Mr. DANIEL McIVOR (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege, when I saw part of the press gallery and some of the seats in the members' gallery occupied before prayers, I was going to congratulate you on your progress, as their attendance is in keeping with the prayer we pray every day, that whosoever will may come. I think the press gallery and the general public will enjoy the prayers some day in the future.



FREIGHT RATES


Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, the Board of
Transport Commissioners for Canada, by order No. 70425 of March 30, 1948, authorized the member railway companies of the Railway Association of Canada to make a general advance in freight rates of 21 per cent with certain exceptions, and on coal and coke a flat increase of 25 cents per ton.
The railway companies were authorized to publish and file tariff schedules, in accordance with the board's findings, on not less than three days' notice.
The board's authorization for increased rates does not include the following:-
1.	Rates on grain and grain products from all points on all lines of railway west of Fort William to Fort William, Port Arthur and Armstrong.
2.	Rates on grain and grain products from all prairie points on all lines of railway to Vancouver, Prince Rupert and other British Columbia coast ports for export.
3.	Rates on grain and grain products for domestic consumption between points in western Canada and rates on feed grain published in C.F.A. tariff C.T.C. 154.
4.	Joint international rates between Canada and the United States of America (except
coal and coke, board order No. 70462) which were increased as a result of decisions of the interstate commerce commission in ex parte 148, 162 and 166.
5.	Rates between United States points on traffic passing through Canada.
6.	Export and import rates to and from Canadian ports, which are at present on a parity with rates to or from United States ports.
7.	Agreed charges.
8.	Demurrage and penalty charges.
9.	Interswitching rates covered by the board's general order No. 252, dated October 26, 1918.
The government has reviewed the petition from the transportation commission of the maritime board of trade, representing inter alia the governments of the provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island and representations made on behalf of the governments of the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia and other interested persons and organizations, to vary order No. 70425 of the board of transport commissioners by providing that tariff schedules published and filed under the provisions of this order be not effective until at least thirty days from the date thereof.
After careful consideration of these representations, and, without prejudice to any appeal, the government has decided that it should not interfere with the effective date of the board's order.
The government has taken into consideration the fact that no general investigation of freight rates has been made in Canada since that conducted in 1925 by the board of railway commissioners. In the circumstances, the government has decided it would be in the public interest to have the board of transport commissioners make a thorough investigation of the rate structure of railways and railway companies which are under the jurisdiction of parliament, with a view to the establishment of a fair and reasonable rate structure which will, under substantially similar circumstances and conditions, be equal in its application to all persons and localities so as to permit the freest possible exchange of commodities between the various provinces and territories of Canada and the extension of Canadian trade, both foreign and domestic, having due regard
Freight Rates

to the needs of agriculture and other basic industries. This investigation will be subject, of course, to the statutory provisions affecting freight rates known as the Maritime Freight Rates Act and the Crowsnest Pass agreement.
I now table orders in council P.C. 1486 and P.C. 1487 of today's date, giving effect to the decisions of the government.


Mr. REID:: I should like to ask the minister a question on the statement he has just made. In view of the fact that instructions, almost identical with those previously given, have been given by the government to the board of transport commissioners to investigate freight rates, will the minister review the instructions given to see that the board has power to remove the mountain differential in British Columbia? I ask this question because I think these are the very words in the instructions given by governments in the past, and the board of transport commissioners has said that it has no power to equalize rates.


Lionel Chevrier: That is the object of this investigation.
Mr. CRUICKSHANIv: And nothing will come of it.


Lionel Chevrier: The object of the investigation is to make a thorough study of the inequalities which may exist in the various regions across Canada.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: May I ask the minister a supplementary question? In the meantime I suppose the rates go into effect?


Lionel Chevrier: Yes.


Mr. COLDWELL:: And the investigation may take as long as the investigation of last year. The rate structure of the railways is a complicated affair and the investigation may take a year or two.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: Ten years.


Major James William Coldwell: In the meantime the people of Canada are to be penalized by these excessive rates.


Lionel Chevrier: I cannot tell the hon. gentleman how long the investigation will take. It may take a year, or it may take two years. That will depend upon the dispatch with which the board can get across the country.


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: Have the findings of the board of transport commissioners been printed? If so, will copies be placed in the hands of hon. members? I myself have not yet received a copy.


Lionel Chevrier: The judgment consists of some 162 pages-


Percy Chapman Black: It is important enough to have printed and placed in our hands, Mr. Speaker.


Lionel Chevrier: The hon. gentleman did not give me time to complete my reply. If he had he would have learned that I was about to say that the order is a simple matter to get out; the judgment consists of some 166 pages or more, which cannot be put out overnight, but if it is the wish of the house I shall see to it that hon. members get copies of it.


Mr. ABBOTT:: It was distributed.


George Alexander Cruickshank: In view of the decision will the ceiling be taken off farm prices so that western Canada will not be further penalized? I am asking for an answer.


Mr. HOMUTH:: Why don't you move over to this side of the house?


Mr. KNOWLES:: Where do you stand?


George Alexander Cruickshank: Because I am too useful a member to sit over in that corner. If the minister cannot answer my question, what member of the government can?


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order. Hon. members will realize that there is nothing before the house and therefore no debate can take place. If hon. members have some additional questions to ask I would suggest that they wait until the orders of the day are called.


Percy Chapman Black: Mr. Speaker, the minister said that the report of the board of transport commissioners would be printed if hon. members wanted it. It is my wish that it be printed, and I think it is the wish of all hon. members.


James Horace King: Order. I have just suggested to hon. members that if they have more questions to put to the minister they had better wait until the orders of the day are called.


Mr. GRAYDON:: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, it has long been the wish of hon. members on this side of the house that latitude commensurate with the latitude which is given and often taken by the ministry in making long statements, which of course are not debatable, should be given to hon. members on this side. If we wait until we reach another part of the proceedings other matters sometimes intervene and the whole trend and thread of the discussion is lost. I think Your

Freight Rates
Honour would be quite right in allowing the same latitude that is given to the government and I hope you will continue to do so.

On the orders of the day:


Mr. JAENICKE:: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Transport. Will the minister consider the appointment of a royal commission or some tribunal other than the board of transport commissioners for the investigation, of the Canadian freight rates structure which he announced this afternoon?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: What nonsense!


Lionel Chevrier: If my hon. friend will look at the Railway Act I believe he will find in a pertinent section of that act that freight rates are regulated by the board and that in order to set up a royal commission parliament would have to amend that act. So the answer is no.


Thomas Reid: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Transport in the light of the announcement he has made today. Can he give the house any assurance that the instructions to the board to investigate freight rates with a view to establishing a structure that will be just and reasonable will enable the board to remove the mountain differential if evidence is given showing that it should be removed?


Lionel Chevrier: The only answer I can give to my hon. friend is that under the terms of reference as set out in the order in council and the powers which the board already have under the act to equalize rates, if in their investigation the board find that there should be an equalization I take it that they will so order.


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport in connection with his announcement that the government does not intend to postpone or interfere in any way with the increase in freight rates ordered by the board. Were representations made by several of the provinces to the government asking the government to intervene? If so, what provinces, and will he lay on the table the representations made by the several provinces?


Lionel Chevrier: If the hon. gentleman had listened to the statement which was made-


John George Diefenbaker: I listened.


Lionel Chevrier: -he would have noticed that representations were made by each of the
provinces. If the hon. gentleman wants the representations, which were very short, laid on the table I have no objection.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I should like to ask a supplementary question. Did Ontario and Quebec make any representations?


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Why do you worry about those provinces?


Lionel Chevrier: I am not aware of any.



WELCOME TO R.C.A.F. FLYERS, WINNERS OF OLYMPIC CHAMPIONSHIP, ON THEIR RETURN

Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, may I turn now to a subject on which, unlike the last, I believe there will be complete unanimity in all parts of the house? All hon. members will, I am sure, join me in extending a hearty welcome to the R.C.A.F. flyers on their return home after winning the Olympic championship at hockey. It is often forgotten that Canada did not win at hockey at the last winter games played in 1936. Now the Royal Canadian Air Force team has re-established Canada's proper supremacy in her native sport.
In addition to winning the championship in Switzerland without losing a game, the hockey team, at the invitation of other countries, visited France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Sweden and Czechoslovakia, as well as England and Scotland. They were good ambassadors.
Reports received from abroad show that everywhere, whether on the rink or off, they conducted themselves in the best traditions of Canadian sportsmanship and of the armed forces of Canada. They w-ere a credit to themselves, to their service and to their country.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs, for the Prime Minister) moved:
That, notwithstanding any other order passed by the house in relation thereto, on and after Wednesday, the 7th of April and every day thereafter until otherwise ordered during the present session, government notices of motions and government orders shall have precedence over all other business except the introduction of bills, questions by members and notices of motions for the production of papers, and from 8 to 9 p.m. on Fridays, private bills.
Gordon Graydon: I desire to say a word on this motion of the Prime Minister which has been moved by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. It is
Business oj the House

generally understood, and I think generally accepted in all corners of the house, that normally and naturally a certain right of way should be given to the government in connection with urgent business which it desires to bring before parliament. On that point therefore no grave exception will be taken to the general principle. On the other hand, the situation here is quite different, because the government, I submit, should not take the attitude of hogging procedure, if I may use that expression, with respect to the introduction and discussion of legislation at the expense of private members on all sides of the house. There must be some give and take on both sides. I would not want to see the order paper cluttered up with private members' resolutions at various stages of the session at the expense of urgent government legislation which all of us wish to have passed. Surely, however, there is some happy medium which parliament might adopt. I must confess that I cannot see how the government at this stage of the session can possibly ask parliament to pass a resolution in the precise terms of the motion now before us.
There are thirty-five private members' notices of motions on the order paper. Many of these are of very great importance. In addition there are public bills awaiting consideration. I think the government is asking too much of parliament when it seeks to have this resolution carried in a form which private members on all sides of the house find it impossible to accept.
I wish to make it perfectly clear that any move we make with reference to this resolution is not for the purpose of delaying government business, because we are not asking for very much in what we now seek. I hear an interruption. You people over there would have us get nothing, I suppose, but thank goodness there are members here who want us to get a fair deal.


Mr. MacKINNON:: The interruption came from that side.


Gordon Graydon: I do not care where it came from. You people will have to take the same criticism because I will criticize fairly wherever criticism is called for.
My suggestion on behalf of the official opposition is this. We are prepared to allow the government to pass this resolution if they will reduce the period to two weeks, because it is not fair to ask parliament to give the government carte blanche, a blank cheque for the whole session, thereby denying private members the right to bring forward important matters from time to time.

If this motion is adopted it will be following a precedent which has been adhered to not only during the war but in sessions since the war. It is about time the government realized that they are not the only ones in the House of Commons who have been sent here by the people of the country.
I submit that the suggestion I offer is a fair and a just one, namely that we change the date mentioned in this resolution, April 7, to two weeks thereafter. Then, if government business demands a further extension, we shall be prepared to consider it, though I believe that by the time the two weeks have elapsed, enough of urgent government business ought to have been passed, so we should at least give private members something of a break. They are entitled to it, and I am speaking on their behalf at the moment. I ask the government to accept this proposal.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Speaker, I agree with the criticism made this afternoon by the acting leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon). I am not sure whether his suggestion to the government is of sufficient advantage or offers sufficient latitude to private members. As he pointed out, there are thirty-five private members' resolutions on the order paper, some of them relating to very important topics of great interest to the country at large. I agree with him that while we were willing to forgo many of the rights and privileges of private members during the war, because of the necessities of that period, we do not feel that we should forgo those rights and privileges now that the war is over.
As a matter of fact, all that this resolution proposed by the Prime Minister allots is the hour from 8 to 9 on Friday evenings, and for private bills only. May I point out that private bills are measures that are of interest to private individuals or to private corporations. They are bills which come before this house, moved by private members, asking for special privileges, often for an individual, as in the case of divorce, or for small groups, associations or corporations. On the other hand, there are a number of public bills on the order paper, and they have to do with matters which are of paramount interest to the public of Canada. True, they are sponsored by private members, but when we look at them we realize how important they are. One or two may be rather embarrassing to the government and may not meet with the approval of some members of the house, but whether they are embarrassing or not, whether we agree with them or not, they are of public importance and should be given precedence

Business oj the House
over bills which relate merely to individuals or to private groups of people. I say whether we agree with them or not, and there are at least two of these bills with which I am in disagreement; nevertheless they are of sufficient importance to warrant their being discussed and decided by the house.
Let us look for a moment at these bills. There is an act to amend the criminal code, moved by the hon. member for Quebec-Montmoreney (Mr. LaCroix). There is an act to amend the Dairy Industry Act, which is a measure dealing with the sale of oleomargarine,-


George Alexander Cruickshank: Shame.


Major James William Coldwell: -something which is important to the country. Whether my hon. friend the member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruickshank) and I agree with it or not, it should be discussed and decided by the house.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Hear, hear.


Major James William Coldwell: That is where it should be decided. Then there is an act to amend the Supreme Court Act, which deals with appeals to the privy council, and an act to amend the Railway Act, which deals with a very large group of pensioners of one of the railways.
These are public bills the subject matters of which are of widespread interest. Why should private bills be given preference over public bills of such importance?
I am going to move in amendment:
That all the words after the words "production of papers," in the sixth line of the motion, be deleted, and the following be substituted therefor:
"and from 8 to 9 p.m. on Tuesdays and Fridays, public and private bills, the former having precedence."
From 8 to 9 p.m. on Tuesdays and Fridays, restoring the two. hours that are given to bills introduced into this house by private members, public bills having a preference over private bills-the opposite of the motion standing in the name of the Prime Minister and now before the house. I believe the house should support such an amendment.
May I say this before I take my seat. We are not asking for the restoration of all private members' days at this stage of the session, but we do think that the minimum we should ask for is what my amendment to the motion now proposes.


Mr. JAMES SINCLAIR (Vancouver North) :: I should like to say a few words on this subject, Mr. Speaker, speaking not as a nominal supporter of the government but as a private member and a backbencher.
We have heard from the leader of the government and leaders of the opposition groups. We as backbenchers may be comparatively insignificant and unimportant as individuals when compared with these leaders, but the rights we have as members of parliament are extremely important and significant, and they have never been more so than they are today. Chief amongst those is a fair allocation to private members of the time of parliament as set forth in standing order 15(3), which says that on Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday for the first four weeks of the session the business of private members shall have precedence over government business. That clearly shows that the intent of our constitution is not that this parliament should be the creature of the government, and not that the time of this parliament should be the monopoly of the government.
It is quiet true that in some countries- Russia for example-the government has the monopoly of. government business, with no opposition. On the other extreme, in the United States, the executive branch of the government has no right to initiate legislation. All legislation is sponsored by private members, if they can be so called, members of congress or the senate. Here under the British system I think we have a middle course, very wisely, in that the government, being the responsible authority in the country, has certain rights in parliament. But so has every backbencher, no matter how distant or remote his riding may be. If we are limited to those subjects which the government cares to bring forward, then we are in this position: we can only support or oppose. Anything which the government does not want to bring before parliament, anything which it ignores, overlooks, or thinks to be unimportant, no matter what our constituents may think, we of course cadnot discuss.
In wartime we gladly gave up certain rights we had as private members, but once the war was over we expected that they would be restored. I looked over the orders of the day for the third session after the last war, in 1921; it is three years now since the end of the second world war. In 1921 the speech from the throne was given the usual precedence over all other business and the debate ended on March 3. March 4 was private members' day. At 3.15 on March 4, without any question or hesitation, a private member from Edmonton started to discuss his resolution. That is the way things went during that session. I looked up the record after the second world war, and found it most interesting. In 1946 the
Business of the House

session began on March 15. On April 3, less than three weeks after the beginning of the session, we were embarked on private members' day, with resolutions and bills. There were five bills and six resolutions debated that session. Three of them came to a vote. In 1947 the session began on January 31. Thi3 time it was not until April 4, two months later, that private members had an opportunity to discuss public bills and resolutions. At that time seven bills and six resolutions were debated. Three were voted upon.
Now in 1948, when we are three years away from the war, after four months of sitting, a motion is proposed the effect of which is to cut off completely any hope of private members' bills cr resolutions coming up for debate.
The government offers the argument-the Prime Minister offered it to me two years ago when I objected to being cut off when the resolution was reached at that time-that ample opportunity is afforded to private members to discuss whatever they wish on the speech from the throne, on the budget or on going into supply. Those opportunities are there, it is true. But what happens in those debates is that every member speaks on a different subject. We are like an army riding off in all directions. Our efforts are dissipated and the government carries on with its own program. If we had our private members' days on which to debate specific problems, then the attention of all members would be fixed on those problems, and bills and resolutions introduced by private members are voted upon. Then the government and the people of the country would know what parliament's feeling is on these matters.
The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) has mentioned the fact that these public bills-and naturally I am greatly interested in one of them, the oleomargarine bill- are not unimportant or trivial. Certainly the first bill, with regard to the outlawing of the communist party, is a subject of great concern across this country. It is quite true that we had a debate on it in parliament lasting one day and leading nowhere. In this country there are a great many people who think that the communist party should be outlawed. There are also a great many people who are not communists but who believe it should not be outlawed. All these people are looking to this parliament for specific direction on that matter-a direction which cannot be avoided by having a three-hour afternoon's blowoff on the subject of communism.
The next thing under public bills and orders is the bill in respect to oleomargarine. The members from Montreal and Quebec tell me

that their mail today consists mostly of letters from people in the lower income groups, protesting first of all against the high price of butter, and secondly-


James Horace King: Order. I do not think I can permit the hon. member to discuss public and private bills which are on the order paper. Discussion should be relevant to the motion before the house.


James Sinclair: It is true that I am a backbencher and not a leader of an opposition group. But as the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar has just finished discussing these bills in excellent style, I think I should have an opportunity of commenting in the same brief way.


James Horace King: Order. I must say to the hon. gentleman that I am trying to treat all hon. members in the same way, whether they are backbenchers or not. I would ask the hon. member to resume his seat. I think it is my duty to call the attention of hon. members to the fact that I will not permit him to discuss oleomargarine or any private or public bills on the order paper. Discussion should be relevant to the motion which is before the house.


James Sinclair: I will bow to your ruling, Mr. Speaker, and just conclude by saying that certainly in the estimation of the people of this country none of these four bills is trivial or unimportant. I agree with the leader of the opposition when he says that there is no doubt in the minds of the citizens of this country that these bills are infinitely more important than a divorce bill or a bill to increase the capital of some little insurance company. I cannot agree with the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, however, that simply devoting two hours a week, one on Tuesday and one on Friday evening to these public bills is sufficient, because in the case of Bill No. 4, for instance, which I cannot discuss, the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruick-shank) is perfectly capable of talking it out in the time allotted.


George Alexander Cruickshank: And he intends to do so.


James Sinclair: What we need is a chance to revert, as private members, to a full day's discussion in accordance with standing order 15(3) of measures of public importance which we as members of parliament have brought before parliament. I cannot vote for the amendment moved by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, but I shall oppose the motion moved by the Acting Prime Minister.


Mr. E. D. FULTON (Kamloops):: May I ask a question having to do with the amendment

Business of the House
just moved by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar? I observe that this motion makes no mention of notices of motion which may be moved by private members. I wonder whether I am right in my understanding that no time would be given to such notices of motion, or whether he or any member of his party would be willing to add that to the amendment which he has moved?


Mr. COLD  WELL@: May I just answer that question, Mr. Speaker? We should be quite willing to add that, but we thought we were asking for the minimum. May I just say to the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair) that private and public bills may be discussed only on Tuesdays and Fridays, under the standing order.


Mr. JEAN LESAGE (Montmagny-LIslet):: May I as a backbencher say that I am in agreement generally with what the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) has said, and that I would be in favour of his amendment if it provided a means of giving justice to the people who have come here with private bills. If private bills could come before public bills, I would be in favour of his amendment.


Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Broadview):: If this house adopts this motion, then any question of the supremacy of parliament can be forgotten for the present session. We passed a motion similar to this last December, under which parliament abdicated all its rights, functions and privileges to the executive, who have been ruling the country over the head of parliament since the day this house met in December. As I have said on other occasions, the freedom and liberty of the subject have been surrendered to outside boards and controls so that people are being fined and imprisoned against all the laws which should apply in this country.


James Horace King: Order. I would ask hon. members to be silent, because it is very difficult to hear the hon. gentleman who has the floor. A great deal has been said about the privileges of backbenchers, but I believe freedom of speech should apply to the occupants of the front benches as well.


Thomas Langton Church: As I have said previously, Mr. Speaker, in difficult days such as these I do not object to giving the government of the day reasonable powers, but the private members of parliament are forgotten entirely. We are the forgotten link in parliamentary government in this country, and this applies to those on the government benches as well as those in all other parties in this house. When the private member ceases to function, all
parliamentary government is at an end. What are we doing here? We are surrendering the control of expenditures to these outside bodies. I had a word to say about this when a previous motion was discussed, and I should like to quote two brief sentences from my remarks on another occasion:
All kinds of bodies, over the head of parliament, are spending money like water. Every principle for which the British nation struggled in the old land since the seventeenth century has been surrendered to the political caucuses. Parliament itself, which came into being to ensure that taxes shall be voted only by those who have to pay them, has become the institution through which those who do not pay them impose them on others.
And there is another sentence:
. . . powers of legislation older even than the right of taxpayers to determine the national expenditure have been surrendered, and if we are to continue this sort of thing the power of parliament will be gone for ever.


James Horace King: Order. I suggest that the hon. member confine his remarks to the amendment.


Thomas Langton Church: Quite right, Mr. Speaker; I am directing my remarks to the motion and the amendment.. I say we might as well all go home. It is no wonder the people back home in our constituencies are asking what the members of parliament are doing. They want to know what we are doing in connection with margarine and many other matters that have been mentioned here today, but the answer is nothing at all. It is said we are to have a debate on foreign affairs, but I doubt if we will ever get to it; by that time the empire may be gone.
In conclusion I say these matters of controllers and executive rule affect every man, woman and child in the country, and we have surrendered all these powers to the executive. They are irresponsible. They are irremovable, under no control and subject to no appeal. They are above the law, the courts and the House of Commons. If we are not to have our rights and privileges we might as well turn the key in the door of parliament and go home.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Mr. Speaker, so far everyone has said he is a backbencher and is speaking for the backbenchers. I am a frontbencher temporarily sitting in the back, though if I were from Ottawa I would be always in the front benches.
I cannot go along with the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) in his amendment. I think everyone knows that the hon. member for Fraser Valley fully intends to talk out some of these measures
Business oj the House

if at all possible, and I am good for forty-eight minutes or sixty-four, with your permission. However, I believe the particular bill I have in mind should be brought before the house and be dealt with here by the elected representatives from all parts of Canada. I believe a private member should have that privilege, just as I believe a private member should have the courage of his convictions and vote on such a matter. I am going to do my best to defeat a certain bill, but I am prepared to do it right here in this house. Therefore I intend to uphold the resolution.


Mr. J. L. GIBSON (Comox-Alberni):: As an independent member of this house


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


John Lambert Gibson: I repeat, as an independent member of this house- infinitely more independent than any member of any of these parties sitting around me, who rally around their whips-I want to add my protest to the form of this resolution. The government must admit that hon. members on all sides have been quite prepared to co-operate in expediting the business of the house, but I think this resolution, which asks us to give up the rights of private members with no guarantee as to the length of time that will be required, is a little unfair. I believe the government should give further consideration to the matter and see if there is not some way in which a limit can be placed on the time during which they may have the power for which they are asking; perhaps it could be for one month.
Personally I should be very glad to grant such power. As has been stated, we have two bills on the order paper which to my mind are extremely important, not only to those of us in the house but to the people of Canada generally. I refer to the bill which would amend the Dairy Industry Act, and the bill sponsored by the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency in regard to illegal organizations. I would not like to have members of the press gallery say in the newspapers that the members of this house were afraid to face these two important issues. I would like the privilege of recording my opinions on these matters, and I am sure many other hon. members feel the same way. I would be grateful therefore if the government would let this motion stand and reconsider the matter with a view to seeing whether it cannot be made more acceptable to the backbenchers-which the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruickshank) claims he is not-and the ordinary members of the house.

Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I think all hon. members realize the [DOT] importance of the public business that has to be considered, and that no one wants to slight that business. And I am sure all hon. members must realize that the government has no desire whatever to act in the way described by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon), in a word for which he apologized before using it. There is no intention of hogging the time of the house.


Gordon Graydon: I did not mean to apologize; I thought the word was very good.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I think we all feel our responsibility in respect of the public affairs of the country, and we all feel that parliament has to deal with the time at its disposal in the manner that will best suit the interests of the public at large.
The hon. member for Peel offered the suggestion that this motion should be allowed to stand for a period of perhaps two weeks. We would be quite prepared to accept something of that kind, but it would not be quite frank to do so, because whether or not the hon. member realizes it, there is a resolution which would still be in effect at the end of that period, which provides less time for private members than is provided here. So his suggestion would not meet the wish of a large number of hon. members that certain time be allowed for the consideration of matters they feel should be dealt with. The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) has suggested that this motion might be acceptable if two hours were reserved for matters being promoted by private members, but he would invert the order set out in standing order 15.
We have had some expression of views as to how the time of the house should be used in the interests of the public. I would suggest that this debate be adjourned until tomorrow and in the meantime we can get together and see if we can do something which will leave the impression that everyone wishes to be fair. Between now and tomorrow afternoon we can give the matter some further thought, and I think we can come to a conclusion which will leave each one with the impression that no other is trying to have his own way, but that everyone is trying to do what is best for the country at large.
I move that the debate be adjourned.


Mr. SMITH (Calgary West):: May I ask the minister a question? I was wondering whether the smoothness of his remarks was induced by butter or margarine.

Questions


Major James William Coldwell: Do I understand that the right hon. gentleman moves an amendment?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: No; I move the-adjoumment of the debate until tomorrow afternoon.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned. QUESTIONS
(Questions answered orally are indicated by' an asterisk).



WAR ASSETS-FIRE EXTINGUISHERS

Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: 1.	How many CO2 fire extinguishers are in the possession of War Assets Corporation?
2.	Have any such extinguishers been destroyed since the cessation of hostilities? If so, how many?
3.	Have any offers of purchase been received by the corporation? If so, how many have been accepted?
4.	To whom were they sold?
5.	What was the cost price of these extinguishers?
6.	Have any been returned to the manufacturers? If so, at what price?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	There are 727 CO2 extinguishers located in the Winnipeg area at the present time.
2.	Yes. 268 have been scrapped.
3.	Yes, offers of purchase have been received and 15 have been accepted.
4.	Canada Car and Foundry Co,., Fort William, Ont., Canadian Pacific Airlines, Winnipeg, Man., province of Manitoba, city of Winnipeg, Man., City Machinery Co., Winnipeg, Man., Aircraft Service Western Ltd., Winnipeg, Man., Luke's Electric Motor and Machinery Co., Winnipeg, Man., J. Werier and Co. Ltd., Winnipeg, Man., Pioneer Electric Limited, St. Boniface, Man., city of St. Boniface, Man., fire exchange, Winnipeg, Man., Security Storage Co. Ltd., Winnipeg, Man., city of Saskatoon, Winnipeg Electric Company, Winnipeg, Man., W. Davies, St. Vital, Man.
5.	The corporation is not in a position to answer this part of the question.
6.	464 of the 2 lb. type were sold to Walter Kidde and Company, Montreal, at 82.25 each. 39 of the 50 lb. and 10 of the 100 lb. types were sold to LaFranee Fire Engine and Foamite Limited, Toronto, at $16.67 and 83325 each respectively.



NATIONAL HOUSING ACT, 1944

Mr. FLEMING:: Up to December 31, 1947, under the National Housing Act, 1944, (a) how many contracts have been entered into under part I; (b) what is the total number of houses for which loans have
been authorized under part I; (c) how many of such houses have been completed and are now occupied; (d) what is the total amount of the loans authorized under part I; (e) how many contracts have been entered into under part II of the act; (f) what is the total number of rental housing projects for which loans have been authorized under part II; (g) how many of such rental housing projects are low-rental housing projects; (h) how many of such rental housing projects have been completed and are now occupied, and how many of them are low-rental housing projects, and where are they located; (i) what is the total amount of the loans authorized under part II; (j) how many limited dividend corporations have been recognized as qualified to receive loans under section 9 of the act? What are they and where are they authorized to operate rental housing projects? Which ones are institutional housing corporations, and which are institutional holding companies; (k) which of such limited dividend housing corporations have received loans under part II? (1) (1) To how many municipalities have grants been made pursuant to section 12;
(2)	what are the individual amounts of such grants and what municipalities respectively received them; (3) what are the other terms, if any of the said grants: (m) (1) how-many municipalities have applied for grants pursuant to section 12; (2) how many have been refused;
(3)	how many of such applications are still pending; (n) how many contracts have been entered into under part III; (o) (1) w-hat is the total number of houses for which loans have been authorized under part III; (2) how many of such houses have been completed and are now occupied: (p) what is the total amount of the loans authorized under part III; (q) how many contracts have been entered into with manufacturers of plumbing and heating equipment or other component parts of houses, pursuant to section 15; (r) how many payments have been made under part IV, and what is the total thereof; (s) what studies and investigations, planning and research have been carried on under part V; (t) what expenditures have been made pursuant to part V out of the $5,000,000 authorized by parliament in 1945, under section 27A?


Mr. McILRAITH:: Detailed information required is available for most questions in the annual reports of the corporation for 1946 and 1947, but is not available for 1945.
(a)	Annual report for 1946, page 30; annual report for 1947, page 29.
(b)	Answered by (a).
(c)	Answered by (a). No information is available for occupancy.
(d)	Answered by (a).
(e)	Answered by (a).
(f)	Answered by (a). The number of rental housing projects corresponds to the number of loans approved under part II.
(g)	Forty-one of these rental housing projects were approved under sections 9 and 9A, covering 3,629 housing units, of which 3,449 housing units were approved during 1946 and 180 during 1947.

Questions
(h)	Answered by (a). Completions during 1947 of housing units in low-rental housing projects were located at: Saint John, Montreal, Three Rivers, Atikokan, Brantford, Brockville, Burlington, Chatham, Guelph, Hamilton, Kingston, Kitchener, Lindsay, London, Marathon, Owen Sound, Peterborough, Sarnia, Stratford, St. Catharines, St. Thomas, Toronto, Waterloo, Windsor, Regina, Saskatoon, Edmonton, New Westminster, Port Neville, Vancouver, Victoria.
No information is available for completions in 1945 and 1946, nor for occupancy.
(i)	Answered by (a).
(j)	Thirty-five, including the 32 subsidiary companies of Housing Enterprises of Canada, Limited at:-Saint John, Montreal (2 projects), Three Rivers, Brantford, Brockville, Chatham, Guelph, Hamilton, Kingston, Kitchener, Lindsay, London (2 projects), Owen Sound, Peterborough, Sarnia, Stratford, St. Catharines, St. Thomas, Toronto (2 projects), Waterloo, Windsor, Regina, Saskatoon, Edmonton, New Westminster, Vancouver (2 projects), Victoria.
The three other companies are:-Burlington Housing Corporation at Burlington, Ontario; Lakeview Heights Limited at Marathon, Ontario; Don Park Homesites Limited at Atikokan, Ontario.
Housing Enterprises of Canada, Ltd., is the only institutional holding company, control of which has been vested in Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, while the remainder are institutional housing corporations, including the subsidiaries of Housing Enterprises of Canada, Limited.
(k)	The 35 limited dividend housing companies listed in (j).
(l)	1, none; 2, answered by 1; 3, answered by 1.
(m)	1, one; 2, none; 3, one.
(n)	None.
(o)	t 1, answered by (n); 2, answered by (n).
(p)	Answered by (n).
(q)	None.
(r)	Annual report for 1946, page 34; annual report for 1947, page 32. No claims have been paid for loans guaranteed under Part IV.
(s)	Annual report for 1946, pages 22 to 24; annual report for 1947, pages 11 to 13.
(t)	Annual report for 1946, page 38; annual report for 1947, page 34.



IMMIGRATION-CITIZENS OF CZECHOSLOVAKIA

Mr. JACKMAN:: 1.	How many citizens of Czechoslovakia were admitted into Canada during the years (a) 1946; (b) 1947; (c) and January and February, 1948?

2.	How many applications from citizens of Czechoslovakia for admission to Canada were on file with the Canadian government as of March 1, 1948, and how many of these had been approved ?
3.	How many of those whose applications were approved had relatives in Canada?
4.	Has Canada an immigration office in Czechoslovakia? If so, when was it re-opened?
5.	Will approved applicants be granted exit permits by the present Czechoslovakian government?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	216 citizens of Czechoslovakia were admitted during the calendar year, 1946.
356 citizens of Czechoslovakia were admitted during the calendar year, 1947.
72 citizens of Czechoslovakia were admitted in January, 194S.
79 citizens of Czechoslovakia were admitted in February, 1948.
2.	Records show that during the period April 1, 1947, to February 29, 1948, relatives in Canada filed' applications for 2,547 persons residing in Czechoslovakia which were all approved and forwarded to the Canadian legation at Prague and the relatives in Canada were advised: to have the proposed immigrants apply in person at the Canadian legation, Prague, for examination and visa. Included in the persons applied for there was undoubtedly a number who were not citizens of Czechoslovakia, and records from Prague show that for the same period 300 immigration visas were granted to citizens of Czechoslovakia.
3.	See answer to question No. 2.
4.	No regular immigration officer but the Canadian legation looks after immigration matters and the grant of immigration visas. Legation was opened in Prague at the end of March, 1947.
5.	The policy of the present Czechoslovakian government in regard to grant of exit permits is uncertain.



MOUNTED POLICE-QUESTIONING OF MEMBERS OF UNIVERSITY FACULTIES

Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: 1.	Have any members of the R.C.M.P. interrogated or questioned, officially or unofficially, any member of any faculty of any university or college in Canada during the last two years?
2.	If so, how many, and for what reason?


Mr. ILSLEY:: Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask the hon. member to drop this question, and' on two grounds. In the first place I have a letter from the commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in which he says that in order to answer the question he would have to ask for a report from every member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and that even that answer would not necessarily be

Questions
correct because a large number of members of the force have left the service in the last two years. He states he would be unable to reach all of them, as he does not have their present addresses.
The second ground is that even though there were not those considerations of practicability and convenience, these inquiries are not inquiries the results of which could be reported to the House of Commons; they would be of a confidential nature. On these grounds it would not be in the public interest to answer the questions.


Mr. WINTERS:: Prince Edward Island
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick ....
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia ... Yukon Territory ....
Canada


Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: I am prepared' to reword the question to get certain information I should like to have. My information is that these interrogations have been taking place, and I should like to know why.


James Horace King: Dropped.



INCOME AND EXCESS PROFITS TAXES

Thomas Reid: What amounts were collected by -way of (a) income tax; (b) excess profits tax, in the various provinces for the year 1946?
Fiscal year 1945-46		
	Excess	
Income tax	profits tax	Total
(a)	(b)	
$ 2,117,412	$ 902.864	S 3,020,27626,178.175	13,490,704	39,668,87916,608,986	10,844,277	27.453,263258.488.521	151.002,358	409,490,879431,732,700	223,634,790	655,367.49048,830,094	28,089,644	76,919,73824,186,459	5,363,786	29,550.24537.679.168	14,597,651	52,276,81991.342,307	46,046.530	137,388.837565,452	223,879	789,331$ 937,729,274	$ 494,196,483	$ 1,431,925,757



LIFE SAVING STATIONS

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Has anything been done by the government since the debate on the estimates last session to establish adequate and properly equipped life saying stations in Ontario on the great lakes and international rivers?
2.	During the floods at the Etobicoke river on lake Ontario, what life saving appliances and equipment had the government for this work there?
3.	What life saving station afforded assistance in this disaster?
4.	What life saving stations lias the government on the great lakes to aid navigation and the safety of the sailors there?
5.	Has any survey been made since the last debate on it?


Mr. CIIEVRIER:: 1.	No actual life saving stations are operated on the great lakes, but as pointed out in an answer to a question tabled last session, the department does maintain and operate on the great lakes between Kingston and the Canada-U.S. border near Fort William, 426 lightstations, fog alarm plants and light and signal buoys as well as approximately 1,100 unlighted buoys, beacons, etc. In addition, government vessels are available on short notice to render assistance to vessels in distress in their immediate vicinity. There are seven ship-to-shore radio telegraph and telephone stations to provide constant 24-hour communication with ships on the great lakes. These stations regularly broadcast weather forecasts, storm warnings and notices of dangers to navigation. There are also fifteen automatic radio beacons from which ships take their bearings by radio.
2.	Etobicoke river not under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transport.
3.	No information. See answer to No. 2.
4.	(a) See answer to No. 1.
(b)	It was pointed out in an answer to a question tabled last session that life saving appliances and equipment required to be carried in ships operating on the great lakes are specified in the regulations respecting life saving appliances made under authority of paragraph (b) of section 405 of the Canada Shipping Act, 1934, as approved by order in council P.C. 3 of the 6th day of January, 1937.
All merchant ships operating on the great lakes are required by the terms of section 387 of the Canada Shipping Act, 1934, to have the hull and equipment inspected by the steamship inspectors at least once a year, and inspectors
Questions

are required to ascertain that the ships are equipped with all equipment necessary for safe navigation, and certificates of inspection are not issued until this equipment is on board.
5.	No.



ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Has the government any announcement to make regarding the postponement of the plans agreed to for the construction of the St. Lawrence waterway by the United States, and by Canada?
2.	Will the minister make any statement on it before the Easter recess? If so, when?
3.	Why and for what purpose was another commission appointed by Canada to investigate the Lachine section of this work?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	On February 27 last, after considering a joint resolution approving, with the exception of certain of its provisions, the agreement concerning great lalces-St. Lawrence basin development, signed by Canada and the United States on March 19, 1941, the United States senate recorded its decision to recommit the resolution to the committee on foreign relations for further study. In the circumstances, it is considered that no useful purpose would be served by making an announcement at the present juncture.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	The desired information was given on February 4, by the Hon. Minister of Transport in reply to a similar question from the hon. member. The reply is to be found on page 858 of Hansard of that date.



HEALTH AND WELFARE-CO-OPERATION WITH PROVINCIAL DEPARTMENTS

Mr. BROWN:: What work of a special nature has been carried out by the Department of National Health and Welfare in co-operation with any provincial department of health?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	In response to a request from the deputy minister of health for Prince Edward Island, a two-months' study was conducted of the bacteriological	and	sanitary quality	of milkthroughout	the	province. The	provincialdepartment	of	health provided	laboratoryfacilities, staff and equipment, the Department of National Health and Welfare making available a mobile bacteriological laboratory and the services of a public health engineer who surveyed dairies,	pasteurization plants and
representative samples of dairy farms. As a result of the report submitted by this department following an analysis of the results of the survey appropriate legislative action was taken to bring into force the recommendations made.

2.	In co-operation with the British Columbia department of health the paediatric specialist of the child and maternal health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare has, since September 1947, been directing a study in Nanaimo, B.C., of the physical condition of some 8,000 school children. This study consists of the evaluation of the physical fitness of children by means of the Wetzel grid. The Wetzel grid is a graph which has recently been evolved for the evaluation of the physique, the growth or nutritional grade, the physical progress and the caloric need of a child. Associated with the study is the organization of services designed to correct the deficiencies encountered; deficiencies due to physical as well as psychological factors, e.g. malnutrition, poor discipline, maladjustment in the home, et cetera, et cetera.
3.	The child and maternal health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare recently co-operated with the school medical officer of Saskatoon in carrying out a study of the influence of psychological factors on the growth of school children. The division provided the necessary Wetzel grids for this study.
4.	The nursing specialist of the child and maternal health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare was in Regina for some months organizing, in co-operation with the provincial authorities and the Saskatchewan branch of the Canadian Red Cross Society, a mothers' milk service. The service is designed to save the lives of premature and debilitated babies and to encourage breast-feeding of infants. This project entailed organizing the collection, storage, refrigeration and dispensing of mothers' milk to babies in hospitals and in homes. A depot at Saskatoon was also established. Many conferences with local health officials, doctors, hospital and nursing groups were arranged. Talks were given by radio, to voluntary groups and to parents, and articles were prepared for the press, monthly health bulletins, et cetera.
5.	The province of New Brunswick is participating with the dominion government in a treatment scheme to determine whether an appreciable number of blind can be removed from the blind pension rolls by operation and medical treatment. Funds have been voted by the dominion government to be used on a 75-25 per cent basis, in agreement with the provinces. Lists of suitable cases have been furnished by the blindness control division of the Department of National Health and Welfare to the other provinces as well, who, it is anticipated, will also participate in the scheme.

Questions
6.	In response to requests received from the provinces model plans have been drawn up by the hospital design division of the Department of National Health and Welfare for (a) a mental hospital and (b) a provincial department of health building to include various [DOT]clinics. On request, a consultation service has also been given on active treatment hospital plans.
7.	The laboratory of hygiene of the Department of National Health and Welfare is participating in a co-operative effort with the provincial public health laboratories to ensure a uniform service in the diagnosis of syphilis, with a view to facilitating the control of the disease. Re-agents used in the blood test for syphilis are prepared and standardized at the laboratory of hygiene for distribution to the provinces. Collaborative studies to evaluate the accuracy of the blood tests, as carried out in each laboratory, are conducted from time to time. New and improved methods of diagnosis are being investigated. The directors of all provincial public health laboratories have by unanimous resolution accepted the laboratory of hygiene as the national referee laboratory for this work.
8.	At the request of the province of Nova Scotia a survey of food services in the small hospitals and country homes was carried out by the nutrition division of the Department of National Health and Welfare. A report was made to the province, giving detailed advice for improvement of the situation observed.
9.	At the request of the province of Saskatchewan a member of the nutrition division of the Department of National Health and Welfare worked in the province for two months assisting in a special effort to expand the operation of a school lunch program in rural schools.
10.	At the request of the provinces concerned, nutrition surveys designed to assess the nutritional status of the population were carried out by personnel of the nutrition division of the Department of National Health and Welfare in-	_
(a)	a Nova Scotia island;
(b)	two counties in Quebec;
(c)	a health unit in Ontario;
(d)	a health unit in Alberta.
11.	A survey of the nursing situation was made in the mental hospitals of Canada, as urged by the dominion-provincial conference on mental health held in October, 1946 and as approved by the dominion council of health at its meeting in November, 1946. The purpose of the survey was to obtain an accurate estimate of the present situation in the mental hospitals as to shortage of nurses, training programs that are being conducted, and working conditions of the nurses, with a view to advising the provinces where their efforts at improvement would be best directed and assisting them with detailed advice.
The survey was conducted by the chief of the mental health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare assisted by a member of the staff of the division, an outstanding nurse with years of experience in responsible positions in the psychiatric field. Thirty-six mental hospitals, three county homes, three veterans' psychiatric units, and three psychiatric units in provincial hospitals were visited. Every province was visited.
A report was made to the provinces which included recommendations regarding a recruitment program, the administrative set-up and nursing services, the staff and facilities needed for an adequate training program, etc.
12.	As the provincial venereal disease control clinics have no facilities for testing the toxicity, physical and chemical properties of arsphenamines and related products, the food and drug division of the Department of National Health and Welfare undertook the testing of stocks of these products on hand in the V.D. control clinics throughout Canada. The purpose was to ascertain the stability of these products under varying conditions of storage and to check the effectiveness of the regulations under which the department controls the release of these products in Canada.
13.	Technical assistance was given by personnel of the industrial health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare in the field and in the industrial health laboratory in Ottawa in respect to a survey of coal mines in Alberta carried out in cooperation with the tuberculosis division of the Alberta department of health and the provincial workmen's compensation board.
14.	Technical assistance was given by personnel of the industrial health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare and in the industrial health laboratory in Ottawa in respect to a survey of the silicosis hazard in foundries and stone-cutting establishments of New Brunswick, carried out in co-operation with the New Brunswick department of health.
15.	A survey of health facilities in industries in New Brunswick was, at the request of the New Brunswick deputy minister of health, carried out by the industrial nursing consultant of the industrial health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare.
Questions

16.	Technical assistance was given by personnel of the industrial health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare and in the industrial health laboratory in Ottawa in respect to a survey of health hazards in certain industries in Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan carried out in cooperation with the Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan departments of health.
17.	The dental health division of the Department of National Health and Welfare is co-operating with the Ontario department of health in a study of the fluorine-dental caries relationship. This study is being conducted in Brantford, Ontario, and, while several similar studies are under way in the United States, the Brantford study is the only place in Canada where this work has been undertaken.
In Brantford, where fluorine is being added to the water supply in an attempt to reproduce conditions of lowered dental caries incidence, previously observed in areas where the water naturally provides this element, the dental health division has conducted a carefully controlled study of the dental status of approximately fifteen hundred school children. Similar examinations will be performed by this division on children in two "control" cities in Ontario, one of which has a fluorine-free water supply, the other having a water supply in which fluorine occurs naturally and in optimal amounts with regard to protection against dental caries.



WAR ASSETS CORPORATION-EMPLOYEES AT BOUCHARD (ST. THERESE)

Mr. BERTRAND (Terrebonne):: 1.	How many persons were in the employ of War Assets Corporation, at Bouchard (Ste. Therese), on January 15, 1948?
2.	What are the names of the said persons, and what were their places of residence and salaries or wages?
3.	Were any employees dismissed between January 15, 1948 and March 15, 1948?
4.	If so, what are their names, and for what reasons were they dismissed?
5.	Have the dismissed employees been replaced? If so, what are the names, places of residence and salaries or wages of the persons replacing the said employees?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	17 employees.
2.	Alarie, R., Ste. Therese, P.Q., $131.00 per month.
Aldridge, J., Verdun, P.Q., $190.00 per month.
Batten, H. E., Montreal, P.Q., $214.00 per month.
Beaupre, P. A., Ste. Therese, P.Q., $173.00 per month.

Chaisson, W. I., Montreal, P.Q., $227.00 per month.
Comeau, H., Ste. Therese, P.Q., $139.00 per month.
Conmee, A. B., Montreal, P.Q., $240.00 per month.
Edwards, C., Montreal, P.Q., $131.00 per month.
Edworthy, Mrs. V. M., Ste. Therese, P.Q, $106.00 per month.
Frawley, C. E., Rosemere, P.Q., $147.00 per month.
Graves, G., Ste. Rose, P.Q, $183.00 per month.
Hetu, M., Ste. Therese, P.Q, S131.00 per month.
Langley, J. E. T., Ste. Therese, P.Q, $253.00 per month.
Mathews, Mrs. M. N., Ste. Therese, P.Q., $126.00 per month.
McDougald, A. A, Ste. Therese, P.Q, $300.00 per month.
Ringle, P. J, Montreal, P.Q, $147.00 per month.
Roberge, D, Ste. Therese, P.Q, $147.00 per month.
3.	Yes.
4.	Aldridge, J, completion of work.
Beaupre, P. A, completion of work.
Edwards, C, completion of work.
Edworthy, Mrs. V. M, completion of work.
Hetu, M, completion of work.
Ringle, P. J, completion of work.
Batten, H. E, completion of work.
Graves, G, completion of work.
Langley, J. E. T, completion of work.
McDougald, A. A, lack of experience in final work required.
No, except:
5.	Replacement of Mr. McDougald in the person of:
David, L. O, Montreal, P.Q, $284.00 per month.
Mr. David was sent to Bouchard to complete War Assets Corporation records as Mr. McDougald did not have the required experience. Mr. David having completed this work has since been separated.



FAMILY ALLOWANCES-OVERPAYMENTS

Mr. McIVOR:: 1.	What is the total amount of overpayments of family allowances as at November 30. 1947?
2.	What proportion of (1) is collectible by deductions from accounts still in force?
3.	What proportion of (1) is considered otherwise collectible although accounts are no longer in force?
4.	What proportion of (1) is considered uncollectible?

Questions


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	8387,494 (covering the period July 1, 1945 to November 30, 1947).
2.	$202,156.
3.	$164,643.
4.	$20,695.



RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION

Mr. McKAY:: 1.	How many miles of railway lines were constructed (a) since 1920; (b) during 1947, in (1) Canada; (2) Saskatchewan?
2.	What mileage af railway was built in Canada since 1920 by (a) Canadian Pacific Railway; (b) other railways?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	New track constructed 1920-1946:
Canada	
5,081	milesSaskatchewan	
2,567	"2.	Net increase in railway mileage, 1920-1946:Canadian Pacific*	
1,842	milesAll other railways .... 1,203	"
(All annual reports for 1947 not yet received -monthly reports indicate a decrease of 13-6 miles.)
Constituent railways of Canadian Pacific system in 1946.



SOLDIER SETTLEMENT-MINERAL RIGHTS

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	Have any purchasers of land from the soldier settlement board been denied the mineral rights which were attached to the land at the time of purchase?
2.	If so, in how many cases?
3.	Under what authority is this course being followed?


Mr. GREGG:: 1.	Yes.
2.	No record has been maintained of the number of soldier settlers who from time to time may have indicated an interest in obtaining title to the mineral rights underlying their land.
3.	Section 57 of the Soldier Settlement Act, as passed in 1919, reserved to the crown all mines and minerals in soldier settlement lands. Such mines and minerals are now administered by the Department of Mines and Resources.



CANADIAN COMMERCIAL CORPORATION-EMPLOYEES VETERANS PREFERENCE

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many persons are presently employed in the government-ow-ned company, Canadian Commercial Corporation?
2.	How many so employed enjoy permanent civil service status?
3.	How many employees of this corporation are in receipt of salaries of $4,900 per year or
over ?
4.	How many persons in (3) are entitled to veterans preference?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	316.
2.	10.
3.	11.
4.	Thirty-one per cent of the male employees of the corporation, including one of those referred to in 3 above, are entitled to veterans preference.



ADVERTISING OF LIQUOR

Mr. BENTLEY:: In what provinces of Canada is liquor advertising illegal?


Robert Henry Winters: No information.



FILM BOARD-DISABLED VETERANS IN RECEIPT OF PENSIONS

Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: 1.	How many disabled veterans in receipt of pensions are on the staff of the National Film Board ?
2.	In what offices or buildings do they work?


Mr. WINTERS:: 1. 12.
2.	6-John street building; 1-Middle street building; 2-225 Sparks street; 2-Monument Nationale building; 1-Sovereign building.



RADIO BROADCASTING-BROADCASTS IN ONTARIO IN FRENCH LANGUAGE

Mr. COLD WELL:: 1.	Has any radio station in the province of Ontario refused to sell more than five minutes continuous time for broadcasts in the French language for commercial, political or other types of broadcast?
2.	If so, has this practice been approved by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation?


Mr. WINTERS:: 1.	No information available.
2.	See No. 1.



GRANBY-MONTREAL MAIL SERVICE

Mr. BOIVIN:: 1.	Have any contracts been awarded by the Postmaster General for the conveyance of mails between Granby and Montreal?
2.	If so, how many?
3.	To whom?
4.	At what amount per annum?


Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):: 1.	No. Mails are conveyed between Granby and Montreal by railway at standard mail pay rates.
2,	3 and 4. See answer to No. 1.
Orders jor Returns



IMMIGRATION-DISPLACED PERSONS

Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	How many persons from displaced persons' camps have been brought to Canada for work in the lumber industry in Ontario from July 1, 1947 to March 1, 1948?
2.	How many lumber -workers in the Ontario
area were registered as unemployed as at March 1, 1948?	.
3.	How many of the unemployed were displaced persons?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	3,472 persons from displaced persons' camps were brought to Canada for work in the lumber industry in Ontario from July 1, 1947 to March 1, 1948.
2.	No figures are available for March 1, 1948, but figures are available for February 26 and March 4. Under the heading of loggers and bushmen there were registered on February 26, as seeking employment in Ontario, 115, and on March 4-102. For your information the unfilled vacancies for this classification of worker were, respectively, for the same dates, 472 and 279. Under the classification of saw mill and planing mill workers there were registered as seeking employment 70 and 67, with unfilled vacancies of 31 and 18 for the same dates-February 26 and March 4. It is probable that these latter figures are not required as displaced persons came out for work in the first classification, that of loggers and bushmen.
3.	No separate statistics are kept for displaced persons.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. FRASER:: 1. Did the War Assets Corporation sell to individuals or firms unused hospital blankets?
2'. If so, to whom were they sold?
3.	What was the original price of same?
4.	What price were they sold at?


RADIO BROADCASTING LICENCES
Mr. HENDERSON:: 1.	How many applications for the issue of radio broadcasting licences were (a) made; (b) granted, since January 1, 1947?
2.	What persons or corporations made the application in each case?
3.	Of these applications, how many have been deferred and what was the reason for deferment in each case?


George James McIlraith: Return tabled.


RYE GRAIN AND MALTING BARLEY
Mr. WINKLER:: 1. Has the government received complaints that there appears to be insufficient rye in Canada to satisfy sales for future delivery in May and July?

2.	Has the government received requests from the United States of America for malting barley shipped in bond through the United States for delivery in eastern Canada, on the basis of exchanging it for feed barley plus the premium for malting barley?
3.	If so, by whom?
4.	What was the reply?


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


FILM BOARD-STILL PRINTS
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	How many stills were made by the national film board during the months of January and February, 1948?
2.	How many of these still prints were sold?
3.	What were the sizes; at what price were they sold, and were they black and white or colour ?


Robert Henry Winters: Return tabled.


CROWN CORPORATIONS
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	What crown corporations have been established since January I, 1940?
2.	What are the names of those corporations that are still in operation?
3.	Who are the directors and senior officials of each such corporation?
4.	What salary, fee or other emolument, is paid to each such director or official?
5.	What is the purpose, or object, of each such corporation?
6.	What is the capitalization of each such
corporation ?	_
7.	What factories, plants or other similar physical properties, are owned by each such corporation and where are they located?



PRIVILEGE


Mr. J. M. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):: Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege affecting myself and, I take it, every hon. member in the house-I believe it can be raised at this point-I wish to refer to a question which I asked the minister weeks ago, and the answer to which was delayed for two months. Eventually it came down on March 22.
The question had to do with the purchase of bonds by or on behalf of the government. I waited without making complaint, except to ask about the question, until I received an answer to it. I am now convinced that if it had been asked for in a private institution and the answer was not forthcoming within forty-eight hours, there would have been all kinds of trouble, with perhaps only one exception. There was a return from the wheat board, and it may be that their office staff is in Winnipeg. However I wish to draw the

Inquiries oj the Ministry
attention of the house to the fact that I believe the delay was either the result of scandalous inefficiency-which I do not believe is the case -or for some reason which I cannot understand it was not thought desirable that I should have the information any earlier.


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend's views are completely without foundation.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I suggest that an ex cathedra statement of that kind does not get us anywhere.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Nor do two ex cathedra statements get us anywhere.



MARSHALL PLAN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. In the press of the last two or three days there has been an intimation that the minister is to lead a delegation from Canada to Washington to discuss matters relating to the Marshall plan. Will he intimate to the house whether that is to be done, and if so, when the delegation is to leave Canada for that purpose?


Right Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I have nothing to announce at the present time. Discussions have taken place on the subject, and when any conclusions are arrived at I shall be glad to announce them.



QUESTION AS TO PROCLAMATION OF WHEAT BOARD ACT AMENDMENTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas John Bentley: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Will the minister inform the house whether Bill 135 is in force now, or does it have to be proclaimed before it is effective?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, Bill 135 has been passed by both houses of parliament and has received the royal assent. It is now in effect. If the hon. member will read the bill he will find that certain sections are made operative by orders in council. Action has been taken accordingly in respect of one section. Suitable steps will be taken when it comes time to consider making other sections operative.



INQUIRY AS TO SIGNING OF INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ROBERT FAIR (Battle River):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Has the international wheat agreement been formally signed on behalf of Canada?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The agreement has been initialed on behalf of Canada by the officer who represented Canada in the discussions which led to the agreement, and later in the course of the session the house will be asked to ratify it.


Robert Fair: Will the ceiling price as set out in the agreement be raised in line with increased freight costs and other increased production costs?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The ceiling price in the international agreement is not affected by any change in freight rates.



PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE OVERPAYMENT UNDER WHEAT ACREAGE REDUCTION SCHEME

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. S. ZAPLITNY (Dauphin):: Mr. Speaker, on February 27 I asked the Minister of Agriculture a question in regard to certain regulations under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act, and I was told that the matter was being referred to the appropriate officers and an answer would be given later. Can the minister now answer my question?


Right Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture):: As I remember the question it had to do with certain amounts owing to the government being deducted from payments under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. I have made inquiry and I am informed that some such charges have been made, but my opinion is that the terms of the act are such as not to contemplate the collection of that kind of payment. Until I have had a final decision in the matter I do not care to say more at the moment. It was not the intention that anyone would be able to charge anything against the payments under that act.



REQUEST FOR INCREASED PRICE TO COMPENSATE FOR HIGHER FREIGHT RATES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Alexander Cruickshank: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of a minister-I am not sure which one.
Inquiries oj the Ministry


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Ask them all.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Sleeping quarters will be provided elsewhere. My question is this. Will consideration be given to an increase in the price of eggs for export, to offset the increase in freight rates? That is a fair question. Surely some member of the government can answer it.


Gordon Graydon: All the eggs are in Mr. Howe's basket.


George Alexander Cruickshank: In order to bring it to a head I shall ask the question of the Acting Prime Minister.
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): I am not in the egg market; but when I do purchase eggs I pay the price quoted, and I do not know that that depends upon any ceiling. I am not aware that there is any ceiling on the price of eggs.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Might I ask a supplementary question on a matter which very seriously affects my riding? I think it is up to some member of the government to give an answer. This freight increase means an increase of two cents a dozen on eggs. The Minister of Agriculture was not responsible for this increase in freight rates, I know, but will he tell me whether any consideration has been given to an increase in the export price of eggs because of this increased cost?


Lionel Chevrier: If my hon. friend's question has to do with what are known as export and import rates, the order of the board does not affect those rates; it excludes them from the operation of the order.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON B. ISNOR (Halifax): Mr. Speaker, in view of the statement made yesterday by the Minister of Labour in regard to deepsea personnel, would the minister give to the house a comparison of the salaries paid to the officer personnel of the ships in 1939 and the salaries recommended in Mr. Justice McNiven's report?
Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: In reply to the senior member for Halifax I will quote from the report of

Mr. Justice McNiven, dated January 22, 1948, in which he states:
The following table sets out basic monthly wage rate for officers on Canadian deepsea dry cargo vessels, corresponding as nearly as possible to the vessels now in service, for the years 1939, 1944 and 1946-47, together with the basic rates which I recommend for inclusion in the new agreements:
Recom-
Rank	1939	1944 :	1946-47	mendedChief officer ....	$135	$234.43	$260	$285Second officer ...	115	209.43	230	255Third officer ....	99	179.43	200	220Second engineer	135	234.43	260	285Third engineer ..	115	209.43	230	255Fourth engineer	90	179.43	200	220Fifth engineer . .	70	159.43	180	200
The radio officer in 1946-47 received $225 and the recommended rate is $250.


Mr. ISNOR:: Do those figures include
allowances for food and clothing?


Humphrey Mitchell: No. Board and accommodation, to use the language of the shore, is in addition to their salaries; or in the language of the street, it is free.



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. O. PROBE (Regina City):: I have given the Postmaster General notice of this question. What is the present position of the Canadian Post Office department with respect to accepting food or other parcels for transmission to Palestine?


Hon. ERNEST BERTRAND (Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, although I received a copy of my hon. friend's question yesterday I was unfortunately unable to meet my officer, but I will give an answer tomorrow.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. J. BROOKS (Royal):: Mr. Speaker, last night it was indicated that we would take today the second reading of Bill No. 196, to amend the War Veterans Allowance Act. But we have just received copies of the bill since coming into the house and have therefore had no opportunity to study it and are not in a position to discuss it this afternoon. Would it be possible to have this order of business left over until tomorrow?
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): I do not know whether an answer to the question would have
Gold Mining
any practioal application today, because there are other items to be taken up before that bill. In any event it was my understanding that as soon as the bill receives second reading it is to be referred to the veterans affairs committee. I am sure that the Minister of Veterans Affairs would not want to ask the house to consider second reading at a time when any hon. member felt that he had not been given sufficient opportunity to study the bill.


Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):: I should like to raise a similar question with respect to the second reading of Bill No. 195. I have had a copy of this bill, and I presume the other members are in the same position, only since I came into the house today. I think it is unfair to ask the members, even if the bill is similar to last year's, to take up the second reading of so important a measure without having had an opportunity to study it.
Hon. MILTON F. GREGG (Minister of Veterans Affairs):	In respect to the bill
referred to by the member for Royal, I am prepared, as indicated by the leader of the house, to arrange a time that will be in accordance with the general wish of the house.



GOLD MINING


[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved the third reading of Bill No. 7, respecting emergency payments to assist in meeting increased cost of production of gold.
Thomas Langton Church: Before this bill receives third reading I wish to say a few words. The bill is entitled, "An act respecting emergency payments to assist in meeting increased cost of production of gold." It is based on a policy which I have advocated for every province of Canada. A policy of bonuses, subventions and subsidies would solve all the economic problems of this country and of every province. It would also solve our economic and fiscal problems and the internal problems of this country, and is based on protection. I advocated this policy when I first entered the house. I advocated a policy of farm assistance and assistance for the development of a national fuel supply from the mari-times, and many other economic aids. I advocated a policy of similar grants, bonuses, subventions and subsidies to food products in this
country. I am sorry that in connection with this gold industry this action was not taken years ago in new Ontario.
I remember when the high production costs of power and many other things in an economic way were preventing the development of this particular industry in northern Ontario. At that time Sir Adam Beck brought forward the policy of municipal ownership of electrical power, and we tried to get it for new Ontario. At that time also the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario railway was being built, and sections had been built into the gold and silver camps. At that time that railway should have been electrified. If that had been done the mines would have had cheaper production costs and cheap light and power. The cost of light and power was one of the main causes of the high production costs there in this particular industry. At one time in the gold mining and other districts the cost of direct current was up to $60 a horsepower at Cochrane. That was under private ownership. If the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario railway, the government-owned transportation system in new Ontario, had been electrified, that country would have had cheaper production costs by one-half and cheap light and power. They would have got it for $9 or S10 a horsepower as against $60. If that had been done the production of gold today would be five times as high as it has been in the past and the production of silver would be about three times as high.
I can only say that the government is adopting the proper policy in giving emergency relief to this particular industry. I hope that the same principle will be carried out in base metal production and in some food products such as milk and other things. If we carried out this system of bonuses, subventions and subsidies for emergency in such days as these it would solve all the economic problems of Canada from coast to coast, in every province, by protection, particularly if it were properly applied.


Mr. ALAN COCKERAM (York South):: Mr. Speaker, I had not intended to speak on third reading of this bill, but in reading over the speech made yesterday by the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) I thought that, as one who has been closely associated with the industry for some twenty odd years, I should put on the record a refutation of some of the things which the hon. member said which were not quite fair to labour and management in that industry.
The first point the hon. member made was that there was difficulty at the present time
2736
Gold Mining

in getting union agreements in the mining districts. The hon. member said at page 2678 of Hansard'.
The reason I would like that assurance is that the miners' union in the gold industry has been endeavouring unsuccessfully for nearly two years to get a trade union agreement with the operators.
As is generally known, the trouble in the mining districts between management and the labour unions at the present time is that communist organizers came into the camps from the United States and it has been very difficult for the management to come to any agreement with the unions. I can assure the hon. member for Cape Breton South that, once these difficulties are ironed out, the mines will be very glad to make an agreement with their employees.
Then the hon. member said:
I do not suppose in the whole of Canada there is a section of any industry where the hazards are greater than in the gold and nickel mines in northern Ontario.
It has been said by Mr. Longmore, the general manager of the Hollinger mine, and one of the greatest employers of labour in the mining industry, that in the past few years more accidents to miners have happened going to and coming from work than have occurred underground. Outside of the very few spectacular accidents, gold mining is, I think, a pretty safe industry, the management having a fetish for the safety and welfare of their men.
The next point the hon. member dealt with was silicosis. I do not think that in any other place in the world one will find more attention paid to silicosis and greater efforts made to overcome that hazard of mining than in the gold mining industry of Canada. Everybody who knows anything about the industry in Ontario knows that twenty-five cents per man shift is deducted and a special fund has been created by the compensation board to take care of any cases of silicosis. I have yet to learn of any one case brought before the board that was not considered on its merits and the man or men given reasonable treatment.
Then the hon. member made this statement:
If the minister had written into this particular subsidy-it should not be a one-way street; it should rvork both ways-protection for the miners who dig the gold, take the risks and sacrifice their health, it -would partly meet our demands. If the minister had recommended that at least a portion of this subsidy should be used for the purpose of setting up adequate machinery for the diagnosis of silicosis, it would meet with our approval.

I have indicated what the industry has done with regard to silicosis. I am sure that there is no other place in the world where men are better looked after.
Then the hon. member for Cape Breton South said:
There is no such thing as underground exploration.
One has only to go to a gold mine to know that veins have a habit of disappearing, and that a great deal of underground exploration has to be done, which is very costly, before the veins are located again. One of the big items in the cost of the gold mine is diamond drilling underground to find the veins which possibly have been lost. The point that I should like to make the most of is found on page 2679 of Hansard. I quote what the hon. member said, as reported at page 2679:
Point number two is that consideration should be given by the department to the matter of setting up a general welfare plan in the community for the purpose of building up the morale of the workers in their homes and raising their standards, and recognizing them as human beings.
I do not suppose there is in this country any other group of employers who do more to see that their men are looked after than does the mining industry of Canada, and1 in this respect I should like to read from the annual report of the Ontario Mining Association issued last year:
The employment statistics branch of the dominion bureau of statistics in their report on the employment situation, issued on May 5, 1947, showed the average weekly earnings in the nine leading industries of Canada as at March 1, 1947.
per
week
The average for the nine industries was $35.62 The average for metal mining was		46.91
In only one group were higher average weekly earnings shown: namely, transportation. Here, while the average for the whole group was down at $44.47 per week, steam railway operation paid an average at that time of $50.45 per w'eek.
As referred to previously earnings of Ontario metal mining employees are higher than the Canadian average and in addition, as from December 1, 1946, when controls were finally removed by the Ottawa government, most of the gold mining companies in the province -instituted pay increases for wage groups of 19 cents per hour with commensurate increases for many of those in the lower salary brackets.
This is the important section:
In addition to wages, Ontario mines generally provide extra benefits, varying from mine to mine-according to circumstances, and applicable entirely at the discretion of the Company. They include such assistances as group medical treatment plans, group insurance facilities, provision of housing below cost, pension plans, operation of

Gold Mining
company stores below cost, provision of mine clothing and a host of other advantages made available through company financial support in whole or in part of the cost involved.
I thought that, in view of the remarks made by the hon. member for Cape Breton South, I should bring these few details before the house in order to set the matter right. I know of no other industry, left alone, in which there is a better feeling between labour and: management than in the mining industry. The management has faith in the men and the men do a good job and are loyal to their employers. Unfortunately there has been some trouble in northern Ontario, caused in the main by communist leaders who have come from the United States to disrupt the industry.


Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: I had not intended taking any further part in this debate. Yesterday I thought that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) completely justified the measure before the house. I made a few observations on it and was prepared to allow the matter to rest there. As I suggested at that time, so long as the Minister of Finance has to play the game according to the rules as they stand today, and when he finds himself faced with a United States dollar crisis, that is about the only basis upon which this measure can be justified. It is unfortunate, however, that of the 245 members the mining companies have so many spokesmen in the house while the miners have so few. I suggest that their side of the story is not being told at all.
The hon. member for York South (Mr. Cockeram), who has provoked me into rising at this time, said that there was no other section of industry in Canada in which there were better internal relations, wherein there was greater mutual love, than between the miners and the mining companies of northern Ontario.
That is not my impression. The miners in the gold mining industry established the right to bargain with their employers only around 1941, after years and years of struggling and pleading merely for the right to form a collective bargaining agency and to have the right to sit around the conference table with the boss in order to get a fair share of the wealth which they produce; for in the final analysis it is the miner who digs the ore who produces all the wealth. After that struggle this government certified a bargaining agency for the gold mining industry of northern Ontario by recognizing the mine, metal and smelter workers' union as the legitimate bargaining body. During the war they arrived at agreements, and in my opinion 5849-174J
they arrived at agreements largely because the federal government had jurisdiction in the field of labour and had some pretty aggressive conciliators. War made it necessary to have harmony in the industry, and the machinery of collective bargaining-democracy in industry is really what it adds up to-was established in the mining industry of northern Ontario.
I should, however, like the hon. member for York South to tell the house why it is that since the close of the war the operators in the gold mining industry of the north, for whom he argues, have refused to sign any kind of collective agreement. If at the present time the relationship is so agreeable between employer and employee, why is there not an agreement in the gold mining industry on wages and conditions?
It has been allowed to run out. The men have tried every reasonable means at their disposal to get a contract and so far no contract has been signed. At the same time the mine operators come to the government wanting a contract with the government in the form of a subsidy that will guarantee them a profit on their operations, not only on the operations underground but on freight rates and on almost every phase of the production, distribution and marketing of the product they turn out.
They want a signed agreement in the form of a bill from the federal government, and at the same time they refuse the man who digs the ore, the man who has to go underground, any kind of agreement that will guarantee him that his wages and his conditions in the future shall be such and such.
As I said yesterday, I think one of the first things the gold mining industry of the north country should be compelled to do, before any subsidy is paid to them by the taxpayers of Canada, is at least to allow in their industry the democracy which they preach so much to the employees who dig the wealth out of the ground and make it possible for the industry to carry on that operation.
That should be done and it has not been done,, and that certainly does not bear out the argument advanced by the member for York South, that the relations are so harmonious between the gold mining industry of the north and the employees. They have done everything they can to frustrate the men who dig the gold in the north country. I know what I am talking about because I have been up there.
On the other hand, the statement the hon. member makes, that while there has been a little trouble up there, it is largely because of
Gold Mining

the infiltration of communists from the United States, is a statement that should be examined. That is only an excuse. That is an escape. That is not true. I am not saying the hon. member is making a false statement consciously, but I am sayitig he is handling the truth rather carelessly or is badly informed on the subject that he discusses. The mine, mill and smelter workers' union is a Canadian union. It has complete jurisdiction in matters of wage negotiations and so forth.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Officered by communists right through the picture.


Clarence Gillis: Just a minute. The officers of that union in northern Ontario are Canadians who dig gold out of the ground in the north country and they are not communists. Perhaps the hardest fight that is being made in Canada right now against the machine which the hon. member characterizes as communist control from the United States, is being made by the miners of the north country who are in there now doing a tough slugging job to clean up a mess that was developed through no fault of their own. There was plenty of trouble there before these people came from the United States. Let hon. members' minds go back to Kirkland Lake and the battle that took place there for months and months.


Alan Cockeram: That was started from the United States.


Clarence Gillis: It was not started from the United States.


Alan Cockeram: Tom McGuire.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER:: Order.


Clarence Gillis: Tom McGuire came in there to help put that thing through. I was out there all through that.


Mr. LITTLE:: Tom McGuire is a communist.


Clarence Gillis: He is not,


Alan Cockeram: He was in those days.


Walter Little: He told me he was a communist. I can prove it.


Clarence Gillis: He was only kidding you. I know Tom McGuire; I am no friend of the communist party and they are not friends of mine. Do not make any mistake about that. I have a fairly good idea of who is who in this country today.


Walter Little: So have I.


Clarence Gillis: That fight took place in northern Ontario. What for? It was not over wages; it was not over conditions. That

strike was for the right to sit around the conference table, for certification for their union.


Walter Little: There is no objection to that.


Clarence Gillis: And McGuire came in there to help. These men were new. They were green at that time; and in my opinion they were taken for a ride in that strike by the gold mining industry in northern Ontario. I say that for this reason. Gold was a nonessential commodity during 'the war. Men were badly needed in other sections of industry across Canada for war purposes. A large percentage of the men had to be rooted out of the gold mining industry for that purpose. But instead of taking the responsibility of doing it themselves, the company and the government precipitated a strike, rooted the men out, practically scrapped the community and blamed it on the men. That is what happened at that time. That could not have been done to a union which was well organized and understood the tactics of those who wanted to scrap a community and blame it on somebody else. The men from Kirkland Lake were rooted out all across this country.
Nevertheless, after that fight for certification of their union, today in that north country, in that gold mining industry, the men are denied the right to a contract. If there is any section of the public which has some right to security, the right to know what their wages and their conditions are to be this month and next [DOT] month, by means of an agreement with their employer, I think it is those who work in the mines. The hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) last night made certain remarks. He is a man who is quite familiar with the mining industry. He served for many years as the legal adviser to the united mine workers out in western Canada. He knows the score. Last night he said that this house was weeping too many salty tears over the life of the miner, that the miner had a wonderful life- once a miner, always a miner. I was a miner for twenty-six years and I would tell hon. members this. I have said it in the house before and I say it again. If I had my choice of going back to the mine or of putting on a uniform and fighting a war, I would put the uniform on and fight the war. That would be short; it would be quick; and I would have some fun while I was doing it. But if the hot member for Calgary West thinks a miner': life is a nice one-and this applies equally to coal and gold, I suppose-

Gold Mining


Arthur Leroy Smith: I did not say it was a wonderful life. I said the other two things, but let us be accurate. I did not say that or anything like that.


Clarence Gillis: Well, by implication.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I would not go down in a coal mine if you gave me the mine; that is, if I had to work in it.


Clarence Gillis: I am glad to hear the hon. member for Calgary West say that. He says he would not go down in a coal mine if they gave it to him. I suppose that the same thing applies to a gold mine.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I have not been in one.


Clarence Gillis: He is quite satisfied that it is a wonderful life for somebody else, and he tries to kid this house that we are weeping too many salty tears over the miners. I am on the side of the fellow who has to get out of bed at four o'clock in the morning, in the middle of the night, and wend his way out into these large mines, walk for hours, sweat all day, and come back again at night. Then the following week he goes out at three o'clock and he is back home again at twelve o'clock. Then next week he goes out on the graveyard shift.


Mr. CASE:: May I ask one question?


Clarence Gillis: If it is not a speech.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: The men are not conscripted to go down in the mines, are they? There is freedom of choice, is there not?


Clarence Gillis: I will answer that question. Yes, I would say they are conscripted. It is economic conscription. They are there by force of circumstances, not by choice.


An hon. MEMBER:: The class war.


Clarence Gillis: My hon. friend can construe it as the class war if he likes. That is the fact of the matter. If it is a class war, it is because the upper class imposes on those below-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Clarence Gillis: -who lack an opportunity to
do something for themselves.


John Lambert Gibson: Rubbish.


Clarence Gillis: If it is a class war, that war was declared a long time ago by the upper strata of society.


An hon. MEMBER:: Not in Canada.


Clarence Gillis: It is merely a matter of attack from the top, in my opinion, on the fellow at
the bottom, by definite means. I certainly cannot sit here and listen to the argument that the mining companies are angels with wings, that they are great humanitarians, that their hearts bleed for the men who work for them, because that is not the fact of the matter at all.


Alan Cockeram: They look after their men. I will take you up north and show you.


Clarence Gillis: I have been up there. And I am going to stay on the ground until some kind of democracy is established in that industry. Anything I can do to help, I am going to do. As I suggested last night, if I were Minister of Finance I would send a wire to the northern Ontario mining companies, and I would say that it does not look so good, granting a subsidy which guarantees you certain profits on your operations while you deny a contract to the employees who work in that industry. Settle your wage question. How are you going to determine a subsidy when these people do not know next month or next year what their wage bill will be?


Alan Cockeram: They do too.


Clarence Gillis: It is at least one-third of their total cost. That should be settled. Then you would know what you were doing. If there were a two-year contract in there, you could make some kind of appraisal of what the operation will co9t. They should do that and do it immediately. If the taxpayers' money is to be spent, some form of welfare plan should be established in these heavy industries. As hon. members know, you oan wend your way around this House of Commons until you are eighty or ninety, be slipped over to the other place and wheeled in in a wheel chair. But when you go into these heavy industries, at forty you are washed up. Fifteen hundred men were laid off in the mining industry of Nova Scotia within the last few months. They had reached the age of sixty-five. There is nothing for them. They are just out. In your north country today, in your mining industry and1 in your coal industry, the companies will not hire a man over forty years of age.


Alan Cockeram: That is nonsense.


Clarence Gillis: Who said that?


Alan Cockeram: I did.


Clarence Gillis: I am making that statement, and I challenge contradiction of it.


An hon. MEMBER:: You have had it.


Clarence Gillis: If you go to any mining section of Canada today and try to get employment,
Gold Mining

you face a medical doctor first, and' you must be 100 per cent fit. If you are forty years of age, he will not even examine you; you are too old. That is the established practice today right across this country. That is so in your steel plants also. That has crept in since the end of the war. The hon. member for York South, checking balance sheets and buying stocks and bonds in an office on Bay street, is certainly not keeping in touch with actual conditions in the industry for which he is arguing here. At forty years of age you are out. You have no job. They will "not hire you; you are too old.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Nonsense. I know personally dozens of men seventy years of age or more, still working in the coal mines.


Mr. MATTHEWS (Kootenay East):: Shame.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Why shame?


James Herbert Matthews: That a man seventy years of age should still have to work in a coal mine.


Arthur Leroy Smith: They could buy out both you and me. They have plenty of money and are working because they like to do so.


James Herbert Matthews: They are working because they have to, not because they want to.


William Ross Macdonald: Order. The hon. member for Cape Breton South has the floor.


Clarence Gillis: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I enjoyed that little exchange.


Arthur Leroy Smith: You may know one of them; his name is Joyce, and he is president of the union.


Clarence Gillis: That may have been true until a year or so ago, but I know that last year the mining industry in Nova Scotia adopted that formula, that at forty years of age you are out. If you reach the age of sixty-five you are laid off, and the company pays you a small pension. That has been the system for a great many years in the north sountry. You undergo an examination, and you must be completely physically fit. If you reach the age of forty you are too old; they do not employ you.
So in this matter of welfare, having that in mind, since the Minister of Finance is going to pay millions of dollars from the public treasury in order to finance this industry- and I say "finance" advisedly because he has covered practically every phase of its opera-

tions-I think it not unreasonable to ask the gold mining companies to set aside a certain amount for the purpose of establishing a welfare fund under which a man who, because of disability or age, was laid off by the industry would at least have something on which to live. That is done in practically every other section of society. Many of the industries across Canada are doing that very thing today, but it is not done in that section of the country.
On this business of silicosis, the hon. member for York West-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: York South.


Clarence Gillis: York West or York East or York South, it does not make any difference; he is from Toronto anyway. That is a subject I do not want to go into, though I have done so here in the house on several occasions. I antagonized the compensation board in this province back in 1941 to the point that they wrote a brief and sent it to this house in an attempt to prove to hon. members that there was no such thing as silicosis. I had an argument with a medical man in the house. There is a medical man here at the present time. I have gone into this business of silicosis and its diagnosis and so on for a good many years. We fought for years in Nova Scotia to have it made a compensable disease and we finally won the battle; but proving that a man has silicosis is a difficult proposition. I got into it by fighting a claim with the Canadian pension commission. A man suffering from a chest condition had served overseas for a considerable time. Our contention was that the man was 100 per cent disabled; that he had developed tuberculosis on service, aggravated by coal and stone dust after coming back, and that he had a tubercular condition. The pension board said there was no such thing. Well, after checking around for some considerable time, I found out, on medical advice, that by stethoscope and X-ray it is almost impossible for any medical man to differentiate definitely between half a dozen chest conditions. Having that in mind, I went farther. What was to be done about the matter? Well, there is a drug known as libiatol which is injected into the bronchial tree, and the man is put in the sanatorium. I went through that in the case to which I am referring. We had an expert there in Halifax, Doctor Schinaveze; and in the final analysis, after an examination of this kind, he agreed with us. His report said the man had tuberculosis incurred about 1916, aggravated by coal and stone dust; and that man was given a 100 per cent pension.

Gold Mining
Having that in mind, and having in mind the advice of medical men, to determine whether it is silicosis, tuberculosis or half a dozen other chest conditions with which hon. members are familiar and w'hich I do not want to go into today, the only accurate test that can be made quickly is the test I have described. The hon. member for York West-
Some hon. MEMBERS : York South.


Clarence Gillis: Well, the Toronto member- says they are doing a great deal of research into the matter. Certainly they are. They are doing research into almost everything, but not very much is coming from it. Here is a test that can be made quickly. It is a little more expensive than what they are doing now, but until this is done in every case I say they are not doing for the miners of the north country, or the miners of Nova Scotia either, what should be done to determine whether or not a man has silicosis. Putting it in the act and saying it is compensable, and then making a man go out and prove he has that disability, is not the sort of thing that should be done. If there is a test-and there is one, as I have just stated- that test should be made.
A man who develops that condition underground is placed in this position. He is examined by his doctors and they find some condition has developed in his chest. They take him out of the mine and put him on the surface. They leave him on the surface for two or three years, coughing his heart out, and in the final stages he becomes tubercular. That is not compensable. He passes on and his widow and orphan children have no protection. If in the first place there was a proper diagnosis and he was given compensation for that disability, there would be protection for his family when he passed on. As I told this house yesterday afternoon, in 1941 I read into the records of this house a will in which a man employed in the gold mining industry, suffering from silicosis, gave his body to his friend in order that, after he passed away, it might be dissected, to prove that he had this disability, so that his wife and family might be protected. There is no fair play.


Arthur Leroy Smith: No, and it was not yesterday afternoon, either, when you told us the same story. I agree with you.


Clarence Gillis: Well, until these injustices are wiped out in the matter of establishing a condition of that kind, I say the compensation board and the Ontario government are
not doing what they should. If there are tests that can be made within reason-and there are-then those tests should be made, instead of a man being put on the surface and beaten out of his compensation. I am not saying that is done only in Ontario; that is the situation in every section of the mining industry. I personally know men in Nova Scotia who are on the road because of the same condition. A doctor says it is silicosis. The papers are sent to Doctor Riddell here in Ontario. He does not see the man; he sees the papers and the X-ray reports, and he says the man is not suffering from silicosis. But the man cannot work; he is on the street. He has no income, and that is not fair play. Until these things are wiped out, I do not believe the hon. member for York West-


An hon. MEMBER:: York North.


Clarence Gillis: -or York East-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: York South.


Clarence Gillis: -can stand in his place and say the mining industry in Canada is a great, humanitarian organization. I am going to vote for this measure to help out the Minister of Finance. I am sorry for him. He is a pretty good fellow, caught up in a pretty bad machine. He needs United States dollars. This old system, with the rules of the game as they are, makes him play poker in this way; and until the people of Canada are prepared to give him a mandate to use the financial structure of this country in another way, he will have to do it in this way. But I am strongly suggesting to him that he get in touch with the mining companies and that he say to them, "We are going to give you this money. We are going to do what we can to help you. But get together with your employees and take some of the smear off because of the fact that you are not playing ball. You have not democracy in your industry". Try to establish some kind of welfare scheme up there which will give these men some kind of encouragement for the future along the lines I have suggested.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Speaker, I wish to say just a word. I am stimulated to rise partly by what was said by the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) and partly by what has been said by the hon. member for York South (Mr. Cockeram).


Mr. COLD  WELL@: Good stimulation.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: My reason for rising is that the hon. member for Cape Breton South said it was a great pity that there were not enough spokesmen for the
Gold Mining

miners here. It so happens that in a small way I can speak for one miner on this question. The reason I want to do it is that my good friend the hon. member for Cape Breton South undertook when he was speaking to make some pretty sweeping statements about employers.
I do not suggest that all employers are made in heaven, or that they are all going to heaven. I am not suggesting for one moment that they are always doing what is right. But I dislike hearing anyone say that employers have done everything to frustrate their employees.


Clarence Gillis: No.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Those are your words. I took them down.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Speaker-


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Let me make my speech. You can correct it later.


Clarence Gillis: The hon. member is not quoting me accurately. I said the mining industry in northern Ontario did everything they could to frustrate their employees in securing collective bargaining.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: If you think that is a correction, all right. My little bit of experience-and it is small perhaps, but I suggest it is indicative of the situation-would show that the situation is not just exactly as our hon. friends would represent it.
Driving along the road not long ago, I happened to pick up a man, and it turned out that he was a miner. He began to talk to me about mining and, without any prompting from me at all, told me that in his mine they were very well treated indeed.
You will say, "Oh, that is only one mine". You will say it is only one man. I am not exaggerating this, nor am I asking anyone else to exaggerate it. I am just bringing this in because it goes to support what was said by the hon. member for York South.
I believe these questions with which we have to deal are difficult enough, and I would agree with many of the difficulties which my hon. friend has mentioned. But the point I make is this, that every time an attempt is made by any person to set class against class- I do not like that term "class"; let me say rather interest against interest-I say this deliberately, and I do not care what party he belongs to, he is following the communist line. That is communism. Wherever you get that attempt to create hatred, that is communism,

and I defy anyone to deny it. And I say that anyone who takes that line need not be surprised if people accuse him of following the communist line.
I have just this to add. I object to people undertaking to say that those in certain occupations have less humanity than people in other occupations. They do not. I have had some little experience with labour. As a matter of fact my experience with labour was right down in Cape Breton South. I am bold enough to say that I and the people with whom I associated got along with labour very well, and it was not because we were different from other people. It was because we tried to be decent, and to tell them the truth. We tried to let them know about the business they were in, with the result we got 100 per cent support.
Then, coming to these people in the north country may I say that I do not doubt there are some of the difficulties the hon. member for Cape Breton South mentioned. But I feel that we in the House of Commons should try to restrain ourselves from suggesting that somehow or another there are some people who are wicked and others who are good, and that that is the reason we are in trouble.


Walter Little: Mr. Speaker, I feel that, coming from the north country, I should say a few words. I have lived in that north country for thirty-seven years; and when I say that I refer to the Kirkland Lake district. I know miners and I know mining just about as well as the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) does.
He has talked about men not wanting to work underground. I could tell him about a chap who worked in a mine right from grass roots until he was down 5,000 feet. The manager of that mine wanted the miner in question to come up to the surface and to work there for a while, but the miner did not want to come up. The manager insisted that it would do him good to get some sun for a while; and when the manager insisted too much the miner said, "Well, I can go to another mine and get work underground". That is an indication of how much that fellow liked working underground. The miner about whom I am speaking still works at the same mine, although I suppose that today he is at least sixty-five years of age. He does not now work underground, but acts as night-watchman.
Then, the hon. member referred to McGuire. I know McGuire well. In company with another man he came into my office one day, and he told me in my office that he was a

Freight Rates
communist, and that he was not ashamed of it. I will go before any judge in the country or take an affidavit to that effect against Mr. McGuire, and also have the other man called, if that is necessary. There is no use in rising in the House of Commons and trying to protect these fellows when they say they are communists. Reid Robinson says he is not, so we cannot do anything about that. But when a man tells one frankly that he is a communist, then not much more can be said about him.
Mr. GILLI8: McGuire is not in this country now.


Walter Little: I know he is not; and I wish Reid Robinson was not here either.
The hon. member has talked about mine managers. I have had business with mine managers for thirty-seven years. I hauled stuff into that country until such time as the railroad went in, and I had to deal with mine managers. I had to make many contracts and agreements with them, and I can say I got along well with them. I never had a mine manager act in a mean way toward me, or in a way different from that in which other men would have acted. They are businessmen, just the same as other men who are in business. They will try to get the best bargain they can; but I have always found them fair about it.
I can tell the house that when war broke out prices increased to a great extent in that district, much higher than they are today. We were paying $45 a ton for hay and $5.25 a bag for western oats. I was receiving $7 a day; I was paying my men $4.50 and it cost me $2.50 a day to feed my horses. I went to the mine managers and laid my cards on the table. They said to me, "Say what you want and, if it is fair, we will give it to you." Surely that was fair enough.
I do not like to hear men rise in the House of Commons and speak as the hon. member for Cape Breton South has done, and to talk as he has about mine managers. They axe not angels, I know; but-


Clarence Gillis: I was not talking about mine managers. I was talking about operators.


Walter Little: Operators, then, if you like.


Clarence Gillis: A mine manager is, himself, an employee.


Walter Little: He is an operator.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of supply.
Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Speaker, I regret I have to do
what I intend to do this afternoon. I had no intention of doing it when I came to the house, but, in view of the statement made by the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) this afternoon, I wish to say something about his announcement. I feel that in endeavouring to place the review of the freight rates and their equalization before the board of transport commissioners again he is simply shelving the question for a couple of years, during which time the people of Canada will have exceedingly high rates inflicted upon them, and that this house should not tolerate the delay.
This matter, as has been pointed out by various hon. members on all sides of the house, including the government side, is one which is squarely on the doorstep of the government itself. I believe that, in view of the serious effects to our economy, this house should have an opportunity of expressing an opinion about what the government proposes to do and, indeed, about what the government has failed to do. I propose to give the house that opportunity, for I am going to move an amendment to the motion to go into supply. My amendment, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) is:
That all the words after the word "that" to the end of the question be deleted and the following be substituted therefor:
"this house is of the opinion that the failure of the government to defer the imposition of the increases in freight rates recently authorized by the board of transport commissioners is inimical to the best interests of the people of Canada; further this house is of the opinion that the government should reconsider this matter and take action to prevent the proposed increases from coming into effect at this time."
The reference again to the board of transport commissioners will be a reference on the basis of certain economic considerations; for that, I take it, is what the equalization of freight rates really involves. The speech which I made on Monday afternoon did not deal with economic considerations. It dealt primarily with political considerations; that is to say, on the effects which the board order would have on various areas of Canada in relation to other areas within our country. I said it was a threat to the continuance of good relationships between the various regions of Canada. I said
Freight Rates

it might undermine the very basis of confederation upon which this country was founded. I said it would cause discontent because it would impose upon groups of people who live in the more remote areas a charge which was unfair when that imposition was considered in relation to its effect on people who live in other areas in Canada. I said the judgment of the board of transport commissioners on the basis of cold railroad economics was unjust, unfair, and prejudicial to people who live, as I put it, in the maritimes, in British Columbia and in the prairie provinces.
The Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) has already, I believe, received protests from seven premiers of seven provinces of Canada asking that the new rates be not permitted to go into effect until seven of the nine federated provinces of Canada shall have had an opportunity of placing their representations before the authority which has the right and the obligation to make the final decision in this matter-the federal cabinet of this country.
I say, Mr. Speaker, this house should have the opportunity of expressing itself on this issue. While I regret very much having to delay our going into supply to provide an opportunity which we all want to discuss external affairs on Monday next, this issue is of such importance to the whole of Canada that I believe it should be discussed and decided by the house. I believe in responsible government. I believe that the government of this country should be responsible to this house, just as in turn we are responsible to the people of Canada.
I realize that the amendment which I have moved to the motion to go into supply and which I believe to be entirely in order may mean a vote of want of confidence in the government because of the action it has taken today. I realize what may flow from that vote if the government is defeated, but I want to say to the government that if those consequences should flow this question is of such vital importance to the people of Canada that it should be decided by the people of Canada if necessary.
In moving the amendment, I make it abundantly clear that I believe that this house must [DOT]accept the responsibility of saying to the government: These rates, unjust, unfair and discriminatory, prejudicial to various parts of Canada, should not go into effect at this time. The government in bringing down the order in council this afternoon, merely to refer again to the same tribunal the question of the equalization of rates, is simply dodging an issue which it must face squarely.

I do not propose to enter into a long debate. I made the case I intended to make on Monday afternoon. But this is a grievance which the people of Canada have, and it is a grievance which should not only be aired but placed squarely before the government so that there can be no dodging of the issue. I have moved the amendment, Mr. Speaker, because I want parliament to decide this issue now.


Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):: Mr. Speaker, I believe that the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) has done a public service to the people of Canada in raising this question at this time, and I wish to associate myself with what he has said. I would draw the attention of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) and all the members of the cabinet to the very serious situation which they have allowed to develop during the last few days. I desire to be very moderate in the language I use on this occasion, but it is a very serious occasion. I believe one would be justified in saying that the government has been guilty of the complete abnegation of democracy in this dominion during the last few days. The dominion government represents the provinces of the Dominion of Canada. The government originally in Ottawa was set in Ottawa by the provinces of Canada to act as an agent for them. Seven of the nine provinces of Canada have on several occasions expressed the strongest disapproval of increasing freight rates in the Dominion of Canada at the present time, and since the judgment of the board was announced increasing freight rates by 21 per cent, I understand that every one of those seven provinces has expressed its disapproval once more. The government in its announcement today has chosen to ride roughshod over the expressed opinion of seven of the sovereign provinces of the Dominion of Canada. That is no small matter, and it will lead to plenty of trouble. The government has apparently developed the idea that it can kick the people of Canada around whichever way it chooses. We have seen that attitude in existence on several occasions in the last few years. The people of Canada are becoming tired of being kicked around. The government seems to have the idea that there is no recourse, that a people like the people of the maritimes and the people of the west simply must take whatever the dominion government chooses to give them and like it. There are means to which these people can have recourse. I should like to warn the members of the government not to drive these people too far. If we once become convinced in the western provinces that it is impossible to live with Ontario and Quebec we shall find some means of doing another thing.

Freight Rates
The people of this dominion must bear in mind that western Canadians are Canadians and are entitled to equal treatment. They do not consist of slaves or menials or peasants; they consist of free men, descendants of free men with free traditions, and if they cannot accomplish the desires of their hearts in the way of fair government by sending representatives to Ottawa, Mr. Speaker, they will be tempted to send representatives somewhere else. That is just how serious it is. And if the members of the cabinet have not had that impressed on them I urge them to take my words seriously because I mean every syllable of what I am saying. Men in my constituency, in my province and in several others are talking in just such terms as that.
Not only has the government disregarded the expressed will of seven sovereign provinces in this dominion, but it has completely disregarded the pleas and requests of organizations of producers from coast to coast in this nation. Farmers' organizations and organizations of producers of every kind have sent in requests. Why, one would think these people were babes whispering in a windstorm for all the attention the dominion government gives to what they say.
May I say one more striking thing? I will wager, Mr. Speaker, that if hon. members were freed from party consideration seventy-five per cent of them would vote against the freight rate increase. I will go farther than that; I will wager that sixty per cent of the present Liberal members of this house, if they were freed from party affiliations, would vote solidly against this increase. Therefore what is the government doing when it is disregarding the will of the members of this house? 'If it is not abrogating democracy, I do not know where one would go to find it. Is there any way in the world in which the will of the Dominion of Canada can be made to reach into the minds of the men who occupy the treasury benches today?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Carry this amendment, and you will defeat the government.
Mr. BLACIvMORE: Perhaps it would not be wise for me to go into many of the discriminations in the present freight structure. Years ago, before the war broke out, I used to say a great many hard things and cite many serious facts, all bearing on this matter. My province, Alberta, happens to be at the apex. They get us going and coming, and they get us to the extreme going and coming. We know what these freight rates mean to the people. I do not believe it would be well for me to elaborate on this discrimination just
now, since it has been discussed considerably during the last two or three days, but there is in the matter of the freight rate structure from coast to coast in this country a discrimination which stands as a condemnation of any government that permits these discriminations to continue; and to tell us that all the government proposes to do is to turn the problem over again to the board of transport commissioners is to insult us. Why, that group of gentlemen have been in charge of the railway affairs of this country for ten or fifteen years. I do not know where one would go to find a group of men who have made a more tragic mess of their task than these men have. To turn this problem back to them under these circumstances is far far short of being good enough.
I was astonished when the minister made his announcement this afternoon. If there is to be an investigation of the inequities of the freight rate structure in this country, why not have it first and then let the increase be put on if it is found necessary. Just imagine forcing the people all over this dominion to suffer at the present time from the inequities of this freight rate structure for two or three years more, while the board of transport commissioners leisurely proceeds to examine the situation and discovers the abuses which it already knows exist!
I am not going to say any more at the present time. I know there are a good many hon. members who wish to express their feelings in the same way as I have. I am going, to cut my remarks short, but I will say that the members of my group will support the amendment of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, and they will support it with the' fervent wish that this dominion government be defeated at once. These people have acted as tyrants in this country long enough. I do not know that the ordinary members of the government are at fault; I do not know who is at fault; but there are certain people in the government at the present time whom the Liberal government must discipline, who have to be given to understand that they are the servants of the people and not the masters; and the government might as well start on these gentlemen first, because I have the suspicion that the members of the party will go to work on them if the cabinet does not. As soon as the cabinet discovers who the men are who are trying to run this country and have made such a terrible mess of it, it will be able to decide to do something which will enable this dominion to have decent govern-
Freight Rates

ment. People are simply crying out in anguish from coast to coast because of the things from which they are suffering.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


John Horne Blackmore: I hear some hon. members saying "Oh, oh." Don't say "Oh, oh" too often. Remember what I have said. I could go to the reading room and bring back resolutions from three meetings in western Canada calling for secession from eastern Canada.


Mr. GRANT:: You said that before the last election.


John Horne Blackmore: Some of these are going to say it and mean it as the American colonies did.


Thomas Vincent Grant: You said that before the last election.


John Horne Blackmore: I do not know whether I said it before the last election or not. If I did, I meant it and there was plenty of reason for it. The point I wish to make is this: I fervently hope that the government will be defeated so that we can have some sort of chance to give this country democratic government.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Mr. Speaker, I just bought two pairs of new glasses: I think I had better give you one pair of them. I am here, really I am, and I want to join in this debate for a number of reasons. My first reason is to try to review the actual situation that we are up against and perhaps take away some of the emotionalism which has characterized the debate up to the present time. I may say that I regret the statements made by my old and honourable friend, the member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore), when he was talking about secession, because, although he did not use that word, that is exactly what he was talking about. That will not help the situation at the present time.
I wish to say something about railway rates, and may I first repeat what I said in this House of Commons the first year I was here? On many occasions I have acted for the railways professionally. Therefore I wish the house, in judging anything I may say, to take that fact into consideration. It may be said that I have some self-interest. At any rate, I wish to make it plain that I have had that connection. Perhaps I should add that I acted for the western coal people and the Alberta government in a rate-finding matter where I was opposed by both railways, so that I have had a bit of experience on both sides.
What is the history of rate-making in this dominion? We built these railways, and at

that time the railways charged exactly what they pleased for the freight services which they were rendering. From that time on, everything has been based upon the revenues derived from freight, while very little regard has been had to passenger service, including the hotels, which for a long time were regarded from the point of view of rate-making purposes largely as an advertising lead for the freight carrying business of the roads.
Then we built other railways and competition then limited the rates. And in every case where there was a dual service to any point it reduced those rates. But while that was done, no reductions were ever made in carrying freight to points where there was no competitive rail.
The next event of major importance was the opening of the Panama canal, which introduced into this subject the first major difference, and that was that rates were altered in order to meet water competition from eastern Canada through the canal and around to Vancouver. That was the second major event which took place.
The third thing that happened was the building of good roads in eastern Canada- I mean the middle east here-and then we had truck competition, which directly affected freight rates to points where this competition could operate by way of roads.
I mention these things for this reason, that when we start dealing with railway rates it is necessary to find out exactly what the present crazy-quilt structure is in connection with our present rates. I am not using that word in any derogatory or contemptuous way, because it is admitted by everybody that it is a crazy-quilt structure. In other words, there is no railway in the dominion today that can tell you how much it costs to haul a ton of goods from here to there. They cannot do so because the structure has not been built in that way.
On one occasion before the railway board, when Mr. Justice Fullerton was the chairman, we spent some time in endeavouring to find out what it. cost to haul a ton of coal from Drumheller or Edmonton or Lethbridge to North Bay and to Toronto. In order to get someone who knew how that might be done, they imported a man who was known as a railway cost accountant. At that time there were only five on the continent and they were all employed by the interstate commerce commission. It was there they received their training because the interstate commerce commission had to a very large extent gone into a new system of trying to find out what costs were and then adding something for the operation. That must have been a dozen years ago

Freight Rates
that I am speaking of, and to my knowledge nothing has ever been done to further studies which I consider necessary along lines of that description.
We now come to the present time. We find that the board of transport commissioners have sat, and to me it is a matter of great regret that they either did not deal with or were not permitted to deal with the question of equalization. I think anyone who wants to be fair will admit that, having regard to present conditions, the railways need more money to operate. Anyone who has not had his charges raised in ten years, granted that there was some reason in them at that time, must have, it seems obvious to me, more financial return to permit operations to be carried on.
I need only point to the Canadian National deficit. I do not know whether it was announced in the house, but I saw it in the newspapers within the last month or so. It is a very high figure-


Lionel Chevrier: Twenty-three millions.


Arthur Leroy Smith: It proves that the railway which we ourselves own is certainly not operating at a profit and in fact has not enough revenue to allow it merely to break even. I have no intention of discussing that further, but we come to this position, and I have been a believer in this for a long time. Granted that they need this money, they do not need to get it all in one place, namely in the maritime provinces and western Canada.
What is the situation with respect to freight? I admit that this will be a puzzler to the board or to the government or to anyone else. While we have had an over-all increase of 21 per cent, I know perfectly well that in this part of Canada, where there is real truck competition, they will never get it. If they do, they will lose their business to the trucks. That is a simple economic statement which is absolutely true. I do not, of course, mean all the business. Some things do not lend themselves to movement by trucks. But trucks are growing. The other day I was on the road and I saw them carrying five or six motorcars each. At one time these cars were all carried by the railways in western Canada. I do not know whether it is true of the maritimes, but they are still carried out there by rail.
What does that mean? Let us assume that this over-all 21 per cent is the proper figure and that that is what is required to put these people on a healthy operating basis. It means that that sum which is necessary, or whatever portion of that sum may be raised, owing to real practical conditions, the practical problems of competition in transportation, will be paid by western Canada and by the maritime provinces.
I submit this therefore. I had no idea that this motion was to be moved or that there would be a debate, but I am firmly convinced that what we need is a complete overhauling of the structure, a complete change in the basis upon which it was built, which, of course, involves equalization between western and eastern rates.
I am not one of those who think, in fact I do not believe that anybody does think, the provinces of Ontario and Quebec are deliberately trying to bleed us. I do not think they are deliberately doing anything of the kind, but at the present moment that thought is entering into this situation. I have been down east a number of times and have been told by the people of Ontario that Ontario is the old milch cow and that we are still feeding on this milch cow. I have not heard that so much lately and I am glad I have not. I can refute it at any time. It is no problem at all.
I well remember working in a law office as a student in the years 1907, 1908 and 1909. I was a final year student. I was paid the magnificent or munificent sum of $25 a month, which is not quite as much as is received by the miners about whom the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) is so greatly worried. All I did then was to make out mortgages on land, 90 per cent of them on farm land. I never drew a mortgage in the hundreds and hundreds which I wrote-we could not typewrite them under the law, in those days; they had to be written by hand, those private portions-nor did I see one at less than eight per cent; and I drew many at nine per cent. Then we had tough times in western Canada. We had foreclosures and all that sort of thing.
In eastern Canada the comparable interest rate for the kind of loan I am speaking of was five per cent and not above six per cent. In other words, there was at least a two per cent or three per cent differential. The answer that was given was a sound one. It was that this is new country, the risk is greater; therefore the principle of the larger return applies on account of that risk. What happened? The west paid its interest for a long time and paid it at eight per cent and at nine per cent. Then we had drought and trouble, and we did not get our crops; so we had foreclosures and so on. Then we were told about the tremendous losses made by the eastern loan companies because they had been foolish enough to lend their money in western Canada. Mr. Speaker, they never lost a cent in the aggregate. If, when going into a risky venture they would
Freight Rates

make the ordinary business move that a cobbler become a shoemaker would make, they would set up a reserve. If there were more risks, he would set up his reserve. And if that reserve, on the differential in the interest rate, had been set up as it should have been, instead of being put into large buildings and investments of one kind or another, the people who lent money in western Canada on real estate would not have been out one five-cent piece. So we are not so hard on the old milch cow as some people in this eastern part of the country seem to think.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: The old cow does not object.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I think I made a remark once before and used the wrong word. But any cows I have known had only four good udders. I think the people in the country here have kept at those four pretty well and we have been left with decoys.


Mr. MANROSS:: That is "moosic" of an
udder kind.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I now turn to an anomaly which has arisen, and which I think is simply crying out for a remedy. I shall refer to Fort William, and this is in May, 1945; that is the date of this little pamphlet I have in my hand. The differential is given there. For example, the standard rate for first-class freight east of Fort William-Port Arthur is fifty-eight cents for carrying 100 pounds 100 miles. West of Fort William the first-class rate is sixty-five cents for the same thing. Then we have a tapering off of the rate. In the east it tapers a good deal faster and the percentage is much higher than the tapering of the rate west of there. It is not so much west of Fort William that the railways have their difficulties and lose their money. It is going around the north shore of lake Superior where there is no freight accumulating and no additional freight burden is given to the railways that go through that rocky country. While it is true that the country is rocky, it is now showing something in the way of metals.
To my hon. friends from British Columbia who think they are the people who are being gored at the present time with respect to their mountain differential and so on, I want to give a few figures which they can contemplate over the evening or any other time they wish. This is because of competition of water-borne traffic. As I say, I am speaking of the year 1945, but I certainly have not seen anything in the newspapers to indicate any change at all in connection with the figures I am using. We

will take a number of commodities as examples, as they are given in this pamphlet, with the rates:
	Montreal-	Montreal-
Commodity	Vancouver	CalgaryCalcium phosphate .	.. $0.75	$2,344Ammonia 	.. 1.25	2.33JGlassware 	.. 1.34	1.98Window glass	.. 1.00	1.98Paint and varnish .	. . 1.25	1.98Barbed wire	.. .75	1.98Hardware and tools	.. 1.25	1.98The rates are also given for boots	and shoes
iron pipe, structural steel, cotton dry goods and canned goods, so I am not talking about strange articles that get on a train once in a while; I am talking about commodities which are in everyday use. I would ask hon. members to remember this. For certain points in Alberta you can ship into Vancouver and back again at a lower rate than you can ship direct. The town of Holden is one place I have in mind, which torvn is sixty miles from Edmonton; and I have the exact figures here if anyone is interested in them.
I talked in the beginning about the introduction of some new principle in our freight rate structure. I want to say that in the United States of America there is a case dealing with the rates. I have forgotten the name of it, but it is known generally as the Spokane rates case. The Spokane case decided one thing, and I think this might well be adopted as a principle in any new rate structure which we may have. That case decided, and it is the law in the United States, that you cannot on the same line of railway charge a lesser sum for the long haul than you do at any point on that line. That seems to me to be a sensible decision and would do a great deal indeed to get us out of our present predicament. It seems to me the adoption of that principle is something which should be considered by whatever body may be dealing with this matter.
I do not think it is sufficient to have an accident of geography govern in the matter. You have a flat plain here, we will say, where you can build roads. I shall give you another example. Edmonton is about the same distance from Drumheller as it is from Cadomin. You go west out of Edmonton to Edson, and you go down what we call the coal branch to Cadomin. The other way is the direct line. As a matter of fact, from Edmonton you go east to Tofield and down to Drumheller. But between Edson and Cadomin you are there in the mountains and there is no road whatever to Drumheller; from Edmonton there is a good highway. I took the matter up. I am sorry the hon. member for Cape Breton South

Freight Rates
has left the chamber, because I want him to know that I have tried to do something for the miners. The people in Cadomin thought that the rate situation was affecting their cost of living, as it was. We took a tub of ice cream as a sample. I went to the freight people of the railroad and found out the difference. I am not going to give the figures from memory, but the difference was considerable; in fact I think the one rate was almost double for the same haul. I asked why this should be; and to prove that I have not been talking nonsense about how the rate structure is made, they told me it was because of the truck competition between Edmonton and Drumheller.
It does seem to me that in this country we should not have a rate structure built on such shifting sands, such changeable conditions as I have outlined. Now the government of Alberta is building that road, and of course the freight and package rates will drop right down, so that eventually I am quite sure we shall have a position similar to what we would have if we were shipping to Drumheller, let us say.
What is the answer to this whole problem? I repeat that I do not think we can expect the railways to carry on when for the last ten years they have had no increase in their rates.


Lionel Chevrier: Not since 1920.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Then it is much longer than I said. I do not think in this House of Commons we are the kind of people who would say they just must do this. Wages and all other costs are rising. I do not want to speak of wages only, though I did notice that if he was correctly reported in the newspapers Mr. Mosher said the increase was not enough because the men are at present seeking an increase, and I know a board has been sitting in Montreal dealing with that very matter. Mr. Mosher said the increase was not sufficient to give the men the additional wages to which they thought they were entitled. We cannot just brush off these things. I can see that the minister has a tough problem, and I do not know how he is going to deal with it. I am afraid I have not been a great deal of help, though I have tried to discuss the matter fairly and without pointing at or naming anyone else. But I do say there is not much use in monkeying with the rates, allowing or refusing increases, without at the same time ironing out the inequalities which exist. Someone may say, what about the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, which took no part before this board in those proceedings which were a boon to
my profession; if I had not been in the House of Commons I might have been in them myself? As I say, however, that is a situation which really needs to be remedied.
But supposing we refuse this application today. What will it mean? We are going to pay the Canadian National deficit anyway. We are paying $23,000,000 for this year, one of the biggest years they have ever known. If they do not get more revenue from the people with whom they deal and for whom they transport goods we shall have to pay the difference from the taxes of the people of Canada. It is just as plain as that; there can be no doubt whatever about it.
Then what should we do? I agree with much that has already been said, particularly the remarks of the hon. member for Lethbridge. I do not consider it fair to the people, nor do I consider it fair to the board of transport commissioners themselves, that they should be asked to accept the directive which has been issued. I know some of those men; in fact the chairman is a distant relative by marriage. I know that a person sitting in a judicial position, who appreciates the responsibilities that position carries, does not want to be placed in a position where he might be even suspected of reviewing something he has already done. That just does not belong in the administration of justice, or the administration of law if some people like that word better.
In my opinion our great and main problem is equalization, though I find it very difficult to see that we in the west will be helped substantially when you get to the end of that road, when I know, or at least I think I know, that if the railway companies meet truck competition here in the east they will have to do so at a lower rate than whatever horizontal advance may be permitted in the general rates. As I have said, I appreciate that it is a difficult problem-, but I am going to go farther and say I think it is a responsibility the government must assume. More -than that, it is a responsibility this House of Commons must -assume. While some of us come from one part of the country and others come from another, I think this house can shake off sectionalism in a matter of this kind. Surely we do not want to buy votes in the places where we live because we are helping people purely in- a financial way, while on -the other hand we realize that some increase may be necessary. This may mean the profit making, if you like, and the better operation of our railways; and heaven knows they are far enough behind now. For example, in passenger service they do not even compare with the trains across the line.: - But
Freight Rates

surely we can say we believe this is right. Did it ever occur to anyone in this house to think what would happen to the economy of this country if both the Canadian Pacific and the Canadian National went broke? Let us not blind ourselves to the real situation.
As I said, equalization is the main problem. I know we in the west and you in the mari-times are carrying too much of the load now; and I know if we do not have equalization, when this is over we shall be carrying not only more of the load but a greater percentage of the load1, which is utterly unfair. I am not going to secede with my good friend the hon. member for Lethbridge; but, though I hate superlatives, I say I think the equalization of freight rates is one of the most urgent matters to be undertaken in this country. If they are equal, who can complain? If they are discriminatory, as they are now, they sow disunity; and as the hon. member for Lethbridge said, disunity is growing in the part of the country from1 which we come.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Mr. Speaker-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Question.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Don't get in too great a rush. I agree wholeheartedly with what has been said by my colleague the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith); and in his summation of the situation I think he has left no doubt in the minds of hon. members of this house as to where our party stands with respect to the question of freight rates. Let me reiterate what I said the other day, that the responsibility for the elimination of discrimination in freight rates rests with the government, or with this house if you like that better; after all, the government is pretty well the house, and we must accept that fact. Here we have a board set up to hear a certain case. It is in the position of a judge, a tribunal to hear arguments for and against a certain matter. Let me repeat what I said the other day, that the best accountants and the best legal minds in the various provinces were chosen to place this question before that tribunal. They did so. As a result of what they brought forth, the board made a decision.
Members in the house from various sections of the country, east and west, have seen fit to take Ontario and Quebec to task because those provinces were not represented at the hearings. I would say that if those governments had had anything at stake in the hearings they would have been represented.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Would the hon. member-


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Let me say to the hon. member from Nova Scotia that the people there felt they had something at stake, with the result that they were represented. Ontario and Quebec, on the other hand, were not. But the fact of their attitude and the further fact that they were not represented do not mean that the people of Ontario and Quebec are less union-minded than the people in other provinces. We are just as much interested in this national union as any people could be.
I look back over the years and I can remember various situations which developed where help was needed either in the east or in the west. Never once in the years I have sat in the House of Commons have I heard a member from Ontario or Quebec deny to the other provinces of Canada anything we thought was in the best interests^ of the country. Never have I heard a member from Ontario or Quebec in the days of depression say we should not have done this or have done that for the wheat farmers in the drought areas of western Canada.
I have found that in the House of Commons members have been willing to bury their differences, so far as geographical position was concerned; I have found they have been only to O' willing to do anything which would unite more solidly than ever the various provinces. So I say, when hon. members criticize the two central provinces they are doing something to create national disunity rather than to build unity in Canada.
Let us deal with the problem in a big and broad way, considering what is best and in the interests of the country. Again I say: Certainly there are discriminatory rates. I have no hesitation in saying I do not think a man who lives in Lethbridge, Regina or Edmonton should have to pay $200 or $250 more for a Chevrolet than I pay for one in Ontario.


John Horne Blackmore: That is the way to talk.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: I have no hesitation in saying that perhaps the burden is not proportionately distributed across the country. But that was not the question placed before the board of transport commissioners. The question they had to decide was: Do the railways need more money in order to carry on? Their judgment was that those railways needed 21 per cent more.
The question of discrimination is one of government policy. The other day the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) said the board was a creature of parliament. It is a creature of the government which appointed it-the

Freight Rates
present government. It is not a creature of parliament at all. I say it is the creature of the majority of members in parliament, the majority which constitutes the government of the day. If the government is not prepared to bring in legislation such as would eliminate this discrimination in freight rates, then surely we cannot blame the board of transport commissioners or the provinces of Ontario or Quebec. We must place the blame where it belongs, and that is on the government. They are the ones who should amend the Railway Act, so that this discrimination will be ended, so that a proper share of the burden of freight rates will be distributed across the whole country, and so that the per capita responsibility in respect of freight rates will be better equalized.
When I read the amendment offered by the leader of the C.C.F. (Mr. Coldwell) I agree with my colleague the hon. member for Calgary West when he says that we cannot say to the board, after those months and months of careful consideration, and after all the money and time that have been spent in placing the facts before it, "You must reconsider your decision. The government is now going to take the power to say that the decision shall not come into force." Surely we would look ridiculous if we were to do anything like that, particularly when, as the minister has said, the board is the creature of parliament or, as I say, of the government.
But the government has every right to say, "We will reconsider the Railway Act; we will reconsider the question of the equalization of freight rates, and their equal distribution across the country." If the government does that I think we shall have brought to an end this unfortunate situation in which we find men from the maritimes and the west attacking the two central provinces, and leaving the impression across the country that the two central provinces are milking the rest of the country in the matter of freight rates.
This question is not the responsibility of the central provinces at all. They do not make the rates, nor do they appoint the board of transport commissioners. It just happens that Ontario and Quebec are situated as they are, and that the question of freight rates is one entirely within federal jurisdiction and one over which the provinces have no control.
On motion of Mr. Homuth the debate was adjourned.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Gordon Graydon: What is the business for tomorrow?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Tomorrow we shall take up second reading of Bill No. 195 concerning the investigation, conciliation and settlement of industrial disputes. Following that, we shall take second reading of Bill No. 196, to amend the War Veterans Allowance Act; then the resolution standing in the name of the Secretary of State for the introduction of a bill to amend the elections act. Following that, we shall' consider the resolution standing in the name of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, having for its purpose the introduction of a bill to amend the Export Credits Insurance Act, and the order in the name of the Minister of Trade and Commerce for the second reading of Bill No. 138, to amend the Export and Import Permits Act.


Major James William Coldwell: When will this debate be resumed?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: We shall now have to consider what would be the convenient time to resume this debate. Of course the debate on external affairs cannot go on until this debate has been disposed of.


Major James William Coldwell: I understand that, and I regret it.


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

[Stage Direction]

[Stage Direction]
Thursday, April 8, 1948