statement that I propose to make now. The very thoughts expressed by the leader of the opposition were in my mind when I discussed this matter with the officials. It was only because the argument was used that provision be made now to take care of some future eventuality that I agreed to bring the bill before the house in this form. I am perfectly willing to drop that clause in the bill and will do so when we come to it in committee.


Thomas John Bentley: May I ask the minister a question on the bill? I am also disturbed by twenty-five per cent of this bill. However, I am not disturbed to learn that there may be some good in it. If it were sent to the agriculture committee or to some other committee we would be able to bring officials from the different organizations to give evidence as to whether there is something good in it or not. If it is discussed in the committee of the whole we shall not have that opportunity; we shall simply have to take the minister's explanation as to why these things are there. Has there been a discussion carried on with officials of the grain companies which operate terminal elevators and which may be affected by any ruling which the grain board may make when the power is given to them to postpone weighing?


James Angus MacKinnon: I have not carried on any such conversations nor so far as I know have the officials of my department. If my hon. friend is referring to the clause dealing with the weigh-over, I have just said that I am willing to withdraw it.


James Arthur Ross: Have we disposed of the amendment? Are we now in order to discuss the principle of the bill?


John Bracken: I rise now, Mr. Speaker, to speak to your ruling with respect to the amendment. Your Honour has declared it out of order on the ground that at the moment
LMr. Speaker.]
there is no standing committee on agriculture and colonization. In other words, Your Honour is ruling it out of order on the technical ground that at the moment there is no such committee. The house, it appears, is now in the position where a perfectly proper amendment is to be denied on technical grounds. I must protest your ruling and I do so.


James Horace King: May I say, first, to the hon. gentleman, that the Speaker's ruling is not debatable. Second, I have no choice but to declare the motion out of order since it provides that a bill be referred to a committee which does not exist. I should like to add this. It is not the duty of the Speaker to offer any suggestions, but I must say that there is a way of referring the bill to the committee.


John Bracken: That is what I want, Mr. Speaker, a way of getting this to the committee, but your ruling precludes that possibility and therefore I have no choice but to appeal against it.


James Horace King: The question before the
house is the following: Mr. MacKinnon has moved, seconded by Mr. Usley, that Bill No. 4, intituled an Act to amend the Canada Grain Act, be read the second time. Mr. Bracken moves as an amendment, seconded by Mr. Brooks, that the bill be not now read the second time but that the subject matter thereof be referred to the committee on agriculture and colonization. As the committee on agriculture and colonization has not yet been formed that committee does not exist and I have declared the amendment out of order since it is impossible to refer a bill to a committee which does not exist. Mr. Bracken appeals from my decision, and the question before the house is, shall the Speaker's ruling be sustained?


Mr. JOHNSTON:: I was paired with the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Cleaver). Had I voted, I would have supported the Speaker's ruling.


James Horace King: Is the house ready for the question? Mr. MacKinnon moves:
That Bill No. 4, an act to amend the Canada Grain Act, be now read a second time.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I say to my hon. friend opposite that I know the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. MacKinnon) had no intention of seeking to prevent this bill from going to a committee if such were the desire of this house; but there being no committee, the bill could not be referred to a body that did not exist. I am rising at the moment to say that I propose to move to adjourn the debate with the understanding that it will be resumed after the committee on agriculture has been established, and that the minister will be quite prepared, once the bill is given second reading, to have it referred to the committee.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King the
debate was adjourned.



FEEDING STUFFS ACT


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) moved the second reading of Bill No. 7, to amend the Feeding Stuffs Act, 1937.
Messrs:
Adamson	Hatfield
Archibald	Hazen
Argue	Homuth
Blair	Jackman
Boucher	Knowles
Bracken	Lennard
Brooks	Lockhart
Bryce	Maclnnis
Case	MacNicol
Casselman	Merritt
Castleden	Miller '
Charlton	Murphy
Church	Pearkes
Cockeram	Robinson (Bruce)
Daniel	Ross (Souris)
Diefenbaker	Senn
Ferguson	Smith (Calgary West)
Fleming	Stephenson
Fulton	Wright
Green Harkness	Zaplitny-41.
Mr. BRUNELLE:: I was paired with the hon. member for High Park (Mr. McMaster). If I had voted, I would have supported the decision of Mr. Speaker.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1-Regulations.
Mr. SENN:: Could the minister make a statement?


James Garfield Gardiner: There is only one section in this bill. Section 4 of the Feeding Stuffs Act of 1937 provides for the registration of certain feeding stuffs mentioned in schedule A to the act before they are imported into, manufactured, distributed, advertised, sold or offered or held in possession for sale in Canada; and the section being added here, section (4a), provides:
When in his opinion the public interest so requires the minister may by regulation provide that only feeding stuffs of the kind or composition specified in such regulations shall be eligible for registration under this act and the minister may refuse to register any feeding stuff that is not of such kind or composition.
Feeding Stuffs Act

That is a provision which was made by order in council during the time of the war, and both producers and users of the feeding stuffs are asking that it be continued in the act, which is what we propose to do.


Mark Cecil Senn: Does the minister say there were no regulations whatever regarding patent feeds or feeding stuffs prior to the order in council being brought down?


James Garfield Gardiner: No, I am not suggesting that, but this gives the minister a special right. It says:
When in his opinion the public interest so requires the minister may by regulation provide that only feeding stuffs of the kind or composition specified . . .
My understanding is that under the section previously in the act the minister was required to register these particular feeding stuffs if application was made, and different requirements were set out. But a practice grew up whereby a company manufacturing feeding stuffs simply brought in another, slightly different form of the feeding stuff, a slightly different mixture, in order to put it on the market as another grade of feed stuff and thus require another price for it, putting it into competition with commodities already being sold. During the war it was declared that there was not sufficient difference between many of these registered feeds for which registration was being asked to warrant the mixtures being put on the market under a different brand. So the minister was given authority under that regulation to control the registration of these feeding stuffs simply to keep unnecessary brands off the market.


Mark Cecil Senn: I certainly agree with the minister that every effort should be made to protect the farmers fully. I am afraid that quite often in the past we have had different feedstuffs which perhaps were not exactly as they were represented to be. There has been a good deal of advertising carried on in connection with these things, and I have often wondered whether the farmer was not paying altogether too much for these feeds which are supposed to work wonders for his live stock. I am in full accord with the bill as far as it goes.


Mr. BRYCE:: Will this interfere with farmers making up feed and disposing of it? Must they have a special brand name, and the permission of the minister?


James Garfield Gardiner: This act does not
cover the matter of one farmer selling mixtures of his own to other farmers. It has to do with the manufacturer, the professional mixer of feeds, who sells them to farmers.


William Scottie Bryce: They will have to be registered as such?


James Garfield Gardiner: I do not think the farmer himself would ask for registration.


William Scottie Bryce: But the company will have to be registered in the regular way?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes.


Mark Cecil Senn: Very recently the practice has grown up throughout Ontario of people engaging in the chopping of grain of different kinds. Many farmers do not have their own chopping outfits, and they take their grain to a chopping mill. Soane of these chopping mills are buying grain of all kinds and mixing it for sale to farmers, though it is only done in a small way. Is it intended that all these people will have to have brand names and be registered with the department, or is there some limit to the amount that must be produced before they are required to do so?


James Garfield Gardiner: There is nothing in
this bill which compels any practice different from that which prevailed in the past. It has to do with things like this. Under schedule A to the order which previously existed, the kinds of feed, and the purposes, were set out. Under that heading we have cattle feeds, complete or ready to feed; first, to cows on pasture; second, to dry and freshening cows, growing calves, heifers, bulls in service and fattening steers. That is all put in one classification; under the regulations it is determined that in those feeds there must be from thirteen to fourteen per cent of protein, and only three different brands are allowed to be registered under that mixture. That is the general regulation. Then for cows in milk the protein content must be from fifteen to sixteen per cent, and there can be only one brand or mixture for cows in milk. That is the nature of the schedule right through, and I think it is in the interests of the farmers generally.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock. INSPECTION AND SALE ACT

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) moved the second reading of Bill No. 8, to amend the Inspection and Sale Act, 1938.

Inspection and Sale Act
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1-Definitions.
Mark Cecil Senn: Will the minister explain these amendments?


James Garfield Gardiner: The Inspection and Sale Act, 1938, makes provision for grading and maintaining the standards of certain products, and part I covers binder twine. During the war we sold considerable flax fibre and tow to the British government and during that time we were asked to grade the flax fibre and tow being sold to the British government. As a result of the experiences gained, it is considered, by both the producers and the trade, that it would be a good thing to have that provision put in this act. The bill provides that we may grade fibre flax and tow which may be sold from time to time and these provisions are put in as part IA, the sections being numbered 12A, 12B and so on.


Mark Cecil Senn: Is any great quantity of flax being produced in Canada? I understood the minister to say that most of it was going to Great Britain; is that still the case?


James Garfield Gardiner: In the first year of the war, 1939-40, there were 8,306 acres of land in Canada engaged in the growing of fibre flax. That was increased in the first year of the war to 20,000 acres. In 1941-42 the acreage was increased to 44,000, and in 1942-43, to 47,000. From 1942-43 down to the present there has been a reduction in acreage. In 1943-44 the acreage was down to 33,000, and there was a slight increase in 1944-45 to 38,000 acres. In 1945-46 it was down to 21,000 acres. Last year, largely owing to the fact that the season was late and those who seed flax do not like to take chances on late seeding, the total acreage was down to 15,762 acres.
It is expected that the acreage will go up this year, probably back to about 21,000 acres. It is not likely that it will increase much beyond that. The amount secured for the flax in the different years ranged from $837,000 in 1939-40 to $2,25 ,000 in 1943-44, and: this despite the fact that that was not the highest year as far as total acreage was concerned. However, the price was higher in that year. The reductions in the years following are partly due to the fact that there has been a
decrease in the amount offered for the flax. Perhaps I might give the prices, which are as follows:
cents
Flax, Canada, 1945-46, grade 1	 55
Next grade	 53
Next	 54
Next	 47
Tow Canada, pluckings. first grade		24
A	 22
B	 20
C	 18
D	 16
B	 13
F	 Ill
At the end of that year it was not thought necessary to enter into an agreement with Great Britain for the sale of flax and tow that might be available, because of the lower seedlings. However, as we moved into the season it was thought advisable to have an agreement and one was entered into. The prices offered by the British board of trade, f.a.s. Atlantic seaboard, were as follows:
cents
Canada, grade 1	 40
Grade 2	 38
Grade 3	 35
Grade 4	 31
Pluckings, No.	1	 22
A	 16
B	 14
C	 12
There were no quotations for the lower grades. This is partly because of the changed situation in there not being as high an acreage during the last year and partly because there was a late season and it is not wise to seed flax too late. We are not expecting an increase back to anything like the figures we had in 1942-43.


Mark Cecil Senn: If my memory serves me correctly, during the last war there was a large increase in the production of flax fibres in Canada and this was a profitable business for both the farmers and the merchants. However, at the close of the war production began to decline, largely on account of lower prices as well as certain other factors. The result was that the flax business in Canada went out of existence entirely. I am just wondering whether something similar might not happen now. No doubt the needs of the war were responsible for the increase in flax production as well as the good: prices being offered by the British government, but I hope nothing will be done by the Department of Agriculture to induce people to go into the flax business. After the last war many men lost everything they had in the flax business.


James Garfield Gardiner: I wish to express my appreciation for the words just uttered by the hon. member who, I understand, is the
Inspection and Sale Act

official agricultural critic of the official opposition. He has just expressed the view which we hold. At the beginning of the war quite a number of people came to Canada from some of the European countries and they were ardent promoters of the production of flax. On every occasion when a delegation came to us, sometimes headed by some of these people, we gave exactly the warning which has just been given by the hon. member for Haldimand, namely, that the experience of the first war was that the flax which we could produce in this country, and produce successfully, was required in great quantities during that war, but dropped very rapidly following the war. I think the acreage was increased from around the smaller acreage we had in this last war up to about 40,000 acres; then after the war, it dropped to 10,000 or 12,000 acres. As has been stated, a considerable number of people lost money in attempting to stay in the business too long. When we were approached in 1943 or 1944 to increase the price from fifty-five to sixty-three cents we inquired why sixty-three cents was suggested. It was stated that persons here who were familiar with the production of flax and were on land suitable for flax growing could produce flax for fifty-five cents or even less, but that if persons who were not on the best flax land and had had no experience in flax growing were to be induced to go into flax growing we would have to pay up to sixty-three cents. We refused to go up to sixty-three cents or to pay any subsidy that would make that price possible. We advised the farmers to be careful in proceeding to get into flax growing in a big way if their land was better suited to something else, and that had something to do with the reduction in acreage beginning back in 1943. We are not urging them to increase the present acreage, although I would not be surprised, if conditions are favourable in the spring, if some who got partly out of flax last year went back into it.


Mark Cecil Senn: Was any amount specified in
the agreement with Great Britain?


James Garfield Gardiner: The agreement involves a substantial price reduction which the British board of trade claims was justified in order to bring the price being paid for Canadian flax into line with prices paid for comparable quantities from other empire sources. It was suggested that they would take all we could produce at that price on the acreage we then had, but there was no inducement to cultivate any larger acreage than was then available. In fact the considerable reduction in price would indicate that they were not anxious to have the acreage increased this year.


Mr. REID:: With regard to the inspection certificate mentioned in paragraph (c), will the inspection certificates issued by the officers of the department be recognized by buyers from abroad? I mention that because, during the war when the British buyers were here, complaints were made by flax growers in the district I have the honour to represent that the British inspectors were too exacting in their requirements. Now that we are to continue our inspection, I wonder if the Canadian inspection certificate will be recognized by buyers from other countries.


James Garfield Gardiner: Some difficulty was experienced about the middle of the war when the price was increased and an inspection was required. The British sent an inspector over who passed upon flax and flax fibre before it was finally accepted. My memory is that, after some misunderstandings and some discussions between our own people and the British, the Canadian inspections were almost invariably accepted, and I think there is an understanding now between the British and ourselves which will result in standards established by our certificates being acceptable to the British.


Mr. WRIGHT:: Certain people from certain countries in Europe came here and urged us to go into production of flax fibre. I believe those people had linen mills in certain countries in Europe, and I was wondering if the minister could indicate whether these people showed any inclination to establish branches of their mills in Canada to process our fibre flax in this country.


James Garfield Gardiner: The persons I was referring to specifically were in the business in this country. Whether they have gone back to their own countries or not I am not in a position to say, but I do not think they have; I think they are still here. They came over here in the early part of the war, after having been in the same business on the continent of Europe, and they established themselves in the business here and were quite active in it. Naturally they were anxious to get a greater acreage of flax produced so that they would have greater quantities to handle. I must say this for them, that immediately we made the suggestions I have just mentioned to the committee, they ceased to advocate an increased acreage for flax production in this country, and they went on to handle the product that was here.


Percy Ellis Wright: They have not shown any intention of establishing branch factories in this country?

Inspection and Sale Act


James Garfield Gardiner: I would not want to be too certain about that. If they did not establish plants of their own, they were engaged by others who had plants.


Percy Ellis Wright: I do not mean plants for the processing of flax fibres. I was inquiring with regard to the establishment of spinning mills.


James Garfield Gardiner: I do not think they did that.


Mark Cecil Senn: I distinctly remember a very handsome Irishman who was out at the experimental farm conducting experiments with flax and flax fibres. Is that work being continued?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, the experimental work is still being continued.


Mr. HARKNESS:: Who make the inspections and fix the grades, and is that their sole job? What is the cost of the inspection to the dominion government?


James Garfield Gardiner: I have not those figures here but will have them on my estimates. The inspection is conducted under the direction of the gentleman who has been conducting the experiments at the farm. He is experienced in flax growing, and the inspectors work under his direction.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Is that their sole job?


James Garfield Gardiner: I would think it is their main job, although no doubt they will be working in connection with the experimental work that is going on. We are conducting experiments at Portage in the west and at the central experimental farm. These men are very well schooled in flax production.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The idea I had in mind was that the cost of the inspection and grading was probably greater than the total quantity of flax produced would justify.


James Garfield Gardiner: I can prove, when my estimates are before the committee, that that is not the case. I think that would be the proper time to raise that question.


John George Diefenbaker: This is one of the first of the bills incorporating orders in council passed in wartime. Looking over some of the provisions of this bill, I notice that the minister has power to make regulations prescribing standards of grade, class or quality for flax fibre and the names or marks that may be used to designate such grade, class or quality; also to provide for the inspection, grading and labelling of flax fibre, and generally for carrying into effect any of the purposes or provisions of part I of the bill. Most of these
powers in almost identical terms were to be found in the Natural Products Marketing Act, which became law during the Bennett administration and which was submitted to the supreme court after the defeat of that administration. Later on, the references were taken to the privy council where the Natural Products Marketing Act was declared ultra vires. As I understand the argument in the privy council, it was held that the act purported to control not only export and interprovincial trade but also trade within a province. Have these particular amendments been submitted to the law officers of the crown, and if so will the minister give the committee the benefit of the opinions they gave as to whether or not these sections are within the power of parliament?


James Garfield Gardiner: The bill has been submitted to the law officers of the Department of Justice. I think section 12(b) answers the question. It reads as follows:
No person shall export any flax fibre unless it is inspected, graded, marked or designated, and labelled in accordance with the regulations made under this part.
It is only a product that has been exported which must be brought under this act.


John George Diefenbaker: The simple answer is, then, that it was submitted to the law officers and they said that it was within the powers of parliament?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes.


George Russell Boucher: May I point out that according to the definition in 12A "export" is defined as follows:
"Export" means send out of Canada or out of one province to another province.


James Garfield Gardiner: It is perfectly within the constitution, as the hon. member for Lake Centre will probably agree, to say that export does mean from one province to another or from this country to another country. If that is so, then the dominion government has authority to legislate with regard to it. If it is trade within one province, then we have no authority.
. Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



FERTILIZERS ACT


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) moved the second reading of Bill No. 9, to amend the Fertilizers Act.
Mr. E. G. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: Because of the ramifications of fertilizer products I should like to draw to the attention
Fertilizers Act

not only of the Minister of Agriculture but of all hon. members the situation in regard to fertilizer, its production, distribution and price. I wish to draw attention to this fact. I think all hon. members will agree that from the short point of view we want immediate all-out production in Canada. Fertilizer applied to our land today in every field of agriculture will increase production. My second point is that from the long point of view we have in the past exploited this great resource of our country, our land, to the extent that unless we make provision so that farmers can use fertilizers on their soil we are going to face decreased production, and also find that we are mining out our land of those precious elements which can be replaced only by various types of fertilizer.
I hold in my hand a publication put out by Mr. F. A. McGregor entitled "Canada and the International Cartels". The first cartel or monopoly which he deals with in this pamphlet is fertilizer. I do not know whether the commissioner places the most importance on that or not, but at any rate we find that in Canada today there are three main constituents in the mixture of fertilizers, namely, potash, nitrogen and phosphorus.
I should like to follow closely the development of the fertilizer business in Canada because, in spite of all the ramifications which it may have in the international picture, here in Canada the Canadian people and the farmers generally are much concerned about it. Prior to the great war, the potash industry was largely controlled within the German empire by a German syndicate. With the restoration, after the first great war. of Alsace-Lorraine to France we find that the Alsatian deposits came under French control. After a brief period of competition, the German and French companies got together and, under an understanding formed a cartel. The important thing is that we find that from 1924 to 1933 a uniform price was maintained throughout the world. Later on in 1932, when the Polish producers of fertilizer came into the market they started to compete with the world cartel which had been built up, and they were finally dragged into the cartel arrangement and given four per cent of the world market. In that way the cartel stopped the pressure on breaking the price of fertilizer throughout the world. This condition remained in existence until 1934 when the Russian and Spanish fertilizers came on to the world markets. During that time the Lnited States market was increasing production. The effect of this competition from the new sources of production, and the elimination of the Spanish and Russian

exporters are reflected in the prices which are given in this pamphlet by the commissioner. We find that in 1932 the price per unit of 20 pounds of potash was $0,619. That price was maintained until 1934 when there was competition; the price of the world cartel was broken, and the price was brought down to $0,300, or a little less than fifty per cent of the price established in 1932.
After these cartels got together in 1939, we find that they were once again successful in increasing the price of fertilizer until in 1939 it was $0,471.


Mr. SMITH (Calgary West):: Where was that?


Edward George McCullough: It is f.o.b. United States ports. This showed clearly that these companies entering into the cartel arrangements were able to control prices. One thing that we should note carefully is that in Canada we have no great deposits of potash which is one of the ingredients we require in our fertilizer, and therefore it is of tremendous importance to us. We find a branch of the European cartel with a selling company established in Montreal, which is the Canadian subsidiary of the great German-French cartel with headquarters in Holland. This is what the report says:
The close relationship between the cartel and the American producers of potash provided an opportunity for Canadian manufacturers and distributors of fertilizers to formulate common policies as to prices and conditions of sale.
The table I have quoted will, I believe, bear this out. One of the other chief ingredients of fertilizer is, of course, nitrogen. Prior to world war I, fifty-four per cent of the world requirement of nitrogen compounds was produced in Chile and it was a by-producf of the steel and coke industries and of other activities as well. During the war, we started in Canada to produce our own nitrogen and, by the end of the war, the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company was able to manufacture a synthetic fertilizer at Trail, British Columbia. This is of extreme importance to us because, after being at the mercy of the fertilizer-producing countries of the world, we in Canada had in that crown company an opportunity of producing this material for ourselves.
My information is that the government expressly promised the Canadian Federation of Agriculture that either this or one of the other wartime plants would be kept under public ownership so that the world monopoly would not get the Canadian farmer in its grasp. The Canadian Mining and Smelting Company of British Columbia was producing

Fertilizers Act
a waste by-product going into nitrates, a product going into fertilizer. As I say, it was a by-product, and while the company was selling it to the mixers at $33 a ton the farmers were paying $44. I think the minister will agree with me that it is a waste product in the foundries of the smelting company. In fact, you have to put a price on it as a waste product. We produced in these war plants at Calgary and at Welland this product, ammonia nitrate.
I suggest that this is perhaps one of the sell-outs of the Canadian farmer on the part of the government, because here we had an opportunity of maintaining a crown-owned corporation where we could produce fertilizers for the farmers, which they must get if they are to maintain the nitrogen content of our soil. But instead of doing that, the Alberta Nitrogen Products plant and the Trail smelting company, the former costing $9,821,000 odd and the latter $5,816,217 were sold for $7,500,000, or less than half the original price of the two. They were sold at half the original cost to the Canadian taxpayers.
I contend, therefore, that we have messed things up here and that the time has come, if we wish to take with any seriousness the report of our commissioner, when we should make provision to supply our farmers at a decent price the fertilizers which they so greatly need.


James Garfield Gardiner: I was very much interested in the remarks made by the hon. member, but I think it is necessary to say something on the second reading of the bill as a result of what has already been said.
It is perfectly true that potash is an important ingredient of fertilizer'and that practically all the potash we used in the past came from Europe, some of it from the sources mentioned, and some from Russia.
The situation with regard to nitrates is partly as has been described. Prior to the war, we had got most of our fertilizer in western Canada from the operations of the Trail smelting plant and we did as well get a considerable part of our nitrates from another plant which is located in the Niagara peninsula. During the war it became necessary to have nitrates produced for the manufacture of explosives and one of the plants opened for that purpose was the plant at Calgary, to which reference has been made.
My understanding is that during the war nitrates were produced at Calgary at the lowest cost of any plant established anywhere. I have heard it stated on good authority, and I believe it can be substantiated, that nitrates were laid down in Halifax from
Calgary at a cost lower than from anywhere else on this continent. The plant was an efficient one and did an important job during the war. Unfortunately we do not require very much in the form of nitrates for fertilizer in western Canada. Our fertilizer mixtures require other ingredients in so far as we use fertilizer at all in the west. We are not heavy users of fertilizers.
It has been suggested that probably someone was sold out in the disposition of the plant.
I had considerable experience with it myself, and 1 would not want anyone to go away with the idea that anyone was sold out without at least having an opportunity of buying before any selling was done.
The president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture raised the question as to whether or not this plant should be sold, and they raised it first, in a very effective way, with the Minister of Munitions and Supply, who had been responsible for the establishment of the plant in the first place and for its utilization during the war. Then the president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture brought the matter to the attention of the Department of Agriculture and asked us to take an interest in the matter and see whether this plant could not be put in the hands of someone other than Consolidated Smelters or any other organization that had been in the business up until then.
I went to the then Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) and, without any hesitation whatsoever, he said that the plant was being put on the market and would be sold, that he invited bids on it from any source whatsoever. Not only did he agree to that, but for the greater part of a year- I have forgotten the exact period of time now, but it could be obtained from the records-he refrained from selling the plant. During that period of time, I personally took the matter up with every organization in western Canada that had money. At that time one of the very strong organizations in western Canada had a profit of seven million dollars which, I suppose, could have been utilized under certain circumstances for doing certain things. They examined into the possibilities of buying and operating the plant; other organizations examined into the possibilities of buying and operating it, and the matter was publicly discussed so that any government or anyone desiring to go intc that kind of business could have gone into it. But no one desired to do so.
I say quite candidly that the reason the government did not go into it was that we have not been advocates of that kind of thing. We have not been advocating that
Fertilizers Act

the government should go into that type of business at any time. We have been maintaining that that type of business is a legitimate business for either private or cooperative capital to be in, and we believe that kind of business will be much more efficiently operated in the interest of everyone concerned if it is carried on either through the utilization of private capital or through the utilization of capital made available by cooperatives set up by the people who desire to use the product. So we took sufficient time, by correspondence, by meeting delegations and otherwise, ki trying to interest some of these people in that plant in order that it might be operated in a manner which they might think would be in the interests of the farmer. I am not going to say that others, whether it be government or whether it be farmers' cooperatives, were unwise in not taking on this particular investment; because, as was stated by the hon. member a few moments ago, the greatest supply of the product prior to the war as well as during the first war was obtained from Chile. The only way in which that plant could be operated successfully purely for the production of fertilizer, according to the information we were able to gather, was by producing nitrates which would be marketed largely in the United States and which would be sold in competition with the product that comes from Chile. Everyone who examined into the possibilities of the plant-and that included the cooperatives in the west-came to the conclusion that it was not a good business proposition into which to put the money of his organization, and I presume that, if the western governments gave any thought to it, they probably came to the same conclusion.
The plant was eventually sold to the highest bidder and the highest bidder was Consolidated Smelters. Consolidated Smelters bought the plant, I think at the figure which was indicated by the hon. member for Assini-boia (Mr. McCullough) a few minutes ago, seven million and some odd thousand dollars. They have that plant now.
While I was west recently I made a number of speeches, as hon. members know, and some of them appeared in the press. But in addition to the speeches, I had the usual number of newspapermen who wanted interviews; and one of them who had an interview, afterwards published in the press a statement to the effect that I had said that Consolidated Smelters had taken this plant over and closed it up. Immediately upon seeing that item in the Vancouver Province, I telephoned the editor and told him that I could not have made any such state-
ment as that because the plant was not closed up. But the incident had its good effect, because the next day I received a telephone call from the vice-president of the company who was then in Victoria, who told me that one of the newspapers had wanted a story from him contradicting what I had said in order that they might be able to write it up. Instead of giving that, he telephoned to me to ask me what I really had said. I told him what I had said, namely, that I hoped the company was not going to close it up. He said, "Well, I can tell you quite emphatically that we have no intention of closing it up; we intend to go on and operate it." So I am pleased to know that the company which has it, Consolidated Smelters, do intend to operate it and do intend to utilize it for the purpose of making an ingredient of fertilizer to the extent that it can be disposed of and utilized.
I wanted to say that in order to indicate that the government have not thoughtlessly allowed this plant to be sold to Consolidated Smelters. They have given every opportunity possible to anyone else who desired to go into the business of producing fertilizer. We even went so far as to urge upon every farm organization that has considerable capital for other things, that they utilize some of it for that purpose; and to urge on them that, if they did not desire to utilize the capital in the present organization, they do something similar to what was done in relation to farm implements. When we were having our discussion early in the war, or just before the war, with regard1 to farm implements, many of us took the position that the proper way to deal with the question was to form a cooperative in western Canada to make farm implements available at lower costs. That kind of organization is there today. It has considerable capital. It ha9 not seen fit to manufacture, but maybe someday it will manufacture. We even suggested to the farmers in western Canada that, if the present organization were not in a position to deal with the matter, an organization be established for that purpose. All I have to say with regard to it is that we were not able to interest anyone in it; and finally, after months had gone by and every means had been exhausted for having this plant turned over to somebody out there who wanted to operate it, and it had been made known to everyone who wanted to discuss the matter and to many who did not want to discuss it, it was 3old to the only company that seemed interested, namely, Consolidated. Smelters.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Will the hon. gentleman permit a question? Was it not a term of the arrangement by which Consoli-

Fertilizers Act
dated operated that Calgary plant during the war, or did they not have in their agreement an option to purchase that plant? Did they not have an option to ourchase that plant at tire highest price offered by any bidder? Then perhaps another question that I am sure will be very helpful to him is this. As he well knows, that plant made a great deal of fertilizer during the war. Does he know the percentage of that which was used in Canada? The manager told me that plant could make enough fertilizer in one week to supply the whole of the Dominion of Canada. They sold their fertilizer on the gulf coast. That is where it went.


James Garfield Gardiner: They did not make very much fertilizer during the war period; as I understand it, they were making nitrates for use in connection with the war.


Arthur Leroy Smith: They
operated, making fertilizer, for about six months, and did a wonderful job.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not sure about the period of a week, but I do know that in a very short time they could make in that plant all the nitrates necessary for the production of fertilizer in Canada. It is also true that the other plant located in Canada produces a very large part of the nitrates required for the production of fertilizers in eastern Canada. That is why I say one of the influencing factors in relation to some of these people about whom I have been speaking was that they found that if they operated the plant they would have to go into the United States market, where probably eighty ot ninety per cent of the product turned out-I am not sure of the percentages-would have to be sold. They no doubt thought that as farm organizations they were not inclined to invest the sum of money necessary to obtain control of that plant in order to sell nitrates in the United States.
As to the matter of terms, I have not the contract here and I would not be too definite about it, but my memory is that the option they had was at the figure which has been stated, $7,000,000 odd. I do not think they were to be permitted to buy at the highest price that might be offered, but I am speaking subject to correction. Perhaps my hon. friend knows more about the matter than I do. My memory is that they got the plant at the price indicated at the time the arrangement was entered into, but I do not think that would have prevented anyone else from bidding more had they desired to do so.


Mr. HOMUTH:: I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this whole debate is entirely out of order. You are in the chair; we have been addressing questions to the minister and he has been answering them.


James Horace King: I appreciate very much the assistance of my hon. friend. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1

Fineness in clay or rock phosphate.
Thomas John Bentley: I heard it said, and to some extent I believe it is correct, that some of the western farm organizations with quite large surplus earnings were not interested in buying the plant at Calgary. I would not want the wrong impression to be left by that statement. These organizations have been referred to from time to time as not being as much interested as they might have been, even though they had large surplus earnings on hand, but at the time they were more or less in a state of disorganization because of the actions of our hon. friends opposite. They did not know what was going to happen to their surpluses as a result of income tax legislation, and therefore were loathe to purchase new plants, even though they had been interested in them, or to go ahead with other plants as to which they had already made commitments. I thought it might be well to draw the attention of the committee to this situation so that wrong conclusions would not be drawn from some of the things we hear from time to time in the house.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: The hon. member is trying to make some apology for what the minister has said. We have heard a great deal from that group as to what should be done in regard to the socialization of industry. Here they had a chance to buy an industry, though it was outside their own province. Surely the apology offered by the hon. member just now does not apply to this situation. Apparently the farm organizations were afraid to tackle this problem. I think, if he can, the minister should give us a little more information in regard to the relative profits, the sales in this country and the sales abroad. He made the statement that the farm organizations were not prepared to tackle this project. Are the socialistic organizations not prepared to tackle a project they think might not pay?


James Garfield Gardiner: In view of the fact that a few moments ago my hon. friend was trying to keep us in order, I would suggest that now
Fertilizers Act

he should not try to get me out of order. It was quite proper to discuss the larger issues on the motion for second reading, but I do not think this section has much to do with the point he has raised. I believe the hon. member for Swift Current was out of order, really, and I do not want to get out of order also.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 2-Registration number.
Edward George McCullough: I see that this section provides for the deletion of "designation of year of issue." I feel that it would be quite unfortunate if this change should be made, because of the deterioration that takes place in the product. So that, unless the minister has some explanation to offer, I believe it would be a mistake not to have the date on the bag.


James Garfield Gardiner: The explanation is that section 5 of the act as it is at present requires the designation of the year of issue in addition to the registration number. That registration number itself will indicate the time at which the product was issued. This additional provision has been found of no value, and has been found to interfere with the use of printed packages or bags carried over from previous years. It is proposed, therefore, to repeal it. The number itself is a sufficient record; we can always check back from it. If you put a particular year of issue on the packages, and all those packages are not used, those remaining have to be discarded. Since the number appears on the package in any event, and any inspector of ours can check the product from the date the number is issued, it is not considered necessary to put manufacturers to the extra expense of printing new packages while they already have some on hand.


Edward George McCullough: But that would not give the farmer the information; he would not know when it was made. He would have no idea whatever of the year the fertilizer was packaged or made up.


James Garfield Gardiner: I think it will be found that all these matters are pretty carefully checked through inspection, and I do not think the farmer would lose anything by not having the date on the container. I believe the product is careful!}' checked and inspected in that regard.


Mark Cecil Senn: I cannot altogether agree with the minister in that respect. From time to time bags of fertilizer go out that are old and not as good as they should be. I have
(Mr. Gardiner.]
seen fertilizer that has eaten up the bags entirely. The containers had no numbers at all, and in such cases the farmers would be at a disadvantage.


James Garfield Gardiner: The number would be on the package, but if this amendment is adopted the year of issue will not appear on the containers.


Heber Harold Hatfield: What is the regulation in regard to a farmer mixing his own fertilizer?


James Garfield Gardiner: I do not believe there is any regulation in regard to that. I do not know why there should be. If a farmer mixes his own fertilizer he buys his own ingredients and mixes them in accordance with what he thinks are the needs of his land, and I presume he gets some information first.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Does this give the
minister power to prescribe certain formulas for fertilizer?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes. The percentages of ingredients are arranged between our officials and the officials of the provincial governments. The percentages of ingredients in a fertilizer for Nova Scotia would not be the same as the percentages for a fertilizer for the prairie provinces. There is less difference as between Ontario and- Nova Scotia, but there is still a difference. Then there may be a difference within a province. When land is sampled and is found to be lacking in fertility, the mixture is made up to suit. That is all done by arrangement between our officials and the provincial officials. They agree on what the ingredients ought to be and those are set out in the regulations.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Has the department the power to compel a farmer to use a certain formula of fertilizer?


James Garfield Gardiner: They are not compelling the farmer to use it; they are compelling the person who mixes and sells the fertilizer to use the proportions suitable to that particular section of the country. If the farmer wants to mix something else and he can secure the ingredients, there is nothing to prevent him from doing so.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Manufacturers in Saint
John were putting out a certain formula which was prescribed by the fertilizer council, and they were also manufacturing another formula to be sold in Maine. We in New Brunswick could not buy the Maine 5-8-10-1 fertilizer, but we could go over to Maine and buy it.
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH:	Should the fertilizer be of the required strength all the time or just at the time of registration?

Fertilizers Act


James Garfield Gardiner: The point that was discussed a few moments ago in connection with the previous section bears right on the matter now being brought up. Some of the ingredients of a fertilizer may deteriorate over a period of time. For that reason it was thought at one time that the date the mixture was made up in accordance with the regulations ought to be on the container, but the officials now tell me that that is not necessary because the numbers themselves make it possible for them to be checked. Those dates were never of any great help. Of course there is considerable loss to a person who buys a package and does not use it. There is set out in the regulations the different percentages of ingredients that must be put into a fertilizer. A fertilizer will be mixed by a company, and then that will be checked from time to time by our inspectors or the provincial inspectors to make certain that the fertilizer does maintain its utility. I do not think there is any possibility of much of it getting out that is not up to strength.


Mr. CHARLTON:: Is it necessary for the companies to get a new permit number each year?


James Garfield Gardiner: A manufacturer would have to get a permit at least once a year, or more often as the different fertilizers are checked and changes made from time to time. As a fertilizer is used on land for a certain period it begins to replace in the land what is most essential and it may be necessary to use something containing a different strength of certain material. That is dealt with consistently. The company would have to get a number which would indicate the product being put out that year.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Can anyone get a permit to mix fertilizer?


James Garfield Gardiner: I do not know that anyone needs a permit to mix fertilizer unless he is going to sell it.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Can he get a permit to mix and sell fertilizer?


Edward George McCullough: I am not satisfied with the minister's explanation of this proposed amendment, because I feel the farmer is not completely protected. Therefore I move, seconded by the hon. member for Dauphin (Mr. Zaplitny) that paragraph (c) of section 2 be amended by adding the words, "and designation of year of issue" after the word "number."


James Garfield Gardiner: That has always been in the act. It is stated by the officials that it is not of any particular use and, does not help a
a great deal. If the committee wants the section to remain as it is in that regard, I am not going to press for the amendment, but I just want to say that it does add to the expense to cause containers to be destroyed. I do not think the farmers want to put people to unnecessary expense because, if they do, they have to pay for it.


William Scottie Bryce: When a product is reinspected, is the date of reinspection noted for the benefit of the farmer?


James Garfield Gardiner: The number would
indicate that the product had been put out within a reasonable length of time.


William Scottie Bryce: But is it given a new number when it is reinspected?


James Garfield Gardiner: It will get a new number each season in case there is any change.


Mr. STEPHENSON:: What happens when fertilizer is found to be too strong and the company recommends that the formula be decreased? What happens when a fertilizer company recommends a formula different from the standard formula?


James Garfield Gardiner: I imagine that if a fertilizer company came along and said that their experience indicated it would be better to use larger percentages of certain ingredients, that would be investigated at once by both the provincial and our own technical men. If they agreed with the manufacturer, and the additional ingredient were available, no doubt they would change the ingredients to suit. Otherwise I think they would make them conform to their views on it.


Charles Elwood Stephenson: I am thinking of the case where they have worked out a different formula. I know of one case where they used 3-10-6, I think it was and they are suggesting that' 2-10-6 should be used this year. Would it be possible if the government checked the soil analyses for that particular area that they might recommend a change in the fertilizer?


James Garfield Gardiner: These are all set out for the different types of soil. There is 0-14-7, 0-12-12 and 0-12-20 for soils lacking in nitrogen. Then for general farm crops there are 2-12-6 and 2-16-6. For crops requiring more potash there are 2-12-10 and 2-8-16. For general farm crops requiring a little more nitrogen there are 3-15-6, 4-12-6 and 4-8-6, for potatoes and root vegetables 4-8-8, 4-8-20, 4-12-10 and 5-10-10, for orchards, 9-5-7. Those are the mixes that are recommended for those purposes.
Fertilizers Act


Heber Harold Hatfield: That would do away with the mixing fertilizers according to prescription. If you analysed your soil and found that you needed a different fertilizer from those formulas you would not be able to buy it. The farmer should be able to buy whatever fertilizer his soil requires.
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH: The important thing as far as the farmer is concerned is that the fertilizer be full strength. If the minister can assure us that no attempt is to be made to sell the fertilizer at less than the prescribed strength we do not care what kind of mark it bears.


James Garfield Gardiner: That is the intention.
I am not going to say that there never is a slip made by those carrying out the inspection, and that no one gets by who is selling fertilizer a little under strength. But the objective of this legislation is to see that that never does happen, and we believe that the legislation provides so far as it can against such a possibility. I understand that the Chairman is now going to put the amendment. So far as I am concerned it is in the hands of the committee. I am not going to urge members to vote one way or the other. If it is felt that the farmer is not sufficiently protected without the data being on the container as it has been in the past, hon. members can vote accordingly, but I would point out again that all those who have been associated with this matter both provincially and federally agree that, with all the other provisions that are here, it does not do any particular good, and my own judgment would be that, if you put an additional expense upon those who are producing the commodity, there is only one place where the producers can get it back and that is from the farmer. Therefore I would suggest that the legislation had better be left as it is drafted. But it is entirely in the hands of the committee.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section 2 as amended agreed to.
On section 3-Information	on fertilizer
package.
Mr. CAMPBELL:: In line 22 should not
the word "may" be "shall"? Then it would read:
The names of the constituent materials of a fertilizer mixture shall be stated as prescribed by regulation.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Does the regulation say
"shall"? If the regulation says so, the amendment does not mean anything.


James Garfield Gardiner: It has been ruled many times that in cases like this "may" means "shall". The first time I heard that declared was by Mr. Bennett when he was leader of the opposition, and finally everyone agreed with him.


An hon. MEMBER:: If he did so, it was
right.


Major James William Coldwell: I do not think everyone would agree because, after all, "shall" is mandatory and "may" is permissive.


James Garfield Gardiner: Not in this case.


Major James William Coldwell: I am not a lawyer,
but I have heard it argued many times that "may" is permissive and "shall" is mandatory.


Howard Charles Green: You are a pretty good sea
lawyer.


Major James William Coldwell: I do not know about
that, but I would like to see the word "shall" used when we mean "shall".


James Garfield Gardiner: It means "shall" in
legislation applying to the crown.


Major James William Coldwell: I would like the Secretary of State for External Affairs to confirm that statement.
Mr. ST. LAURENT:	I think the hon.
member had better look at the Interpretation Act, where he will find it dealt with in express terms.


Thomas John Bentley: If the minister is correct in what he says, surely he will not mind changing "may" to "shall". Then everybody will be happy.


James Garfield Gardiner: As the Secretary of State for External Affairs says, the Interpretation Act interprets "may" as used here to mean what "shall" means as applied to an individual. It is the crown itself that is referred to here.


Major James William Coldwell: That is not what the Secretary of State for External Affairs said.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I did not venture to repeat from memory what is in the Interpretation Act, but the matter is expressly dealt with in that act.


James Garfield Gardiner: It has been threshed out in our legislation at least three different times that "may" as applied to the crown means "shall".


Edward George McCullough: I move, Mr. Chairman, that "may" in line 22 be changed to "shall".


James Garfield Gardiner: We hire good draftsmen to draft legislation. I am not a lawyer; I am sure my hon. friend is not, and I do not think we should attempt to interfere with the

Fertilizers Act
language of legislation that has been carefully drafted and that means exactly what it is intended to mean. As it stands, it does exactly as my hon. friend wants.


Major James William Coldwell: When as eminent a lawyer as the Secretary of State for External Affairs suggests that we look into the Interpretation Act because he is not sure, I think the house should make sure of what we are doing by looking into that act.


James Garfield Gardiner: Then we had better start right from the beginning again because "may" occurs all the way through.


Major James William Coldwell: Here is a case where the right word, "may" or "shall", is very important.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: As I understand the English language-


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Do you?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: -the section provides that the names of the constituent materials of a fertilizer mixture may be stated as prescribed by regulations. I think the members of this committee intend that the names of the ingredients shall be stated, and I think we should support the motion of the hon. member for Assiniboia.


John Bracken: If I may add my contribution I will support the Minister of Agriculture if the Secretary of State for External Affairs will say that the word "may" means "shall".
Mr. ST. LAURENT: The Secretary of State for External Affairs could not change what parliament has put into the Interpretation Act.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 4 to 6 inclusive agreed to.
On section 7-Properties of fertilizers prescribed.
John Alpheus Charlton: Probably most of the discussion on section 2 should have come on this section, prescribing the properties of fertilizers for use in any province or other zones of Canada. During the war we did not mind being told what fertilizer we were to use because we realized that certain elements were not procurable. But personally I am getting a little tired of using 0-14-7 if I want to use 0-12-10. We should be left to judge as to what fertilizer we want to use instead of somebody else coming along and telling us what we should use. For a number of years I have had soil tests made. I know that if I .send soil tests to one place it comes back with .a certain analysis. If I send it to a fertilizer
company it comes back with another analysis. Which one am I to take? I have to make up my own mind as to the results I have on the different analyses of fertilizers. We should be the judge of what fertilizer we want to use and we should be able to procure that analysis which gives us the best results.
During the war, it was the practice to have fertilizer sold through one company alone in a certain district. Before the war, I bought fertilizer from a certain company. When this order was put into effect I was told I had to buy from another company. I do not like it, and there are many farmers in the country who do not like it. I am not in favour of section 7.


William Henry Golding: Shall section 7 carry?


Karl Kenneth Homuth: No.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Perhaps the minister will say why these powers are necessary.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: We are gradually getting away from controls, but nevertheless what the hon. member for Brant said is only too true.
I find the same condition in my county. Sometimes the farmers are led to believe that they are not in the hands of the production requirements of the government, but they' are more or less in the hands of the fertilizer companies. As the hon. member has said, the time has come when farmers should have some freedom of choice. I cannot see anything in this section which necessitates its being in the act if we are gradually to eliminate controls.
If we believe in private enterprise, if we believe that some fertilizer companies put up a better fertilizer than other companies, or that the fertilizer companies are willing to produce a fertilizer which is best suited for a particular district, the farmers ought to have the right to choose. We would be well advised to delete this section altogether because it would be one step in the direction of the decontrol of the farmers of the country.


James Garfield Gardiner: Section 7 reads as
follows:
Paragraph (i) of section 10 of the said act is repealed and the following substituted therefor:
(i) make regulations prescribing the chemical, physical or other properties of fertilizers for use in any province or other zone of Canada or for any crop or soil requirement and prohibiting the sale and the advertising, offering, exposing or holding in possession for sale in such province or zone or for such use unless the properties of the fertilizer are in accordance with thi properties so prescribed.
It does have the effect which was indicatec by both hon. members who have spoken. The explanation is that during the war years much progress was made in confining the sale of
Fertilizers Act

fertilizers to those best suited to the different crop requirements and soil conditions. This was done under war emergency powers in cooperation with fertilizer boards established by the provincial governments. Section 7(i) of the bill would permit the continuance of this control in cooperation with the provincial fertilizer boards so that farmers will be supplied with fertilizers best suited to their needs based on experimental evidence and sound practice; whereas deterioration of the quality of fertilizer may result if this control were not continued. That latter matter has been in the minds of most of the hon. members who have discussed the question this evening. It is stated by those who are administering the act, both provincially and federally, that in the interests of farmers this should be done. Certainly it is not in the interests of the men who are the experts in connection with it and who are making the findings. There is no reason why they should say that unless they actually believe that it is in the interest of the farmers that it should be done. As a farmer I am quite certain that if I were buying fertilizer-I have none of the facilities with which to test fertilizer to know whether I am buying what I am supposed to be buying or not, and I doubt whether one farmer in one hundred in Canada has any facilities for making the test-I would want to buy the fertilizer which the experts told me was the right one for my farm. Both the provincial governments and the federal government have facilities for making these tests. We are not all like my hon. friend who is one of the biggest potato merchants in the country. He no doubt has facilities for making the test because he sells fertilizer as well, but it does not mean that every farmer in Canada has. If they have not the equipment with which to do it they must depend on the governments doing it. The provincial and federal governments test these fertilizers and they say that that is the type of fertilizer which is best for that area. They advise the farmers to buy it. We are simply saying here that the manufacturers and dealers in fertilizer should not be selling to the farmers something that is not in their interest to buy; that the fertilizers which are the best for that area ought to be sold in that area, and that that fertilizer is the one which will do the farmer's job for him best. If the government does not say it there is nobody who has the facilities with which to say it.


John Alpheus Charlton: The minister knows very well that on the same field within the same farm two different fertilizers may be necessary. Why should someone else come along and

tell me I. should not be able to obtain a certain fertilizer? I note that 0-12-10 is not on that list. I find that 0-12-10 is a good fertilizer. We cannot get it. We have to use either 0-12-6 or 0-14-7. If I want 0-12-10, why should it not be my privilege to buy it?
The minister mentioned something about fertilizers losing their value. I believe that anybody who has used fertilizer for any length of time can tell when it is good and when it is not. If the fertilizer is not hard I do not believe that it has lost much of its value. If a fertilizer is hard when I go to buy it I will not take it because it has to be re-ground before it is put through the drill. I am not worried about that aspect of it. I would move that section 7, paragraph (i) be removed from the act.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: I second the motion.


Mr. SINNOTT:: As I see this section, it is a safeguard against the farmers being gypped. There is nothing in this act to prevent a company from making a better fertilizer. What it does is to protect the farmer to the extent that the ingredients in the fertilizer are proper. If other companies are willing to make a better fertilizer and sell it for the same amount of money, naturally they are going to get the benefit of that. Let us support the act.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: In seconding the motion of the hon. member for Brant, may I refer to what the hon. member who has just taken his seat has said. He said that this is a protection against the farmer being gypped. What it will do is to drive the farmer into the hands of certain fertilizer companies who are to be allocated certain territories, and they are going to say that this is the fertilizer you need in that territory, regardless of what you say. We have seen this thing happen quite often under the regulations which were brought into effect during the war. I can cite instances of that. We all know of the regulation with regard to maple syrup. Maple syrup was judged on a colour meter basis. The people in my district-and I represent a prosperous and highly organized agricultural district- protested against the maple syrup from their district being set at a price much lower than that from Quebec. It was found after very careful investigation that the maple syrup from our district was just as good as the other but that it had a slightly different colour because of the soil in which the trees grew.


Mr. CRUICKSHANIC:: Wrong fertilizer.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: We get lots of fertilizer from the other side of the house. Surely the time has come when we should give the farmers of the country some freedom of choice

Fertilizers Act
as to where they will buy-, what they will buy, and what is best suited to their particular soil. If a man is in the farming business, just as some of us are in the manufacturing business or in other lines, surely he knows what is best for his own needs. Let us give the farmers a free choice instead of driving them by the action of the government into the hands of certain people who will have a certain territory allotted to them, in which territory the farmer must buy whatever the government allows him to buy. In seconding the motion, I believe I am giving the farmer freedom of choice in what he ought to do, and so it is moved by the hon. member for Brant and seconded by myself that this clause be deleted.


James Garfield Gardiner: Before the question is put I want to make the committee fully acquainted with the manner in which these decisions are arrived at. I have said a. number of times that the decisions are reached after discussion between the officials of this department and officials of the provincial governments, and the memorandum I have sets out the provincial fertilizer board. There is a fertilizer board in each province and these boards are the authorized agents of the respective provinces for recommending fertilizers for use.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Also the authorized
agents of the fertilizer companies.


James Garfield Gardiner: Probably your company is represented on one of them.
The personnel of the board includes representatives from farmers organizations, soil and crop specialists, and the government experimental farms and agricultural colleges as well as the fertilizer industry. It is made up of representatives from all. Each board has representatives of farm organizations, soil and crop specialists and representatives of the government experimental farms and the agricultural colleges, the experimental farms being federal and the agricultural colleges provincial, and there are also representatives of the fertilizer industry. The boards meet periodically to study the use of fertilizers in relation to soil fertility and crop requirements based on the results of experiments and established practice. Their recommendations are published for the use of farmers, and during and since the war have been used also for providing a basis for preventing the sale of unsuitable fertilizers. The proposed amendments would implement the recommendations of these boards respecting suitable fertilizers for the farmer, and there is really nothing in it to prevent the farmer from getting other ingredients and adding any of them or mixing fertilizer to suit
himself, or anything of that kind. It does, however, protect the farmer, who has not the facilities to make the checks, against anything that any salesman or manufacturer may desire to do which would result in the farmer getting something he does not want. Everyone is carefully protected in the matter, and these boards are carefully set up. They are not federal boards but provincial, and this legislation is made in a form which all of those persons consider would obtain the results desired. This is an important section and it ought to be passed.


John Alpheus Charlton: It goes farther than that. As I stated before, it becomes impossible for a man to buy a certain fertilizer in a certain district. Whether or not 0-12-10 is going to be included in the new list, I do not know, but it was not included in the list the minister read.


James Garfield Gardiner: That is the war list.


John Alpheus Charlton: That is all right, but
it could be the next list if this committee so designated. If the companies do not want to manufacture 0-12-10, it would be possible for them to say so to the committee and get away with it, would it not?


James Garfield Gardiner: It might be possible


John Alpheus Charlton: It certainly would.


James Garfield Gardiner: -but I think my hon. friend has had sufficient experience in this and similar matters to believe that these particular officials to whom I have referred are not going to be working in the interests of any particular manufacturer of fertilizer but will be doing the best they can for the farmer. I can understand that during war time there were certain ingredients which it was not possible to put in, in the same proportions as at other times-


John Alpheus Charlton: That is true.


James Garfield Gardiner: -and because of that, certain mixtures had to be provided for. But I am quite certain that any organization such as I have referred to, set up within the province to do a job of this kind, will put back the necessary ingredients as soon as they can be obtained. There is no doubt about that. They will take into consideration the quantities of different ingredients that are available and the absolute necessity for these ingredients in the mixture.


John Alpheus Charlton: No fertilizer company
will manufacture something which the farmei does not demand and does not want. Let u.i be realists about the matter. The fertilizer company is going to manufacture what the farmer demands and not something that it
28S
Fertilizers Act

cannot sell. Let the farmer himself make up his mind, after soil analyses, the fertilizer he wants, without being restricted by any board. He should be able to buy what he wants. It is he who is paying for it.


James Garfield Gardiner: He can get something
else even under this.


Major James William Coldwell: I think the farmer has the right in every case to know what he is buying, and that is why we wish to change "may" to "shall". I now have the Interpretation Act before me, and if the minister will look up section 37, paragraph 24, he will find it stated that "shall" is to be construed as imperative and "may" as permissive. That settles the point, surely.


John George Diefenbaker: As far as the
Interpretation Act is concerned, it has nothing whatever to do with the relationship of the crown. In a number of cases it has been decided that the Interpretation Act does not apply to any reference to the crown, and in every case the crown is in the position where the word "may" applies to it not permissively but obligatorily. While there has been argument for years over that question, nevertheless there have been recent authorities-I believe there has been one within the last two years- wherein it has been stated that "may", applied to the crown, is invariably interpreted as "shall".
With regard to this particular section, I have the act before me, and I find that the minister is the person who enjoys all these powers and not any committee set up by the provinces. Section 10 says the minister "may". Then paragraph (i) says, "make regulations prescribing the chemical, physical or other properties." This is placing the minister, not a committee of any province, in a position of having absolute power to determine what shall be sold, where it shall be sold, and the circumstances under which it shall be sold. That is putting in the hands of the minister tremendous power uncontrolled in any way. In other words, the whole act, including the amendments that have been introduced this evening and which have already been passed, indicate a widespread advance along the way of bureaucratic control in this country. Earlier the minister received power under paragraph (f) of section 1 to demand any relevant information, as the minister may require, and I could understand his asking for that power. Then under section 3 he received the power to demand such other relevant information as may be prescribed by regulation. Those sections gave him wide powers. This section places the minister in the position of being able to determine what companies shall, in

fact, sell fertilizer if they are not selling the type of fertilizer that he deems necessary for any particular area.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Regardless of whether they are.


John George Diefenbaker: I think the people
today are getting sick and tired of being catechized and directed by governmental authority. I am sure that the minister, on reconsideration, will realize that this represents the placing in his hands of absolute power to determine who shall and who shall not sell, which is too wide a power to be placed in the hands of any minister, no matter how estimable he may be. I suggest that the minister might very well consider having the committee postpone consideration of this section in its present form. After all, however desirable the aim, which is to assure that the farmer shall know the content of the fertilizer he purchases, nevertheless this goes far beyond that and says that not only shall he know, but no matter what his wishes are he shall purchase only that which the minister designates that he shall purchase. That represents a gross interference with the rights of the individual far and beyond the need of protecting his rights. I feel sure that, no matter how one looks at those other subsections in section 10 of the act as at present constituted, he will realize that never before has a minister asked the absolute power that is asked for under this particular subsection. I feel that the minister should give reconsideration to the matter of asking parliament to make him an absolute dictator in regard to what shall be purchased.


Heber Harold Hatfield: To show how the zoning works out, last spring when we had a shortage of fertilizer in my constituency, the farmers could not buy fertilizer anywhere. We had large quantities of 5-8-10-1 fertilizer stored in that constituency to be shipped over to the state of Maine. The Maine farmers did not need that fertilizer, but the fertilizer companies were not allowed to sell it in New Brunswick because it was not mixed according to the prescribed formula. So that works a hardship. The most popular fertilizer in my constituency is 5-8-10-1, but the farmers have had to put up with 4-8-10 because there was a shortage of material during the war. As far as we are concerned, the war is over now; the farmer wants to buy what he wants, and that is what this prescribed formula prohibits him from doing. We could have bought that stored fertilizer and the farmers could have used it if it had not been for the prescribed formula.

Fertilizers Act
289'


Mr. WARREN:: There is one thing the farmer is not fond of doing and that is paying more money for anything than he would otherwise have to pay.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: That is what he will have to do under this act.


Ralph Melville Warren: It may be all right for farmers in the districts of Brant or Waterloo South where they probably use a great deal of artificial fertilizer. But in districts where they are just beginning to use artificial fertilizer and perhaps find a great difficulty of disposing of one carload in a season, what will this mean? You just start competition. I am not very much accustomed to artificial fertilizer, but I was surprised that during the war years that was one thing that our farmers were able to buy at a very moderate price, and it was not hard to dispose of a carload or perhaps two carloads in a district where its use was comparatively new. I think it has been remarkably well handled and there has been encouragement to the farmers to use fertilizer to the benefit of crops of all kinds. Speaking for the district that I live in and, I think, for all Renfrew county, I would say that we are very much better satisfied to have this clause left in, in order to keep out competition and to keep the price to a point where the farmer can buy fertilizer.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: It is a great thing to hear the free trade Liberal talk about keeping out competition. As the hon. member for Brant has said, it does not matter what industrial organization you have, they are going out to sell the product which is most suited to the people who will use it; and the sooner you can get competition in your district on fertilizer, the sooner you will get fertilizer at a price which is conducive to the production of better crops and which is much cheaper than what you have been paying, instead of having your farmers in Renfrew county being told by the Department of Agriculture, and incidentally not only by the department but by the minister himself under these powers that we have been giving them day after day and year after year, what to buy and what they have to buy, whether it produces more competition or not.


Ralph Melville Warren: May I ask the hon. member this question; has he no confidence whatever in the officials of the federal government or the provincial government?


Karl Kenneth Homuth: That is just what I wanted. I may have a lot of confidence in the men who have grown up in the various
departments of government; but those men who have grown up in the departments of government over a long period of years have had their claws clipped so far as doing anything for the benefit of the people of this country is concerned, and bureaucracy has come into control. The ministers of this cabinet today, as the Prime Minister said this afternoon, are a little inner cabinet and are going to do these things and the people of this country can be damned because they are not going to learn anything about them.


Arthur Leroy Smith: 
James Garfield Gardiner: The ingredients mentioned all through this act, and the only ingredients that are affected by it, I think, are potash, phosphate and nitrates. Where a mixture of these is used in order to make up the fertilizer, then this act deals with it. I think I am right when I say that up to the present all our potash has come from outside Canada, and that applies also to some of the other ingredients. I doubt that it would be possible to make up most of the mixtures that are made up at present except by bringing in products from outside. I just want to point out to those who are speaking with regard to the powers given the minister-


Arthur Leroy Smith: Are you through with my question?


James Garfield Gardiner: I may come back to it, but at the moment I want to take up this other point. This section of the act is written

Fertilizers Act

in those terms. It is not a new thing arising out of the war. To go back to some of the questions which have been asked and some of the discussion that has taken place, in order to give the correct information I would refer to page 2 of this act, section 4(3) which states: The assignment of a registration number shall of itself authorize the sale of a fertilizer tor the period continuing until the first day of duly following the date upon which it is granted; but such registration may be renewed from year to year and the same registration number may be assigned to the fertilizer provided no change is made in the brand name, guaranteed analysis, materials from which it is made, or the fineness thereof.
That indicates that everyone has to come back once a year to have this product checked again and a number given to it, which may be the same number. Then it goes on to say: The minister may cancel any registration which in his opinion has been made in violation of any of the provisions of this act or any regulations hereunder.
Then jumping over a page or two you find this, and it runs all through the act:
No person shall advertise, offer, sell, expose or 'hold in possession for sale any potash salts containing more than five-tenths of one per cent of anhydrous borax, or mixed fertilizer containing more than one-tenth of one per cent of anhydrous borax, or any fertilizer containing sufficient destructive ingredients or properties which may prove harmful to plant growth when the fertilizer is used in a reasonable manner.
Going on through the act, we find this all the way through: "The minister may appoint an advisory board"; "The minister may make regulations", and so on. Then coming down to the section we are dealing with, the section preceding it provides that the minister may make regulations prescribing the methods to be used in the examination or analysis of any fertilizer for the purposes of this act. Then comes the section we are proposing to put in, and it is followed by:
The minister may make regulations for any other purpose deemed by him to be necessary for making effective the provisions of this act.
I am not altogether sure that I could not do what is suggested in this amendment under the provisions already in the act, under which the minister has authority to make regulations for any purpose deemed by him to be necessary for making effective the provisions of this act. My purpose in reading these sections is simply to indicate that there is nothing new in the authority or the powers given to the minister; that this act has been on the statute books almost since the beginning of time as far as this country is concerned, and that it has been amended from time to time. One section of the act goes back to 1927; another 
goes back to 1928. I do not know just when the first bill was passed with regard to fertilizers, but it would be some considerable time ago.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Were the regulations in regard to the allocation of fertilizers to certain territories part of the original act, or was that done under the War Measures Act?


James Garfield Gardiner: _ Certain things were done under the War Measures Act. As someone has suggested, during the war we did not have the necessary quantities to mix the kind of fertilizers we knew to be best suited to certain districts. Therefore, during that period of time we took authority to say that the fertilizer which must be sold in a district, which was the nearest approach to what was required, would be numbered so and so and so. In some of these mixtures that were no nitrates at ill and no potash, depending upon the needs of a particular area. These districts were told that for the time being they would have to get along without those particular ingredients. Now the war is over, and in these districts which we said could not have what they needed during most of the war, the soil has been depleted to a greater extent than before, and we believe we ought to have authority to go back and say to the people in that district that now they may have a mixture containing more of the particular elements they require..


Edmund Davie Fulton: You do not say "may"; you say "must."


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes; but if you do not
say "must" I do not know how many people would pay much attention to it. You say this must be done; you say this particular mixture must be used, in order to meet the conditions existing there. You must go some place to get the material in the first instance. You cannot get all the potash you need in Canada today; you must get to an international board and make arrangements with them to have potash shipped into Canada in certain quantities. Then, when we know the quantities that are to be assigned to this country we say those quantities must be divided in order that all the people who need that ingredient may have their share. That is the only reason this is being done and the only reason it was done during the war. That is why it will be necessary to continue to follow this procedure for some time after the war. If with regard to this question my hon. friends want to say, "We will give it to you for one year," I am quite prepared to accept that. Or if they want to say, "We will give it to you for two years, but next year you

Fertilizers Act
must come back and say whether or not it is required any longer," I am prepared to accept that. But I do not think it would be fair to the farmers of this country to be told that they must use certain ingredients during a time when others were not available in greater quantities and now, when those ingredients are beginning to come back, we should1 say we are not going to look after the farmers in a particular district.


Mark Cecil Senn: The minister is talking about not being fair to the farmers. Farmers are having analyses made of the soil on their farms in increasing numbers throughout Ontario, and perhaps in other provinces as well. I know I have had the poil of my farm analysed at the Ontario agricultural college, as have many farmers in the district. They come back and tell me certain things are needed for my farm, while something else may be needed on the farm of a neighbour, but we are unable to buy what we need because it has not been specified by the minister and his officials. I am sure no one wants to detract from the efficiency of the officials of his department o,r of the provincial department. They are a capable body of men, doing good work; but no official-


James Garfield Gardiner: Suppose there is not a sufficient quantity, as there is not in some of these ingredients, to go round. Why should anyone allow you to get all you require for your farm, while your neighbour may not be allowed to get any?


Mark Cecil Senn: I would not take very much of it, after all. What I might need for my farm might not be needed on the next farm, because I have seen enough land throughout Ontario at least-I do not know anything about the west-to realize that the type and quality of land vary substantially within the course of, say five miles. One type of soil may need lime; another needs nitrates, and so on all the way down the list.


James Garfield Gardiner: But you could not get them.


Mark Cecil Senn: They might not always be available ; and if this is purely for the sake of conserving certain ingredients that are hard to obtain, that might be a different aspect of the matter. But I do not think a man should be forced to buy a particular fertilizer which is not the best for his particular soil, and prohibited from buying the fertilizer that is best.


James Garfield Gardiner: The short-term objective is to deal with the shortage of these commodities. That is the only reason it was done during the war. It might have been done before if there had not been a shortage, and 83166-19J
that condition still exists. We must go to the international board in order to get our proportion of potash and some other ingredients for fertilizer. So long as that is the condition I think we do require, irrespective of what one might think about a long-term policy, that kind! of action. If hon. members are afraid that too much authority is being given for too long a period, then I have no objection to amending this section to provide that if we want the power to be continued beyond a certain period, say a year or two years, we must come back here.


Mark Cecil Senn: The minister says that certain fertilizer constituents are in short supply. Can the officials of his department working with the provincial authorities distribute those so that everybody will get a fair deal? I doubt very much if they can do so. Ontario may want more than some other province, and there will be a shortage in any event.


James Garfield Gardiner: They did the best job they could during the war period. They have not satisfied everybody and you cannot satisfy everybody when there is a shortage of anything. But they have got the different provincial boards to consider the situation which exists and to agree that for this year the mixture ought to be so-and-so for that particular district. They are making the ingredients go as far as they can to meet the requirements in the different areas. I submit that, as long as we have to go to international boards to get our share of ingredients, that authority ought to be there, whether we continue it afterwards or not.


Mr. SINCLAIR (Vancouver North):: I do not represent many farmers, perhaps only half a dozen, but I do represent quite a few Liberals. During the war we gave up a number of liberties which we valued and permitted government controls, but it was our hope that we would get rid of those controls as soon as possible. When we read regulations like this saying that the farmers are going to be forced to buy government approved fertilizer in certain areas, and when we hear the hon. member for Calgary West say that one factory could turn out all the fertilizer needed in Canada in one week if it were permitted to work to full capacity, I cannot understand why the government does not say, "We will give approval to the fertilizer we think best suited to the district and if other fertilizer manufacturers want to put out inferior brands for sale in those districts we shall have no objection as Liberals as long as what is in the bag is clearly shown on the bag."
Fertilizers Act


Karl Kenneth Homuth: We have extended considerable credits to France, and I am told that France has withdrawn from this organization and has set up a cartel within the past two or three months which has increased the price of potash two or three times. Is that the sort of treatment this government is ready to accept from a nation to which we have extended such tremendous credits? Now we find a bill being brought into this house by which the government say that they must regulate this thing. The price will go up because a nation to which we extended such tremendous credits has withdrawn from the organization and has raised the price of potash two or three times. Will the minister say that that is not true?


James Garfield Gardiner: I will not say it is true.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: You will not say it is not?


James Garfield Gardiner: I have no information on which to base an answer, but I do say that it has not much to do with this bill.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: It has a great deal to do with it.


James Garfield Gardiner: If we are not able to get potash from France for any reason, then this bill is all the more necessary.


Edmund Davie Fulton: It is significant to note that the minister has changed his grounds altogether. He is now defending this section on grounds which are quite different from those he first put forward when it was suggested that the section be deleted. I think it would be beneficial to go back and examine the ground which the minister first put forward in support of this section. He said that we had advisory boards which advised that certain fertilizers were best suited to certain areas. As I listened to him, I thought that here was another case where the government is getting confused between the functions of advising and the functions of ordering.
I do not think anyone will object to the principle of government bodies such as agricultural colleges and experimental farms advising what fertilizer or other product is best suited to a certain district, but that is a different thing from having a board order that only a certain fertilizer may be used in a certain district. That is what this section gives the minister the power to do. It is significant to note that that was the first ground put forward in support of this section.
But now there is a difference. It is now said there are certain things which are difficult to get. The government says they are concerned with the even distribution of these things. If the minister only wanted the power to ration and the power to make regulations

for equitable distribution, that would be a different matter, but this section goes far beyond that. This section gives the minister the power to prohibit the sale of certain fertilizers in certain zones.
The minister must admit that farmers are constantly experimenting. If he takes the power to prohibit the sale of certain fertilizers in a certain zone and the farmers in that zone desire to use fertilizers containing ingredients which the minister has forbidden to be used, they are going to halt their experimentation. The farmers are going to find themselves up against this bureaucratic wall which is being erected.
I do not pose as an expert op fertilizers, but I know that in the tomato growing areas there is a tremendous difference of opinion between experts in the various departments, dominion and provincial, as to what fertilizer should be used or whether certain fertilizers should be used at all. If we look at this thing honestly I think we shall find that it is giving the minister power which he should not have. It is going to prevent the farmer from making progress. Furthermore, it is ultra vires and is simply another example of the hunger for regulation and for the power to make regulations which is creeping, sometimes almost unbeknownst, into every enactment which this government brings forward.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am not as much an expert on this subject as are most of the previous speakers, but I come from a farming district. If the time taken on this section is an indication of the time it is going to take to put through this bill, I think it will be too late. You have to use this stuff in the spring; there is no use in putting it in after the crops are in. I think the only sensible thing that has been said about this amendment tonight was said by my colleague who is not from a farming district. I support what he said because the Liberals in my riding do not want any of this business of being told what they have to buy and where they have to buy it.


William Scottie Bryce: I do not agree with what has been said tonight by some hon. members. I was not blessed with a university education and I have to depend upon my provincial department to tell me what fertilizer to select. The minister says that it is these provincial boards-


Karl Kenneth Homuth: No, no.


William Scottie Bryce: I am trying to get some
information.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: You will not get it over there.

Fertilizers Act


William Scottie Bryce: The provincial department ought to know what they are doing and I do not see any objection to that. If we do not believe what they say, then we do not need a department of agriculture to advise us.


James Garfield Gardiner: No action is taken on these matters without consulting the provincial boards. The provincial boards have represented on them, as I indicated a few moments ago, the farm organizations, the soil and crop specialists, the government experimental farms-those are	federal-the agricultural
colleges, which are provincial, and the fertilizer industry. They are all represented on these provincial boards.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Mostly the fertilizer
industry.


James Garfield Gardiner: They make the recommendations and decisions. It is all very well to say that the minister does it but the minister does not do it. The minister is the administrative head of the department and their recommendations are carried out.
With regard to the farmer having no choice, let me point out that in the areas with soils requiring no nitrogen the farmer has three choices; for soils for the raising of general farm crops, there are two choices; for crops requiring more potash, there are two choices; for general farm crops requiring a little more nitrogen, there are three choices; for potatoes and root vegetables, there are four choices; for orchards, there is only one choice; for flue-cured tobacco, there are two choices; for cigar and pipe tobaccos, there are two choices. These are all set up after consultation with [DOT] the board. As a matter of fact, no one else has the necessary information upon which to set up the regulations. The first basis of all this is that the boards say what they think is the proper proportion of the ingredients to be put into the fertilizer for a certain district. After having determined that, they ascertain the quantity of the ingredients available, and basing their decisions upon the nature of the soil and its requirements they say: This is the best mix that can be made for that district, and this is the quantity that is available for that district, out of the quota that has been assigned to this country. This had to be done during the war because the ingredients were in short supply, and they are still in short supply. So long as that condition obtains you cannot have all the mixtures that everyone desires to have. The boards have no other objective than to try to improve the soil in different parts of Canada so that it can produce better crops, and just as soon as every mixture
desired by the farmers is available and the ingredients to make them, I am sure that it is the desire of all of us that they be made available. There is nothing of Liberalism or Toryism in that. My hon. friends sometimes get carried away.


Mr. JACKMAN:: Your own friends too.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am speaking of friends on both sides of the house. The best authorities available in Canada are being utilized for the purpose of determining what is the best use that can be made of the limited quantities of fertilizer ingredients that we have.
In answer to my hon. friend who said that the member for Calgary West said that you could make all the fertilizer required in a week that could be used in this country, he did not say that. What he said was that you could make in a week all the nitrogen or nitrates that were required to be put into the mixtures that form the fertilizers. That is quite a different matter. Nitrogen is only one ingredient that goes into the fertilizer. I would suggest that we are not helping anyone; we are not helping the farmer; we are not helping the industry that makes the fertilizer; we are not helping the authorities that make the division of the fertilizer as between this and other countries; we are not helping anyone by throwing out this authority which has been held by the department during the last three or four years. On the contrary, we would be doing injury to all these different groups. But if the committee insists on throwing out the section after the explanation that has been given, there is nothing we can do about it.


John Alpheus Charlton: Would the minister suggest that any board made up of the best of government officials or farmers, whoever they may be, is capable of deciding that only certain fertilizers should be used in zones such as in my own district where there is the very lightest of sand and the very heaviest of clay?
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH: I have had the honour of knowing and working with a good many of the men mentioned by the minister and I would not hesitate to accept their recommendations as to the best fertilizer to use on my soils. I think section 7 is quite reasonable, and we should accept it and get on with the bill.


James Garfield Gardiner: In reply to the hon. member for Brant, the act gives authority to divide the districts into light soils and heavy soils. I know, as my hon. friend knows, that there are districts where you will have farms
Fertilizers Act

that have a mixture of both light and heavy soils, and both the farmer himself-my hon. friend shakes his head.


John Alpheus Charlton: There are many fertilizers we cannot get.


James Garfield Gardiner: There are certain mixtures you cannot get because there is a shortage of some ingredients.


John Alpheus Charlton: Not now.


James Garfield Gardiner: There is.


Heber Harold Hatfield: The potato farmer in the state of Maine can get different mixtures that we cannot get.


James Garfield Gardiner: We do not live in the United States.


Heber Harold Hatfield: But there is an international board that controls the supply of materials.


Ralph Melville Warren: The hon. member for Kamloops said that farmers will be glad to experiment with fertilizers. I think that is nonsense because the farmer would have to use a number of different types of fertilizer and would have to wait over a term of years to find out which gave the best results, and the factor of weather would also enter into it and sometimes make a great deal of difference.
I am very glad that some of our western friends have had a good word to say regarding the officials who have been handling the distribution of fertilizer. Personally I have a great deal of respect for these officials.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: No one is attacking the officials. Do not try to get away with that.


Ralph Melville Warren: The hon. member for Waterloo South did not have anything nice to say about the officials when I asked him if he had no respect for them.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: I have a great deal of respect for the judgment of the farmers who till the soil.


Ralph Melville Warren: I have a great deal of respect for the officials who have been doing this work in Renfrew county. In my opinion, they have made and are making a good job of it. They are relieving the farmer of much worry that he might otherwise have. What farmer' has the time or opportunity to make tests of his own soils and study the different mixtures until he finds the most suitable one? I think the shortage of fertilizer ingredients has been very well handled by the officials, particularly in the outlying districts. I would be glad to see this clause carried as it is.


Mr. FERGUSON:: The question is, are these controls necessary because there is a definite shortage of fertilizer materials now that the -war is over? Or is it the case of a few members of the government and the entire C.C.F. party saying that, now that it is being handled by the government, they should retain the possession of this? This is what you shall buy, no more and no less, whether you like it or not. Or is it a case of wanting to retain this act as it is and not willing to vote on the amendment because there is a definite shortage and the commodity cannot be supplied? If that is so, let the minister state that we must have this act as it is without the amendment because there is a shortage, and this is the only method by which the farmer can receive his equal share. If there is not a shortage, please let the people of Canada select and buy for themselves. The farmers of Canada do not need to be protected by the government from being gypped.


William Henry Golding: Is the committee ready for the question?
Amendment negatived.
Bill reported.


James Horace King: When shall the bill be read the third time?


John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, when an amendment has been moved in committee I should like to know if third reading can be given to the bill now.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: With the unanimous consent of the house.


James Garfield Gardiner: There is only one reason for having it read the third time tonight, namely, to get some work over to the senate. If anyone wishes to have it left over, that will be quite satisfactory.



MILITIA PENSION ACT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration in committee of Bill No. 5, to amend the Militia Pension Act-Mr. Claxton-Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 2.
George Randolph Pearkes: Mr. Chairman, I understand that the object of section 2 is to recognize the preparations which a large number of men of this country gave to be prepared in the event of a war breaking out during a period of time between great war I and great war II. It covers all this personnel

Militia Pension Act
who served in the non-permanent active militia, the reserves of the navy and of the air force, including such units of the nonpermanent militia as the university contingent of the C.O.T.C. Before we adjourned, I called attention to the fact that the corps oi gentlemen cadets of the Royal Military College and the naval cadets of the Royal Naval College of Royal Roads were not included. I pointed out that the corps of gentlemen cadets at the Royal Military College had not in the past been recognized as being an integral part of the non-permanent militia of Canada. In fact, King's Rules and Regulations say that the Royal Military College is supplementary to, though not an integral part of, the permanent militia; but it is generally recognized that the training which gentlemen cadets received at the Royal Military College did fit them admirably for the service of their country when they had graduated from that college and had gone into the various units of the militia. That fact was recognized because they were given seniority over individuals entering into the permanent force from other sources, such as through the militia or graduating from the university C.O.T.C. The gentlemen cadets of the Royal Military College were given one year's seniority over those who came in from the non-permanent active militia. Furthermore, that training was recognized by the fact that the time spent at the Royal Military College wTas permitted to count toward the efficiency decoration which was awarded after so many years of service in one of the units of the militia. They were also allowed to count their service at the Royal Military College toward their promotion and toward increases of pay according to the term of years which they had served. For instance, a subaltern got a raise in pay after three years service and another raise in pay after six years service. The service that an individual had put in at the Royal Military College had always counted toward these increases in pay. My contention is that, although the Royal Military College may not be recognized as being an integral part of the non-permanent militia, there is no question about it that these young men who were at that college were there with the idea of preparing themselves for an emergency. They operated in exactly the same way as the young men who were in the non-permanent militia units preparing themselves.
It is true that the gentlemen cadets at the Royal Military College were under military discipline while there. On the outbreak of the first world war, the senior classes were at once closed and were given the opportunity, which
they at once accepted, of entering into the services of the country. Therefore it is purely a legal quibble to say that they are not a part of the militia. Their years of preparation justify them just as much as the years of preparation which the other young, men of the country put in the university C.O.T.C. for this recognition. I feel it is an oversight that the Royal Military College and the Royal Naval College, Royal Roads, have been omitted from this provision, and I am sure the minister will realize this. I hope he will agree to adding these two corps to this list.


Brooke Claxton: When the discussion of section 2 was adjourned the hon. member had asked me whether the point he was making had been considered by the government when this clause was drafted. I should point out that the clause in the bill before us makes no change whatever in the existing situation with regard to the type of service that will be counted for pension purposes. This clause, in so far as the point made by the hon. member for Nanaimo in concerned, is in the same terms as the clause that was adopted by this house last year when part V of the Militia Pension Act was enacted, and indeed a similar provision will be found in the Militia Pension Act amendments of 1928, in the Revised Statutes, 1927, chapter 133, section 8, and in 1919, and a similar clause, though not in the same words, will be found in the amendments made to the Militia Pension Act as far back as 1910 when for the first time, I think I am correct in saying, service in the non-permanent active militia was to count for past service in the permanent force for pension purposes.
I have made inquiries and find that the point put forward by my hon. friend has been advanced at various times during this whole period. It is not an oversight. This has received the most serious consideration, and it has simply been found, without derogation to the fine qualities and characteristics of the Royal Military College and Royal Roads, that they axe not "services", and the Militia Act puts pension on the basis of "service". The basis on which pension is calculated is service in one of the armed forces of Canada, and I should point out that section 42, subsection 1, provides that not only must the service in the non-permanent active militia- the reserve as we call it now-be in a unit of the non-permanent active militia, but in order to count for your pension when you are in the active army, the service must have been with the army; and in order to count for your pension with the navy, the service must have been with the naval reserve, and similarly with the air force.
Militia Pension Act


George Randolph Pearkes: I did not say that.


Brooke Claxton: Under the Militia Pension Act that was in force until 1946, service for the purposes of calculating pension for an officer in the Royal Canadian Navy was defined by section 36, paragraph (e) (1) as including service in the force, in commissioned, warrant or midshipman rank, over the age of eighteen

years. The language used here supports the contention I have made, namely, that even in this case the mam only counts his service, for the purpose of estimating his pension, from the time he is commissioned and over eighteen years of age. I submit, therefore, that the clause should be adopted.


George Randolph Pearkes: After the close of great
war I, in order to encourage those officers who had been in the non-permanent militia to enter into the permanent force, they were allowed to count their pensionable service in the nonpermanent militia as two years, or one-half of the time.


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


George Randolph Pearkes: May I ask why that has been changed to one-quarter now? Surely we want to encourage those men who were in the non-permanent militia before world war II to go into what is to be a largely increased active army. I should like to know what the point is in reducing the amount of benefit from one-half to one-quarter?


Brooke Claxton: That change was made last year by this house when it enacted part V of the act. The purpose of part V was to provide a system of pensions for the permanent force, or the active army, as we now call it. It would be similar in its provision to that for the civil service and the other services of Canada. I think in working it out it will be found that, by and large, the provisions regarding pensions that are now to be found in part V are fair and generous. But the point of all this is that anyone who enlisted and was a member of the permanent force prior to March 31, 1946, can either stay under the old pension provisions or, if he prefers and so elects by March 31, 1948, he can come under the new pension provisions, part V. The purpose of this amendment that we are putting before the house today is just to do one thing, namely, to make it clear that he has that election, that he has the choice either to stay under the old provisions or to come in under the new ones. We do not know how many men will come under the new provisions, but we imagine a considerable proportion of them will do so.


George Randolph Pearkes: I am afraid the minister has not quite answered my question. I asked what the point was of reducing it from one-half to one-quarter.


Brooke Claxton: It was considered that
part V, as it was drafted as a whole, provided a fair pension plan and that a quarter was a fair period of time to allow in respect of the

Militia Pension Act
non-permanent active service. I think I should also point out that this is not free, that if a man wishes to avail himself of the service, he will have to make a contribution which will be related to the benefit to be obtained. Consequently this is not nearly as serious as it might be thought to ibe by hon. members who are not quite as familiar with the provisions as others. This was, as I say, adopted last year. One-quarter was thought to be a fair amount, having regard to the part-time nature of the non-permanent active militia and the working reserve. Taken together with the other provisions, it was considered to be a generous one.


James Sinclair: Would the minister explain why this section is so restrictive? A man in the permanent force of the army must have served with the militia and the militia only. A man in the air force must have served in the air force auxiliary and the same thing is true of the navy. Our whole move today is to have the service regarded as one service. As far as the air force is concerned, particularly before the war I know it was very difficult for a young lad who was keen to serve, to get into the auxiliary air force. One reason for that was that there wore so few units. Even in places like Vancouver, where there was a unit, it was very difficult for a young man who was keen to serve in the non-permanent force to get into the auxiliary air force. As a consequence, a great number of them joined the militia, which they could do. If these men should stay on in the permanent air force, having joined the air force, it seems unfair to me that their militia time before the war should not be counted on their pension plan.


Brooke Claxton: The answer to the hon. member's question is this. The idea has been to count only service in the reserve of the arm of the service in which the man serves in the permanent force. That was deliberately done. It was made restrictive. It has been so since 1910. There is no change in it. It is considered to be a fair provision.


Edmund Davie Fulton: We did not have an air force in 1910.


Brooke Claxton: It was reenacted in 1940 and in 1946; it received consideration on all those occasions, and no reason to change it has been found.


James Sinclair: The very fact that it was good in 1910 definitely does not make it good today. In 1910, for example, we had no air force; and the one lesson which we should have learned out of 83166-20
this war is the need of having just one armed service for Canada. It certainly does seem ridiculous deliberately to exclude lads who did give the best sort of non-permanent service before the war, simply because they are not now in the little pigeonhole they were in before. Therefore, seconded by the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River, I should like to move in amendment that in paragraphs (A), (B) and (C) the last words "in respect of army personnel", "in respect of air force personnel" and "in respect of naval personnel" be deleted. The effect of that will be that a man who served in any branch of the non-permanent forces can get one-quarter of the time spent in any branch of the permanent forces.


Brooke Claxton: I regret having to do so, but I would point out that this clause as it stands and as amended, if the amendment were to carry, would impose a charge on the treasury'; and consequently I submit that it is out of order.


James Sinclair: I agree with the minister on that point. Perhaps the minister will give a little better explanation on the committee as to why he is perpetuating this disunity as regards pension rights for the services.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Ask him if he will move the amendment himself.


James Sinclair: Thank you very much.


William Henry Golding: Shall the clause carry?


Alan Cockeram: There are two or three things about this clause that I do not understand, and one is why there should be the difference in the time. I heard the remarks made about militia service, and I think any one who served in the militia during peace time knows it entailed a great deal of service given at night and on week-ends. In the years when we were coming nearer to war, the men who served in the milita spent a lot of time.
I was surprised when this amendment came in that there should be a change, of this kind. After the first great war it was considered that a, man who served in the militia should be given half-time for his permanent force pension. Today, on the ground of economy, I suppose, it is cut down to a quarter, and I do not think that is fair to those men who gave their time or to the men who are today giving their time in the militia.


Brooke Claxton: That change was made last year.

Militia Pension Act


Alan Cockeram: Well, it has been made, and we are discussing it now.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think the point made by the hon. member for Vancouver North deserves more consideration than so far the minister has seen fit to give it. One realizes that it was made as an amendment, and also one realizes that the minister is anxious to have his bill go forward a step tonight and that, therefore, he is not inclined to accede to a suggestion that he reconsider the matter. But I feel that the suggestion made is worthy of such consideration, and if the minister is not prepared to move an appropriate amendment himself, then I suggest that he resubmit the matter to his advisers, to see whether they do not feel that the suggestion made by the hon. member for Vancouver North should be incorporated in the bill. One might point out that it would not impose a very great burden on the treasury, because these personnel are still required to make contributions at the time they make their election. So I think that technical point is not very important, as the minister may find out if he reconsiders it; and I see no good reason why it should not be adopted.


Brooke Claxton: I can assure the committee and the hon. member who has spoken that everything will be considered and reconsidered, that this process is going on continually. But with regard to this matter I am informed that it was thoroughly considered by an inter-departmental committee last year. It was considered by the government and was put forward to the house after all that consideration, and we are not prepared to make any further change at the present time. It is considered to be a fair proposal and, as I say, it should be read together with all of part V, which constitutes a whole that has been worked out to give a fair pension provision for the members of our active forces.


Frank Exton Lennard: Could the minister give us the names of the personnel of this interdepartmental committee who set themselves up as authorities as to whether or not this act is streamlined for 1947? The minister says it was passed last year, but a good many bills were passed last year in which we can find loopholes now. I suggest that it should be given further consideration.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: The minister has given two reasons for making no change in this provision. The first is that it has been there since 1910; the second is that this particular restriction has been carefully considered. I do not suppose the fact that it has been there since 1910 appeals to any member of the

committee, or even to the minister, but he has not given the committee the grounds for the decision to maintain the restrictive clause, though several times he has said that very point was considered. Would he now give the committee the particular grounds upon which it was decided to retain the restrictive clause in this section?


Brooke Claxton: Like other hon. members, I served in the non-permanent active militia on two separate occasions, once before serving in the first war and once after, and I appreciate very well the extent and value of their services. They are a fundamental, essential part of the work of our armed forces in Canada. But I think anyone who suggests that from the point of view of money value for pension purposes a year in the nonpermanent active militia should be considered as equivalent to half a year in the full-time permanent force-


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: Or at R.M.C.


Brooke Claxton: -is not taking full
account of the actual facts as they are. I am sure that was the reason the change was made; but, as I say, it was made at a time when the provisions generally were made more liberal, and at that time everything was taken into consideration to work out in part V a fair and generous pension plan.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: That is not at all an answer to my question. My question is why the restrictive parts of the section were left in; why the service, in the case of someone in the army, must have been in the nonpermanent militia and in the case of someone in the air force, in the auxiliary air force, and why that non-permanent service could not have been in either of the forces. I wanted the particular reasons why that decision was arrived at.


Brooke Claxton: It was felt that if you were to get any benefit in respect of pension from your service in the permanent force for the period spent in the non-permanent force, it should be in respect of service which was of direct value to your service in the permanent force. It is for service; it is not for periods of time spent in some work not directly contributory to the work you do in the permanent force.


James Sinclair: I
should like to point out to the minister that before the war there were in the auxiliary air force, for example, men serving as transport drivers andi getting exactly the same training they -would have been given in the army, serving as transport drivers. As a veteran I think

Standing Committees
I can congratulate the minister on his recent efforts to consolidate the transport services of the army, navy and air force, for example, the medical services, and so on. Here is something exactly along the same line. Before the war, there were only four auxiliary air force squadrons in Canada, and lads who did not live in the cities where those squadrons were located hadi no hope of giving service to their king and country ini the auxiliary air force. If they wanted to give service they had to join the militia or the naval reserve. When the war came on, they joined the air force. Now they are continuing in the permanent force, and the minister is trying to point out that their service was of very little value to the air force. I would think one of the best indications we could have that we are moving ahead to one consolidated armed service, under one minister, would be to recognize the young lad who, before 1939, wanted to serve in the non-permanent forces, whether army, navy or air force. The actual number of people involved must be very small. I should like to wager that only the air force is involved, because certainly no man who was in an air squadron before the war joined the army or navy. I know most men who were in the naval reserve joined the navy, but there were a number, a considerable number, who, as I have said, could not get into the air squadron and who joined the militia as the next best thing but who joined the air force when the war came. I suggest that it would be another step in this consolidation! of the three branches of our services into one united service to acknowledge this service in any branch.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Tuesday, February 11, 1947