PRIVATE BILL


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 30, respecting a certain patent of the American Dairy Supply Company-Mr. Anderson (Toronto-High Park).
UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF On the orders of the day:	-h
Mr. J. A. DENIES (St. Denis):: Mr. Speaker, some weeks ago I asked the Prime Minister to lay on the table of the house correspondence between him and Mr. George C. Vaudrin. I should like to know if tihe right hon. gentleman has that information.


Right Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Prime Minister) :: I understand they did not find any
correspondence in the office, but I shall have it looked into again. I personally have no recollection of it, but there is a very large body of correspondence and I shall have another search made for it.
CAIRO POSTAL CONGRESS On the orders of the day:
Mr. JEAN-FRANCOIB POULIOT (Temis-oouata):	Whereas, on February 27, at page
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

979 of Hansard in answer to a question about the Cairo postal congress the Prime Minister said:
Wherever the Postmaster General may be I am sure that upon his return he will satisfy the very laudable curiosity of the hon. gentleman.
and whereas on March 8, at page 1434 of Hansard, under the heading "Adjournment- Business of the House " the Prime Minister said:
Mines and immigration were opened' and agriculture was opened. There are post office, interior and fisheries. Whichever is most acceptable and best suited to the convenience of the opposition we shall take.
therefore may I ask, sir, if it is the intention of the government to have the post office estimates passed before the return of the Postmaster General, and if that is the reason why the Postmaster General has been playing hide and seek in three continents, namely, Asia, Africa and Europe?



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question *of the Minister of Railways and Canals. A report has reached me from British Columbia to the effect that abandonment of the main line of the Canadian National railway from Hope west to Vancouver has been under consideration. I should like to ask if the minister has any information in that connection, or if the statement is correct?


Hon. R. J. MANION (Minister of Railways and Canals):: I have never heard of it before, so I really know nothing about it.



COMPLETION OF LINES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. CAMERON R. McINTOSH (North Battleford) : Mr. Speaker, I have a question to ask of the genial Minister of Railways and Canals.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Mr. McINTOSH:: Surely you do not wish me to modify my question, do you? May I say I have a letter from a leading business man in North Battleford to the effect that a statement was current throughout the district that the railway from Frenchman's Butte to Elk Point in Alberta, and from St. Walburg north to Edmonton, will be
[Mr. Pouliot.l
completed this summer. May I ask the minister if he is in a position to make a statement to parliament in connection with these two important northwestern lines?


Robert James Manion: We will not know anything about the plans of the Canadian National railways until their estimates are before the house. In the near future their estimates will be before us and we will know more about it then. Up to the present, however, I know nothing about their suggested plans concerning the completion of lines in the west.



BANK OF CANADA

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, March 8, consideration of the motion of Hon. Mr. Rhodes for the second reading of Bill No. 19, to incorporate the Bank of Canada.
Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg North Centre):: "Are we in danger of
Fascism in Canada?" is a question sometimes asked among the workers. Thinking in terms of brown shirts, parades and salutes I would say no, but when I come to a measure of this kind I am rather doubtful. In the days of the Romans we are told it was their practice to erect two upright spears, then place one transversely upon them and force their conquered enemies to pass under the spears, sub jugum-under the yoke-and usually a heavy tribute was exacted from the conquered enemies. It would seem to me that in the bill now before us we are arranging for the people of Canada to pass under the yoke, and if the bill is passed they must expect to pay a heavy tribute in the years to come.
For years we have had in this country a financial dictatorship but it has been somewhat concealed. By this legislation, instead of challenging that dictatorship, we are in reality legalizing and stabilizing it. The Finance minister warns us against any possible delay in giving the people the benefits of a central bank. I would say that the people have waited for some years for a central bank, and I think they can afford to wait a little longer rather than that we should saddle this country with what I regard as a private tyranny.
The bill provides for the creation of a private central bank. The amendment which we moved from this corner would seek to alter that so as to make the bank a public bank, but that amendment has been ruled out of order. Under those circumstances I think I must join with my hon. friend from Bow River (Mr. Garland) and take the position that the only course for us is to vote against

Bank of Canada-Mr. Woodsworth
this bill. I cannot see how we can possibly separate the bill from its contents. The main principle of the bill is that the bank shall be a privately owned institution. That is the proposal which comes before us. Could we have altered that to a publicy owned bank I would gladly have voted for the bill.
Let me point out that we do not object to a commission or board with wide powers, but we do object to the setting up of a body independent of and superior to the authority of parliament. I must quote again the statement of the Finance minister in reply to a question by my colleague from Wetaskiwin (Mr. Irvine) because I do not think it can be broadcast too widely. He asked:
Supposing the central bank was endeavouring to regulate the control of credit in Canada, and supposing the policy it adopted in order to do so was contrary to the policy of the government of the day and they clashed, which official would make the decision?
The answer of the Finance minister was: Unquestionably the authority of the governor and the board of directors of the bank would prevail.
Here we have the unequivocal statement that we are at the moment being asked to erect a body whose decision would be superior to that of the government, It is an abdication of the powers of parliament. The Finance minister in order to try to justify his position is driven to the most specious reasoning. He refers to the board of railway commissioners. I submit that there is no such sovereign power given to the board of railway commissioners. It is true that they are free from everyday interference in the carrying on of their work, as undoubtedly this bank should be,, but still the great railway policies of this country are decided, not by the board of railway commissioners, but by this parliament. I recall that a few years ago, even with regard to a specific matter, that of the Crowsnest pass agreement, this parliament overrode the decision of the railway commission, and last year the special railway legislation which was passed surely indicated the supreme power of this parliament.
The Finance minister also referred to the tariff board, but again I point out that there is no sovereign authority in the tariff board. The tariff board does not override the decisions of this house. It may perform a valuable function, but still its reports go to the government. The government assumes responsibility, and we ratify or reject the measures that are in consequence brought down.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Would it interfere with
the hon. gentleman if I asked him a question?


James Shaver Woodsworth: Certainly not.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The hon. gentleman must realize that what he has just said negatives his argument because is it not parliament that is supreme and will continue to be supreme in the case he has just mentioned? And it will similarly be supreme over the decisions of the bank.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Then may I point
out that the Finance minister is at variance with the Prime Minister.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Oh, no. We are at one.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Because the Finance minister said that if there was a clash the will of the bank should prevail.


Richard Bedford Bennett: With the government,
not with parliament.


James Shaver Woodsworth: There may be a
distinction there, but I doubt it very much. But I am glad that the Prime Minister is now being converted to the idea that parliament, rather than the government, should be supreme. It is a new doctrine from him, very new, for all along he has taken the ground that it was the government that assumed supreme responsibility, and we know that only in the most indirect fashion indeed has this government thought that it had to come to parliament. I think that that reasoning does not carry us very far.
The Finance minister also refers to the civil service commission, and suggests that it too is free from interference. Well, if I may venture on a colloquialism, it is to laugh, for anyone who knows the pressure that has been exerted from day to day on the civil service commission and the large number of reservations that are constantly being made of positions that are not to be filled by the commission will understand how little real independence has been exercised either under this government or the governmnt that preceded it, by the civil service commission. If the bank was to be as subject to as much interference as the civil service commission the situation would indeed be a difficult one. No one would suggest that it be subjected to interference as is the civil service commission. At the same time I say that it would be an impossible situation if the authority of the governor of the bank were to be superior to that of the government of this country.
It is true that the powers of parliament are being curtailed. The decisions of the Imperial conference have the effect of practically taking over taxing powers. Again, in connection with our estimates we have large blocks of
Bank of Canada-Mr. COMMONS
Woodsworth
expenditures which we commonly call uncontrollable expenditures. A recent bulletin of the Citizen's Research Institute states:
Including the interest paid by the dominion on guaranteed railway bonds, the total debt service cost $193,894,024, or $3,700,000 per week. This item alone cost $18.45 per capita, or 63 per cent of the gross revenue.
That is, 63 per cent of our gross revenue under present conditions does not come within the control of this parliament but automatically goes to the debt service.
By this bill we place under private ownership and control the issuance of currency, always regarded as the prerogative of the crown, and secondly the control of price levels, which is most important to the whole financial and economic life of this country. I should like to ask where is the leader of His Majesty's opposition at this time. He likes to boast that his grandfather helped to secure responsible government in Canada, but now it would seem that he himself acquiesces in the great betrayal, for such I think it will be considered in the years to come. We are taking away truly responsible government in this country in one of the most important spheres in which government should have control.


Mr. IRVINE:: The right hon. gentleman
has not yet decided whether to do one thing or the other.


James Shaver Woodsworth: While the discussion was going on last night there lay on my table the evening newspaper in which appeared a fine photograph of the Prime Minister (Mr. Bennett) and the leader of the opposition (Mr. Mackenzie King) arm in arm. It is delightful to know that they do find it possible to avoid political differences.


Mr. DUPUIS:: If the hon. member were there, would he have refused to be photographed?


James Shaver Woodsworth: It is very delightful to see these two gentlemen together and it would seem to be someiwhat symbolical. In dealing with this bill1 we are now finding that in the realm of financial affairs as well as in connection with a centennial celebration these two gentlemen can walk hand in hand,


Richard Bedford Bennett: While the lamp holds out to burn, the vilest sinner may return.


An hon. MEMBER:: Who is the sinner?


James Shaver Woodsworth: 
An hon. MEMBER:: What year was that?


James Shaver Woodsworth: In 1924; and that is precisely what happened to himself and his own government. Apparently, with his eyes wide open to the exact situation, he allowed himself to be duped a few years later and the bankers again won. Now we are proposing in this legislation to set up a domination of bankers or of a banker who will be able to defy the government that is in power. That is the actual situation. Further behind that banker would be the international bankers.
I agree with the minister that a central bank is a natural and inevitable development of our financial system. The chartered banks are essentially commercial banks, but their
1328	COMMONS
Bank oj Canada-Mr. Woodsworth
functions have been gradually extended until they have not only become deposit banks, taking in the savings of the people and on the basis of this providing for short term loans-and I may point out that they have gone on the basis of a ratio of ten to one- but in addition to that, through the provisions of the Bank Act and because of the lack of adequate machinery to put into operation the provisions of the Finance Act, these commercial banks have in practice been banka of issue. They have influenced price levels and, further, they have exercised an influence on foreign exchange matters and have been the government's own bankers. One might have thought that was sufficiently wide scope, but in more recent years they have entered the field of investment banking, either directly, taking up certain issues, or more generally indirectly through the means of the interlocking directorates of which we heard the other day. In addition to that they have been expected to supply agricultural credit.	This has been done through the
extension of short term credits by arrangements that have proved ruinous to the farmers and have left them without the power of securing further loans, even short term loans, from the banks.
This central bank legislation proposes to take over at least four of these functions I have enumerated. The central bank is to become a bank of issue. Its obligation will be to control price levels, and it will arrange foreign exchange matters and act as the government's bank. This, I suppose, is not the place to discuss the need for control over the distribution of credit; but that would still be quite untouched by the proposed central bank. I would point out that banking is the key industry which affects all others; no industry can be carried on without adequate supplies of credit. Banks alone, under modern conditions, are able to supply these credits, and they cannot only make credit in general cheap or dear, scarce or abundant, but they can also direct credit to one industry or firm rather than to another, and so prevent industrial expansion in this or that field. In our judgment, credit is of the nature of a public utility and should he publicly controlled.
This is not the place either for me to discuss the need for adequate agricultural credit, but I would point out in passing that this should enter into any general scheme of Canadian financial reorganization.
Again this is not the place I suppose to discuss the need for a national investment board, but I would point out that neither the proposed revision of the Bank Act nor
TMr. Woodsworth.]
this bill which we have under consideration to-day provides for such a board. If the principle of the nationalization of insurance, which was advanced from this corner the other day, could be adopted, we should have abundant funds available for investment purposes. To-day these funds are all gathered up and put in the hands of private institutions for investment. If national insurance were carried into effect all these funds would be gathered up and made available for an investment board to put into such enterprises as were socially of value.
So far as I can see, the main objection to a publicly-owned bank seems to be that it would be subject to political pressure if indeed it would not leave the way open for political corruption. It does seem to me that if we adopt that attitude the statement of my hon. friend from Wetaskiwin (Mr. Irvine) becomes true and we simply recognize that parliament to-day has ceased to be of value to the people. The argument goes altogether too far. If we are not able to govern in the sphere of finance we are not able to govern in lesser spheres, and if we do not gov-rn finance, then it is only a question of time until government in other spheres becomes a veritable farce. I should rather like to think that by means of added responsibility we should gradually come to a higher conception of government. As J. A. Hobson said some time ago:
May not the conception of public control as a junto of officials and politicians, slowly grinding their own axes, be displaced by a more intelligent conception of a really representative control in which the various factors comprising the public interest shall be duly represented under a system removed from immediate political or class pressures?
If there are objections on the ground of possible dangers under a publicly-owned bank, it seems to me that there are also decided objections to, and inevitable dangers [DOT],n a privately-owned institution. Undoubtedly class interests would prevail; only fairly well to do people could own stock; and, as was pointed out last night by the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland), this means, as in ordinary companies, that the control would not be widespread but would rather be concentrated in a few hands, ultimately in the hands probably of one person. This was very well expressed in a short paragraph I was reading the other day in a book by John Strachey:
It. is quite true that claims to a participation in the profits of the great modern centralized and concentrated enterprises are now, by means of the sale of shares, quite widely distributed amongst members of the property-

Bank of Canada-Mr. Woodsworth
owning class. But it is very naive to suppose that this constitutes any diffusion of effective ownership or control. A small shareholder, or indeed the whole body of small shareholders collectively, in a great modern company, have about as much control over it as they have over the Grand llama of Tibet. They take what dividends the directors, who own the controlling blocks of shares, like to pay them, and read, devoutly, the financial columns of their newspapers, where city editors tell them what the big capitalists want them to think.
That is about what would happen in the case of a national bank if it were organized on the basis proposed in this bill.
While I cannot go quite so far as my colleague the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Coote) that the main cause of poverty in the midst of plenty is the money question, undoubtedly that question is of prime importance. May I ask: Can we look to such a bank as that which it is proposed to set up, to make any radical changes in the money system? I hold in my hands an article by Mr. A. de V. Leigh entitled Realities and Make-Belief published on March 25, 1933, in the Times Trade and Engineering Supplement from which I quote the following:
The experts .are like squirrels, able to crack nuts-however hard these may be-with the greatest skill and cleverness, but being, so far as progression is concerned, circumscribed by their cages, they can only run round and round in circles. They recognize that what is necessary is to put more tokens into the pockets of consumers, but these tokens can be obtained only by being borrowed at interest. This implies repayment of more than has been put in, so that they are once more back at the point of only being able to recommend more debt to cure a system which is breaking down on account of too much debt.
I would point out that if it becomes necessary to change the money system, it is extremely difficult to have this done by a bank that is to a large extent removed from the pressure of public opinion and that also by its very constitution is in the hands of those who are interested not only in maintaining the status quo but also in seeing that their own immediate financial investments are protected. The bank must make money and one cannot read the reports of the Bank of England without realizing that that bank is not altogether indifferent to the dividends paid to its shareholders. Further, suppose by any chance the time might come in this country when the people generally think, in order to relieve themselves of the burden of debt, some sort of reflationary process is necessary. Would a privately owned bank agree to anything of this kind? I cannot think that is possible. A privately owned bank is in the hands of people who would undoubtedly lose money by such a process.
Some years ago France got rid of the greater part of her public debt by a process commonly called inflation when the franc was reduced from 20 cents to 4 cents. I wonder whether that would be possible if we had a privately owned bank in this country, in which not only the stock was owned by private individuals but the management was under the control of a governor not responsible to the dominion government. Again may I read a paragraph from a very interesting book called What Everybody Wants to Know About Money, edited by G. D. H. Cole. I think he puts the whole situation very clearly:
More than once it has become plain that the only real alternative to government control of the banking system has been, not the separation of the financial and political powers, but rather the control of the political by the financial authority. The British Labour government of 1931 is by no means the only government that has been brought down since the war by the action of the financial world. For example, the same fate overtook the short-lived socialist government of Norway, and bankers' pressure upon governments has been a familiar feature of the world's history during the past dozen years. It is no easier for banks and governments to separate their spheres of jurisdiction to-day than it was in medieval Europe for pope and emperor to live side by side without clash-ings of authority.
In these circumstances the question appears nowadays to many people to be not whether bankers ought to be allowed to carry on their own business without public interference, but whether governments or banks are to have the last word in matters in which they are both inevitably concerned.
That is a clear statement of the issue before us to-day. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes) has stated very distinctly that when there is a clash, the bankers are to have the last word. We in this comer-and' I hope we shall be joined by at least some members of the Liberal party-would like to provide that when there is a clash, the government must have the last word because in the long run the government is responsible to the people. Such a bank would be quite removed from contact with the ordinary rank and file of the people; its governor would not be required to present himself for election nor to keep in touch with nor to be guided by the will of the people. If we have reached that stage, it is about time we give up even the semblance of democracy. Surely the people themselves have the right to decide. Whilst we talk about the danger of political influence, we must remember that if we have no political influence we are thereby giving up the very essence, the very foundation of democracy. It may very well be that sometimes democracy may make mistakes in its decisions, but that is the only way in which
1330	COMMONS
Bank of Canada-Mr. Spencer
higher levels can be attained. We believe the ultimate control of policy should rest with government, but detailed administration should be left to the appointed board; that governments should have the right to appoint and dismiss members of the board; that there should be a minister of state responsible for answering in parliament for the affairs of the board, but that parliamentary discussions of financial matters should be confined to questions of policy and not matters of detail.
We find a very fine example of this in the arrangements connected with the British Broadcasting Corporation which is a separate corporation, if you like, but the control of which finally is with the government. There is to a certain extent a similar arrangement in Great Britain under the Central Electricity Board. I cannot see why some such arrangement cannot be adopted in this country whereby we may have a board having under its control this bank and directing its administration but in its general policies subject to the government and to parliament.


Mr. H. E. SPENCER (Battle River):: Bank oj Canada-Mr. Spencer
was no less a man than Sir Charles Addis who at one time was connected, if not now, with the Bank of International Settlements; when we recognize, as was mentioned by the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland) that two officials of the Bank of England travelled across Canada with the commission, the presence of whom was not advertised, are we to take it for granted that there was some pressure exerted in connection with the setting up of a central bank which would have the effect of bringing it under the influence of the Bank of England? While on the one hand I must congratulate the government of the day upon doing all they can to guard against private bank control of the central bank, on the other hand, there seems to be a real danger, and one which I believe we have overlooked, of a possible disadvantageous influence from outside banks such as the Bank of England or the Bank of International Settlements over the Bank of Canada. There does not seem to be a realization of the influence such a condition may have upon the whole country.


Mr. RHODES:: May I ask the hon. member a question? In view of what he has said, how does he justify his action last year in voting to tie the dollar to the pound sterling?


Henry Elvins Spencer: That is not entirely in line with the argument I am placing before [DOT] hon. members at the present time. At particular times it may be worth while to tie the dollar to the pound sterling. But what I am trying to emphasize is this, that Canada should be mistress of her own house. The market to which wm should pay most attention is the market within Canada. Our first aim should be to see that our people, with their great possibilities for production of goods and services, should be able to take full advantage of them. Our people can take full advantage of those possibilities if we have a financial system which at all times will enable them to have sufficient purchasing power, so that they may be enabled to make those exchanges. And if, as has been done in the past, we find ourselves in the position where on the one hand we have an abundance of goods and sendees while on the other we have an increasing number of people who are not only unemployed but under employed, and therefore not in a position to make those purchases, or in a position to take the fullest advantage of our great powers of production and services, we invite inevitable chaos. The fear I have therefore, is of adverse effects upon our whole financial system brought about by outside influence.

Last night the hon. member for Bow River placed on record some figures with respect to the total assets and liabilities of Canadian banks. He took the liabilities from the assets and showed in each case the balance in favour of the banks. Then he went on to show how much of what is now known as the C.P.R. loan of $60,000,000, was taken up by each of those banks. Without taking up the time of the house by repeating the figures I should like to make some observations in this connection. One big bank in Canada which had an excess of assets over liabilities of $1,551,159 took a share of the C.P.R. loan equal to $22,404,000. Another one with a balance of assets over liabilities amounting to $699,612 made a loan of $5,180,000. A third one with assets over liabilities amounting to $1,818,499 made a loan of $12,280,000. One may wonder how this was done, but the explanation is very simple. The situation shows, first of all, that the banks did not loan other people's deposits, because in each of these cases they loaned from six to ten times the total amount of the balance between their assets and their liabilities. As the Prime Minister quite properly pointed out, it shows that the security was put up by the company in question, backed, by the way, by the guarantee of the dominion government. What was it that enabled the banks to write into existence this $60,000,000? It was the security put up by the railway company, in the first instance, supported by the guarantee of the federal government. Therefore the transaction is based entirely .on the assets and on the credit first of the railway company and secondly on the credit of the nation. It is because the banking fraternity have taken the privilege, and have been allowed to write credits into existence to any amount that they could get away with, and because such action is permitted, that we take the stand, that such an important function should be under much more drastic government control. When we face the possibility of having a government bank, a Bank of Canada, we feel that such an institution should be entirely under governmental control and not in private hands. Although there have been certain safeguards allowed-and we sincerely hope those safeguards will prove effective-at the same time there is no guarantee that they will be effective. We in this section of the house fear that the safeguards will not be strong enough, and that ultimately the institution will come under complete private control.
The present Secretary of State (Mr. Cahan) one of the ablest members in this house, and as we know, an authority on financial matters,

Bank oj Canada-Mr. Spencer
when speaking in Toronto last year made two outstanding statements. The first was:
Bank deposits consist largely of credit money which has been created by the banks.
I have just outlined that that was done with regard to the Canadian Pacific loan. The second statement was:
The cheque system enables the banks to create credit money at will.
Of course, that is along similar lines. It is clear that, first, the creation and control of credit money is part of the crown's prerogative. Secondly, that prerogative is created for the benefit of the people and cannot be exercised to their prejudice. Thirdly, that prerogative has not been parted with, and cannot be parted with except by statute. Fourthly, the exercise of this power by any private corporation is without 'legal warrant, and consequently is illegal, differing in degree only and not in kind from the art of the counterfeiter. Fifthly, it is not in the interest of the state to renounce its sovereignty. It is because of these considerations that we lay so much stTess upon parliament not giving up its control of the creation of credit and of money matters in general because through the control of private interests whose main incentive is profit, and who favour certain businesses with which the banks are connected by interlocking directorates, these great functions have not been always and may not be exercised in the interests of the state.
Our real problem, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me is one of purchasing power. In purchasing power can be found the key to various problems that we have confronting us at this time. It is the key, for instance, to the unemployment problem. It is the key to the underemployment problem. It is the key to the undernourishment problem, because we know full well that if this country with its vast riches of goods and everything that is required in the matter of food, clothing and shelter made proper use of its powers of production, plus its powers of distribution, there need not be anyone undernourished. Again, it is the key to the glut of commodities, because if we had proper means of transferring the many commodities that we make to the people who want them there should be no glut. Any surplus there might be would 'be very small indeed. Purchasing power is the key also to the stagnation of our trade. Some .people think that trading must be done first before you can obtain money, but you must have money in some form before you can trade. If those who control money simply decided to take it out
of existence by cancellation of loans, which can be done so easily under our financial system, it would at once put a crimp intc our trade and would make trading impossible except by way of barter.
Lastly, the lack of purchasing power is in no small degree responsible for our difficulties with regard to taxation. A large proportion of our people are not in a position to pay their taxes. Further, when I remind this house that the total amount of income tax that is paid annually in this country is paid by less than three per cent of the population, in other words that 97 per cent of our people have not a sufficient income upon which to pay income tax, I think it will be recognized by everybody that something is wrong with our financial system.
In closing, I should like to put on record the reasons for the lag in purchasing power. I quote from the New English Weekly, a well known English paper:
So much misunderstanding, misrepresentation and misinterpretation has lately overlaid the discussion whether industry distributes a deficiency of purchasing that it is necessary for us categorically to restate the causes of the obvious deficiency. The passage from Major Douglas' "The New and the Old Economics," and our columns are open to any Goliath of economics to show us where we are wrong.
Categorically there are at least the following five causes of a deficiency of purchasing power as compared with the collective prices of goods on sale:
(11 Money profits collected from the public (interest is profit on an intangible).
(2)	Savings, i.e. mere abstention from buying.
Everyone must recognize that to the extent that savings are not used to buy goods or services or loaned to others to buy goods there must be an equivalent amount of goods and services idle. It goes on:
(3)	Investment of savings in new works which create a new coat without fresh purchasing power.
(4)	Difference in circuit velocity between cost liquidation and price creation, which results in charges being carried over into prices from a previous cost-accounting cycle. Practically all plant charges are of this nature, and all payments for material brought in from a previous wage-cycle are of the same nature.
(5)	Deflation, i.e. sale of securities by banks and recall of loans.
With regard to the last-mentioned cause of the lag in purchasing power, we are giving to the central bank known as the Bank of Canada the power of inflation and deflation within proper limits, also the sale and purchase of securities, the making of loans to the federal and provincial governments and to banks, and the recalling of those loans. If the strings which the government are providing in this

Bank of Canada-Mr. Lucas
act in order to make the bank function as a semi-government bank are sound and strong, well and good; but we are afraid that they may not be strong enough to take care of the interests of the public. It is for that reason that we criticize severely the setting up of this Bank of Canada and turning it over to the control of private shareholders, who, through the manipulation of share control in the years to come, may bring the bank under the control of a few people, just as we find the shares of our private banks to-day in the hands of a few. If that takes place, not only shall we have lost one of the greatest opportunities that we have ever had of placing this country in a position to start out on a new era of prosperity, with a new and better standard of living, but we shall find ourselves in an infinitely worse position than we are in to-day.


Mr. W. T. LUCAS (Camrose):: Mr. Speaker, in introducing the resolution on which the present bill is founded, the hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes) made the following statement, which will be found at page 824 of Hansard:
The bill which is founded upon this resolution is one of unusual importance and significance.
That is a statement upon which I think all parties in the house are agreed. The Finance minister went on to say:
It marks an advanced stage in our economic and financial development as a nation. The proposed central bank should not, I submit, be regarded as a break with the past; we are not departing from the system which was served us so well. Rather the central bank should be regarded as another stage in the natural evolution of our banking system.
I feel sure, Mr. Speaker, that that is tantamount to saying to the Canadian people that the evolution will be so gradual that they need not expect to see any change come from the establishment of this central bank. I was sorry to hear the minister make the statement that we should not expect any break with the past. I believe when the great war ended there was a distinct cleavage with the past. As the soldier was demobilized and fumigated, he left off his old uniform, put on a new suit of clothes and went out to face a new world. While it may have taken ten or eleven years to recognize this fact, I think that what occurred during the great collapse of 1929 and the four years of depression which followed has brought home to us the realization that we must face the future with an entirely new outlook and that we can never go back to pre-war day conditions. The minister stated that this proposed legislation marked an advanced stage in the economic and financial

development of the nation. We have been told that thirty-six nations already have central banks, most of them privately owned. Will any hon. member say that any of those nations with privately owned central banks were outstanding in preventing unemployment or easing the situation through the great depression? It seems to me that we are simply placing ourselves in the same position as those nations which accepted central banks some years ago, and therefore adding to the danger of a world domination of banking policy.
Realizing the importance of this question, earlier in the session I introduced a resolution asking for a national system of credit and finance to be controlled in the interests of all the people. My object in doing so was to bring on a discussion of this very important question before any banking legislation was brought down. I sought to have the government fully advised of the views of the members of the house before committing themselves to any definite legislation. I was told that as my resolution anticipated legislation to be brought down, the time was not opportune for the carrying on of such a discussion. We now find that both the old parties feel that the second reading of the bill is not the proper time to discuss this question. Not long ago an eminent professor in the United States stated that there were only sixteen men in the world who understood anything about finance. There was no Canadian in that list, but I ask hon. members not to take the professor too seriously. During the debate on my resolution the Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes) seemed to take the opinion of this professor as final and to assume that the question of finance was too vast and sacred to be discussed by the ordinary individual. In fact, the minister went so far as to twit myself and the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Spencer) with having the temerity to rush in where angels feared to tread. I do not lay any claim to being a financial expert, but I think I can say without any spirit of egotism that I possess, at least I hope I do, average intelligence and common sense; and I believe if these qualities alone were applied, some solution of our difficulties might be found.
In claiming that our present financial system is at fault I find myself in very good company. One has only to quote the inaugural address of President Roosevelt made last year and recall his indictment of the system and the money changers. One could quote scores of other prominent people

Bank of Canada-Mr. Lucas
throughout the world who are convinced that the root of our trouble lies in our financial system. I should like to put on record a statement of a former governor of the Bank of England, Mr. Vincent Vickers, who said in 1932:
Obviously he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) must rely upon the long experience and the wider knowledge of the Bank of England; but when things go wrong, terribly wrong; when we are told one day that the national safety depends upon the adherence to the gold standard no matter what the sacrifice; and a week or so later that our abandonment of it will bring salvation and prosperity to our industries; when the pulling of old levers no longer moves the signals; when the patient no longer responds to the old prescriptions . . . then surely it is time for the government to seek advice elsewhere, and to encourage open discussion, rather than attempt to "shelve" the question, as was done at Ottawa, and to avoid the issue because it is so difficult.
The fear of discussing monetary questions is a splendid example of the atmosphere which has been built up around the whole matter of finance. We have been taught to believe that finance was a subject for supermen and that it was the rankest kind of heresy and sacrilege for an ordinary individual to delve into the matter. It was surrounded more or less with a veil of mystery. But the disclosures of the last few years have rent that veil asunder and the picture disclosed was not altogether a pleasant one. With the idea prevailing that finance was a subject for supermen, the result has been that the ordinary individual has given very little thought to it. To-day we find that Mr. Average Citizen knows very little about financial matters. However, that condition is changing rapidly and to-day throughout western Canada many study clubs are engaged in the discussion of monetary problems. Right in this city there are many such clubs and one has only to travel across Canada in a smoking compartment to realize that finance is the main topic of discussion among the people. Speaking on the British budget in April, 1932, Sir Robert Horne said:
These questions of currency always seem very remote from the ordinary life of the people, who have not had to consider them for more than 100 years, and yet the question of currency sits down at every table that is spread with a meal in every cottage or castle throughout the country.
Aristotle said that money exists not by nature but by law; it is the law that says what shall be legal tender, and it is in this house that we make the laws. I think everyone admits that there is something wrong, but when we come to decide just what it is there seem to be almost as many opinions as there
are people. In my opinion, it is important that we first make a proper diagnosis of our trouble. When this is done we may then be in a better position to deal with it. In this house there are many hon. gentlemen who are prominent in the medical profession, and I think they will agree with me that the most important thing a medical man has to do when called to see a patient is first to make a proper diagnosis of the disease. As a matter of fact, until that is done more harm than good may come to the patient. If the doctor cannot tell at a glance what is wrong with the patient, I understand that he begins what is known as the process of elimination. In other words, he will first test the heart and if he finds it functioning properly he eliminates that organ for the time being, then examines the lungs, the liver and so on, eliminating each organ as he finds it properly performing its function. Now, if we apply that test to our body politic we can start with agriculture, and I presume that if I asked whether there was anything wrong with agriculture to-day almost everyone in the country would hold up both hands. But let me ask, what is the function of agriculture? The answer is the function of agriculture is to produce the foodstuffs required by the people of the world; and will anyone say that agriculture is failing in that respect? I do not think anyone will say so when we find the elevators bursting with grain, and that a policy of curtailment of production is proposed. Indeed, we see various countries destroying a part of their crops; we learn of coffee being burned, of cotton being ploughed under. I doubt whether there is a country in the world where the farmers are producing as much per capita as they are right in the Dominion of Canada. So far as agriculture is concerned therefore I think we can very well eliminate it in our search for the trouble; it is performing its function one hundred per cent.
Let us turn then to industry; and when we find many of the great factories in the last few years have either closed down or have been running part time, unable to sell their goods, their one great desire being to open up and to manufacture the things people need. We must admit, therefore, that so far as industry is concerned, it was never more efficient, never more prepared to supply the needs of people everywhere. And so we eliminate industry.
What about transportation? Was there ever a time in the history of the world when all the means of transportation were so efficient,



Bank of Canada-Mr. Lucas
never were we able to transport goods to the far corners of the earth so rapidly. And so we eliminate transportation.
Coming to labour, I would ask whether labour was ever more efficient than it is at the present time. Is labour refusing to work?
I say, no. When we find thousands of people unemployed, not because they wish to be idle but 'because they cannot get an opportunity to earn a decent living, we must conclude that there is unemployment for some particular reason. One has only to read the evidence that has been adduced in the committee on mass buying and spreads to see where labourers have been working from fifty, sixty, to seventy-five hours a week and receiving only from $1.60 to $6.50 a week. I claim that when any individual works such long hours for such a pittance, it is evidence that labour is doing its utmost to earn a living and so keep away from charity. We have to confess therefore that labour is performing its function efficiently.
This brings us to the next organism that functions in the body politic, namely, finance. Now, what is the function of finance? In my opinion its proper function is to facilitate the exchange of goods. It is the link between production and consumption, and here we find every one of the organisms that go to make u,p the body politic anxious to perform its particular function and, indeed, performing it on the physical side 100 per cent, and yet because of the financial system the people are not able to make use of the goods which we are in a position to produce. It is the burden of debt which is strangling these various organisms and like a cancer will finally destroy them.
Let me give an illustration. A customer wants a box of matches; the storekeeper has matches on the shelf: what is the thing that keeps them apart? If the man has money in his pocket and walks in and lays the money on the counter he can walk out with the matches, but if he has no money no transaction takes place. Money is the link which connects the two. The thing we have to realize is that we have passed from the age of our ancestors, which was an age of real scarcity. The present money system was developed under that condition and apparently it will not function in an age of plenty. Our only scarcity to-day is artificial. I believe I am right in saying that there is practically no demand for goods that cannot be met if we are able to place the money on the table: yet there is a vast unfilled demand. On one side we find producers straining to produce, while on the other side there is un-

employment, with consumers not allowed to consume. Something stands between, and that thing is finance.
I might give another illustration. Here is a beautiful section of country divided by a very deep ravine. People wish to trade with one another and they decide to build a bridge. That bridge is built, not simply as a thing of beauty to look at but for service. By and by trade develops and the bridge is no longer large enough to accommodate the traffic between the two sections of the country and so the people decide that they will have either to enlarge the bridge or to build a new one to take care of the increased traffic. They do not say, "The bridge not being large enough, we will restrict the traffic to suit the bridge." But apparently that is what we are doing today in the matter of finance. We are capable of producing in vast quantities, but because we. cannot get sufficient tickets or tokens for the exchange of goods we are starting on a policy of curtailment, trying to limit the wants of people to the amount of money the banks see fit to let them have.
Professor Murdock of Perth university, in the New Era of Sydney, Australia, has written an article which admirably describes the situation:
The world is not suffering from a lack of goods to-day, but from a lack of tickets for the exchange of goods. To give you a picture of what is happening in this world of ours, I must ask you to imagine a village-not a poor village-but a very wealthy one-threatened with floods. All the villagers come in haste to the railway station, where as it happens there is a train large enough to accommodate all of them, with steam up ready to go. They rush on board, but the guard comes along and asks them to show their tickets. Rather impatient, because the waters are rising rapidly, they get out and rush to the ticket office, only to be'told that unfortunately there are no tickets to be had; the last were sold yesterday, and no new supplies have come along. They all rush back to the train, where they find the engine-driver engaged in putting out his fires. "I'm very sorrj%" says the station-master, "but I'm afraid you'll have to drown. If it's any consolation to you to know it, I shall have to drown with you. There's no help for it. Obviously the train can't carry passengers who haven't got tickets. That has never yet been allowed." So they all drown for lack of tickets.
What would you think of a railway company which, instead of printing tickets sufficient for the number of passengers it might be required to carry, limited the number of passengers and the number of trains to make them fit the number of tickets it had' printed? That is what happens in the world to-day.
Instead of creating the right amount of money to carry on all the business possible in the world, rve limit the business to make it fit the amount of money there is. We close factories, we limit production, we throw men

out of work, we starve people, simply and solely for lack of money; and yet money is a thing we can create in precisely whatever quantities we choose.


Mr. STEWART (Edmonton):: May I ask the hon. gentleman who wrote that article?


William Thomas Lucas: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the select standing committee on banking and commerce.

[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Smith (Cumberland) in the chair.
Miscellaneous services relating to navigation and shipping, $35,000.
Mr. DUFF:: What is the reason for this
decrease ?


Hon. ALFRED DURANLEAU (Minister of Marine):: There is a saving in the spending of this item.


William Duff: What is the $35,000 spent
for?


Alfred Duranleau: The proposed appropriation includes necessary provision for the examination of masters and mates, $14,300; navigation schools, $5,700; temporary relief for distressed seamen, $2,500; investigation into wrecks, $5,000; registration of shipping, $2,000; removal of obstructions in navigable waters, $1,500 and inspection of livestock shipments, $4,000. In the year 1932-33 the expenditure was $28,605. I must add that the expenditure up to the present date in this fiscal year is $25,000. For that reason we believe $35,000 will be a sufficient vote.


William Duff: Where are navigation schools established in Canada?


Alfred Duranleau: There is a school at
Halifax, and also schools at Yarmouth, Saint John, NjB., Quebec and Prince Rupert. There is also a grant to the navigation school at Queens university.


William Duff: Does the minister think there are sufficient schools of navigation to encourage young men to take to the sea?


Alfred Duranleau: These schools are not instituted for the purpose of inviting young men to go into navigation, or to take training in navigation. The purpose of the schools is to offer them an opportunity to study navigation so that they may obtain their certificates as mates, seamen and masters.


William Duff: I understand that, but it
seems to me that if there were sufficient
Supply-M arine

schools in the country more young men would be likely to apply for masters' and mates' certificates. The difficulty now is that these schools are so placed that it is a hardship for many of the young men in Nova Scotia to attend; they have difficulty in getting to Halifax or to Yarmouth. My idea is that in a number of Nova Scotian ports, where there is shipping, other schools could be established at small cost.


Alfred Duranleau: If we may judge by the attendance of young men at these schools I do not think it could be said that more schools are needed. For instance, the Halifax school is open during twelve months of the year, but the average monthly attendance is only seven. That school serves the whole province.


William Duff: I am afraid the argument
used by the minister is not a good one. I have always been taught that most of the brilliant young Canadians come from the farm or the village. Take Scotchmen, if you wish- I know of thousands of young men born in the highlands of Scotland away from the cities and towns who, like Dick Whittingdon, travelled to London and took charge of the government of Great Britain. I know, further, of a number of cases in this great Dominion of Canada where men born on farms or in little fishing villages on the Atlantic or Pacific coasts, have gone far in the life of this country. I do not expect that many people in the city of Halifax will attend the navigation school; no one would expect they would. That is the reason I have hinted to the minister that it would be much better to close the navigation school at Halifax and to open small schools in other parts of the province within easy reach of the seamen. It is a hardship for the people from Cape North or Neil's Harbour, or Canso, to go to Halifax to attend school for three or four months so as to obtain the necessary knowledge to become a mate. The same statements would apply to the western part of the province. For instance, let us consider the county in which I live. My opinion is that there should be a school for seamen and sailors in the county of Lunenburg, because it is in that county sailors are made. They do not make them in Antigonish, but they make them in part of Guysborough. There should be a school at Canso; there might be another one at Sherbrooke. As I say, the fact that only seven students attend the navigation school at Halifax is not an argument against the establishment of further schools. I must say that the teacher at the Halifax school is a most estimable gentleman;

he knows his business, and it is not his fault that there are only seven pupils.
The point I am trying to impress upon the minister is this, however, that the department should endeavour to establish small schools in the rural sections of the province, and not particularly in the city of Halifax. The trouble in Nova Scotia is -that Halifax is getting too much. In my opinion it would be a good thing to put a fence around Halifax, and do something for the rest of the province.


Mr. MARCIL:: The minister has said there is one school in the city of Quebec. What opportunity does that offer the people of Bonaventure and Gaspe who are living four hundred or five hundred miles away from Quebec? What advantage is the Quebec school to those poor fishermen who wish to enter schools of navigation?


Alfred Duranleau: I understand that
young men who wish to qualify as seamen obtain their early experience on steamships, or some other type of boat, and when they have acquired a certain degree of experience they attend schools and study for the purpose of obtaining -the certificate of a master or mate. I understand that those young men who are anxious to gain their livelihood in that line of work gladly go from Gaspe to Quebec for the purpose of studying for a few months. At that point they take their examinations.


Charles Marcil: Does the minister imagine that under the present state of affairs, with fish selling at about two cents per pound, young men from Gaspe and Bonaventure could afford to attend the school at Quebec? Would it not be better to open a school in the Gaspe peninsula which is four hundred or five hundred miles from Quebec, so that those young men could have an opportunity to qualify?


Alfred Duranleau: May I remind the
hon. member that the men in charge of fishing vessels do not require masters' certificates.


Charles Marcil: But outside of men on fishing vessels, may I point out that there are fishermen in Gaspe and Bonaventure who are five hundred miles away from Quebec. How can those poor people undertake to go to Quebec to follow a course of education? Why not establish a school of this kind somewhere on the Gaspe coast or on the north shore of the St. Lawrence between Chicoutimi and Saguenay where the fishermen live and where the sailors are born?


Alfred Duranleau: We would gladly do it to please my hon. friend and his electors, but

Supply-Marine
it is not very convenient to establish schools in every part of all the provinces. We have a school now in nearly every province, one at Halifax and another at Yarmouth for Nova Scotia, one at Saint John for New Brunswick, one in the city of Quebec, one at Kingston and another at Collingwood for Ontario, and another at Prince Rupert for British Columbia. So far as I am aware there have been no complaints from the public that there is an insufficient number of navigation schools. We are disposed to do anything that is reasonable to help the navigators, but in these times when we have had to reduce expenditures generally we did not think of increasing the number of schools. But in the future, if things continue to improve, as I think they are improving, if we see there is a necessity for more schools, this government will be disposed to do anything reasonable.
Mr. MARCH.: Can the minister say how many students attended the school at Quebec last year?


Alfred Duranleau: Last year the school at Quebec was open for three months and had an average monthly attendance of sixteen.


Charles Marcil: You have a school in
Yarmouth, and it is not as far for Nova Scotians to go to Halifax as the distance from Gaspe to Quebec. Why should not the same argument apply for Quebec province as for Nova Scotia? If you have a second school in Nova Scotia, why not a second school in the province of Quebec?


Alfred Duranleau: I should hope the results would be better from a second school established in the province of Quebec than from the second school in Nova Scotia because at the school at Yarmouth, which has been open twelve months on half time, the average monthly attendance was only two, which is not very encouraging.


Charles A. Stewart: Move that school to Gaspe.


Charles Marcil: The minister says he is willing to give all the facilities that are required as conditions improve. Why should not the government itself start to improve conditions by giving to the young people on the Gaspe coast the facilities for learning a calling? They are all sailors and fishermen, and they have certainly not the means to go such a long distance as to the school at Quebec. I know the minister cannot finally decide the question to-day but I would ask him to consider fully whether this is not an opportune time for him to establish a school
to enable these young people to learn a calling. They live on the Atlantic coast, and naturally are all fishermen. They would ask for nothing better than the opportunity to qualify for a calling if they could only be given the chance by the government. I think the minister should consider the question of having a school either in Bonaventure or Gaspe for these young people who live such a long distance away from Quebec. The question has often been mooted. These young people of Bonaventure have no other trade or occupation to go into whereas there are many trades and occupations open to the people of Quebec city. Down on the Gaspe coast the opportunities are limited to farming, lumbering and fishing, and the minister knows that so far as fishing is concerned the Gaspe coast is far behind what it should be. Representations have been made to him time and time again by men of both political parties, and by such an eminent personage as His Excellency the Bishop of Gaspe, who is now taking charge of this question in the interests of his people. He has called the minister's attention repeatedly, I am sure, to the handicaps under which this population labours and to the condition of the fishing industry itself. I think application has been made for the establishment of a biological station down there. I do not like to bring that question up on the Marine estimates, but perhaps I might be allowed to make a reference to it. I should like to know from the minister if anything has been done in regard to the requests made by Bishop Ross and the people generally on the Gaspe coast. The question was discussed no later than yesterday or the day before in the Quebec legislature, and it was contended there that if an agreement could be arrived at between the two governments it would be for the benefit of the population. I have no doubt that the minister is impressed with the importance of the matter and is willing to do what is possible. He will admit that conditions at the present time are not at all satisfactory and that something should be done if we want to help these people to carry on their calling. I am not asking for the establishment of schools above Quebec in that part of the province where there are no fishermen or sailors, but down in that part of the province where the sea is the natural calling of the population. I hope that the minister, who acts in the dual capacity of Minister of Marine and Acting Minister of Fisheries, will come forward and say that the government of which he is
Supply-M arine

a member will give these people some encouragement and say that he is in favour of a progressive policy. If there is a misunderstanding, as it were, between the government at Quebec and the government at Ottawa because the fisheries of the province are under the control of the Quebec government, it is unfortunate that the population has to suffer on that account. It is for that reason that I bring this matter up, in the hope that the minister will be able to give us some encouragement, and tell us that he has considered this question and intends doing something. If he will give us some assurance on that point I am sure that his announce-' ment will be received with great pleasure by the population generally of that peninsula.


Alfred Duranleau: I should like to remind my hon. friend from Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) that we are not at the present time discussing the estimates of the Fisheries department. We are discussing the estimates of the Marine department. However, I have no objection to saying a few words on the question raised by my hon. friend. As he well knows, the fisheries were transferred to the provincial authorities in 1923, I think it was, at the request of the authorities in Quebec. Since then the fisheries have been under their absolute control, but nevertheless we were asked last year by the authorities at Quebec to cooperate and help them in the administration of the fisheries of that province. I had conferences with the Minister of Fisheries of Quebec, one at Quebec and another at Ottawa, and I expressed my strong desire as Acting Minister of Fisheries to help the Quebec authorities in the way suggested by my hon. friend. It was suggested that a French school might be established in Gaspe for the fishermen and to train inspectors of fisheries-a French school, which would be of service to the French fishermen of the province and of New Brunswick and the Magdalen islands. The Quebec government was supposed to supply the building, and two or three French teachers would be supplied by my department. The matter will be discussed further with the provincial authorities. I understand that the Quebec government has sent to Europe two or three young men who had already some knowledge in fishery matters in order that they may perfect their studies abroad. These young men may become the teachers of that school.
I hope to be in a position before long to do something in cooperation with the Fisheries department at Quebec.


Charles Marcil: I wish to thank the minister for his announcement. I know he
iMr. Marcil.]
realizes the importance of this matter. It is all right to have English-speaking schools in the English-speaking districts, but in a population which is largely French it is only fair that the people should be taught in the language in which they are the most competent. I understand the university of Laval has offered the services of young men or even professors who would be qualified to take up this matter and start it along. It is unfortunate that the population should suffer through a lack of cooperation between the two governments. I do not blame either this or the provincial government and I am glad to know that the minister realizes the importance of doing something for these people.
The Magdalen islands, the Gaspe coast, the noirth and south shores of the St. Lawrence, Gloucester, Shippigan and other places along there are inhabited almost solely by fishermen and sailors. If a start could be made at Gaspe, the centre of the whole district, I am sure considerable improvement would be made. The minister would be entitled to a great deal of credit if he continued his cooperation with the Quebec government. I am glad to know that Mr. LaFerte, the Minister of Fisheries of Quebec, has met the minister in this respect. The Bishop of Gaspe has offered his most sincere cooperation, as has the university of Laval. A sincere desire is expressed throughout the whole district that this great part of our national domain in which is carried on one of the great industries of Canada should receive the attention it deserves. These people are poor, they are hard working, they have to face hard winters and are handicapped in many respects. During the last three or four years there has been a marked decline in the lumbering industry and many shanties and mills have been closed throwing thousands of men out of employment. The fishermen are forced to work hard to eke out a living of the barest kind and they are entitled to all the assistance the minister can give.
I hope the minister will continue his efforts to bring about a better understanding. The province of Quebec controls these fisheries but the dominion government expends a lot of money in the improvement of fishing conditions and the distribution of knowledge in connection therewith. This fact was pointed out only a few weeks ago in the legislative council of Quebec by the Honourable Mr. Kelly, who resides at New Carlisle and who is an authority on fishing matters. He pointed out many ways in which agreement could be brought about between the two governments with the cooperation of Bishop

Supply-Marine
Ross. The bishop exercises great influence in the district and he has the interests of the people at heart. Fishing will always remain one of the main occupations of these people and I think some effort should be made to bring this matter to a conclusion as soon as possible.


Alfred Duranleau: I have followed the discussions and the debates which have taken place in the legislative council and the house at Quebec and during my trip last summer down the St. Lawrence I visited the fishermen of Quebec and New Brunswick. I had the pleasure also of meeting Monseigneur Ross at Gaspe and 1 was impressed by the great interest which this reverend gentleman is taking in fisheries. I was impressed by his competency to deal with these matters and I told him that this government would cooperate with the provincial government on the lines I have already stated. We are still of the same disposition.


Charles Marcil: I should like to know if the minister has instructed his deputy to go to Quebec, I understand that the premier of Quebec has made the announcement that negotiations were under way and that Mr. Found had been instructed to come down there to learn the views of the Quebec government and see how cooperation could be brought about. Could the minister give me any information in this regard?


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Smith, Cumberland) :: I would draw the attention of the committee to the fact that we are discussing the estimates of the Department of Marine and not the Department of Fisheries.


Mr. GIROUARD (Translation):: Could the hon. minister inform me whether the instruction in those schools is gratuitous?


Alfred Duranleau: The instruction is gratuitous.


Wilfrid Girouard: What was the maintenance cost of these schools at Halifax and Yarmouth, last year?


Alfred Duranleau: I can
inform the hon. member what were the salaries paid to professors. At the Yarmouth school, the professor works only half time and receives $810.


Vincent Dupuis: What is his
name?


Alfred Duranleau: A. W.
Hillton. At Quebec the school has only been opened since four months and we have paid out $440 in salary.


Sir EUGENE FISET (Translation):: For
sixteen students?


Alfred Duranleau: An
average of sixteen students per month.


Vincent Dupuis: How many
students are there at Yarmouth?


Alfred Duranleau: I stated a moment ago that there were on an average two students per month.


Wilfrid Girouard: At Halifax?


Alfred Duranleau: The
school, at Halifax, is open twelve months per year and we have paid $2,100 to the professor.


Wilfrid Girouard: Do the buildings in which are located these schools belong to the government or are they rented?


Alfred Duranleau: I think that the buildings in which the courses are given are rented. There may be one or two exceptions where the schools might be located in buildings belonging to the Public Works department; however, I think that in most cases they are rented.


Wilfrid Girouard: Could the hon. Minister inform us what is the rent of the school at Yarmouth, if he has this information?


Alfred Duranleau: It is impossible to give any information in this connection to my hon. friend, because the renting of such buildings comes under the Department of Public Works.


Vincent Dupuis: No report is sent to the Department of Marine by the Public Works department?


Alfred Duranleau: Not in connection with the payment of rents.


William Duff: The minister made the statement that last year only two pupils attended the school at Yarmouth. There is a reason for this. In the old days when we had freer trade relations not only with the United States but with the rest of the world, when there were not so many tariff restrictions, Yarmouth was known as the great port of Nova Scotia. Many vessels were sailed from this port and in fact, many were built there and sold throughout the world. A great mercantile marine was built up, but this situation has changed to such an extent that now there are only two pupils in the school. However, this is no reason why some encouragement should not be given to other parts of the province.


Alfred Duranleau: I never said there
were only two pupils last year, I said that the average monthly attendance was two.


William Duff: How many pupils were there altogether?
Supply-M mine


Alfred Duranleau: I cannot say; I have only the monthly average attendance.


William Duff: I am not criticizing the minister at all; I am not asking him to close the school at Yarmouth. What I want is to have that school and others encouraged, and I think the department should make an effort to induce more pupils to attend the schools. But there are other parts of Nova Scotia where in my opinion it is necessary to have schools in the interests of this country. As my hon. friend from Bonaventure said, fishing is so to speak the birthplace of the merchant marine. It is the 'boys who go in fishing boats that afterwards become sailors and later on in life even captains of ocean liners going out of New York and other American ports. These boys are virtually raised in fishing boats from the time their eyes open, almost, and I am impressing on the minister the importance of establishing these schools. When he says that they are being cut down owing to economy, I say to him that that is the worst kind of false economy.


Alfred Duranleau: I did not say that.


William Duff: I understood the minister to
say that it was done in the interests of economy.


Alfred Duranleau: I am misquoted.


William Duff: Then I apologize and take it back. But I want to impress upon the minister the seriousness of this matter. There exists in Nova Scotia a condition which this or any other government should remedy, and this government is no more to blame than previous governments so far as the fisheries and the merchant marine are concerned. I am not blaming this government. I came to this parliament seventeen years ago, hoping to do something for the merchant marine and the fisheries of the maritime provinces, and ever since I have tried to do my duty. I repeat, there is a serious situation in that province and an effort should be made to remedy it. All it costs for one of these schools is about five hundred dollars, if my information is correct, and I submit to the minister that a school should be established at North Sydney, in the constituency of the hon. member for Cape Breton North-Victoria, and also one in the county of Pictou, which would serve not only the north shore of Nova Scotia but Prince Edward Island as well. There should be one at Canso and one at Lunenburg. It would cost only a couple of thousand dollars for the whole thing and it
'Mr. Duff.]
would encourage young men to go to sea, because our trouble in Nova Scotia is that, owing to lack of facilities and because of certain marine laws 'based on British board of trade regulations, it is almost impossible for the ordinary sailor to go to school to learn to be a navigator or to qualify to be a mate or captain. These people have not the money. I say to the minister and his officials that in the interests of this country, especially as regards the Atlantic coast-and I presume the same applies to the Pacific-a few thousand dollars should be spent to encourage men to go to school and take an interest in the merchant marine. And I am an outsider when I say this, that if you encourage Canadians to become masters and mates you will not have so many Englishmen on ships in the Canadian merchant marine.
Mr. MA'ODOUGALiL: How much money was spent by the Liberal government during the nine years the Liberal party was in power, supported by the hon. gentleman? How much was appropriated to teach the young fishermen of Nova Scotia-the hon. gentleman's province and mine?


William Duff: Perhaps my voice was not loud enough, but if the hon. gentleman had listened he would have heard me say that I did not blame either the minister or this government; I said that both this government and previous governments were in exactly the same position, neither having done their full duty.
Mr. MAiCDOUGALL: With which I perfectly agree.
Mr. NElILL: Doesn't the minister think there should be a school in Vancouver? I understood him to say that the school was at Prince Rupert, but I would point out -that Vancouver is a bigger shipping centre.


Alfred Duranleau: I understand that there are private schools in Vancouver, as there are in Montreal and Toronto.


Thomas Reid: In this connection, may I point out something -that affects mates and engineers on ships. Both in the port of Vancouver and at New Westminster there are many ocean-going ships that require mates, and when Canadians apply they are asked for their certificate from the British board of trade. A British board of trade certificate must be shown before any man can be engaged on these ships, and it works a hardship on Canadian seamen, of the rating of mates and engineers, who cannot produce these board of trade certificates from Great Britain. Seeing

Supply-Marine
that there are schools throughout the country, I think that these two Pacific ports should be taken into consideration when the establishment of further institutions is being considered. There is one at Prince Rupert and I raise no objection to that, but in Vancouver and New Westminster schools should be established, because as I say we are faced to-day with that situation, where mates and engineers are refused positions on board these ships owing to the fact that they cannot produce the certificate of competency demanded. The information has come to me from the men's association that men have been brought out from the old country to fill positions on ships while in Vancouver and New Westminster there are men capable of filling them. This statement has been made in good faith, instances having been cited. T would ask the minister to consider the inauguration of such schools so that men around New Westminster and Vancouver may be able to qualify and so obtain the necessary certificates of competency.
Last year there passed through this house a measure known as Bill Cl, to amend the Canada Shipping Act. That bill was passed and sent to the Senate. Section 681 reads:
The governor in council may from time to time appoint, at such places in Canada as he deems advisable, one or more persons to inspect ships' tackle and to supervise, to such extent as may be necessary for the protection of those employed therein the work of loading and unloading of ships.
Why has not the government taken action to appoint an officer in the port of New Westminster in connection with this provision? Over four hundred large ocean going vessels entered that port last year from all parts of the world, Norway, Sweden, Great Britain, China, Japan and practically every other country, but there is no government official there to inspect ships' tackle. I wish the minister would inform me why an officer has not been appointed before this, and whether such appointment in: the near future 'is under consideration.


Alfred Duranleau: As regards the first question., this is the first time I have heard that navigators or mates have difficulty in obtaining certificates to go to sea. I have always understood, and my deputy minister informs me that there is ample opportunity in Vancouver for seamen to study at private schools, and so to obtain the necessary certificates. However. I shall be pleased to take the matter into consideration and get more information, and if something can be done to improve the situation it will be done.
As to the other question, the reason inspectors of ship tackle have not yet been appointed is that my department have drawn up certain regulations for the prevention of accidents in loading or unloading ships and these regulations have been forwarded to all the shipping interests, associations of stevedores and so forth on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts for their study and report. As soon as this is completed, we intend to appoint inspectors where they are required.


Thomas Reid: I am glad to hear that they
are to be appointed, but I still think there has been considerable delay. Last year when the bill was under discussion in the house, those of us who spoke about the inspection of ship tackle, and supported the bill, understood that an officer would be appointed at least as soon as parliament prorogued. It is all very well to send out regulations, but unless there is some official who has proper authority from the government, I do not think any regulation would be carried out at least officially. I would urge the minister to have an officer appointed very soon because ship tackle inspection is absolutely necessary. Sailing out of the port of New Westminster last year were four hundred large vessels, all with considerable tackle, some of it very poor; but there was no one in authority to tell the captain or the officers that they could not use that tackle. I need hardly draw the attention of the minister to the fact that such tackle may endanger the lives of the men who are working on those ships.
May I refer to just one other matter and this time it is not to offer criticism? Last year I appealed to the minister to have some money spent on navigation lights in the Fraser river and the minister was kind enough to say that the matter would be investigated. I am taking this opportunity to let him know I appreciate on behalf of the port of New Westminster the work done on the Fraser river last year by his department and through his good offices. That work, I understand, has been very nearly completed and, I am glad to say, at a lower cost than the first estimate given by one of his officials. In fact, I think commendation should be given to the marine engineer in Victoria who said that the navigation lights would cost $60,000, whereas the work has been completed at a cost of around $12,000 or S15.000. This is the first engineers' report I know of that has been well under the estimate. My reason, however, for speaking is to say that I appreciate the work done there, but in regard to the matter of ship tackle I would very earnestly urge the minister to have this inspector appointed right away.
Supply-M arine


Alfred Duranleau: I thank the hon.
member for his words of commendation.


Mr. NEILL:: The real trouble in regard
to the non-appointment of those officers is due, is it not, to the fact that the act passed last year was never brought into effect? It was to be brought into effect on proclamation and if my memory is not incorrect, it has never been proclaimed. I can support the hon. member for New Westminster in regard to the need for this inspection because Port Alberni is also shipping a large quantity of lumber and an inspector is badly needed there.


Alfred Duranleau: An inspector would
not have much to do if he had no regulations to enforce.


Alan Webster Neill: The regulations are in the
act, but the government has not put the act into effect.


Alfred Duranleau: The regulations have to be adopted by the department and approved by order in council. As a matter of fact they have been drafted and are being circulated throughout the country.


Alan Webster Neill: Has the act been proclaimed?


Alfred Duranleau: I do not think so.
We have been waiting until the regulations were ready to be put into force; then we shall have the act proclaimed at the same time and we shall appoint inspectors. We had in view having a ship tackle inspector in Vancouver, but we thought it was not the proper time to appoint a man because no regulations had been adopted. It is very important that those who are interested in these matters should have the opportunity of being consulted on the regulations to be adopted. I hope within a few months we shall have complete reports from all sides and then we shall proceed, I trust, during the coming summer.


Mr. CANTLEY:: This item deserves more
consideration than has been given to it by any minister in recent years. One of the first occasions upon which I rose in the house was to support the hon. member for Richelieu (Mr. Cardin), the former Minister of Marine, when the same question was up. Let us consider for a moment the object of these schools. A young man has been going to sea for a couple of years; he has ambition and he goes to the marine school to get some tuition in navigation and passes for second mate. He then goes back to sea as a second mate and after he has spent two years at sea, he returns with a certificate of servitude of two years. He goes again to school and applies for a

ticket as fii'st mate. He passes the examination; he gets his ticket and again goes to sea. After two years further service he returns to one of these navigation schools where he studies for a master's certificate and if he is successful, he gets it. These young men cannot travel long distances; they cannot go to Halifax and spend five dollars a day for board and tuition, so these schools should be planted in at least three or four places in the maritime provinces. Forty years ago Yarmouth had more sail tonnage than any other port in Canada, but that has evaporated. Why? simply because steam drove sail off the ocean. In the seventies and eighties Nova Scotia owned more sailing vessels per head of population than any other country on the face of the earth, but that has gone due entirely, as already said, to steam superseding sail. While I do not often do so, on this occasion I support the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough because I think we should have marine schools at Halifax, Lunenburg, Canso, Sydney and Pictou. The total cost need not run into large figures, but these schools should be provided, where our young men would have the opportunity of attending them, and that without any undue expense. My hon. friend the "Admiral" has alluded to the fact that at present many of the commanders of the best liners on the Atlantic are Nova Scotians. Half the United States merchant fleet is officered by Nova Scotians, who in order to be able to serve on those ships have had to sacrifice their Canadian nationality. Our boats that are running to-day under government control to the West Indies are all manned and officered by Nova Scotians, all of whom got their first lessons in seamanship under sail. The total figure given by the minister for these schools does not amount to a bagatelle; let him double if and give these young men an opportunity to become efficient deep sea commanders.


Alfred Duranleau: I thank the hon. member for Pictou for the views he has just expressed. The department is willing to hear and to put into force any reasonable suggestion made in the house and the views of a man of the experience of the hon. member for Pictou are always carefully considered. I also thank the other hon. gentlemen for their expressions of views this afternoon and I can assure them the department will be pleased to study everything that has been said to-day.


Thomas Reid: Can the minister throw a little light on the subject of mates' certificates? I think the trouble arises owing to the fact that ships coming to the ports of New West-

Supply-M arine
minster or Vancouver demand a Lloyd's certificate; they will not recognize a Canadian certificate. They ask for a board of trade certificate from London. I think the reason they are afraid to engage seamen with Canadian papers is in case they might have to pay their fare back or bring them back here from the old country. I appeal to the minister to look into that. There should be some reciprocal arrangements between this country and Lloyd's, if we recognize a Lloyd's or London board of trade certificate, instructions should be issued to vessels coming from the old country to Canada to recognize Canadian papers of competency.
Before sitting down may I ask the minister if he has in mind the appointment of a ship tackle inspection officer for the port of New Westminster as well as for the port of Vancouver?
Mr. DURANlLEAU: As to the latter part of the query, I am not prepared to say if an inspector will also be appointed at New Westminster, the matter will be considered. As to the other point, I am afraid it rests with the owners of the ships to accept or refuse any employee, but I can assure my hon. friend that if anything can be done by corresponding with the British authorities on the point suggested we shall be pleased to do it.


Mr. MacINNIS:: Referring again to the appointment of inspectors, some of us supported and voted for the Canada shipping bill last year wholly on the score that we thought these inspectors would be appointed as soon as the act was passed. I have been after the minister ever since I came down here to have these inspectors appointed. My understanding is that at the end of 1932 there was an agreement between the department and the stevedoring companies, in Vancouver at least, as to safety regulations. I thought the safety inspector would have been appointed even before the amendment of last year. What is holding up the appointment? 'Is it that the minister has not heard from the shipping companies, or that they are not in agreement with him on the regulations? If that is the case, then the shipping companies should be hurried because the situation is becoming serious.


Alfred Duranleau: The reason is that we are waiting for reports from the shipping interests on the draft regulations. In fact we have received many reports. Recently we have met the shipping interests from Montreal who came to discuss these regulations and suggested some amendments, and we are
waiting for the others. I am told that it will not be long now. The moment these regulations are adopted and approved by order in council we shall put the act in force and appoint the inspectors.


Angus MacInnis: I wish to thank my hon. friend from New Westminster for bringing this matter to the attention of the minister, and I would ask that the minister write to these people and tell them that delay cannot be permitted much longer.


Mr. QUINN:: I would like to add a word in support of the observations of the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Cantley) and to protest against the reduction in this item. It is unnecessary for me to add anything to what the hon. member for Pictou has said with regard to the services of captains, officers, mates and graduates of the marine school in Nova Scotia and the maritime ports and their position in the mercantile marine. I quite agree with the hon. member for Pictou that instead of curtailing this amount, increased facilities should be given to the people of the maritimes who are so well qualified to take positions in the navy and the mercantile marine. In this connection I might also draw to the attention of the committee the fact that in Halifax the positions of superintendent of pilots and supervising examiner of masters and mates have been temporarily joined; that is the supervising examiner of masters and mates at Halifax is now temporarily filling the position of superintendent of pilots. That should not be; these positions are of such importance that one man cannot fill them both. I would urge that a permanent appointment be made to the position of superintendent of pilots and also that an appointment be made of supervising examiner of masters and mates. This matter is of great importance to the people of the maritimes. I would request that the minister reconsider the curtailment of this item in his estimates.


Alfred Duranleau: I will give the suggestions of my hon. friend serious consideration.


Mr. HEENAN:: I was very glad to hear
the hon. member for Pictou tell of the ships officered by Nova Scotians, particularly in the mercantilte marine. I would like to point out to the minister that there is another class of seafarers that ought to be given consideration, especially on boats owned by the Canadian government. I have a complaint pointing out that the staff of cooks and waiters on the West Indies service numbers
Private Bill

thirty-six, and they are all West Indians except three. Many of the men who have been applying for those position'-coloured men-are veterans of the late war, and they have not been able to get places. It is true they were given a trial last summer, but the service upon which they were tried seems to have been disbanded, and these men are now unemployed in Canada, while thirty-three West Indians are on the ships belonging to the Canadian government.
At six o'clodk the Speaker resumed the chair and the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.



PRIVATE BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house in committee on Bill No. 10, respecting a certain patent owned by the Firth-Brearley	Stainless	Steel	Limited-Mr. Kennedy	(Winnipeg South Centre)-Mr. Gobeil in the chair.
Charles A. Stewart: I should
like to ask the bon. member sponsoring the bill to give the reason for the extension by legislative action.


Mr. KENNEDY (Winnipeg):: Mr. Chairman, this is a bill to revive and extend the patents in respect of a certain invention commonly known as stainless steel. The reasons for which the legislation is asked are briefly as follows: The information I have before me sets out that the inventor, Harry Brearley, a British subject, residing in England, obtained a Canadian patent in 1915. In the normal course of events the patent expired at the end of August last. Prior to the date of expiration a petition was filed asking that it be extended for a period of six years, the reasons being as follows: This patent covers an alloy. Without going into the chemical properties of that alloy I may say that its outstanding property is the production of steel that is stainless in character, and is used largely in the manufacture of cutlery. The war being in progress the services of Mr. Brearley, the British inventor who was one of the leading engineers in the service of Thomas Firth and Sons, steel makers, were commandeered by the British government. The firms which developed the patent required to exert all their energies towards the construction of munitions until after the close of the war. So 
that for the period of the war and for some time following the inventor was unable to develop his invention.
The invention is set out briefly as follows: The production of the alloy, otherwise than for purposes of munitions, was from the first rendered practically impossible owing to the great scarcity of chromium, almost the whole of which was required for munitions, and the preoccupation of steel makers with war work and the necessity of utilizing the whole of the steel works output for government requirements. The British government for the time being prohibited entirely the manufacture of the alloy for purposes of manufacturing cutlery. At the time this prohibition was imposed the use of the alloy had not been developed for purposes other than cutlery and munitions, and therefore the prohibition of its use for the manufacture of cutlery practically amounted to a complete cessation of its manufacture for non-military purposes. So that so far as the inventor was concerned the years of the war were lost, and it was not until a couple of years afterwards that he could take steps to develop it. The patent is held by the parties named in the bill, namely The Firth-Brearley Stainless Steel Syndicate, Limited, which company is composed of the Firth of Thomas Firth and Sons and the original inventor, Brearley.
The principle of passing legislation to extend the ordinary life of a patent has been accepted on more than one occasion in this house. I took occasion to look up the precedents, and I have before me at least seven instances where similar action has been taken. Therefore I suggest that once the principle has been accepted we must face the question of merits. With this in mind I have indicated the merits of the present bill. If the house would be interested in having a list of precedents I shall state them briefly.
In 1930 the principle was acted upon in the case of an application by Stauntons Limited of the city of Toronto. In that instance the patent was extended from 1933 to 1938, a period of five years. In the case of the Canadian Cinch Anchoring Systems Limited of the city of Montreal, the patent was extended from 1930 to 1936, a period of six years. In the case of A. P. Frigon, of the city of Montreal, the patent was extended from 1922 to 1936, a period of fourteen years. In the case of Gold Medal Furniture Manufacturing Company of Toronto, the patent was extended from 1906 for a period of six years. In the case of the Facer Solid Steel Car Wheel Company Limited, of Perth, the

Supply-M arine
principle was acted upon and the extension obtained for a period of nine years. This bill asks for an extension of six years, being the time which it is estimated was lost.
Mr jSTEWART (Edmonton):	May I say
to the hon. member there is no doubt about precedents. The ones he has quoted, however, are Canadian. There are two questions I should like to ask him: First, has the patent been extended in England, where the patentee resides? The hon. member has not given us any special reason for the extension in Canada. Such extension would certainly keep Canadian manufacturers from using the product.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: In reply to
my hon. friend I would say that already, under patent, articles have been manufactured in Canada, by licence from the original patentees. That is the system by which it is being developed. I have before me the figures showing the extent of development in Canada, if the hon. member would like to hear them.


Charles A. Stewart: I am not
interested in that, except as to this point: The company using the patent will have to pay a tribute to the patentee, and rightly so, during the life of the patent. He has enjoyed that privilege in Canada, and the only reason the hon. member gives for asking for the extension of the patent is the prohibition order of the British government made during the war, which would affect only Great Britain.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: It is not a
matter of affecting Great Britain alone. The condition which existed in Great Britain existed to the same extent in Canada. The steel works were used almost exclusively not only in Great Britain but throughout the British Empire for the manufacture of war munitions, and for that reason the articles which would be made under this patent could not be made. The time asked for is really equal only to the loss of time suffered.


Charles A. Stewart: Are there
any requests from the companies who under the patent purchased the right to manufacture?	[DOT]


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: I did not
hear my hon. friend.


Charles A. Stewart: Can my
hon. friend give any assurance that the companies who purchased the right to manufacture under this patent, expecting naturally at
the expiry of the life of the patent to be free from paying any further compensation to the patentee, have made any requests?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Due notice was given in the ordinary course. The matter came up in the usual course in the private bills committee and no objection whatever was entered by any person or party.


Wilfrid Girouard: Can the hon. member say in what year the patent was first obtained?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: In 1915.
Bill reported, read the third time and
passed.

The house again in committee of supply, Mr. MacNiool in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF MARINE

[Stage Direction]
Miscellaneous services relating to navigation and shipping, $35,000.
Eugène Fiset: Before the recess I listened with a great deal of pleasure to the plea made by hon. members from Nova Scotia for the establishment of three other schools of instruction in that province. I noted that the minister in his explanation stated that there were already two schools in that province, one at Yarmouth and the other at Halifax. I also noted that the number of students who attended these schools during the last year was two at Yarmouth and six ait Halifax, while the school at Quebec had an average of sixteen students during the season. If we are to judge by numbers, those figures might go to prove that the sailors of the province of Quebec take a stranger interest in the school of instruction than do the sailors in the maritime provinces.
In view of the admirable patience with which the minister has listened to the pleas that were made to him I venture to call his attention to the needs of the lower St. Lawrence, including the counties of Temiscouata, Rimouski and Matane. As the minister very well knows, sailors' families have been estab-tised in all the parishes of these counties for over a century, and the officers and men who man the fleets running from Montreal down to Matane come from these families. The minister knows how expensive it would be for the sons of these families to travel from points further down the river to the city of Quebec to take a course of instruction at the school there. He will recall that in the county of Rimouski at Father Point is situated the pilot station for the lower St. Lawrence, and there he has an officer of his department, an
Supply-M arine

ex-pilot, a very well educated man, who is extremely well qualified to take charge of one of these schools of instruction. I am asking the minister seriously to consider the establishment during the winter of a school of instruction at Father Point so that the sons of these families will have the opportunity of getting instruction. I can assure him that the expense connected with such a school would fee absolutely nil because the school itself could be located free of cost either through the municipal council or in one of the buildings belonging to the Department of Marine or the Department of Public Works. Secondly, the instructor for such a school could be chosen from among the present personnel of the Marine department at Father Point. Captain Lachance would be an admirable instructor for such a school. I have already spoken of his qualifications. He is paid his full salary during the summer but receives only part-time salary during the winter. If he were paid his full salary for the whole year I am sure that he would be very willing indeed to undertake this task.
I make this appeal to the minister because like many of my colleagues in the house I have received numerous applications and de1-mands for such a school, and we could do no more than refer them to the Department of Marine, where they have been told that the only school that exists in the province of Quebec was in the city of Quebec. The great majority of those who would like to take instruction in such a school could not possibly afford to pay their travelling expenses to Quebec and pay for their board there. It must be borne in mind that no allowance is made to the students attending these schools. They do not receive their railway fare or anything of the kind, but have to pay all their own expenses. In these times of stress it will be realized that it is not simply inconvenient but practically impossible for these young students to attend these schools, and therefore I hope the minister will give us people of the lower St. Lawrence the same- shall I say?-favourable consideration that he has promised those of the maritime provinces.


Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: On behalf of the fishermen and mariners of northern British Columbia I wish to thank the Minister of Marine for establishing one of these schools of instruction at Prince Rupert. I have received many letters of appreciation of the fine service which the school at Prince Rupert is rendering, and I am therefore sorry to see that this vote is being reduced. These Canadian men make their living from the sea and this school is a great thing for them.

Instead of decreasing the vote I think it should be increased, but I thank the minister on their behalf for establishing the school. The young men of Canada who make their living from the sea should receive every encouragement.


Mr. BROWN:: Before the committee rose at six o'clock the hon. member for South Vancouver (Mr. Maclnnis) was inquiring with regard to a bill which contained certain provisions with reference to labour. I think he was referring to the bill passed last session which amended the coastal laws. My understanding is that it has not yet been put into force.


Alfred Duranleau: It is not yet in force.


Albert Joseph Brown: Is that because hon. members opposite representing farming constituencies made protests to the minister after having voted in favour of the bill?


Alfred Duranleau: Not at all.


Albert Joseph Brown: Why has this law not been put into force? We should like to know why legislation adopted by the house in the face of very strong opposition has not been put into force. Is it because protests have been made by farmer members opposite?


Alfred Duranleau: The hon. gentleman will recall that that law was to come into force upon proclamation. At the time there were certain difficulties which prevented its being put into force, and those difficulties have not been overcome.


Peter Heenan: Before adjournment I
asked the minister if he would consider giving employment to the coloured stewards and cooks in Halifax about whom I spoke. I am wondering if he has given this matter some consideration during the recess.


Robert James Manion: I think the hon. gentleman is referring to the Canadian National Steamships rather than the Department of Marine. I heard some of the remarks of the hon. gentleman just before six o'clock and I have asked my secretary to look up the file and perhaps a little later I may be able to give my hon. friend some information. I dealt with this matter quite fully some time ago.


Mr. BRASSET (Translation):: I should like to inquire of the Minister of Marine (Mr. Duranleau) whether any progress was made at the dominion and provincial conference in connection with cooperation in the fisheries.


Alfred Duranleau: Mr. Chairman, I do not know whether my hon. friend was in the house this afternoon as I gave some explanation in this respect, not-

Supply-M arine
withstanding the fact that we were not discussing the estimates on Fisheries but those on Marine. If my hon. friend will again put his question when the estimates on Fisheries are brought down, I shall be pleased to discuss the subject with him.


Maurice Brasset: I am quite aware that the present discussion is on marine schools. What I wish to point out to the hon. minister is that the recruiting of sailors, engineers or seamen is especially done in the counties of Bonaventure and Gaspe. There is no naval training school in the Gaspe peninsula. There is one in Quebec and it is the only one where the Gaspe people can qualify as seamen. The citizens of Bonaventure, Gaspe and the Magdalen islands are obliged to travel 500 to 600 miles to reach Quebec in order to learn this trade. I think this is not very encouraging. It would be much preferable to have a school in Gaspe or in the surrounding country or again make some arrangement so as to encourage the fishermen of that section of Quebec who wish to follow this occupation and are obliged to travel 1,500 miles to do so. Under the circumstances, I would inquire from the hon. minister whether he intends to establish a marine training school in Gaspe itself, or in the neighbourhood so as to encourage our fishermen and our seamen.


Alfred Duranleau: I must inform my hon. friend that the question has not yet been considered. To multiply these schools in the various sections of a province would be departing from the policy followed heretofore by all governments. There are marine schools in one or two locations in almost every province interested in navigation matters. I am willing to consider whether it would be possible to put into practice the suggestions made by my hon. friend, however, I wish to point out to him that it would be completely changing the practice followed heretofore.


Maurice Brasset: I am aware that such a policy should perhaps have been adopted before to-day; however, this is not a reason because nothing was done in the past, not to establish such schools in the future. I wish to point out that the marine school at Quebec is not centrally located. Schools should be established in localities easy of access for those who wish to become seamen. Quebec, I know, is a maritime port, however, it is far from the sea and there are few people from that section of the country who wish to become seamen, while in Gaspe, 74726-86
for instance, those who live along the shores of the gulf are naturally more attracted to this kind of life.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide subsidies for wrecking plants

Quebec and British Columbia, $40,000.
Mr. HANBURY:: Will the minister explain this item?


Alfred Duranleau: This is to provide subsidies for wrecking plants, one at Quebec and one at Victoria, British Columbia.


Olof Hanson: What were the
expenditures last year in British Columbia and on the Atlantic coast?


Alfred Duranleau: We have an agreement with the Pacific Salvage Company which runs until 1935 for $10,000 a year.


Olof Hanson: Is that the total amount expended on the Pacific coast?


Alfred Duranleau: Yes, under agreement.


Wilfrid Girouard: Would the hon. minister state to what companies subsidies were granted last year in the province of Quebec?


Alfred Duranleau: To the Quebec Salvage Company.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous and unforeseen expenses, $8,000.
Wilfrid Girouard: What unforeseen expenses were made last year?


Alfred Duranleau: Does my hon. friend refer to the present fiscal year?


Wilfrid Girouard: Yes.


Alfred Duranleau: Up to February 28 last, we had expended $4,164.


Wilfrid Girouard: Could the hon. minister supply some details in connection with this amount?


Alfred Duranleau: There are a number of small amounts. On the whole they refer to fees of notaries or lawyers and a few travelling expenses of officials.


Vincent Dupuis: Will the minister be good
enough to give the names of those receiving salaries or fees?


Alfred Duranleau: Captain H. W. King; Captain J. O. Gray; A. C. Brown; C. M. OBrien; C. K. Hanson; W. M. Griffin, K.C.; W. F. O'Connor, K.C.; A. Chasse; J. E. L. Heroux; J. Chevalier; L. Paulhus; R. Lan-glois, K.C.; W. T. Haydon.

Supply-Marine


Vincent Dupuis: That covers the whole
country?


Alfred Duranleau: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Hydrographic and tidal and current surveys, and to provide for the maintenance and repair of hydrographic steamers, $400,000.
Wilfred Hanbury: What is being done in
hydrographic work in British Columbia waters?


Alfred Duranleau: The work is mostly on the west coast of Vancouver island.


Wilfred Hanbury: What is the total equipment available in British Columbia waters?


Alfred Duranleau: The charting operations were carried out with the new hydrographic steamer William J. Stewart and the auxiliary houseboat tender, both parties working along the wTest coast of Vancouver island. The steamer carried out operations in the exposed offshore waters while the houseboat work was confined to more sheltered localities.


Mr. POULIOT:: The minister has just
referred to a steamboat called the W. J. Stewart. As everyone knows, that name is very improper; he could have been a very respectable citizen but he had a very disagreeable character. The name of the boat should be changed to Alex. Johnston in honour of the former deputy minister, who has not been replaced.
An lion. MEMBER:	Why not name it
Pouliot?


Jean-François Pouliot: 
Alfred Duranleau: Mr. Chairman, so far as the work connected with maps in the department, we intend to utilize our best qualified men and the most up to date methods.


Jean-François Pouliot: Hear, hear!
iMr. DURANLEAU (Translation): That is the government's policy. I also wish to inform my hon. friend that we take advantage of aviation, whenever possible, in the preparation of our marine maps, especially on the north shore of Quebec. I think we also utilize the services of aviators in British Columbia. I shall give serious consideration to the remarks of my hon. friend.


Jean-François Pouliot: I thank the hon. minister. I would request him to inform the committee whether members who

Supply-Marine
have geographical maps, which are continuously in use, could have them mounted by employees of his department.


Alfred Duranleau: I shall inquire from the department and shall be pleased to communicate the information to my hon. friend.


Olof Hanson: I want to draw the attention of the minister to a representation made to him in regard to giving assistance under this item in the way of navigation lights and tidal and current surveys on the north end of Queen Charlotte islands at a place known as Whey Point. The fishermen and navigators on the coast have asked that some assistance be given at that point and the minister informed those who inquired and also myself that the matter would have his consideration and that something would be done. It is a necessity in connection with navigation in current and tidal waters on the north end of Queen Charlotte islands and I hope the minister will see that something is done at that place in the near future.


Alfred Duranleau: I shall be pleased to look into the matter.
Radio ai'd to navigation service, to provide for the construction and maintenance of radio ship to shore stations and the general administration of the provisions of the Radio Act and regulations throughout the dominion, $590,550.


William Duff: Might I ask the minister
whether this item is entirely within the province of the Marine department and has nothing to do with the radio commission?


Alfred Duranleau: Nothing to do with the radio commission.


William Duff: Who has charge of this work in the minister's department?


Alfred Duranleau: Commander Edwards.


Peter Heenan: Is it not a fact that the government has entered into an international agreement with respect to safety of life at sea and that a code has been drafted among several nations? I understand it was designed to assist some of the backward maritime nations. If I am correctly informed, several exemptions have been made by the Dominion government. For instance, an exemption is made in the case of coastwise shipping and of ships that keep off the rocks to the extent of about twenty miles. I would point out to the minister that there is more danger to ships that are closer to the rocks than to vessels that are far out at sea.
74726-86i


William Duff: There is no doubt about that.


Peter Heenan: I think the minister will agree that if he went on the rocks he would be in greater danger than if he were out in the depths. If a ship at sea loses her rudder, there might be a chance of her getting assistance, but if she loses her rudder twenty miles or closer to the rocks, she needs more help than if she were out at sea. Would the minister give us an explanation of this exemption? For many years Canada has boasted of being a progressive maritime nation, in fact, words to that effect will be found on the portals of this building, and it seems to me the Dominion government ought to lead the way in regard to safety of life at sea rather than try to find loopholes in this international code in order to save a few dollars.


Alfred Duranleau: I can answer my hon. friend by saying that no important exemptions have been granted which would have the effect of endangering life at sea.


Peter Heenan: I have under my hand an article which is based upon an announcement which appeared in the Canada Gazette. Unfortunately the article does not give the date. It states:
Among many exemptions, one of particular importance to Canada was that of ships sailing on fresh water, this excluding the great lakes from the scope of the convention. Coastwise shipping is also exempt.
It goes on to say, again quoting from the Canada Gazette:
(1) Passenger ships carrying less than fifty persons all told, provided they keep within twenty miles of the rocks, and do not sail further than two hundred miles between ports; (2) other passenger ships which were not required to be radio-equipped by the Radiotelegraph Act of 1913;	(3) freighters which
keep within one hundred' and fifty miles of land; (4) all freighters of less than 2,000 gross tons, this limit of exemption to be reduced to 1,600 tons in 1938 unless extended in the meantime; (5) sailing ships; and (6) ships which make international voyages infrequently.
That is taken from The Canadian Unionist, a labour paper that is very much interested in men who follow the sea. If it be correct, the minister ought to recommend to his colleagues that this is a poor way of saving money.


Alfred Duranleau: Our regulations are
standard, similar to those adopted by the United States and other countries. There is nothing special in our own regulations.


Mr. BRADETTE:: I would like to ask the minister what has been done under this item
Supply-Marine

in, regard to navigation in the Hudson strait, Hudson bay and James bay. If my information is correct, there is no way of sending meteorological reports to the northern sections of the country. I know as an actual fact they have to get in touch with maritime ports in Baffin Land and similar sections through broadcasts from Chicago and other United States stations. The government should establish meteorological stations that will cover the whole section of the country including Hudson bay, James bay and the strait. Will the minister tell us of the activities that have been undertaken in the last two years in this regard?


Alfred Duranleau: I shall gladly go into the matter with my officials and see if we can remedy the situation.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: It seems a strange
anomaly that at the present time we have to get meteorological reports on Hudson strait from an American station. We should at least have that service from Canadian stations during the summer months. Surely with this big expenditure during the last two years the department could give a certain amount of service in that section. It is absolutely needed.


Alfred Duranleau: We have meteorological stations at Churchill, Chesterfield, Coppermine and Nottingham island, from which stations we have reports every day.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Here in Ottawa?


Alfred Duranleau: Yes, to Ottawa.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I know for a positive
fact that we cannot get these reports in my section. There must be some fault in the arrangements. If we want to get into contact, for instance, with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in Baffin Land or in the northern sections of Canada, it has to be broadcast from Chicago or some American station. Surely with the amount that is being expended that service can be given by a Canadian station.


Alfred Duranleau: I am told that the
radio commission is broadcasting messages to the north all the time.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Through all-Canadian
stations?


Alfred Duranleau: All-Canadian.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Does the minister state that positively? In our section there has been much criticism on the ground that these broadcasts have to be sent through American stations.
(Mr. Bradette.]


Alfred Duranleau: This is the first time we have heard of it. I am told by my officials that the radio commission broadcasts all the messages through Canadian stations.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Will the minister give
particulars of work that has been done on these lines in Hudson strait and Hudson bay- the actual work accomplished during the last year in that radio navigation service?


Alfred Duranleau: During the last two
years my department has built five stations at Churchill, Nottingham island, cape Hope's Advance, Resolution island and Chesterfield, all fitted with direction-finding apparatus.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Robert James Manion: Will the minister and the hon. gentleman permit me to reply to a question asked by the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River (Mr. Heenan)? The hon. gentleman mentioned the coloured ratings on the West Indies ships. I hold in my hand a file dealing with the matter, so the hon. gentleman will understand that this is rather an old question. I shall read some paragraphs from a letter of Mr. Allan, general manager of the Canadian National Steamships, to show the position they take in the matter:
What these men actually want is to replace the West Indians on the vagabond cruise boats, to which, of course, we have no objection whatever provided (1) they will accept the same wages a.nd (2) we can be assured that the service will not deteriorate thereby. It is most unsatisfactory to have half the crew engaged in Canada and the other half in the West Indies, as this means opening two sets of articles and causes confusion.
I have promised a delegation of these men to give the matter some very serious thought, and if it is possible to work out an arrangement whereby they can be employed I will do so, but we will be in the unfortunate position that in the event of these men leaving in the summer time when these vessels proceed to Montreal, we may have to go short of ratings or depend upon picking up further men when the vessels return to Halifax.
The three eastern passenger vessels, namely the Lady Nelson, Lady Drake and Lady Hawkins, now all carry white ratings. The additional expense to the company in breakage, etc., is averaging just about $500 a trip notwithstanding the fact that the men are paid the same wages as were the West Indians; the service is also falling off and we are changing approximately 40 per cent of the men each voyage in an endeavour to establish a satisfactory service.
In explanation of the last paragraph I may say that the fact was that a good many Canadians, both white and coloured, objected to the fact that there were so many West Indians on these boats, and wished to get the positions. The white Canadians who were

Supply-M arine-Radio
asking for the positions-this is about a year ago-were mostly dining ear men who were not accustomed to working on ships. I obtained positions for a considerable number of them on these boats, and it is to them Mr. Allan is referring. In my opinion we should, as far as we can within reason, give both white and coloured Canadians a fair chance to work on these boats, but it must not be forgotten that the West Indian islands pay subsidies to these boats and must be given some consideration. Also there are other points that have been put to me in this file, not by Mr. Allan, but by others, which make it a very complicated question which I prefer not to discuss here in the house, but shall be glad to discuss with my hon. friend on some private occasion, because it deals with matters that do not interest the house as a whole and that may be misunderstood. I assure my hon. friend that as far as I am concerned, and the government, we have endeavoured to get the management of the steamships to look after Canadians both white and coloured, but they make very strenuous objection; and in this letter some paragraphs which I have not read refer to some of the men who signed the letter that I think my hon. friend read before six o'clock, and state that in the case of one he was dismissed for cause. I mention that to indicate to the hon. gentleman the complications in the case. However, I have the matter in hand and will do everything I can to further it.


Peter Heenan: I shall! be glad to discuss it with the minister.
Radio service, to provide for the general improvement of reception conditions to licensed broadcast listeners, $250,400.


Mr. FACTOR:: In connection with this item I should like to draw attention to station ORCT in Toronto. Before the station was taken over by the commission-


Alfred Duranleau: If my hon. friend will permit me, this item has nothing to do with the broadcasting stations.


Samuel Factor: "For the general improvement of reception conditions to licensed broadcast listeners." I imagine that has to do with ordinary listeners.


Alfred Duranleau: As far as interference goes, yes, but not as far as broadcasting stations. That would come under the item concerning the radio commission.


Samuel Factor: Do I understand that this item relates to the improvement of general radio reception?


Alfred Duranleau: It is for the improvement of reception.


Samuel Factor: That is what I am discussing now. The reception from station CRCT in Toronto was excellent until the radio commission took it over. They transferred it to a new wave length, 960, I believe, and now it is impossible to get good reception from that station. For instance, when the Prime Minister was speaking to the Western Conservative Association in London, I tuned in on that station to get the speech and it was impossible to hear the Prime Minister because of the hum and interference. It seems that a certain Mexican station interferes with this station and almost blankets it. I understand that a great many complaints have been made in respect of that interference, and that the technical expert of the department has endeavoured to negotiate with the Mexican government concerning it. I should like to ask what has been done in that regard and if any improvement may be expected.


Alfred Duranleau: As I told my hon.
friend, this discussion should take place when the estimates for the radio commission come before the committee. The item concerns receiving sets only and interference by power lines and so on. For instance, if telephone lines in Toronto were interfering with reception in the house of my hon. friend,, my department would attend to that; ibut I must say that this item has nothing to do with the difficulties in connection with broadcasting stations and wave lengths which come under the radio commission.


Samuel Factor: There is certainly conflicting jurisdiction. As I understand it, this item is for the improvement of reception conditions for licensed broadcast listeners. As a licensed broadcast listener wiho pays two dollars to the department over which the minister presides, I am entitled to make some complaint about the reception on my radio set. That is exactly the complaint I am making. As a matter of fact this payment is made out of the consolidated revenue fund and is charged to the department. The department is responsible for improving radio conditions and eliminating interference. It is impossible on the present wave length to obtain even fairly good reception of the programs broadcast from CRCT, formerly station CKGW. I should like the minister to explain the purpose of the vote. Is it not to improve the very thing about which I am complaining? If reception is bad it is the duty of the minister, through this vote, to improve it.
Supply-Marine-Radio


Alfred Duranleau: This appropriation, is to provide for the .maintenance and general improvement of reception conditions of licensed broadcast listeners, including elimination, as far as practicable, of preventable interference with reception throughout the dominion. It provides also for expense in connection with the sale of radio receiving licences.


Samuel Factor: That bears upon the point I am making. I have received many letters complaining as I am now complaining. They state that reception from the station CRCT is very bad. I should like the minister to explain why he cannot use part of this vote, which is specifically for the purpose of improving reception, to try to eliminate some of the conditions which prevent good reception from that station. Has the minister's department made any investigations or received any complaints about reception from that station?


Alfred Duranleau: As has been stated,
we have trouble with the Mexican stations, and of course it would be very difficult for us to eliminate them. As my hon. friend knows, last spring a North American radio conference was held in Mexico but nothing of a definite nature was agreed upon. As a matter of fact at the present time we are contemplating the construction of very powerful stations in Canada in order to protect our wave-lengths from Mexican interference.


Samuel Factor: The reception from radio
station CRGT, is doing incalculable harm to the very principle of public ownership of radio. I have received dozens of complaints from citizens of Toronto complaining about the continuous hum and interference in the reception from that station. Surely it is not sufficient for the minister to say that nothing can be done with the Mexican government. If that is so, it is the duty of the department or of the radio commission to transfer the Toronto station to some other wave length, so that the people in that city will be able to get at least fair reception from the only station there operated by the radio commission. I want to ask the minister if he will be good enough to investigate the matter and, if he finds it impossible to do anything on the present wave length, have the station transferred to some other wave length.


Alfred Duranleau: I shall be pleased to refer the matter to the radio commission, and forward the complaints of the hon. member. I am sure the commission will investigate the matter.
IMr. Factor.]


Mr. MITCHELL:: I have no objection to-


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. MacNicol):: The
hon. member for Temiscouata was on his feet a moment ago, and he should be allowed to speak at this time.


Jean-François Pouliot: I would respectfully suggest to the minister not to insinuate anything to the chairman of the radio commission, but to tell him to do this, and to do that, and to say, "Those are my instructions." The minister should speak firmly to the chairman, so that he may understand he is a civil servant and must obey the minister when he is told to do something. The minister should tell him, "You, Charlesworth, do this and do that. You are not to plajr tricks on me; you will have to listen to me and do as I say, otherwise no more salary for you." Then, the chairman will act at once.


Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Chairman, I have
no objection to any negotiations which may be carried on with the Mexican government, but I do not want to have the wave length at Toronto changed to the disadvantage of wave lengths now existing in other parts of eastern Canada. I know that influence from the city of Toronto is so strong that that city might get almost anything it desired, but, in the community from which I come, situated as it is not far from Toronto, we do not desire any change which while being advantageous to the city of Toronto would be to our disadvantage. That city has been fairly well provided with stations, and I must urge that any possible change in Toronto be to the disadvantage of conditions in Hamilton.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Since the hon. member
for Toronto West Centre has placed the case for Toronto before the committee, I should like to speak for nothern Ontario. About the end of last October the chairman of the radio commission promised the north country that a high powered station would be installed at Sudbury. From that date I have heard nothing more about it. It is true that the radio commission has established some local stations, one at North Bay, another one at Timmins and on the twentieth day of this month I believe there will be another one at Kirkland Lake. I shall not enlarge upon the situation, because, as the minister said a few moments ago, there will be a full discussion of the matter when the vote for the radio commission is before the committee. I must say, however, that at the present time we have no daylight reception in nothern Ontario so far as national programs are concerned. In the day time, we can get neither Montreal nor

Supply-M arine-Radio
Toronto. The hon. member for Toronto West Centre (Mr. Factor) has said that station CRCT is not giving satisfaction to the listeners in that city, and the statement he has made would apply just as strongly in northern Ontario. Since the change of wave length from 840 to 960 kilocycles some months ago we have not been able to get reception from Toronto in the day time.
Some of the newspapers are urging that the high powered station should be placed between Sudbury and Timmins; others say that it should be on the height of land between Haileybury and Cochrane. One of the newspapers in Kapuskasing, the Northern Tribune, has urged that the high powered station should be established on the James bay slope. I believe these statements will indicate to the committee that so far as our choice of location is concerned, we are not parochial. We want the greatest service for the greatest number of people.
The minister should be seized of the fact that agents sent by the government to collect the licence fee of two dollars have not been able to collect, and have received hundreds of letters from people who have absolutely refused to pay the fee. I do not sympathize with that action, although I know it is impossible for some to pay the fee on account of bad reception. Unless a station of at least 5,000 watts capacity is erected in northern Ontario we will not be able to get reception in the day time outside of that received from local stations. For the last two months we have not been able to get Montreal or high powered stations in other centres. I trust that the minister and his department will review the situation and that it will be found possible to do something for our section, particularly in view of its isolation. We do not receive the daily newspapers until twenty-four or thirty-six hours after they are printed, and it is therefore all the more necessary that we should have good radio reception. If we get it, we are ready and willing to pay the licence fee, but not under present conditions, I repeat, the radio commission will find it almost impossible to collect any fees in our section for the very good reason that we are not getting the service to which we are entitled.


Alfred Duranleau: I shall be pleased to report the complaints of my hon. friend to the radio commission. I would also point out that he will have the opportunity to lay his complaints before the committee which has been set up on radio broadcasting and which sat for the first time this morning.


Charles A. Stewart: I should like to inquire from the minister whether this semi-dual control which has been tried now for over a year is in his opinion working out satisfactorily. With departmental officials looking after reception, and with the sending stations in the hands of the radio commission, it does seem as if the present system was bound to lead to trouble. I can say quite candidly that the departmental officials must find it mighty hard to give satisfaction. They are the ones who are coming in contact with the radio listeners, and are the ones who receive complaints such as have been made here to-night because it is part of their duty to try to cure just such troubles. Right in this city we have exactly the same trouble with reception. It is not the fault of the department, but is the result of the adoption of wave lengths which apparently conflict with some of the more powerful stations across the line. I am wondering just where we are going to land with this whole radio business in Canada, and whether we are always going to be subject to interference in reception on the part of our neighbours to the south. There are times in Ottawa when it is utterly impossible to get anything like decent reception. It is not the fault of the receiving set or of the officials of the department who are trying to remove interference; it is because our sending stations clash with the much more powerful stations to the south. It does sefem to me that something might be done by changing the wave lengths. We certainly did not have this difficulty prior to the radio commission taking control, or at least I never experienced it and never heard of it. We had perfect reception, and these more powerful stations across the line were broadcasting at that time just as they are to-day. But since the change took place we have had a great deal of difficulty. I think the minister might endeavour to see whether we could not return to something similar to the old conditions that prevailed before the setting up of the radio commission.


Samuel Factor: I cannot understand why
this item is placed in the estimates of the Department of Marine. I was under the impression that the control of radio was entirely in the hands of the radio commission. Surely the general improvement of reception conditions for licensed listeners should be a matter within the purview of the radio commission. Why this dual control? I quite appreciate that the licence fee is paid to the Department of Marine, but when it comes to the changing of wave lengths, which are bound to play a part in reception, control is in the hands of the radio commission, while
Supply-Marine-Radio

reception conditions come under the department. Surely it is an anomalous situation to have the Department of Marine in charge of the improvement of reception conditions and the radio commission looking after the changing of wave lengths, which go to the very root of radio reception. Why is this item under the minister's department instead of under the radio commission?


Alfred Duranleau: Under the law as it now exists, only broadcasting is under the control of the radio commission. We have the same system in Canada as that existing in England: one body, the post office, is in charge of the collection of the licence fees from the listeners, and the British Broadcasting Commission has charge of the broadcasting. The Marine department collects the licence fees and eliminates interference, while the broadcasting is in the hands of the radio commission; but both come under the minister.


Charles A. Stewart: Might I
suggest to the minister that he had better put the whole of this particular branch of his department under the control that was in existence formerly, and let the radio commission select the programs and run that end of it. If there is another year of this sort of thing there will be a very insistent demand that something of the kind be done.


Humphrey Mitchell: Do I understand the
minister to say that under this item no questions may properly be asked as to the functions of the radio commission?


Alfred Duranleau: The item which concerns the radio commission is No. 233, on page 55, for $1,000,000.


Olof Hanson: My opinion is
that the radio commission is an absolute waste of public money. I have on several occasions had to complain of interference and so forth and I have never got any satisfaction from the radio commission. They refer you to the Marine department. When you go there, at least you get a decent and respectable answer. In my opinion the commission should be done away with and the whole matter put under the Department of Marine. Then we would know where to go with complaints. At present we go to the commission and they refer you to somebody else. We have too many commissions anyway, and the radio commission is one that we should do away with. The minister has to make the final decision and the whole matter in my opinion should be left to him.


Charles A. Stewart: You can get at him.


Alfred Duranleau: I would invite my
hon. friend from Skeena to lay his complaints before the special committee which has been set up especially for the purpose of hearing complaints as to the functioning of the radio commission under the act.


Olof Hanson: I must say that I have had justice done when I appealed to the minister, and I give the minister and the government credit for that. When I have failed to get satisfaction from the commission I have got satisfaction from the minister, and I thank him for it.


Thomas Reid: How many trouble inspectors
are there in Vancouver and vicinity?


Alfred Duranleau: Victoria and Vancouver fall into the same division. We have two electricians, one chauffeur, one stenographer and two cars.


Samuel Factor: How much money was
spent from last year's appropriation to improve radio reception in Toronto, and what staff is available?


Alfred Duranleau: We are spending in
Toronto a total of $15,220.


Mr. VALLANCE:: Is the department finding any difficulty in collecting the licence fee of two dollars?


Alfred Duranleau: We have had a little difficulty in some sections of the country, but as a rule the citizens are well disposed towards paying their licence fees. As a matter of fact, in certain parts of the country, we have collected more this year than we did last year.


John Vallance: The radio commission
has been sending out letters advising individuals who had previously taken out licences that their licences are now overdue; was there much of that done by the commission?


Alfred Duranleau: Periodical notices are sent out to owners of radio sets who have not renewed their licences, calling their attention to the fact. I think it is the duty of the department to do this.


John Vallance: Has the commission
agents out collecting licence fees, and if so to what extent? Have there been any prosecutions against individuals who have been operating radios without a licence?


Alfred Duranleau: Only one court action was taken this last year.


Mr. BOUCHARD:: Has the minister found it possible to stop political interference with the radio commission?

Supply-M arine-Dredging


Alfred Duranleau: I know of no political interference with the radio commission.


John Vallance: A ruling has been made that every individual proposing to broadcast must first submit his speech to the commission; is that ruling always lived up to?


Alfred Duranleau: A regulation to that effect was adopted last year, but I cannot say just to what extent it is followed. I do know that all addresses are not submitted to the radio commission.


John Ritchie MacNicol: These matters should not be discussed under this item.


Humphrey Mitchell: I take exception to the statement made by an hon. member that the money spent on this commission is wasted. If these were not his exact words, they indicate the purport of his remarks. This commission is in its infancy, and-


John Ritchie MacNicol: The
hon. member is out of order as far as this item is concerned.


Humphrey Mitchell: An hon. member was
allowed to make the observation that this is a waste of money and I desire to take exception to that remark. I have no objection to being ruled out of order, but I think once an observation has been made the opportunity should be granted to another hon. member to express a contrary opinion. This commission is more or less in its infancy; it is a child of this house.


William Duff: Charlesworth is not in his
infancy.


Humphrey Mitchell: Neither are you.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The
remarks of the hon. member are out of order under this item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maintenance and repairs to dominion steamers and icebreakers, $1,434,000.
Charles A. Stewart: Have not
some of the ships on the coastal service been sold?


Alfred Duranleau: Those belong to the Canadian National.


Thomas Reid: Where is this money to be spent and how many vessels are used?


Alfred Duranleau: There are twenty-five vessels in the service, made up of four on the Pacific coast, five on the Atlantic coast, three on the upper St. Lawrence and the
great lakes, and the remainder on the lower St. Lawrence and the gulf.


Alan Webster Neill: What are the names of the boats on the Pacific coast?


Alfred Duranleau: The Estevan, the Newington, the Berens, and the Birnie.


Olof Hanson: They would not be icebreakers because there is no ice out there.


Alfred Duranleau: No.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Would the icebreaker service in the lower St. Lawrence and the gulf include service for the Hudson bay and strait? Is there any icebreaker service up there ?


Alfred Duranleau: Yes.


Alan Webster Neill: The Newington is an old boat and was never suited to the work it is performing. Is there any hope of having another boat to take her place?


Alfred Duranleau: My hon. friend is quite right when he says that that boat is old and should be replaced. We are trying to have the necessary estimate approved to provide for the building of a new boat.


Eugène Fiset: Does the Jalobert come under this vote?


Alfred Duranleau: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
River St. Lawrence ship channel dredging:
(a)	to provide payment for work performed and to be performed by contract, $3,750,000;
(b)	to provide for the maintenance and operation of the government ship channel fleet and the government shipyard, including all necessary repairs and reconditioning, $1,140,000.
Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Could the minister advise if any negotiations are going on between the United States and Canada in connection with the low water levels occasioned partly by the Chicago drainage canal? As is well known, last year the water level of the St. Lawrence was the lowest it had been in the preceding forty years. I believe that the Chicago drainage canal is to blame to some extent, and I should be glad if the minister would enlighten the committee on the situation.


Alfred Duranleau: I have lately organized an interdepartmental committee of engineers to study the question of the St. Lawrence water level. The committee is composed of about seven or eight engineers from the de-
Supply-M arine

partments of Marine, Railways and Canals, Public Works and the Interior, and they are meeting every week to investigate the whole subject of water levels on the St. Lawrence. Their object is to ascertain the cause of the low level in the port of Montreal and in that river. Of course, the diversion of water at Chicago will come under consideration, and there is a special item in my estimates in that regard, item 134, to provide for the investigation of water levels in the St. Lawrence river, $50,000.


Mr. MORAND:: I suggest that when the department is investigating that question it should take into consideration St. Clair lake, which is a. low and shallow lake. For the last year the low water has made the whole lake front practically a marsh. There is considerable agitation in the district. It is hard to say exactly what the cause is, but I should like to have an assurance from the minister that when the question of water levels in the St. Lawrence is being considered the great lakes as far as lake St. Clair will also be taken into account.


Alfred Duranleau: The scope of the inquiry which is under way does not include that part of the waters, but I shall be pleased to look into the matter to see whether the powers of the committee can be amplified.


Thomas Reid: There is an increase of $1,459,650 in the item now under consideration. I wonder why dredging is done under the Marine department in the St. Lawrence whereas elsewhere it is done under the Public Works department.


Alfred Duranleau: Only the St. Lawrence ship channel is under the control of the Marine department, the change having been made some years ago-I think it was in 1906. I cannot say what the real reason was; probably it was considered that the Marine department was more interested in navigation matters and it was thought that the St. Lawrence ship channel should be under its control.


Thomas Reid: Why the increase?


Alfred Duranleau: It is due to the works done last year. We have tried to employ as many men as possible in our fleet and the contractors have done the same.


Charles A. Stewart: This is the continuation of a contract. Is it the contract which was let three or four years ago?


Alfred Duranleau: Yes.


Charles A. Stewart: How much longer will it take to complete it?


Alfred Duranleau: The contract is nearly completed according to the reports of my engineers; all that remains to be done now is to clean up at an expense of about $300,000.


Charles A. Stewart: That will complete the contract.


Alfred Duranleau: The agreement was passed on May 30, 1930.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, maintenance and supervision of aids to navigation, including salaries and allowances to lightkeepers, $1,674,000.
William Duff: This includes salaries and
allowances to lightkeepers. Three years ago, when this government decided to reduce the salaries of all public employees by ten per cent I protested vigorously, not only as that action affected lightkeepers but as it affected every other class of citizen, including judges. At that time I expressed the opinion that it was very poor policy and would not mean anything; I said it would not enable the government to balance the budget. My prophecy has been fulfilled; the money retained from civil servants-lightkeepers, charwomen, elevator men and others-


An hon. MEMBER:: And members of
parliament.


William Duff: Yes, and members of parliament; I was opposed to that too, and I was the only one that said so. I said at the time that it was not good policy and would not mean anything, because the very fact that this government gave the lead in the reduction of salaries induced employers of labour all over the country to do the same. It gave them the chance to reduce the salaries of their employees, and to-day we have before the committee which is sitting in this house investigating conditions in different manufacturing plants and other businesses in this country, an example of what this policy has meant. It shows conclusively to my mind that this government is partly to blame for conditions in the sweatshops where poor labouring people work practically for nothing. Now, here are lightkeepers in this country, situated away on rocky promontories and islands scattered throughout the Atlantic, the gulf of St. Lawrence, the great lakes and the Pacific, without facilities for educating their children. Half the time, especially in winter, these children cannot go to school. It is not fair that men in this class, filling responsible positions, most of them receiving very small salaries, should have had their remuneration

Supply-M arine
cut by ten per cent. Before this item carries I should like to have a statement from the minister so far as he himself at any rate is concerned. We have just passed another item of S3,750,000, representing an increase over the previous year of 81,459,650, and if the minister had sufficient influence with his colleagues to get that increase of a million and a half-I congratulate him on that achievement; I am not objecting to it-then I think he ought to bring his influence to bear in behalf of these employees in his department. He is bighearted and he has a good open countenance, and I suggest to him that he should approach his colleagues at the first opportunity and urge them not to renew the act which has been in force for the last two years, whereby the salary of the Minister of Justice, and my indemnity as well, have been reduced by ten per cent. I plead on behalf of the lightkeepers, because I think the minister should be the first man to take the initial step to urge upon the Prime Minister and other members of the cabinet the restoration to these employees of their full remuneration. If there are any people who are entitled to full remuneration it is these particular employees. Most of them get very small salaries and I would like the minister to ask his colleagues that these salaries be reinstated at one hundred per cent instead of ninety per cent. Before this item passes I should like some assurance from the minister on that point.


Eugène Fiset: I would call attention to the fact that the salaries as included in the item do not provide for the ten per cent deduction because there is no footnote at the bottom as there is in the case of other items. Therefore the salaries are voted in toto.


Charles A. Stewart: The deduction is there just the same.


Alfred Duranleau: I have listened with keen interest to my hon. friend's remarks. I have the greatest sympathy for the lighthouse keepers, and I fully agree with him when he says that these civil servants have a hard job to perform and should be protected as much as possible. But I would like to remind him that the ten per cent deduction was not made for pleasure; it was made because we thought that for the purposes of economy civil servants should contribute as other citizens are doing towards the reduction of our yearly expenditures. But I can tell my hon. friend that the promise made by the government two years ago and again last year will be kept and the moment business
improved sufficiently the ten per cent reduction will disappear. I cannot make any promise for this year; it may be this year, but as soon as possible we will do away with the reduction.


William Duff: I am very glad to hear the words of the minister. He said that this was done for the sake of economy; that it was not a pleasure to do it. As I said the first year this matter was brought up in the house, it was false economy. I said that it was not in the best interests of the country that the deduction should be made, because the government took 88,000,000 out of the pockets of its employees and therefore that money could not be spent in the country. Then I said that it had an influence with every employer of labour in Canada who wanted an excuse to reduce the salaries of his employees or labourers. In this way the deduction had a double-barrelled effect. It is all very well for the minister to say very seriously-and I know he is sincere-that he will endeavour to do what he can. What I am saying to the minister and what I said before is this: before he got an increase of about $1,500,000 making a total of $3,750,000 for dredging the St. Lawrence, the first thing he should have done was to have the salaries of the lighthouse keepers put back to the one hundred per cent. The hon. member for Rimouski said that the item did not provide for a ten per cent deduction.


Eugène Fiset: There is no footnote.


William Duff: I know that, but I am afraid this item of $1,434,000 is made up on a basis of ninety per cent of salaries instead of one hundred per cent. Will the minister kindly tell me or the hon. member for Rimouski who is correct?


Alfred Duranleau: So far as salaries are concerned, this includes only ninety per cent.


Mr. MacLEAN:: Last year when this item was up I brought to the attention of the minister a very unfair situation in connection with lighthouse keepers' salaries, to which the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough has referred. There are cases where the department provides living quarters for the lighthouse keeper, and in making the deduction of the ten per cent, not only does it deduct ten per cent from the salary which the lighthouse keeper receives, but it also estimates the value of the living quarters to the man who occupies them and deducts from his wages ten per cent of that estimated value, which is money that he really never gets.
Supply-M mine


Mr. MACDOUGALL:: That is not a statement of fact.


Alfred Edgar MacLean: It is.
Mr. MACiDOUGAiLL: No, it is not.


Alfred Edgar MacLean: Well, we will allow the minister to decide. To my mind such a procedure is unfair. It is hard enough for a man to have ten per cent deducted from money he actually receives, but to have an additional deduction made in respect of the estimated value of his living quarters is really treating the lighthouse keeper unfairly. I know this to be a positive fact. The hon. member for Inverness thinks it is not correct, but men in my constituency have come and showed me their accounts and said: We are subject to a reduction of not only ten per cent, but fifteen or twenty per cent. I wrote to the department and that was the explanation, that in addition to the deduction of ten per cent from the regular monthly payments received by them from the department, they were also charged ten per cent on the estimated value of their living quarters. That is extremely unfair and the1 minister should remedy it.


Mr.   D U R AN LEA II@: I am not prepared to admit that it is unfair, because the rent paid by a civil servant is paid out of his salary. There is nothing extraordinary in that. If something is allowed for the residence of a lightkeeper, it is small, as a rule about $200, but it is supposed to be part of his remuneration just like that of any other employee who gets so much salary and pays his own rent. There is no difference at all.


Alfred Edgar MacLean: The minister imagines he has an argument there, but many of the lighthouse keepers are compelled to live in those residences. They have homes of their own a few miles away in which they would much rather live, but they are forced to live in the lighthouse in order to perform their duties and in many cases they are obliged to keep up a home some miles away in order, as the hon. member for Antigonish-Guys-borough has said, that their children may be able to go to school, because in some cases the lighthouse keepers are in places where it is impossible for the children to go to school if they live in the lighthouses. Therefore these living quarters are of no benefit to them; they are forced to contribute ten per cent of the value that the department may put upon those living quarters. I contend that this is absolutely unfair.
Mr. MAODOUGAiLL: Has there been any change in the regulations regarding lighthouse

keepers since my hon. friend supported the former Liberal government in 1922?


Alfred Edgar MacLean: The answer to that question is that a Liberal government never deducted ten per cent from any man's salary whether he was a lighthouse keeper or anybody else. This is the first government that has attempted to do that, so that the effect was not visible before.


Jean-François Pouliot: I remember very well the time I was arguing with the hon. member for Inverness about minimum wage laws and I was telling him that they should have minimum wage laws in Nova Scotia, the hon. member said that they were superfluous. At that time we were fighting for all the labourers throughout the country from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and my hon. friend was not defending the case of the miners who received such small wages in Inverness and other parts of Cape Breton.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: I am not answering any imbecility.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Marine signal service, $92,750.
Charles A. Stewart: How in the world can the minister cut $6,000 off this very important service, when he has been paring it every year since this government took office? It must be a very important service to navigation.


Alfred Duranleau: With the advent of
radio we can save the expense of some signal stations and give a better service.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Administration of pilotage, $118,000.
Olof Hanson: How many pilots have we in Canada? Is there a fixed yearly remuneration, or is it based on what they collect in each port? I have had many complaints; some pilots, I understand, get up to $20,000 and others are not getting anything, although they are all supposed to perform the same service-take charge of boats that come into certain harbours.


Alfred Duranleau: The pilotage districts are: Quebec, with fifty-three pilots; Montreal, with sixty-two; Halifax, twenty-three; Saint John, eleven; Sidney, fifteen; British Columbia, thirty-two, and Churchill, two. They are not all paid on the same basis; some are paid on the tonnage of the vessel and others on the draft of the vessel. It depends on the arrangements made.

Supply-Marine-Pilotage


Olof Hanson: How much does
the highest receive, and how much the lowest, and where is the one that receives the highest and the one that receives the lowest?


Alfred Duranleau: There is no salary;
the pilot gets what he earns. I know that at Montreal and Quebec there is a pool into which the pilots bring their earnings. They pay the expenses and their superannuation contributions and the rest is divided among themselves. That is what is done as a rule in these pilots' associations.


Olof Hanson: How much would a pilot in Montreal get after all deductions, and a pilot in Vancouver?


Alfred Duranleau: I cannot say exactly
what they get. I know that the pilot in Montreal having the highest gross earnings during last season got $7,000. Rut they have to pay their travelling expenses out of that and their superannuation. I think the average net earnings run about $3,500 to $4,000. But I would remind my hon. friend that these pilots do not start earning money until they are over thirty. Apprentice pilots earn practically nothing for seven or ten years. I know assistant pilots who have been in the service for ten years now, and they cannot be admitted as pilots; according to the regulations the number of pilots cannot be increased, as each pilot is supposed to make so many voyages during the navigation season. So long as that average is not exceeded an assistant pilot is not admitted as a pilot. Sometimes a pilot starts earning his living at thirty-five years of age, and then does not work for a great many years as his eyesight must be first class; the moment he cannot pass the eyesight examination he has to retire.


Mr. YOUNG:: What do they live on before they start earning?


Alfred Duranleau: Well, they get a few dollars. They work as mate or as assistant, and sometimes the assistant gets a little reward from the owner of the ship.


Olof Hanson: I have some
figures from Vancouver, and it seems to me ridiculous that men should get such pay. That is why I am asking for these particulars so that I can see whether these figures are right or wrong. I would like the minister also to let us know what a chief pilot for British Columbia or the Pacific coast gets in gross earnings. I have some figures from the statistical department; they must be reasonably accurate, but I would like to have them verified by the minister.


Alfred Duranleau: I am not in a position to give the information at the present time, but if my hon. friend has a particular case in mind I shall be pleased to take it up.


Olof Hanson: If the minister has the information as to pilots in Montreal he surely can give it in regard to pilots in Vancouver.


Alfred Duranleau: Well, I have the
information as to Montreal, but unfortunately I have not got it for Vancouver. I can write to my hon. friend and give him the full information if he desires.


Olof Hanson: I wish the minister would do that.


Wilfred Hanbury: 'Could the minister tell the committee what arrangement the pilots work under in British Columbia? I understand they have some cooperative arrangement, but I am not familiar with the details.


Alfred Duranleau: I suppose my hon.
friend knows that the pilotage is not compulsory on the British Columbia coast. Some companies have their own pilots; in fact I believe the Canadian Pacific has. I suppose those men are salaried. *


Mr. HA NBURY:: I was not asking the minister for details as to remuneration, but was directing my remarks to regulations controlling pilots in British Columbia.


Alfred Duranleau: I should be glad to
send the hon. member a copy of the British Columbia pilot regulations.


Wilfred Hanbury: I believe thirty-two is
the fixed number of pilots. At the same time I should like to know what competition there is when someone wishes to become a pilot.


Alfred Duranleau: I shall supply the
necessary information.


Jean-François Pouliot: At this very moment who is the pilot of the ship of state in this House of Commons?


William Duff: I notice that the item has
been reduced from $218,000 to $118,000. Can the minister explain how he proposes to save that much money?


Alfred Duranleau: I believe the hon.
member knows that most of the money voted, previously was loaned to the pilots' association. At this time they are collecting faster, and do not need so great a loan.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-M arine
[Stage Direction]
Meteorological service, including magnetic observatory, grants of $450 each to Kingston and Montreal observatories and allowance of $360 to L. F. Gorman, observer at Ottawa, $317,800.
Charles A. Stewart: May I suggest that the minister ought not to close out his department, because the house is poorly attended on Friday evenings, and there may be some questions which hon. members would like to ask.


William Duff: The civil vote remains.


Charles A. Stewart: Hon. members cannot very well ask questions pertaining to administration, unless the government would permit such questions on the civil vote. If the government will permit them, we could take up this vote.


Jean-François Pouliot: Is this item 1497


John Ritchie MacNicol: Yes


Jean-François Pouliot: Is it due to the decrease of $75,490 in the appropriation for the meteorological service that we have so much snow this winter?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian radio broadcasting service, $1,000,000.
Charles A. Stewart: Is the minister going to introduce this item to-night?


William Duff: It will take a week to discuss the item; we may have to sit on Sundays.


Alfred Duranleau: Very well; we will
consider it later.
Item stands.



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

[Stage Direction]
Publications, $23,039.
John Vallance: 
Hon. ROBERT WEIR (Minister of Agriculture) :: The sum of $23,039 represents an amount a little greater than that which was actually spent in 1933-34. We expect to be able to carry on with the same amount. Last year we did not spend everything that was voted.


Mr. DONNELLY:: Would the minister give the list of publications?


Robert Weir: I should be happy to supply the hon. member with a list; it is a very long one.


James J. Donnelly: Probably it could be placed on Hansard.


Robert Weir: Perhaps I did not understand the hon. member's question. This vote is not for the actual publishing or printing of the publications, but provides for payment to the personnel or staff which sends them out. I believe it includes also the cost of envelopes.


John Vallance: How many are engaged in this work of sending out publications?


Robert Weir: In the neighbourhood of twenty-nine or thirty, permanent or regular. Then there is a small temporary staff which from time to time is required to keep up with the work.


Mr. GERSHAW:: May I ask the minister how a farmer is to know what publications are available? Is a list supplied to him? Must he write in, or how is he to obtain the information? Further, to whom is the information sent without application?


Robert Weir: There is a list of publications together with supplementary lists of new publications. Any farmer writing to the department will have sent to him any special publication he wishes, and included in each publication there will be a list of all publications which, if he wishes he may send for.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: Why is there a decrease in the vote for these publications, if they are all so important?


Robert Weir: I have explained
that there is not an actual decrease. We did not use all the money voted last year, so we are asking for a smaller amount this year.


Wilfrid Girouard: Did I understand the minister to say his department employed twenty-nine or thirty persons to send out the publications of his department?


Robert Weir: That is correct.


Wilfrid Girouard: What is the average salary paid to these employees?


Robert Weir: I have not that information before me, but shall be glad to send it to the hon. member.


Wilfrid Girouard: How many publications per month do they send?


Robert Weir: I have not the information in that form, but shall be happy to supply it.


Vincent Dupuis: Do I understand that these publications are sent only on request, or does the department send them to public libraries, universities, and so on?

Supply-Agriculture-Publications


Robert Weir: There are mailing lists. If a farmer for instance, sends in and asks for a publication his name would be added to the list. We also have lists of libraries, agricultural societies and various associations. We keep those mailing lists and send out the new publications.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: Is the circulation nationwide?


Robert Weir: Yes.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: In what parts of Canada is the circulation greatest? I should like to know where this special information is going.


Robert Weir: I think the answer would be where there is the greatest number of farmers.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: If my information is correct the number of publications has been curtailed in* the last few years. As a member of parliament I used to get several more publications from the department than I do now, and these publications were in most cases of great service to the farmers and settlers in our section. I should like to ask if that is the case.


Robert Weir: I am quite certain that no publications that are available will be refused on request of any person. There is no curtailment in the sending out of publications published for general distribution.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I think members of parliament, senators and officials should be placed on the mailing list, because I have found these publications of great service. A member of parliament receiving them can distribute them to the farmers in his riding who are likely to benefit from the information. I think it should be possible for the minister to do that.


Robert Weir: We shall be glad to include the members of parliament who are not already included on the mailing list.


Vincent Dupuis: Provided they can read them.


James J. Donnelly: I understood the minister to say that this item of $22,000 is not to pay for the publications but for the expense of sending them out. It does not cover the salaries of those engaged in preparing the publications?


Robert Weir: That is correct.


James J. Donnelly: It is just to pay the expense of wrapping and sending them out?


Robert Weir: Yes, operation costs together with supplies.


Joseph Georges Bouchard: I should like to draw the attention of the minister to something that very often happens in my district. We have students taking short courses, and in many instances when we ask for a certain number of publications for distribution to these students our requests have been turned down. I think these publications should be distributed to the students in these short courses. In other instances, a professor in an agricultural institution will ask for a certain number of publications, and in some instances in the past, although not quite recently, his request has been refused. The department will reply suggesting that the students themselves write in for the publication. Now it is sometimes a troublesome thing for a farmer to get a pen and sit down and write a letter, and very often he does not know to whom to send it. I think it would be very much better if the department would comply with these requests for various publications from public bodies and organizers of short courses.


Robert Weir: There is no reason whatever why that should not be done if the publication is still available. I believe that in the past, including the more recent past, difficulty has arisen through members of parliament as well as people outside asking for large bulk lots. It was felt that there was perhaps a good deal of wastage in that connection. However, I agree with my hon. friend that there is no place where better use could be made of these publications than in connection with university work and short courses.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: I asked the minister
where the circulation of these publications was the greatest. The minister answered, among the farmers. Perhaps he misunderstood my question. I wanted to know in what part of Canada, in what economic area, there is the largest circulation of these publications.


Robert Weir: My answer was
not " among the farmers " but where the farmers are the most numerous, particularly where there is specialization in poultry, fruit and so forth. More publications are sent there as a rule.


Mr. BOWMAN:: How often is the mailing list revised?


Robert Weir: There is a list of
publications at the beginning of each year, and as new publications come out a supplementary list is sent along to those receiving
1366	COMMONS
Supply-Agriculture-Publications
the original list. At the end of each year an attempt is made to combine as far as possible the new publications and the old in a revised list.


Mr. MOTHERWELL:: I recall that when the minister first took charge of this work he was veTy strong on this vote being an important one. He considered that it was very important that the information should be compiled from the various sources and sent out to the farmer on the ground that through the written word more farmers could be reached than in any other way, and with less expense. So strong was his view that he increased the vote in 1931-32 from $31,000 to $38,000, and I think that was commendable, but this year the vote is reduced from $28,000 to $23,000. Is that due to a falling off of applications or to the general financial conditions, shortage of money and such like?


Robert Weir: As a matter of
fact the demand for the publications is increasing. Although the vote has been decreased the number of publications sent out is increasing to a considerable extent. In 1922-23 the number of publications sent out, annual reports, bulletins, pamphlets, circulars, orders and regulations, was 776,906; in 1932-33, over
834,000.	Market reports, circulars, press articles and so on were sent out to the number of 817,478 in 1922-23, and 1,497,050 in
1932-	33. The mailing lists have also been added to considerably, and that is a very good indication that there is a greater demand for the publications. That demand has been met to a greater extent. The number of names on the mailing lists, special and general lists, in 1922-23 was 308,595 and in 1932-33, 550,907. The number of envelopes addressed, which is also a good index, in 1922-23 was 1,694,252, and in 1932-33, 1,912,696. In 192728 there were more envelopes sent out than in 1932-33. That seemed to be a heavy year. Requests for publications from individuals are not as great at the present time as in 1927-28, but the number of the more important publications sent out has increased.
'Mr. DUPUIS:	May I suggest to the
minister that he did not answer the question asked by the ex-Minister of Agriculture. I understood his question to 'be why there was a decrease in this vote from $28,000 in 1933-34 to $23,000 in 1934-35, and the minister in his reply referred to 1932-33, and not to
1933-	34.


Robert Weir: As I explained before, the vote for 1933-34 was not all used, and yet all requests were met. The estimate for 1934-35 is for slightly more than what was actually spent in 1933-34.


James J. Donnelly: 'Could the minister give some explanation for the wide fluctuation throughout the years in this item? In the estimates for 1931-32 this vote was for $38,000; in 1932-33 the vote was only $7,500; in 1933-34 it was $28,231, and now we find it is $23,000.


Robert Weir: That might have
been caused by larger amounts being voted than were actually used. As far as I am aware, there has always been a sufficient amount voted to meet the requests of the public for publications.


James J. Donnelly: "Might have been"
is no answer. In 1932-33 the vote was only $7,500; if that amount was sufficient, why should it be raised to $23,000? There must be some other reason.


Robert Weir: When the vote was in the neighbourhood of $7,000 it was found that that was not sufficient. Certain publications could not be sent out when requested and they had to be sent out by the various branches of the department.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: Is it not just a matter
of supply and demand?


Robert Weir: This vote is to pay for the wrappings and the labour of sending out the publications.


Joseph Georges Bouchard: It does not include the cost of publication?


Robert Weir: Not at all.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
International Institute of Agriculture, $8,500.
John Vallance: Is this the institute at Rome?


Robert Weir: Yes.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: How is this appropriation spent?


Robert Weir: A number of countries have agreed that they will each make a certain contribution so that machinery may be set up to receive statistics and information on agriculture from all countries that are parties to the agreement. This information is then sent out to the countries which have contributed. It is an attempt to prevent the wastage which would arise if this work were attempted to be done by each individual country.

Supply-Agriculture


Joseph Georges Bouchard: Is there a connection
between this and the following item which covers the contribution to Empire bureaux?
Mr. IV E.IR (Melfort):	In general principles only. In the one case it is the dominions of the empire; in the other it is international.


William Richard Motherwell: Has the department sent a representative over to the institute meetings at Rome in recent years?


Robert Weir: We have not sent
a representative for some time; we are represented by the representative of the United Kingdom.
Mr. MOTHER'W ELL:	Who is he?


Robert Weir: I do not recall the name of the last delegate but I shall be glad to give my hon. friend his name later.


James J. Donnelly: Do we receive as many publications from this institute to-day as we did back in 1931-32?


Robert Weir: I could not give a definite answer, but offhand I would say that the number is greater because the work has become more detailed. I shall let the hon. member have that information.


James J. Donnelly: In that year we voted $13,o00 while this year we are voting $8,500. That is a difference of $5,000, over one-third, and I should like to know if there have been any ill effects from this reduction.


Robert Weir: I would say, no.


John Vallance: How many countries contribute to the institute and upon what basis?


Robert Weir: Seventy-five countries contribute; they are grouped into five different groups.
Mr. MoINTOSH: Are the meetings annual and has Canada a representative at all important gatherings?


Robert Weir: Either directly or through the United Kingdom representative.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: They are annual?


Robert Weir: They have meetings annually.


John Vallance: Are the publications which are received from the institute available in the department?
Mr. WElIR (Melfort): Yes.


John Vallance: What are they?


Robert Weir: Examples are the Monthly Bulletin of Agricultural Economics
and Sociology, the Monthly Crop Report and Agricultural Statistics, Monthly Bulletin of Agricultural Science and Statistics, and International Bulletin of Plant Protection.


William Richard Motherwell: I recall that four or five years ago the United States practically dissociated themselves from this institute, I have wondered if they have restored their connection and are again sending over regular representatives.


Robert Weir: They did last year.


James J. Donnelly: The minister has named only four or five publications which are received, but there must be a larger number than that.


Robert Weir: The number is quite large, but it varies from year to year.


Joseph Georges Bouchard: A few years ago when this vote was something like $13,000 a number of these publications were sent out free of cost. As a professor of agriculture I had the privilege of receiving copies and I should like to ask the minister if this distribution has been curtailed or if the agricultural institutions and colleges are supplied with these publications free of cost.


Robert Weir: My understanding is that they still receive them free of cost.


Joseph Georges Bouchard: How many copies are sent out?
Mr. WEIR Melfort): I could not give the exact number, but I shall be glad to give my hon. friend that information.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: The minister says there is at least one meeting annually of the institute and I think representation at that assembly is important. Could the minister tell us who represented Canada last year and the year before?


Robert Weir: I have not that information before me. Last year we were represented by a representative of the British ministry, and I believe also the year before although I would not trust my memory.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: The minister will bring down that information?


Robert Weir: Yes.


William Richard Motherwell: My recollection is that they meet every other year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]


Supply-Agriculture-Dairying
Dairying, $234,000.
William Richard Motherwell: Perhaps this would be as good a time as any to remark on the general tendency to decrease practically every vote for agriculture. This year there has been a decrease in every vote but two, and every year we see these votes decreasing and decreasing. This would seem to be a time when agriculture should receive an increase in assistance rather than suffer a decrease. If any of us were sick he would want more care at that time than when he was well. Now agriculture is decidedly sick not only in Canada but the world over; yet we have withdrawn aid from a sick institution at a time when we should be nursing it. That is the complaint I have to make with regard to these estimates. There is a progressive reduction year after year, and if this keeps up, and if my good friend should have the opportunity of presiding over the department another four years, I am afraid the estimates and his department will have disappeared altogether by that time unless something is done to stop the downward tendency. I would convey my remarks as much to the hon. gentleman's colleagues as to himself. Since the revenues are supposed to be improving, and I think they are, I would bespeak a reasonable amount of the increase which is accruing from month to month to be devoted to the Department of Agriculture. I do not know what department will be instrumental in getting Canada back on her feet more than agriculture. That industry represents more people than any other in the dominion. I do not blame the Minister of Finance so much either, because after all it is the Prime Minister who has to say definitely what each department shall receive. It looks to me that the trouble lies between the minister and the Prime Minister so far as this regrettable continuous reduction in estimates for agriculture is concerned. This year it is lower than ever by three-quarters of a million; it is down to what it was about ten years ago, six and a half millions.
I am really getting anxious, wondering where this downward tendency will stop, and I hold the ministry as a whole rather than the Minister of Agriculture responsible for this absolute neglect of the major occupation of the people of Canada. I spoke of this last year and I will not speak harshly about it any more. I merely direct the attention of the ministry to this tendency towards a seeming neglect of the major occupation of the Canadian people. Why it should be I do not know. Evidently the relative importance of

this industry has not yet been seized by the government, or it would have been given visibility to, in these estimates, by an upward rather than a downward tendency. I can only express my regret at it as I have done on former occasions, and I hope that the minister and his colleagues present will do something to stop this tendency. I am sure the minister's estimates go to the treasury board much larger than this; I feel confident that they do.
I know that the heads of branches must ask for more than they get, and the matter must come in that shape before the ministry and the subcommittee of government called the treasury board. So that the whole government is to be held responsible for this, and I do not think the excuse of low revenues is sufficient to justify the decrease. Canada can never come back until agriculture shows a tendency to come back, and consequently the props should be strengthened under this department instead of being jolted from under it.


Robert Weir: It is only natural
that the hon. member (Mr. Motherwell) should be struck in this way with the reduction of estimates. The test I keep before me each year when the estimates are submitted and agreed to-and so far I have had no difficulty in having the request met-is this that the services in each branch will not be in any way impaired. A large number of reductions have been made possible, for instance by reorganization. I might refer to the live stock branch, but I do not wish to open up this matter here because I should prefer to have the items dealt with item by item. I can assure hon. members however that there has been no depreciation in the services given in each of these votes. In the majority of the votes there has been improved service as a result of reorganization within the particular branch, combining the heads of services, so that it is more flexible, uniting them in a common effort, than had been the case in various divisions before. Perhaps we have given the matter more attention because of the period of economic depression through which we have been passing; it has been necessary for us to endeavour, as we might not have done had it not been for the present financial condition, to make every effort to reorganize in order to save money. But we have always kept before us the one yardstick, namely, that there should be no depreciation in any service rendered agriculture in the various branches. And in most branches the services have been actually strengthened.

Supply-A griculture-Dairyin g


William Richard Motherwell: There is something in that, but I am afraid that reason does not quite satisfy my hon. friend himself. He better than anyone else must know that some of the activities of the various branches have been reduced, the staff being reduced, pos-s;bly owing to reorganization. However, we will not discuss this particular item, which is not so conspicuous as some others. In the Health of Animals branch, for example, the activities can hardly be as general and widespread in the establishment of restricted areas for instance, as in the past. However, we will leave that vote until we come to it. I think my hon. friend knows better than anyone else that he has been jewing the votes down year by year, pinching off here and pinching off there, until so to speak the work has its eyes sticking out, wondering what is going to happen next.
I know you cannot make a substantial reduction in each of these estimates without affecting the service. You can lop off a few salaries, dismiss a few employees, getting rid of them by reorganization, and while that may effect a small saving I do not know but even that will have an injurious effect on the service. But generally, in the main work of the field men throughout Canada, whether it is one branch or the other, I am afraid you cannot take off four millions in three years without substantially reducing services, some here and some there, all making a considerable aggregate. If it can be done this way, how would it do to make the vote for agriculture a little lower still and save that much more money? I am afraid my hon. friend has come long ago to the point where no further reductions can be made without sacrificing the work to a considerable extent. There is something, possibly, in what th-e minister says in regard to reorganization, and perhaps some slight saving has been effected there. But to cut tlhe aggregate vote nearly in two and at the same time to maintain the services is a suggestion which I am not quite prepared to accept at its full face value; not that I doubt my hon. friend's statement, but I do not think it can be done by anyone. Nor do I think my hon. friend believes it can be done, if he will analyse the work and compare it with what was in vogue a few years ago. However, maybe we have now come to the bottom of these ruthless cuts. Now that we are looking forward to the salary cuts being restored-the newspapers say there are prospects of it-maybe we have got to the bottom of these successive declines in agricultural appropriations. In other words maybe we
74726-87i
have touched bottom in the matter of reduction in the agricultural estimates and another year will see a revival, an upward tendency. If that happens, I shall be the first to congratulate ourselves, the government and the minister.


Robert Weir: In that connection, as I suggested, I am anxious that each appropriation that appears in the estimates should be dealt with from that test as to just what changes have been made in the service and whether the work is suffering as a result of this. Personally I do not believe it is, and I think it has been possible, due to different things, to reduce the vote without in any way injuring the services. I shall be glad to invite discussion vote by vote along this particular line in reference to the services given.


Albert Joseph Brown: Supply-A gricult ure-Dairying
The following is the percentages of all prizes:
Percentages of
Province-	all prizes
Manitoba	 55 A
Saskatchewan	 15.9
Alberta	 17.4
Ontario	 8.7
Quebec	 1-7
British Columbia	 0-9


Mr. STANLEY:: Was the hon. member at all these fairs?


Albert Joseph Brown: That takes in all the fairs. A summary of prizes won in 1933 is as
follows:	
	Manitoba
155	Firsts.
154	Seconds.
72	Thirds.
2	Fourths.
1	First highest average score.
4	Highest scores.
1	Championship silver cup.
1	Gold medal Motherwell trophy.
3	Silver medals.
1	Highest total score.
r	Saskatchewan
11	Firsts.
71	Seconds.
28	Thirds.
1	Second high average score.
	Alberta
22	Firsts.
59	Seconds.
39	Thirds.
	British Columbia
2	Firsts.
4	Seconds.
	Ontario
17	Firsts.
12	Seconds.
31	Thirds.
1	Silver medal.
1	Highest score.
	Quebec
3	Seconds.
9	Thirds.
I put that on record because I think we cannot too often emphasize the necessity of maintaining high quality production, nor do I think we can too often emphasize the necessity of grading our farm products. Since the principle of cream grading has been adopted in Manitoba and has been consistently adhered to, the work being done in conjunction with the very effective dairy commissioner in that province, the result has been as I have indicated. Nobody will contend that commercial butter is equal to that which appears at these exhibitions, but the fact that this record has been made is to my mind a strong argument for the maintenance of the grading of our cream and of all our other dairy products.

Perhaps just in this connection I might mention poultry. If there is one thing that has been an outstanding success in the west, it is the poultry pools where under government auspices or through the initiative of the government some years ago an expert poultry man was sent out. When we began to ship poultry through those pools some of the stuff that was brought in was so poor the people had to take it home again; it would not be accepted. But the people who brought that stuff in were able to see what good, properly dressed poultry really was, and the consequence has been that the whole standard of dressed poultry has been raised, due undoubtedly to. the fact that this system of grading has been adopted. People have been able to see what good poultry is.
Speaking again on the grading of cream,
I am not certain of this figure, but I heard it asserted that sixty per cent of the cream delivered to the creameries in Manitoba last year was table cream. People thought at "first cream was simply cream, but they very soon learned that when cream was paid for by the grade, it paid them to take good care of their cream. I do not want to cast reflections upon other provinces, but some objection has pretty persistently come from Quebec. I can say this, that from my knowledge of Quebec there is no other country in the world better suited to the production of high quality butter than the eastern townships of Quebec and the Laurentian mountains across the Ottawa river. They have splendid pasture and the very best of running water, and there is no reason why a high quality of butter could not be produced. I know they tell us that it pays them better to produce cream and I know also very large quantities of milk from Quebec go into Montreal as liquid milk; but still I maintain that if the producers adopt and consistently adhere to the principle of the grading of cream as we have done in Manitoba, all the provinces will be able to come somewhere near the level that has been attained in my province.


Mr. GARLAND (Carleton):: Does the hon. member give the government any credit for that?


Cameron Ross McIntosh: Why, certainly.


Albert Joseph Brown: This was going on long
before the present government came into power. I might say that as far back as 1924 the records were as high. I am willing to give the Minister of Agriculture every credit for consistently adhering to the system of grading farm products, and I am only sorry he has not had much support from eastern Canada up to date.

Supply-Agriculture-Dairying


Cameron Ross McIntosh: A common practice across the way.


Joseph Georges Bouchard: From his own side.


Robert Weir: I am pleased that the hon. member. for Lisgar (Mr. Brown) took the time to bring to the attention of the committee the very excellent progress that has been made in the province of Manitoba in this connection. I am sure those of us who for years have been interested in this work have been impressed by the excellent showing that has been made in exhibitions, particularly by a number of the creameries in Manitoba. I think one of the most consistent winners for years has been the creamery at Shoal Lake. But the winning of prizes, although it speaks volumes in itself, has led to a certain misunderstanding with reference to the quality of butter that is produced in the various provinces. With the indulgence of the committee I would like to put on the record the picture as we have it; I think perhaps it is more representative of the industry as a whole in the various provinces.



TABLE No. 5

[Stage Direction]
Creamery butter production and grading including butter scored from samples, 1933
Province	Production lbs.	Graded lbs.	% Total Make Graded	Y<>
First Grade	% Of the First Grade Scoring 93 and over*Saskatchewan	19,440,564	16,783,089	86-3	83-44	49-7*Alberta	23,542,877	19,310,427	82-0	78-03	41-7Manitoba	19,591,957	13,886,040	70-9	83-94	37-1Quebec	62,738,000	23,604,280	37-6	85-67	34-6*British Columbia	5,047,241	1,290,586	25-6	85-51	71-0*Ontario	75,438,501	15,456,224	20-5	69-77	28-4*Nova Scotia	5,966,588	526,632	8-8	27-16	5-1P. E. Island	2,118,110	76,440	3-6	100-00	62-1New Brunswick	2,584,714	15,288	0-6	31-50	Total	216,468,552	90,949,006	42 01	80-32	39-7
* Provinces which had butter scored from samples.
Considering that Saskatchewan has the highest percentage graded, and has almost fifty per cent high scoring first grade, I am informed that the truest picture of the relative quality of the production of butter on that basis put Saskatchewan in the lead. We have heard it stated on different occasions, and the impression seems to be held by many, that Quebec does not produce on the whole as good quality butter as some of the other provinces-
Vincent Dupuis: Is that the affirmation of the minister?


Robert Weir: No, I am just
correcting a wrong impression. Quebec has out of a total of 37-6 per cent graded 85-67 per cent first grade, and of the highest scoring first grade 34-6 per cent, which stands well to the top of all the provinces in the whole picture.


Vincent Dupuis: That is some compensation.


Robert Weir: And it represents a very large amount of butter.


Wilfrid Girouard: Mr. Chairman, I wish to immediately associate myself with the former Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) in protesting. All admit that, at present, a normal and permanent recovery is impossible in this country unless measures are taken to help and develop agriculture more than what is being done at present. It is most amazing to observe that the Dominion Department of Agriculture, within the last few years, has considerably reduced its estimates. This year, I note that a reduction of 8858,000 is made, last year $381,000, and the previous year $3,297,471. Ever since the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Weir) has been at the head of this department, his estimates have been decreasing from year to year and I recall, a short time ago-last week, I think-that the hon. Minister enumerated what he contended he had done to help agriculture, on the whole, in Canada. I had the opportunity last year and two years ago to ask the Minister of Agriculture what steps he had taken to help the farmers of Quebec and Ontario. I was unable to get a satisfactory reply. I trust that before these estimates are carried the minister will explain what special steps he has taken to help the Quebec and Ontario farmers.
We are, at present, discussing an item which interests the dairy industry and if we are to
Questions

put faith in the reports which have been issued, up to date, by the Department of Agriculture, one might be led to believe that our cheese exports, for instance, have greatly increased. It is true that the Quebec and Ontario farmers were told-


John Ritchie MacNicol: It is eleven o'clock.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Monday, March 12, 1934