[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Introduction of	bills-Mr.	Reid-Bill
intituled: "An Act to amend the Bank of Canada Act."
Mr. SPEAKER:: When the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) on Wednesday last moved for leave to introduce a bill to amend the Bank of Canada Act, a point of order was raised by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning), and I deferred my decision until to-day because I wanted to make a complete examination of the proposed bill. I find that the bill is not in order, and shall now give the details of my decision.
The objects of the bill which the hon. member for New Westminster is seeking to introduce in amendment to the Bank of Canada Act are to allow the Bank of Canada to hold silver coin and bullion in conjunction with gold as a reserve against the note issue and deposit liabilities and also to authorize the issue of certificates against the silver held in the reserve.
Under section 31 of the act, the Receiver General of Canada is entitled to share in the profits of the bank. If the reserve required as security against outstanding notes and deposit liabilities is to consist of silver bullion as well as gold, the fluctuations in the price of silver may cause the bank to sustain serious losses and therefore its profits may be substantially curtailed with an accompanying reduction of the receiver general's share therein and therefore a diminution of the public revenue. It is an established principle in British parliaments, which was set down by a standing order passed in the British House of Commons as far back as 1707, that financial business must originate in a committee of the whole house.
Private members cannot introduce a bill of this character, which ought to be preceded by a resolution on motion of a minister with the recommendation of His Excellency the Governor General.
Moreover, there is now on the order paper a resolution in the name of the Minister of Finance antecedent to a bill to amend the Bank of Canada Act so as to increase the capital stock of the bank and to assure ownership of a majority of shares by the government. Full discussion on this measure cannot be anticipated by a private member's bill, and in determining whether a discussion is out of order on the ground of antici-

Moose River Mine Rescue
pation, the authors say that regard shall be had by the Speaker to the probability of the matter anticipated being brought before the house in a reasonable time. I am well aware that a motion for leave to bring in a bill is in order even if another similar motion with regard to a bill dealing with the same- subject matter stands on the order paper, but when the latter is a government measure announced in the speech from the throne and bound to be taken up by the house, I doubt if the discussion of some of its provisions can be forestalled by the introduction of a private member's bill. For this reason and also because the bill sought to be introduced deals with a part of the dominion's finances, I rule it out of order.


Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):: Speaking to the point of order, Mr. Speaker, I suppose I shall have to abide by your decision, but I would point out that your decision dealt with only one part of the bill. When this bill was before the house last year the same position was taken by the then Speaker, and although I have modified my bill to conform with the ruling then given, it has again been thrown out, and again only the first clause of the bill has been dealt with. Last year when I introduced my bill I was supported by members of the present government who said that the bill was in order.


Mr. MacNICOL:: They did many things
last year they would not do this year.


Walter Edward Foster: Order.



PRICES OF FARM IMPLEMENTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. C. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: I would ask the government if it has drawn to the attention of the agricultural implement industry the motion passed by this house asking that industry to keep the price of farm implements at their former level until the present investigation has been completed; what assurance has been received from the agricultural implement industry, and why has this request not been complied with?


Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, letters were sent
to the implement companies calling their attention to the resolution passed by the committee. So far as I know there has not been, down to the present, information received in reply from all the companies. I think a letter was received from one company, but I would prefer when the information is produced to have it brought down as a whole.


Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: Does the government contemplate bringing down any legislation or taking other action to bring the implement companies to a reasonable frame of mind regarding these prices?



MOOSE RIVER MINE RESCUE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I hesitate to
do more than suggest to the government, particularly to the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), the possibility of considering whether parliament might not itself take some steps to mark its appreciation of the heroic efforts of those who restored to society the two gentlemen who were entombed at Moose River. It might be well in view of the subscription that is being taken up by the Canadian Red Cross to do something for them, or for the government to consider whether parliament as such might not take some other means of marking our appreciation of what has been done. I was going to mention it privately to the right hon. gentleman, but I was detained and did not get into the house until this moment.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, may I say to my right hon. friend that had I been in the house yesterday I would have sought to give expression to what I believe to be the feelings of all hon. members with respect to the heroic service rendered by those who participated in effecting the deliverance of Doctor Robertson and Mr. Scadding from their long entombment in the mine at Moose River. Unfortunately I was not in the city. I sent a message by wire, however, from Toronto, to the Premier of Nova Scotia, in which I ventured to express sentiments on behalf of all members of parliament which I believed it would be their wish to have expressed. In the circumstances I did not rise in my place to-day on the orders of the day to make a further reference, but I may say to my right hon. friend that the government has had under consideration the very matter he has suggested.
Now that the leader of the opposition has mentioned the subject, I should like to say that I know it is the wish of hon. members of parliament that some expression should be given in its records to the feelings of relief, joy and thankfulness felt by us all at the saving of the lives of Doctor Robertson and Mr. Scadding, to our feeling of profoundest sympathy with Mrs. Magill and the members of her family in the bereavement which they
Supply-Superannuation

have suffered, and to our unbounded admiration of the heroism of those who, altogether regardless of the risks involved, cooperated in the rescue effected.
I imagine at no other time have the thoughts of persons of all classes in all parts of this country been more united in their hopes and wishes and prayers than they have been during the -past fortnight. There has been on the part of the people of Canada as a whole a unanimity of feeling alike of the deepest sympathy and of the greatest admiration as respects those who displayed such determination, fortitude and endurance and who so bravely and so efficiently cooperated in effecting the rescue, as also with respect to those who were rescued. We have felt that we have had a manifestation of the human spirit at its highest and best. That spirit has exhibited itself in a manner which has reflected credit not only on all those who participated in the actual rescue, but on our whole country. There has been service, not for the sake of recognition or decoration, but for the love of service itself; a willingness, if need be, to give life with no thought other than to save life. It is wholly appropriate that members of this parliament should express their profound appreciation of what will remain I believe for all time an epic in Canadian annals, revealing at its true worth the character of the men and women of this country.


Mr. DANIEL McIVOR (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, perhaps fools rush in where angels fear to tread. This example of bravery and endurance has thrilled all Canada, but I am concerned, sir, with the value of human life wherever it may be, whether in Canada or in Ethiopia, and I think it is time that the Christian nations of the world woke up to the value of human life anywhere.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Bradette in the chair.



SUPERANNUATION

[Stage Direction]
To provide for retiring allowances to former employees of the department of public printing and stationery, $6,432.
Richard Bedford Bennett: I should like to inquire of the government if the work with respect to superannuation has progressed beyond where it was a few months ago. Probably the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning) will be able to answer this question. As the minister knows, superannuation payments are paid into the consolidated revenue fund and are utilized for general public purposes. For some

time an effort has been made to determine the exact actuarial position of the superannuation fund, that is, whether or not the fund is sufficiently large to meet the charges against it, having regard to the sums that must be paid and the ages of those entitled to payment. So far as I am aware this work, was not completed and I do not know to what extent the actuarial investigation has gone forward. This is one of the matters to which we gave some attention and made some reference during the first year we were in office. If the minister has any further information on this matter, I think it should be given to the committee. It is possible there may be an increase in our liability as the fund may or may not be ample for the purpose of meeting the charges which may be made against it. I do not know whether any progress has been made in determining this during the last six months.
Hon. CHARLES A. DUNNING (Minister of Finance):	Mr. Chairman, I think the
answer is that no progress has been made. I know my right hon. friend and the Minister of Finance of his government, Hon. E. N. Rhodes, both received delegations from civil service associations making representations, among other things, with regard to the superannuation fund. After consultation with my colleagues, I undertook that during this term of parliament a committee of parliament would be appointed to deal with matters of this kind and other matters respecting the Civil Service Act. Having that in mind, we shall endeavour to press along the investigation into the very complex matter to which my hon. friend refers in order that information may be available to the committee.


Mr. NEILL:: The minister in making fais
reply does not seem to have touched upon what is almost a burning question, that is, the need of superannuation by a large body of public servants who are not now eligible.


Mr. DUNNING:: That is part of the
question.
Mr. NE.ILL: Many of these people occupy what are known as permanent-temporary positions, whatever they may be. Some of them have served the government thirty-five years, but they are still considered as temporaries and are not qualified for superannuation. They are paid what are known as current rates; they receive their salaries year by year on a fixed basis, and I hope the minister will consider the many discrepancies of this kind. He mentioned appointing a committee during this term of parliament, but I hope that means during the next

Supply-Post Office
session. I believe there was a committee of t)he civil service which sat for some years and which made certain recommendations to which very little attention was paid. I hope this matter will be gone into because it is a terrible thing that people who have served their country well for twenty or thirty years cannot get any superannuation.


Charles Avery Dunning: That would be part of the subject with which I dealt when replying to the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett). I would not like to give a definite undertaking that a committee similar to what was known as the Malcolm committee will be appointed at the next session of parliament; the next session of parliament is a long way off, and I merely repeat the undertaking I gave on behalf of the government to the civil service organizations that waited upon me in connection with all these matters.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It might be desirable to set up a small committee in the service with powers under the Inquries Act, so that when the committee of the house meets the actuarial review will have been completed and the committee of the house will be able to deal with it. A committee of the house can deal only with facts that are made apparent to it, it would not be able to deal with this complex actuarial question. I am speaking subject to correction, but I believe the superintendent of insurance and his department were giving some attention to this phase of the matter.


Charles Avery Dunning: That is correct.


Mrs. BLACK (Yukon):: When this superannuation question is being considered will the minister consider also the condition of many retired civil servants in the Yukon who were so dishonestly and corruptly treated by the previous government?


Charles Avery Dunning: That is a matter which scarcely falls within the scope of amending the law, unless it were decided to change completely the basis of civil service superannuation. I am in some embarrassment in replying to the hon. member, but if she has reference to the matter to which I believe she has, in connection with which some parties desire to take action against the government, I am afraid that is a question of the interpretation of the law as it now exists. From the examination I have been able to make of it, I certainly cannot join her in applying the terms she does to my predecessors in office.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It applies to the government previous to that, because that is where it originated.


Charles Avery Dunning: I can only assure the hon. member that the government is quite prepared to make a thorough examination of the merits of the case. This really does not involve considerations similar to those involved in the other matters to which I referred.


Mr. STIRLING:: I notice this item applies only to one department of government. Could the minister explain why it should relate only to the public printing and stationery branch?


Mr. ELLIOTT (Middlesex):: When the committee rose the other evening we were considering the post office items on page 93. I do not think this particular item was intended to be considered this afternoon.


Sir GEORGE PERLEY:: I see no reason why this item should not be carried.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Salaries, including amounts required to pay allowances to office appliance operators, grade 2, operating mechanical audit card punching machines in accordance with the terms of order in council P.C. 280/383, dated February 17, 1930; to pay allowances to typists, grade 1, employed cutting stencils in accordance with regulations approved by order in council; and to pay allowances to office appliance operators, grade 2, in the revenue division employed as key punch operators, schedules and rates to be decided upon by the Civil Service Commission and the Post Office Department and approved by the governor in council, $1,248,660; contingencies, $155,920.
Mr. POULIOT:: May I ask the minister if there are any more copies left of the very beautiful and very expensive album published last year under the instructions of Mr. Sauve, the former Postmaster General? If so, is a copy available for every member of the house? If there is not, may I ask whether there will be a copy in the parliamentary library.


John Campbell Elliott: I am unable
to answer the question offhand but I shall be glad to make inquiries and see that my hon. friend at any rate is furnished with a copy.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Salaries and allowances, $16,063,627.50.
Mail services, including mail services by air, $13,874,500.
Miscellaneous, including $5,000 to provide for payment of compassionate allowances to employees injured while in the performance of their duties or to other persons injured while performing duties in any way connected with the postal service or in protecting His Majesty's mails, or to the dependents of such employees or other persons who may be killed while so engaged, payments to be made only on the specific authority of the governor in council, $989,600-Total, $30,927,727.50.
Supply-Post Office
George Halsey Perley: Perhaps the
minister has some general observations to make regarding the department.


John Campbell Elliott: This item is made up of salaries of postmasters of post offices on the city or 6taff basis, of district directors and superintendents of postal services. It is practically all outside service. It includes the salaries of 1,143 railway mail clerks, the mileage allowance paid railway mail clerks and any salaries of the temporary staff in the outside service, totalling 430 employees. Then there are railway mail services amounting to $6,718,'474 and steamboat, $272,241. I think those are the general services that are provided for.


Mr. HEAPS:: Prior to the Easter recess
when some other items of the Post Office Department were under consideration I raised the general question as to why we should not have a sort of concise balance sheet to show exactly how the post office is run and what its annual income and expenditures really are. At present hardly a member of the house knows anything about the operations of the postal service. We skip from one page of the estimates to another, discussing one item and then something else without really getting a complete picture of the operations of the postal service of Canada. When it comes to the buildings we find that they are in some way included as part of the operations of the postal service, though coming I understand under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works. It is impossible for any member to know exactly what the net result is. I asked the minister a few weeks ago whether he would prepare a statement along these lines and I should like to have from him now, or at any rate later on in the estimates, a complete statement such as any business organization would give in the discussion of the operations of an ordinary utility. That is to say, I want to know the total amount of income in the last fiscal year, the total expenditures, what buildings come under the jurisdiction of the department and whether the operations of these buildings are charged to the post office account. We should know all that. I wonder if the minister is in a position to give that information.


John Campbell Elliott: I thought
that I gave that information at the last sitting of the committee but evidently I did not make it sufficiently detailed for the hon. gentleman to get the plan clearly. The total revenue for the fiscal year just ended was $39,122,198. From that is taken first the amount of salaries and allowances paid
[Mr. J. C. Elliott.1
to postmasters at revenue offices, being $6,171,000. You add to that other things such as discount, stamp vendors and postmasters, compensation to messengers for special delivery of letters, $302,000. Then there are losses by fire, burglary and so on amounting to $4,000; balance of commission paid to other countries on money order business, $7,000; postage on parcels to other countries, $56,764; transit charges on correspondence to other countries; $55,000; indemnity paid owners of lost insured parcels, $18,000. These items make a total of $6,614,000.
I am not surprised that any hon. member should have some difficulty in understanding why the bookkeeping is done in the way it is, but that has been the system since confederation, I am advised. All the revenues are put into one account and that comes to $39,000,000 odd as we figure it at the present time. Then you deduct from that the $6,000,000 for the items I have already mentioned-$6,614,748.40. That leaves what is called a net revenue-it is so described, and has been for as many years as I have been able to find any details of it-amounting to $32,507,449.64. The expenditure for the outside service is made up of salaries and allowances: to postmasters and staffs, $12,260,000; district directors and staffs, $810,000; railway mail clerks, $1,951,179; mileage for those clerks, $634,330; making a total of $15,655,509 for what are called salaries and allowances. Coming to the mail service: for railways we pay out $6,718,474; for steamboats, $272,241; for land services, which includes the rural mail deliveries and the side services, that is from station to office or distributing point, $5,945,150; air service, $281,483; mail bags, $220,000. That makes a total of $13,437,348. The balance of the $29,000,000 is made up of the following items: commissions to postmasters, $2,400; travelling expenses, $60,000; printing and stationery, $250,000; postage stamps, $185,000; hand stamps, $388,000; Magdalen Islands service, $500; compassionate allowance, $1,000. Those items total $886,900. The total of that is $29,979,757.


Abraham Albert Heaps: That does not give us the
real picture of the postal service in this country. We have here a net income of a little over $32,000,000 and an expenditure of close to $30,000,000. That does not take into consideration all the buildings and equipment throughout the country?


John Campbell Elliott: No.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I do not think that is a
proper way to do the business of the country.

Supply-Post Office
If the only excuse the government has-and it applies to past governments as well-is that this system has been in effect from the time of confederation, I think it is high time we had a change, and I suggest that the Post Office Department cannot start too quickly to bring about a change by adopting some more modem method of doing its business than, evidently, it practises at the present time. There are throughout this country huge post offices; we do not know their value; we do not know the cost of maintenance of them or any of them, and we cannot have a real picture of the utility, as I call this postal service, until there is placed before us a proper balance sheet, showing the total income, the total expenditure, the cost of the various services that the people receive in respect of matters that come within the jurisdiction of the postal service.
I know that the present Postmaster General is just as anxious as any member of this house to see that we get an efficient and up to date postal service. I believe he wants to conduct the post office, as far as he possibly can, free from some of the evil influences which we know sometimes surround postmasters in their official positions. I want to impress upon him the desirability of instituting from now on a change in the whole administration of the post office. For instance, buildings are erected-by whom, I do not know; possibly by the Department of Public Works.


John Campbell Elliott: By the Department of Public Works.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Some are erected, I believe, by way of unemployment relief. Suddenly the Post Office Department is asked to take over these buildings, whether it requires them or whether it does not. Of course the buildings are maintained by the Department of Public Works and do not appear in any way as part of the postal service. I have come to the conclusion that as in fact they are part of the postal service they should come as far as possible within the jurisdiction of the Post Office Department; at all events they should not be entirely under the Department of Public Works. I favour, of course, the largest possible degree of cooperation between the two departments. But what I am anxious to have from the Postmaster General is some idea whether we cannot escape, from now on, from the tradition which has evidently affected the operation of the Post Office Department since the time of confederation, and launch out into some more up to date method of doing its business.


John Campbell Elliott: With regard to part, at any rate, of my hon. friend's statement I must say that he cannot get into any argument with me, because I agree that this is an unusual way of keeping the accounts. But when you come to consider the whole situation you are confronted with the problem of just in what way you can improve upon it. My hon. friend is quite right in saying that the expenditures include nothing for the construction of all the larger buildings that house the large post offices and post office facilities, departmental and other. They are built and to a large extent furnished by the Department of Public Works. They are taken care of by the same department. While perhaps it looks like an anomalous situation to have one department erecting the buildings and another department occupying them and not being charged up with anything for rental, for caretaking, or for a large part of the repairs, at the same time, as one who happens to know something about the Department of Public Works, I believe that that department should construct all the buildings that are used for the various services. I do not think that we should have the Post Office Department erecting buildings-


Abraham Albert Heaps: I am not suggesting it.


John Campbell Elliott: -and various other departments also constructing buildings. I believe it might be possible to keep some account of what it actually costs the country for reasonable rentals or a reasonable interest on the expenditure upon the buildings to which my hon. friend refers. I might add that when he asked the question the other evening I made inquiries of the Department of Public Works, which by the way is always a busy department, particularly so this year and at this time, when they are preparing their estimates, and my hon. friend might think I was exaggerating if I told him the amount of time required by a great many clerks to give us a fairly accurate estimate of what these costs are. Take the Langevin block, which was built by the Department of Public Works; this building is now occupied by various departments. At the present time it seems almost an interminable job to figure out the space occupied by each of these various departments in the various buildings throughout the country.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: But surely any department store has to do that in figuring its costs.


John Campbell Elliott: My hon. friend would know as much as I know about the
Supply-Post Office

way in which a department store is run. I do not imagine that a department store, all owned by the same company, would require to figure out the cost of the foot space occupied by each little branch of each department.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I do not say that, but they actually do figure out how much of the cost should be allocated to each department, and the manager of that department is held responsible for making the department pay. With regard to the production even of locomotives, in the railway shops, or repairs, they have staffs that are able to figure the cost and that is charged up to the various departments, or so I am informed. I do not see why we cannot have in the government a system which would be in conformity with modern business practice.


John Campbell Elliott: I have no doubt it could be done; it is a question for parliament to consider. This is not a new matter; it has been considered many times before. It is just a question whether or not the cost of figuring out all these various services in the many buildings that would have to be taken into account can 'be justified as an expenditure at the present time. It would have to be a very greatly increased expenditure, and now, beyond question, we are facing a heavy deficit when you take into account the rental of the buildings at fair prices.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Just one other point, as a matter of information. In the statement he gave did the minister include the cost of the inside service, what we would call the overhead, the cost to the department?


John Campbell Elliott: No, that $29,975,000, to which I think my hon. friend refers, is just for the outside service.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I do not want the minister to feel for a moment that I am criticizing him personally or the officers of his department; this is something that has grown up during the years, and I can understand how difficult it would be to launch out immediately on something new after going along in the same old ruts for so many years. At the same time there is no reason in the world why the things I have suggested cannot be done. I think the people have a right to know exactly what the postal service is costing them, and we are not in a position to say what it really does cost.


Mr. VENIOT:: Would the hon. member make that apply to all other departments?


Abraham Albert Heaps: Absolutely, without exception; I do not think we should make any difference between the departments. I should like every department to stand on its own feet. This should apply particularly to the Post Office

department because it is a utility, a revenue producing department. It may be that the people are not paying enough for the services that are rendered, but I should like some true idea of the real position of that utility, and under the present method of bookkeeping it is impossible to obtain that idea. To-day I do not know how many post office buildings are owned outright by the government. I do not know how many buildings are leased for postal purposes. I do not know, and I do not suppose the minister is in a position to give it to me at this time, the total cost of the buildings in various parts of this dominion that have been erected purely for postal purposes. We should have all that information; we should have some idea of the annual interest charges on those postal buildings, and we should have some idea of the cost of maintenance. When we get those facts we will have some idea of what the postal service of this country is costing us. As it is now all we receive is a bald statement, in more or less detail, that there is a net revenue of $32,000,000 and an expenditure of approximately $29,000,000. That is not a fair picture to present to the people, because it is not a true picture. All I am attempting to do this afternoon, as I have done previously, is to see whether it is not possible to assist the minister in getting a proper picture of the postal service of this country from a financial standpoint so that perhaps in another session we may be able to review the postal estimates more intelligently than we can at the present time. I cannot say anything more about it now, except that often after we go over these estimates we are no wiser than we were before, and that is unfortunate. Sometimes I cannot help thinking that it is odd that we in this little group, who are sometimes charged with knowing so little about business., should be the ones to insist on business methods being followed in the conduct of government.


John Campbell Elliott: I would only say to my hon. friend that it is not a matter of choice. From sheer necessity we are compelled to cut out some expenditures that we might think advisable at the present time, in arranging our estimates it has been necessary to do that. I did ask the public works department for a statement along the lines suggested by my hon. friend. When the hon. gentleman speaks of buildings used for post office purposes only, however, I think he will realize that very few of the public buildings that have been erected in Canada are used for postal purposes only. In nearly every building there is a customs office though unfortunately, in the interests of economy, many of those

Supply-Post Office
customs offices in the smaller places were closed recently. At other points you may have a little armoury in the public building, where the arms of the local militia unit are kept, and of course when you get into the larger buildings the situation becomes much more complicated.
I quite appreciate the fact that my hon. friend is doing this in a desire to be helpful, and I have no quarrel with him at all. I think all these discussions are entirely to the good, because this should be a business institution. The department is a large one; our revenue now amounts to nearly $40,000,000 a year, and comes principally from the sale of postage stamps. That means a lot of business, a great many transactions and a great deal of work in handling mail, newspapers and various other articles. My hon. friend will realize that even in the management of an office, for instance, the situation has changed materially in the last fifteen or twenty years.
I recall that when I first occupied an office no one ever thought of estimating the cost of the foot space occupied by each individual in the office. That is done to-day in up to date offices; they know just how much space is used by each man in the office, what share of the time of the office staff he requires, what is involved in the cleaning of his office space, and so on. I suppose the time will come, perhaps sooner than my hon. friend thinks, when some such system will be adopted in the various departments of the government. That is all I can say about it. I am satisfied the business of the department is being conducted with due consideration for economy and an endeavour to serve the public. I do not believe I can add anything to what I have already said.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Are there, individual
accounts for each post office in Canada, indicating the debits, credits and revenues of each?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, and it is on those revenues that the remunerations of postmasters in revenue post offices are based. The annual report shows all post offices in Canada and the revenues of each.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Has the minister the net revenue for the Toronto post office?


John Campbell Elliott: For the year ended March 31, 1935, the revenue of the Toronto post office, including an amount of $17,169 for non-accounting suboffices, was $6,899,398.08. That is divided, and I can give the figures if the hon. member wishes to have them.


John Ritchie MacNicol: No; I should like to have the net profit over and above the expenses.


John Campbell Elliott: We have not that information. That revenue goes in as part of the $39,000,000, and there is no net expense account for Toronto.


John Ritchie MacNicol: How can you tell whether a post office is a liability or an asset to the country? I am referring now not particularly to the Toronto post office, but to any post office from which revenues are derived.


John Campbell Elliott: We can give the salaries and allowances, and can give further information as to costs of all services. We can give a close estimate of a particular office's proportion of the general overhead of the department.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Then I take it that the net revenue for Toronto is not kept separately.


John Campbell Elliott: No, in the sense that there is a charge for public buildings.


John Ritchie MacNicol: In looking over the public accounts I notice that in Toronto the head official is called a district director, whereas in Vancouver he is called a district superintendent. What is the difference between these two officials?


John Campbell Elliott: In some cases the offices of district director and postmaster for the main office have been combined, and in that event the official is called a district director, because he not only manages the local post office but also directs the services in the district. In the other instance the official is called a district superintendent. That is the best explanation I can give. I have had prepared a chart showing a list of offices and officials, starting with the office boys right up to superintendents.


Peter John Veniot: Can the minister tell when the distinction was first made between district superintendent and district director?


Jean-François Pouliot: The previous government did it.


John Campbell Elliott: I am advised it was about 1933 or 1934.


Jean-François Pouliot: It was done by the Bennett government.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The public accounts show that the district director of Toronto receives only $4,771 per year. That seems to be a small salary for a man with such great responsibility. The district director in a large city like Toronto would have heavy responsibilities. Is that all he receives?


Jean-François Pouliot: He has so little because McNaughton has too much.


John Campbell Elliott: The maximum to which he will eventually go will be $6,000. a substantial -sum.

Sup-ply-Post Office


Mr. SPENCE:: Is the minister referring to the postmaster at Toronto?


John Ritchie MacNicol: At this time he receives only $4,771.


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I do not see in the public accounts that any postmaster, either for Montreal or elsewhere, is receiving $6,000. The official in Montreal is receiving the extremely low salary of $3,132. That would seem to be a ridiculous salary for a man in that position.


John Campbell Elliott: What is the date of the report from which the hon. member is getting his information?


John Ritchie MacNicol: It is the report of the auditor general for 1935.


John Campbell Elliott: I think all the postmasters in question are getting more money now. For several years salary increases were stopped, and the salaries in the report from which the hon. member reads are the salaries paid prior to the time the increases began to take effect.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That makes it all the worse.


John Campbell Elliott: Quite so.
Nevertheless we cannot have it both ways. One hon. member complains about losing money in the post office administration.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The Toronto office is a large revenue producing office; perhaps it is your chief revenue producer.


John Campbell Elliott: There are grade five district directors at Toronto and Montreal, and the salaries run from $5,400 to $6,000.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is what they will be, in due course?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I had intended to follow my colleague in a few words along lines suggested by the minister's answer. He speaks of the difficulties of carrying out the administration in a businesslike way. May I mention one further illustration: There are arrangements between the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Canadian National Railways by which they run pool trains and have pooled services at terminals. Often they run over one another's lines, and in some instances they have joint terminals. Sometimes they utilize one another's rolling stock, and all that kind of thing. I am not prepared to say exactly how they work out their arrangements, but if it is possible for these two

great railroads, which are supposed to be rivals in their services at least, to estimate closely the cost that should be charged to each road, I cannot see that it would be anything like as difficult for a department such as the post office to work out some system of allocating costs. To-day, as my friend from Toronto has said, you cannot tell whether any office, even the Toronto office, is really revenue producing. It may have a certain revenue, but the initial expenses may be so great as to offset the revenue.


Mr. GOLDING:: Everybody knows the
expense is greater.


James Shaver Woodsworth: We do not know
anything about it from the minister's statement, and that is my point. I think we ought to have a statement so that the public would have knowledge with regard to the Toronto office and the Winnipeg office and any other office as well as with regard to the whole system.


John Campbell Elliott: In order that there may be no misunderstanding, we can tell the cost of each of these services except the cost to which my h.on. friend has referred, that is the cost of the rentals. All the other costs can be estimated fairly closely. We can ascertain the cost of the caretaker, the cost of coal and fuel, the cost of repairs for that particular building, and all that is kept track of by another department.


James Shaver Woodsworth: The exception is
the very thing we are talking about, and we urge that that exception should be included in order to get a proper balance sheet. Surely the minister will admit that. We do not know to-day, and we ought to know, what should fairly be charged up to the Toronto office for rental, interest, overhead and departmental expenses. The balance sheet should be so arranged that we know the costs for the whole system as well as for particular offices. Not merely should we have this information with regard to each office, but parliament is supposed to pass upon the different charges that are made by the Post Office Department. The department charges three cents postage for a letter, one cent for something else, so much for newspapers, and so on, but unless the department knows the cost of particular services we can have very little conception whether or not the newspapers, for example, are carrying their fair share of the load. It may be that indirectly we are subsidizing the newspapers and magazines to the extent of a very large sum. I have a suspicion that we are, but we have no means of knowing that, and we should know it. If

Supply-Post Office
we are to determine intelligently the costs of the different branches of the service we must have a full statement. I am not very well satisfied with the minister's statement that he has inherited the system and hopes that at some indefinite time in the future it may be changed. He says it has existed since confederation and that many times there has been an agitation to bring about a change. Does the minister suggest that we have to wait another sixty or seventy years until we are all dead and gone before some intelligent government can initiate changes? I would like t-o have from the minister before we gat through to-day a definite assurance that he will initiate the change before the next parliament; then we will know where we are at.
There are two points on which I should like information. The minister spoke about subsidies to the steamship lines. Has he at hand the amount paid to the steamship lines, and also the amount of the subsidies paid to the two great railway companies?


Peter John Veniot: Do you mean transatlantic steamships? The post office pays no subsidies to them.


James Shaver Woodsworth: The minister mentioned the word subsidies, and I want to know what subsidies are being paid.


Peter John Veniot: He mentioned delivery of mail by steamer, but that was not transatlantic.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Is this another
expenditure that has not been mentioned?


John Campbell Elliott: We paid
altogether for mail service by steamboat in the dominion, $272,241. The main subsidies to steamships are paid by the trade and commerce department. The amount I gave is what we pay to various steamships in different parts of this country for bearing in some cases a part of the cost of transferring the mail from one point to another where water has to be crossed.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Entirely within the bounds of Canada?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Is that a fixed charge, or is it a payment for actual services rendered?


John Campbell Elliott: It is for actual services rendered, and the amount is arrived at much in the same way as it is for the rural mail service. Sometimes it is part of a courier contract where the mail is carried in part by land conveyance and in part by steamboat.


James Shaver Woodsworth: The minister says that subsidies to the transatlantic and trans-12739-137
pacific steamships are paid by the Department of Trade and Commerce. Has he any idea of the value of these services to the post office?


John Campbell Elliott: My hon.
friend will understand that it is hard to figure it out to a cent, but I may say that besides the services arranged for and paid for 'by the Post Office Department, the Department of Trade and Commerce provides a subsidy covering the use of steamships for both the transatlantic and the transpacific services, and the discontinuance of this arrangement would mean that an additional $300,000 would have to be provided in the post office vote to carry on this service. It is worth that to us.


James Shaver Woodsworth: You consider it worth that to you?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Does that mean that that is what it costs us now, or what it would cost to provide a substitute service?


John Campbell Elliott: If we had to provide it, that is what it would cost us.


James Shaver Woodsworth: One other point. You pay the railways for carrying the mails. Are you able to determine what that costs?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, we can tell that exactly.


James Shaver Woodsworth: What is paid to the Canadian Pacific and what to the Canadian National?


John Campbell Elliott: We paid to the Canadian Pacific $3,432,249.22 and to the Canadian National $2,779,389.44 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1935, and to other railways for the same year, $369,645.35.


James Shaver Woodsworth: May I ask why a larger amount is paid to the private road than to what is ordinarily termed the government road?


Jean-François Pouliot: It was done by the Bennett government.


John Campbell Elliott: The difference in the payments is explained in this way:	First, there are the transcontinental
railway post office services on the Canadian Pacific Railway which were organized prior to the Canadian National railway being constructed. The Canadian Pacific railway being the pioneer road across Canada, it follows that the majority of important towns and cities have grown up and developed around that railway and it was only natural that the trans-Canada postal services should be organized thereon. Next, there is the ear-

Supply-Post Office

riage of transatlantic and transpacific mail; to China, Japan and Australasia on the Pacific, and to t*he United Kingdom and Europe on the Atlantic. Mails which arrive on Canadian Pacific steamers are transported, under agreement, on Canadian Pacific railway trains, and vice versa. Mails carried on Cunard and White Star steamers are transported on Canadian National railway trains, and vice versa.


James Shaver Woodsworth: If I post a letter
in Vancouver, why cannot that letter come to Ottawa over the Canadian National railways? Why has it to be sent by the Canadian Pacific railway? This is not a transpacific transaction, it is something happening within the bounds of Canada. I should like to know why it is, when wa have our own government railway, constant preference is given to a privately owned road.


John Campbell Elliott: We endeavour to get the mail carried on the fastest route available.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Has the Post Office Department ever made any representations to the board of railway commissioners that the Canadian National Railways be permitted to travel as fast as the Canadian Pacific?


John Campbell Elliott: It is not a question of the speed of the respective trains; it is the routes and the timetable. The hon. member has referred to the service from Vancouver to Ottawa. I think he will readily understand that a more direct service can be had over the Canadian Pacific.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Would the minister give the difference in the running times?


John Campbell Elliott: I cannot do
that offhand.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I do not think the minister ought to-I shall not say "bluff," but he ought not to put forward that point of view unless he is prepared to give the running times. I believe the running time between Vancouver and Ottawa is the same on each road. I cannot see why we cannot use our own line rather than a private line.


Jean-François Pouliot: I should like to submit
one fact to the Postmaster General. Mail leaving Ottawa for Quebec and the maritime provinces is carried on the Ocean Limited which leaves Montreal at eight o'clock; this mail leaves Ottawa on the Canadian Pacific train leaving here at three thirty, the mail closing around two thirty o'clock. It would

be much more convenient if the mail going east could be sent to Montreal on the Canadian National Railway train which leaves at four thirty in the afternoon. The mail would reach Montreal in ample time to be transferred to the Ocean Limited and the people in Ottawa would have one more hour in which to attend to their correspondence. The Canadian Pacific Railway would not suffer very much and those people who are writing to eastern Canada would be benefited. Will the minister kindly consider this suggestion?


John Campbell Elliott: I shall be glad to look into any suggestion made by hy hon. friend. I do not know the times at which these different trains leave, and I make no pretence of knowing it. I do not think the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) was serious when he suggested that I was trying to bluff the committee, any more than I would be serious if I suggested that he was trying to do the same thing, which I do not. I appreciate his criticism and I may tell him that I do not consider it as being at all personal.


James Shaver Woodsworth: It did not seem to me that the minister's argument was relevant to my question. If I understood him, he suggested that the Canadian Pacific was given preference because of its faster services. My first answer is that the railway commission has a great deal to do with determining the rate of travel over the different lines, and I know in one or two cases it has been extremely difficult for the Canadian National to obtain permission to give as fast a transcontinental service as the Canadian Pacific.


John Campbell Elliott: I do not think the hon. member will accuse me or any officials of the department of wanting to give preference to a privately owned railway as against a publicly owned railway. I am not pretending to be a railway timetable, but the frequency of service is taken into consideration by the department. The frequency of service is considered quite as much as the speed of the trains; in fact I do not believe there is a great deal of difference in the actual speed per mile.


Peter John Veniot: I should like to ask the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre a question. If a Canadian Pacific train left Vancouver for the east at eight in the morning and a Canadian National train left at nine, on which train would he want his mail to come?


Grote Stirling: It would depend upon when he wrote it.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Someone has sug-gesed it would depend on when I wrote the letter.

Supply-Post Office


John Campbell Elliott: That is true.


Peter John Veniot: My hon. friend is trying to quibble, something which he was- accusing us on this side of doing. Let us assume the letter has been written and is ready to mail; if the Canadian Pacific leaves at eight in the morning and the Canadian National at nine, on which train would he want his mail to come?


James Shaver Woodsworth: One can give instances of that kind. I can give a little incident. Once I was about to board a Canadian National train which was to leave Vancouver. I tried to post a letter on the train and I was told it could not be done, that it would have to be taken over to the general post office, transported from there to the Canadian Pacific station and leave on a Canadian Pacific train which left twenty-four hours later. In that instance I preferred to have it go Canadian National.


James Houston Spence: I think we have had this
afternoon a demonstration of the fact that the system by which the Post Office Department is conducted is an antiquated one. I am not going to condemn either the present or the preceding Postmaster General, because they have all proceeded along the same line. It is antiquated, no matter how it originated, and it is time for a change. We do not know to-day whether the Post Office Department makes a million or loses ten millions; the only answer we can get from any postmaster general is that the total revenue is so much, because as to expenditures he knows nothing. What we need in Canada is a first class, up to date Public Works department. It is the largest spending department we have and there should be in it an efficient accounting system to keep track of all the work done for the Post Office Department. To begin with, it supplies that department with buildings and charges no rent. It furnishes the buildings, supplies the engineers, caretakers, firemen, cleaning staff and does all that work at the instigation of some postmaster in a particular place such as Toronto. If he wants to spend ten thousand or fifteen thousand dollars tearing down a wall here or there, the Public Works department is charged with that work and the Post Office Department pays nothing. The whole system should be changed so that we might know whether the department was making or losing money. Each department should stand on its own feet; that is the way business is done, and there would be no difficulty at all if such a system were carried out. If the Public Works department builds a post office in Toronto, say, costing $600,000, or a customs house, the Post 12739-137i
Office Department or the department for which the work is done should be charged at the rate of three or four per cent, just as I would be charged if I were occupying space in some store. That is the system followed by Eaton's and Simpson's in Toronto, and there is no reason why it could not be followed here. There is no reason in the world why the Postmaster General should not be in a position to answer one intelligent question-and as I say it is not his fault. The sooner we change the system the better it will be for the Post Office Department. That department should get down to a business basis and let us know whether it is making or losing money. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent in Toronto alone for the Post Office Department for which that department does not pay a red cent.
An observation was made about the salary which the director was receiving

they have a new name for the postmaster in Toronto. When Mr. Lemon was there he received seven or eight thousand a year as postmaster, and now we have a distinguished gentleman acting as superintendent. His official position is postmaster, and he has the superintendent's job, and I am told that he gets $4,771; yet the man is capable of making much more than that in a city like Toronto. I am not advocating high salaries because I cannot make any high salary myself-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


James Houston Spence: -but I do think that
everyone should be treated fairly. My advice to the government is this: Never mind the past; forget about it altogether and get down to hardpan. Start a new system so that we shall know what we are doing and find out whether we are making or losing money in the Post Office Department. The Post Office Department can pay for aeroplanes without going to the Public Works department; they can subsidize a steamship company themselves and where the Public Works department does work for them they should be charged with it, and that money deducted from their total revenue. If that were done, parliament would know what their net revenue was. I venture to say that they have not had any revenue in the last ten years but are thousands of dollars behind. But you cannot get any information.


Thomas Reid: With regard to the remarks of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth), and in order that no false impression may go out, I might make a few observations as one who has delved into this matter. The information I have regarding the speed of the Canadian
Supply-Post Office

National is that it would clip about ten hours off the running time from Vancouver to Ottawa were it allowed to do so. I myself have left Ottawa on a train ten hours late and arrived on time in New Westminster. I have looked into the question of the carriage of mail, particularly on the Canadian Pacific, and the information I have- I should like the minister to check it up-is that the mail cars are largely in the hands of the Canadian Pacific, the Canadian National not having any mail cars operating from the coast. Like the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, I should like to see the Canadian National patronized, and when it comes to speed I do not think that there are any trains that can beat the Canadian National from Ottawa to Vancouver.


Mr. FINN:: What has been the situation since Sir Henry Thornton retired from the presidency of the Canadian National and especially since the passing by the late administration of the Canadian National-Canadian Pacific Act placing three trustees in charge, the chairman of which is Mr. Fullerton, whom I know very well, who lived in the city of Halifax and was a graduate of Dalhousie and a partner of the late Sydney Harrington, a queen's counsel of that day, one of the most outstanding members of the legal profession in Canada. The present condition, over which unfortunately this government has absolutely no control, is attributable to the late government, who saw fit to appoint these three trustees for ten years. They are removable only by an address of both houses and on specific charges, and that is why today the Canadian National is going behind and therefore protracting the running time of its trains. The Ocean Limited used to make the run from Halifax to Montreal in twenty-four hours and the Maritime Express made the run to Montreal in twenty-seven hours, leaving in the afternoon. I came up on that train the other day and to my amazement I found that the running time was thirty-six hours, as fixed by the special management under Mr. Fullerton and his associates, who do not know anything about the running of trains but can argue a case.


James Houston Spence: We are talking about post offices.


Robert Emmett Finn: Hon. gentlemen opposite, now that they are relieved of responsibility, do

not hesitate to suggest reforms. I wonder why the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Spence), who sat in the house when his party was on this side, did not induce the government of those days to bring about the reforms he is suggesting to-day. My hon. friends opposite are pursuing a different method now from that which they followed when they were on the treasury benches. The Postmaster General referred a moment ago to the Atlantic service. I remember that in the days when Sir Henry Thornton was in control he made a running agreement with the Cunard line and the White Star line, whereby they carried freight which was handed over to the Canadian National system. Trade grew by leaps and bounds, and with it came the development of the port of Halifax, which did not interfere with the great sister port of Saint John, served by the Canadian Pacific railway. To-day what are the conditions? The Canadian Pacific boats, the Duchess boats and the Mont boats, running from Liverpool to Halifax with mail, hand it over to whom? To the Canadian National railway through to Montreal? No. That mail is handed over to the Canadian Pacific railway. These ships land only their passengers and mail, which are taken on the Canadian Pacific line with a Canadian National engine hauling the train. The ships go to Saint John to unload their freight, and then return to Halifax to pick up freight which, as it comes over the Canadian National system to Halifax as the last port of departure, they could not get otherwise. Now these new 10,000 ton freight boats drop into Halifax to land freight for the maritime provinces or for Nova Scotia; they then go round to Saint John and spend a week, and come back to Halifax to pick up freight. It seems to me that since these Canadian Pacific and Canadian National acts, legislation to repeal which has been introduced by the Minister of Railways, have been on the statute books, the Canadian National railway has been put in the lion's jaws and they are crushing it inch by inch. There is no better evidence of that fact than the propaganda which is received every day from Montreal, emanating from get-rich-quick gentlemen on a street that is very well known, St. James street, and from Wall street in the city of New York.
That is the condition that prevails to-day. Not even the Minister of Railways has power

Supply-Post Office
so much as to order a truck, let alone a train, to be moved. It is a condition that is not the responsibility of the present government. Hon. gentlemen sitting opposite saw to it, in so far as they were able, that the hands of this government were tied, and until we can get legislation through to take off these Tory steel handcuffs, the Canadian National Railways will never have an opportunity to show a profit. More than that it may be necessary to ask certain officials to do what hon. gentlemen opposite asked Sir Hemy Thornton to do, that is kindly to get out. Sir Henry Thornton was one of the greatest assets this country ever had. He took all the railway systems that belonged to the people of Canada, babies that were bought and paid for at a high price by the party to which hon. gentlemen sitting oposite belong, in the days of Sir Robert Borden and of the Right Hon. Arthur Meighen, now leader of the Tory party in the Senate. It ill becomes hon. gentlemen opposite to criticize the Post Office Department as it is being operated by the present able Postmaster General. The people of Canada understand that the sole object of the Conservative party as led by the present leader of the opposition and the ex-ministers who sit in association with him is to embarrass the government in every move it makes to try to carry into effect the will of the people and to make this parliament truly democratic. The Liberal party stands for democracy. Democracy means individual liberty, and I stand with my party in support of that principle.


Mr. THOMPSON:: I should like to have an explanation of the amounts being voted to two towns in the county of Lanark, one item to Perth and the other to Smiths Falls. The town of Perth has a revenue much larger than that of the town of Smiths Falls, yet I see that the amount of money being voted for Perth is only $7,500, while the amount for Smiths Falls is $15,480, or just double.


John Campbell Elliott: It is proposed to change the status of the Perth office from revenue to staff basis, grade three. Six positions are required. They amount to $7,020. The authority for the change in the status and the creation of the positions was given under order in council dated September 16, 1935. There are also two statutory increases of $120, making $240, and four statutory increases of $60. This makes up the amount of $7,500.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Is it correct that the post office boxes which are installed are charged to the Department of Public Works? That information has been given to me.


John Campbell Elliott: That is the case in all public buildings, or what we call public buildings, where the postmaster is not supplying his own building or his own office.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: To whom does the revenue from these post offices go? Does it go to the Public Works department, to which the item is charged, or to the Post Office Department?


John Campbell Elliott: It goes to the Post Office Department.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: But the post office boxes themselves are charged to the Department of Public Works?


John Campbell Elliott: Quite so, just the same as the buildings.


Mr. GREEN:: Does this grant provide for a trans-Canada air mail service?


John Campbell Elliott: I think a question covering that was asked by the member for Regina, and the answer appears in yesterday's Hansard at page 2078.


Howard Charles Green: Does not this question of an air mail service come under this particular item?


John Campbell Elliott: There is no appropriation in this item for a trans-Canada air mail service.


George Halsey Perley: It could be discussed on the next part of the item, mail services by air.
Mr. ELLIOTT (Middlesex); Yes. However I do not want to limit discussion. It is a lump sum, and we are not following it definitely unless it is thought that progress would be facilitated by doing so.


Howard Charles Green: Then is it in order for me to go ahead?


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Bradette):: Yes, go ahead.


John Campbell Elliott: Go right ahead.


Howard Charles Green: May I ask the Postmaster General what air mail routes are being operated at the present time?
Supply-Post Office


John Campbell Elliott: There are twenty-seven routes now being operated as follows:
Montreal-Albany
Winnipeg-Pembina
Moneton-Charlottetown (via) Summerside
V	ancouver-Yictoria
V	ancouver-Seattle
Fort MacMurray-Aklavik
Fort Resolution-Cameron Bay (via) Rae
Cameron Bay-Coppermine
Fort Chipewyan-Fond du Lac
Fort Chipewyan-Goldfields
Prince Albert-Ile a la Crosse-Lac la Ronge
Winnipeg-God's Lake
Norway House-Cross Lake
Winnipeg-Central Manitoba Mining Area
Kenora-Red Lake and McKenzie Island
Kenora-Cole
Sioux Lookout-Red Lake Sioux Lookout-Casummit Lake Kenora-Whitefish Bay Sioux Lookout-Pickle Crow Rouyn-Kewagama
Amos-Sisco-Val d'Or and Bourlanaque Montreal-Rimouski Atlin-Telegraph Creek (winter only) Leamington-Pelee Island (winter only) Quebec-Sept lies (winter only)
Sept Iles-Natashquan (winter only)
Havre St. Pierre-Port Menier (winter only) Charlottetown-Magdalen Islands (winter only)
Special Flights.


Howard Charles Green: The majority of these
routes are in the mining areas of northern Canada?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, to a large extent.


Howard Charles Green: May I ask whether this mail is carried by air at a profit or at a loss to the post office?


John Campbell Elliott: My information is that the routes I have named, which are the only ones now in operation, are carried on at a profit.


William Henry Golding: How can you tell?


John Campbell Elliott: From the revenue and the expenditures.


Howard Charles Green: May I ask when the minister intends to inaugurate a trans-Canada air mail service?


John Campbell Elliott: This is a matter that is not only under consideration 
now but has been under consideration for some time. I cannot give any statement except that it is under consideration.


Howard Charles Green: Could the minister give us any idea as to the year in which it will be put into operation, and has he any idea as to the cost?


John Campbell Elliott: I know my hon. friend will not press his question when I tell him that it is a matter of government policy, and the conclusion can be disclosed only after it has been definitely arrived at.


Howard Charles Green: How much mail would have to be carried on the trans-Canada route in order to make the operation profitable to the post office ?


John Campbell Elliott: It is pretty difficult to answer that; it all depends upon the charge that is made.


Howard Charles Green: At the present rate of six
cents for a letter?


John Campbell Elliott: Well, that
could be estimated only in view of the probable cost of operation.


Howard Charles Green: Has the department no
figures at all as to the probable cost of operation? Apparently this matter has been considered for some time, and surely the department has some idea as to what the cost would be.


John Campbell Elliott: Estimates
have been furnished, but I do not have them here. The services have not been started and of course nothing definite has been done in that connection. If my hon. friend wished me to do so I could obtain for him some idea of the estimates that were given, but I do not have them with me, since we are dealing only with the services actually in operation.


Howard Charles Green: I should be glad if the
minister would do that, because I think this development of aviation is vital to the growth of Canada. The department must have some figures as a result of the extensive air mail operations we are carrying on at the present time in northern Canada.


Peter John Veniot: May I be permitted to
say a word in connection with the trans-Canada air mail service? When I had the honour of being Postmaster General in a

Supply-Post Office
former government I do not think I am claiming too much credit when I say I attempted to inaugurate that service. We had a survey made from Halifax to Vancouver, and we did start a tentative trans-Canada air mail service. At that time the Halifax to Montreal section did not pay. It became a question of educating the people, particularly the business men, of the maritime provinces, and I regret to say that the Post Office Department did not get the enthusiastic support it should have received from the business sections of the maritime provinces for the transportation of mail from Halifax to Montreal by way of Moncton, Saint John and Quebec city. We kept it up for a year and a half in the hope that we might receive that encouragement that we felt was due us, but finally that section was abandoned. Then we attempted to organize the section from Montreal to Winnipeg, by way of Sturgeon Falls, by rail at night and by airplane to Winnipeg for distribution the next afternoon about one o'clock. We also had investigations made in order to try to find the most feasible route through the mountains. If I mistake not, in connection with the trans-Canada air service from Halifax to Vancouver, if we could have secured an average load of six hundred pounds from Halifax through to Vancouver at the rate then in existence, five cents per letter-


Howard Charles Green: Was that six hundred
pounds per day?


Peter John Veniot: Yes, six hundred pounds
per day each way. At the rate of five cents per letter it was estimated that we could make it pay on that basis. In a pound of mail there are about fifty or fifty-five ordinary letters; in many cases it runs to sixty letters, which at the five cent rate would be S3 per pound for air mail service. Now the rate is six cents per letter, and I feel satisfied that if a proper survey of the trans-Canada air service was made it could be put into operation. I think the people now have been educated to use such a service; they see the benefit of it. In its initial stages they did not anticipate what that benefit would be, but now they appreciate it and I think such a service would be a success. A great deal of air mail was carried up to 1930.
I do not wish to take up too much of the time of the committee, Mr. Chairman, but let me point out the advantages of the air mail service. In 1927 and 1928, in the Mackenzie valley, and as far north inside the arctic circle as Aklavik, it cost the Post Office Department $41,000 for a mail service once each month in the summer time and once every two months in the winter time. When we called for tenders inaugurating the air mail service into the Mackenzie valley from the head of steel we got the service for only $5,000 more than the service which had been given, and rendered it fortnightly.
At that time we inaugurated an air mail service between Montreal and Albany which developed into a paying proposition. In order to give Toronto a footing equal to that of Montreal we attempted to inaugurate an air mail service between Toronto and New York, and there again between 1928 and 1930 the Post Office Department did not get from the business men of the large city of Toronto the encouragement the department deserved for the advances it was making in air mail delivery. That project had to be abandoned after a time; I believe it was abandoned by the late government, and I am not criticizing them for taking that action.
I heard a remark which, I think, should not be allowed to go unchallenged. Whether it referred to the internal administration of the Post Office Department or to the postal service in general, I do not know, but I interpreted it as referring to the Post Office Department in general. The statement was made that we had the most antiquated service known. Let me point out-


An hon. MEMBER:: Who made it?


Peter John Veniot: It was made by the hon.
member for Winnipeg North.


Abraham Albert Heaps: No, I did not refer to an
antiquated service.


Peter John Veniot: No, it was the other representative from Winnipeg.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I did not say anything about antiquated services.


Peter John Veniot: You did not?


James Shaver Woodsworth: No.


Peter John Veniot: Then, I cannot understand English.
Supply-Post Office


James Houston Spence: I am the victim.


John Campbell Elliott: He started it.


Peter John Veniot: All right, I stand corrected. Let me say that I am not claiming credit for the Liberal party when in office or for any steps which may have been taken when I may have been in office as Postmaster General, but I am claiming credit for the men in the service. I want to say here and now that the mail service, and especially the outside service handled and administered from head office-


James Houston Spence: Would the hon. member
allow me to interject one word? When I referred to antiquated service I made no condemnation of the men working in the service. The service is certainly good; there is no doubt of that. I was speaking about the economy of the department; that is the respect in which I say that the service is antiquated.


Peter John Veniot: I want to say on behalf
of the men carrying on the administrative work-


James Houston Spence: I praised the men, and the hon. member cannot do any more than I did.


Peter John Veniot: I am glad I have driven
the hon. member into saying that.


James Houston Spence: No.


Peter John Veniot: Otherwise we would not
have heal'd a word from him.


James Houston Spence: Yes, you would.


Peter John Veniot: He did not say it at the time I was Postmaster General.


James Houston Spence: I said nothing at all then.


Peter John Veniot: He never gave credit even to the employees in the service. Let me say that the postal service carried on in Canada is second to none in the whole world. I am not talking about the financial end, or the economy of the thing-


James Houston Spence: That is what I was talking about.


Peter John Veniot: The postal service in Canada, both air mail and ordinary mail, is second to none in the world. In 1928 we had a request from France to allow one of our officials to go over there and explain to them the system we were carrying on, so that they could amend theirs to meet existing conditions. They accepted our way of doing things. In 1929
[Mr. Veniot.l
the assistant Postmaster General at Washington came here to consult with one of the officials who is now sitting in front of me as to the best method of carrying on air mail delivery in the United States. They changed their system, under which they had suffered enormous deficits every year, and adopted the Canadian system.
May I say a word on behalf of those with whom I worked at the time I held the office of Postmaster General, and may I pay due credit to those men who under all governments in years gone by have given and even at the present time are giving their attention to the perfection of the postal service in Canada, and have brought it to its present state of development. It stands second to none in the world.


James Houston Spence: It is only fair to permit me to say a word, because this has been put over me several times in the House of Commons. It was put over me when I was criticizing the experimental farm. I have not criticized the service given by the Postmaster General. I talked about an antiquated system, the way business is done. The service of the men is perfect, and I do not want my hon. friend to think I am criticizing it. We are getting the best service the Post Office Department can give. I have to pay the present Postmaster General a compliment by saying that I believe he has a vision of the future better than some who think they have it, and he will get even a better service. He may adopt the system I have asked him to adopt, and may get a proper accounting system, get down to business and do business as business should be done.


Mr. DUPUIS:: You cannot divorce a man from the service.


Sir EUGENE FISET:: I have been informed by an official of the Post Office Department that the salary of the postmaster in the town of Mont Joli in Rimouski is over $4,000 a year. If so, I suppose it is a post office which falls under the control of the civil service commission, as the salary comes above the $3,000 mark. Is there a rule of age, so far as this particular postmaster is concerned? Surely, if he comes under the control of the civil service commission, he should be retired at the age of sixty-five years. May I inform the minister that this postmaster is seventy-five years old, and if the minister will take the trouble to inquire in his own department I believe he will find there are special reasons why this office should be reclassified and a new appointment made.

Supply-Post Office


John Campbell Elliott: Eirst of all may I say a word to the hon. member for Vancouver South who, I believe did not get the information he wanted in connection with air service. I do not think it advisable while in committee to go into the present condition of affairs. I am not in a position to make an announcement as to what will take place, because that involves a question of government policy, but I would say to the hon. member that if he would care to come and see me I would be pleased to discuss the matter with him and give him or any other member of the committee estimates as to the cost of the service.
To the hon. members for Parkdale and Gloucester may I say that I did not understand the hon. member for Parkdale to cast any reflection upon the people working in the service, or most certainly I would have said something in reply. I believe there has been a misunderstanding between the two hon. gentlemen. It is my understanding that the hon. member for Parkdale was criticizing the methods and not criticizing the employees.


James Houston Spence: The minister is right.


John Campbell Elliott: As the minister who is trying to administer the department and as one who realizes that he cannot learn all about it in a few months, I wish to pay tribute to the men who have occupied that position in the past. We have had a great many excellent postmasters-general and I know that in most cases they have done their very best and have given to the public a service that has not always been thoroughly understood or thoroughly appreciated.
There is a good deal to be said, I take it, for the view of the hon. member for Park-dale that this should be a paying service; that we should charge enough to make the various branches of the service pay their way. If ever there was a time in the history of this country when that was absolutely necessary this is that time. I assure my hon. friend and other members of the committee that in every branch of the service we are endeavouring to see what can be done that the charges we impose will more nearly meet the expenses which we are forced to incur.
In answer to my hon. friend from Rimouski (Sir Eugene Fiset) with regard to postmasters under the civil service act, sixty-five years is the age limit, I understand.


Eugène Fiset: At which they can stay in?


John Campbell Elliott: There is not, I understand, an age limit for retirement for
revenue postmasters; each case stands on its own merits.


Eugène Fiset: Does the minister realize what he is saying? I said a moment ago that this post office is under the control of the civil service commission. The minister need not consult his officials because I know as much about the matter as they do. I would like this post office to be classified through the civil service commision, and once this classification has been made I think the postmaster who is above seventy-five years of age should be retired. If the minister wants a precedent I will give him one. In 1930 the post office at Rimouski was classified by the civil service commission and salaries fixed for the postmaster and his assistant, and the postmaster was retired. I want exactly the same precedence to be followed with regard to the Mont Joli post office.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Is the present postmaster Liberal or Conservative?


Eugène Fiset: I have not the faintest idea. I know he is over age and is no good.


John Campbell Elliott: I will look into the matter and will see what can be done.


Mr. WILTON:: The Postmaster General made reference some time ago to an expenditure of some $18,000 as an indemnity against loss on postal1 packages. I am assuming that this refers to packages which are covered by insurance or special postage. If so, would the minister say whether a record is kept of the amount of money which the department receives from insurance or special postage on parcels as against this $18,000 which has been paid out in claims. Is there a census or check-up made in that connection to ascertain the predominating cause of this miscarriage of mail? Is it due to misdirection or postal inefficiency or what?


John Campbell Elliott: The regulations provide for indemnity for loss of or damage to or abstraction from parcels that are insured. The amount of the indemnity is governed by the fee paid, with the provision that in no circumstances may the amount be in excess of the actual value of the loss or damage incurred. The claims are paid out of the general funds except where malfeasance or misfeasance is shown, when the employee responsible is required to make good the amount or such portion of it as is deemed advisable under the circumstances, the balance being taken from the guarantee fund. On page 13 of the report of the Postmaster General for the year ended
Supply-Post Office

March 31, 1935, all the figures are given. The approximate number of insured parcels mailed was 14,540,282; number of claims adjusted, 6,673; temporary adjustments, 960; claims paid, 5,713; total disbursements, $23,425.33


Herbert Earl Wilton: Is a bookkeeping record kept of the amount received by the Post Office Department from this insurance service? What I am trying to get at is this: While you may pay out $18,000 or $20,000 in claims, what amount do you receive from insured and special postage? Is a separate account kept of the revenue received from insurance and special postage letters? Is the matter on an actuarial basis?


John Campbell Elliott: I have not the information before me, but if we have it in the department I shall endeavour to supply it.


James Shaver Woodsworth: There are two
criticisms of the service which have been given me by certain business people. One is in regard to delay in delivering letters owing to holidays. In many places now Saturday is a half holiday; there is no delivery on Sunday, of course, and it is becoming the practice on a number of occasions to give a holiday on Monday, which means that the mail is not delivered for two and a half and sometimes three days. In the case of urgent business or sickness or anything of that kind that is a very long delay. Personally I do not want to see the men deprived of their holidays, but I think it might be possible by a slight increase of staff to arrange that there would not be that long delay.


John Campbell Elliott: I quite * agree with what my hon. friend has said. It is a difficult matter to weigh accurately against the inconvenience that may be caused by delay in delivering the mail the convenience of those who are working at its disposition. But complaints have been very few. Difficulty does arise in cases like armistice day when it falls on a Monday. There is the short day on Saturday, and then Sunday. Or take Good Friday, followed by a short day Saturday, and then Sunday and Easter Monday. We try to keep sufficient staff on during such holidays to give a reasonable service. We do not attempt to provide anything like the ordinary service, but we do provide a reasonable service. The question arises as to whether the ordinary employees should be brought back and paid overtime. At the present time it does not seem to be easy to pay overtime in connection with these matters, but it is possible we shall have to consider

a more strict insistence upon employees coming back on holidays such as Good Friday, Enster Monday and so on.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I had no intention of increasing the work of the employees, but I think in these cases the public is entitled to service. In the larger places it should be possible to have a reserve staff and it should not require a great number of people to give the service. Very frequently reserve teachers are carried on the staffs of our schools in case of sickness among the regular teachers, and possibly the same method could be followed here. Another question: Does the department use the different bus lines for the delivery of mail? I think we have all had some experience with the delivery of newspapers by buses. Very often these newspapers arrive at their destination some hours before the regular mail. Unless the department keeps up with the regularly accepted means of transit, it is going to be left behind.


Mr. ISNOR:: What does the hon. member mean by bus lines?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I am referring to the passenger buses that are running all over the country. If the newspapers can make use of these buses for delivery purposes, I see no reason why the department should not do likewise. I have seen cases where mails have arrived in surburban districts two or three days after newspapers had been delivered by buses.


John Campbell Elliott: The only bus lines that can be utilized to advantage are those which run their buses on schedule. Such lines are utilized under contract where an improvement in the service can be brought about.


James Shaver Woodsworth: For first class mail?


John Campbell Elliott: For whatever mail is necessary to be carried between the particular points. It may not all be first class mail.


Howard Charles Green: What time would be necessary to carry mail by air from Montreal to Vancouver?


John Campbell Elliott: The only
answer I can give is not much of an answer; it all depends upon the speed of the plane carrying the mail. It has been worked out at between eighteen to twenty hours.


Howard Charles Green: What additional time would be required to complete the service from Montreal to Halifax?

Supply-Post Office


John Campbell Elliott: Five hours or perhaps a little more.


Howard Charles Green: I understand quite a lot of air mail is sent from Vancouver to eastern Canada through the United States. Has the minister any idea as to the quantity of air mail originating in Vancouver?


John Campbell Elliott: We have a service which runs from Vancouver to Seattle to connect with the United States air lines, but I have not the information as to what amount of air mail originates in Vancouver. That information is available and can be provided.


Howard Charles Green: What is the total cost per annum of the present air mail service?


John Campbell Elliott: The total cost of the twenty-seven routes is $267,738.


Howard Charles Green: Is that all by contract?


John Campbell Elliott: Practically all.


George Halsey Perley: May I suggest to the minister that he place on Hansard the
statement from which he is now reading? We would then have all the details available.


John Campbell Elliott: I shall be glad to.


Howard Charles Green: How many air miles are flown in the postal service?


John Campbell Elliott: I could give that for the different services but they do not seem to be totalled. That information appears on the statement which I will place on Hansard.	[DOT]


Howard Charles Green: Does that show the amount carried?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, it gives the volume of mail carried. The total poundage carried is 1,126,321, but I do not seem to have the total number of miles flowm. Rates of payment, duration of the agreements and other details appear in the statement which my right hon. friend has asked to be placed on Hansard. The statement follows:
Supply-Post Office



AIR MAIL

[Stage Direction]
Name of Service	Contractor	Frequency	Distance (Round trips)
			M iles
1. Montreal-Albany (southbound only)..	Canadian Colonial Air ways, Ltd., Montreal P.Q. Northwest Airlines Inc.	Daily except Sunday		200 (one way
2. Winnipeg-Pembina				only) 132-8 200
3. Moncton-Charlottetown via Summer side.	St. Paul, Minn.,U.S.A Canadian Airways Limited, Montreal, P.Q.	Daily except Sunday	4. Vancouver-Victoria	it tt	a a	122 244 2,9185. Vancouver-Seattle	tt tt	tt ft	6. Fort McMurray-Aklavik...	tt ft	Varied (from 6 to 45	7. Fort Resolution-Cameron Bay via Rae	" "	trips per annum). 1 round trip per month..	8568. Cameron Bay-Coppermine	tt u	2 round trips per annum. 4 round trips per annum.	330 300 216 416 approx. 8009. Fort Chipewyan-Fond du Lac...	tt tt	10. Fort Chipewvan-Goldfields..	it ft	11.	Prince Albert-Ile a la Crosse-Lac la Ronge. 12.	Winnipeg-Gods Lake	tt tt tt tt	1 round trip per week	
13. Norway House-Cross Lake.	tt ft	2	round trips per month. 3	round trips per week...	88 396
14. Winnipeg-Central Manitoba Mining	tt ft		
15.	Kenora-Red Lake and Mackenzie Isld. 16.	Kenora-Cole		tt ft tt tt	4 round trips per week.. 2 round trips per week.. 2	round trips per week.. 3	round trips per week.. 1 round trip per week... 3 round trips per week..	210 200 230 212 80 250 88
17. Sioux Lookout-Red Lake	tt tt		
18. Sioux Lookout-Casummit Lake		tt tt		
19. Kenora-Whitefish Bay..	tt tt		
20. Sioux Lookout-Pickle Crow		tt tt		
21. Rouyn-Kewagama		General Airways Limited, Toronto, Ont.		
		weekly.	
22. Amos-Siscoe-Val d'Or and Bourla-maque.	tt tt	Daily except Sunday	10423. Montreal-Rimouski	Canadian Airways Lim-	n 	
, , . .	61924. Atlin-Telegraph Creek (winter only)..	Northem Airways Limited, Carcross, Y.T.	10 round trips per season	29225. Learning to n-Pelee Island (winter only)	Murray Aeronautical Corp., Ltd., Toronto, Ont.	Daily except Sunday....	4426. Quebec-Sept lies (winter only)	Canadian Airways Ltd.	round trips per week..	678
Sept Iles-Natashquan (winter only)	 Havre St. Pierre-Port Menier (winter m only). 27. Charlottetowm-Magdalen Islands (winter only). Special flights.	tt tt tt tt tt tt	round trip per week	 round trips per month. round trip per week...	410 91 212
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Post Office

[Stage Direction]
Rate of payment	Duration of agreement	During calendar year 1935		Remarks
		Volume of Mail carried	Annual cost	
*	pounds	$ cts.	90c. per mile	4 year contract terminating 31-5-39.	53,503	51,470 00	40c " 	Terminable at P.M.G's pleasure.	15,235	29,082 19	$20,000.00 per annum (100%	4 year contract terminating	218,753	20,885 70	Changed from "winter" to "all-year-round" service 27-5-35 (reduced rate).performance).	26-5-39.	35c. per lb	Terminable at P.M.G's pleasure.	653	228 55	50c. per mile	4 year contract terminating 30-9-39.	4,717	8,113 00	Inaugurated 1-10-35$45,000.00 per annum	Terminable at P.M.G's pleasure.	67,520	45,000 00	Resolution-Rae 15c. per lb.	(< u	14,801	6,481 45	Rae-Cameron Bay 35c. per lb.	53c. per lb	It It	1,868	990,04	25c. " 	1,216	292 25	12*c. " 	4,222	527 76	Inaugurated 2-9-35.7c. " 	4 year contract terminating 31-5-39.	21,437	2,416 11	10c. " 	Terminable at P.M.G's pleasure.	76,449	7,644 90	10c. " 	tt tt	8,345	509 70	10c. " 	a tt	108,999	10,899 90	10c. " 	tt u	64,366	6,436 60	10c. " 	1,493	149 30	10c. " 	47,381	4,736 70	10c. " 	tt tt	20,965	2,096 50	10c. " 	tt tt	8,590	859 00	10c. " 	a tt	20,111	2,011 10	$975.00 per annum-excess	12,273	1,083 70	of 175 lbs. per round trip- 10c. per lb.	35c. per mile-excess of 700 lbs. per round trip at pro	4 year contract (not executed) terminating 31-10-39.	199,269	12,478 54	rata.	$1.25 per mile mail (last year).	No arrangements for this year.	39,390	23,400 03	$1,800.00 per season-excess 225 lbs. each way at pro	4 year contract terminating opening of navigation 1938.	2,896	1,883 20	rata.	$20.00 per round trip-excess of 200 lbs. each way at pro rata.	1-2-36 to opening of navigation 1936.	16,145	2,820 16	Service performed by National Air Transport from 13-12-35 to 12-1-36. W. J. E. Johnston from 13-1-36 to 31-1-36.65c. per mile	Terminable at P.M.G's pleasure.	41,803	14,970 80	65c. " 	u tt	25,435	5,901 94	65c. " 	tt tt	7,714	580 78	80c. " 	4 year contract (not executed) terminating opening navigation 1939.	11,309 9,463 1,126,321	2,204 80 1,583 40 267,738 10	
Supply-Post Office
Howard Charles Green: Has the experience of the department been that passenger and freight traffic by air is promoted by the use of the air mail service?


John Campbell Elliott: My information is that it does increase the traffic.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I do not know that I am familiar enough with the terminology of the department to elicit the information I desire, but as I understand the matter, a small post office does not come under the civil service. That is to say, such a postmaster would hire whatever help he might require and operate on a commission basis.


John Campbell Elliott: That is correct. The post office with a revenue of $3,000 or under would not come under the civil service commission.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: What would be the revenue of the post office at Weyburn, Saskatchewan?


John Campbell Elliott: For the year ended March 31, 1935, it was $22,496.50.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Post offices with a revenue of $3,000 do not come under the civil service commission.


John Campbell Elliott: No; all those above $3,000 do.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Well, the post office at Weyburn does not. I wonder why. It is in the same position as a small post office; the postmaster merely receives a commission and he hires the help. Why is it not under the commission?


John Campbell Elliott: It is under
the commission in the matter of appointments. The $3,000 limit applies to the appointment of postmasters.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The postmaster at Weyburn may be appointed by the civil service commission but he hires the members of the staff and fixes their salaries. The office is not subject to the civil service commission. I submit that a post office with a revenue of S22.000 should be directly under the civil service commission.


John Campbell Elliott: That is quite arguable, I think. I cannot tell my hon. friend offhand the number of post offices with revenue approximating this amount that come under the commission.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Why is it that this post
office is not under the commission?


John Campbell Elliott: Of course
these offices are all inspected regularly. The reports are that the service in this particular post office is adequately performed by the present staff, and of course the service costs less than it would the other way.


Mr. BETTS:: I am gratified at the statement of the Postmaster General" that careful consideration is being given now to the trans-Canada air service. I was very much interested to hear the hon. member for Gloucester speak of the efforts he made to effect that. I know something at first hand of what he did, and I know that since his regime a good deal of water has flowed under the bridge, as I think the figures will show. Taking the air mail, there is an interesting comparison between the poundage carried in 1933 and in 1935. In 1933 there were 539,358 pounds, and in 1035, 1,126,084. The hon. member for Vancouver South spoke of the increase in passenger and other types of flying which very often accompanied the development of the air mail service. The figures I have taken from the report of the department of civil aviation really answer his question. For instance, although the air mail in pounds doubled between those two years, the amount of freight carried increased in a most extraordinary way. In 1933-these figures are for all Canada and of course go outside the mail service proper-there were carried by air 4,205,901 pounds of freight, and by 1935 that quantity had increased to 26,439,224, almost six times as much. The increase in passenger traffic between those two years was from 85.000 odd to 177,000 odd; and if the figures are followed right out one will find extraordinary increases all along the line, all of which goes to show that if you build up the air mail service you will build up the passenger and freight traffic.
As I understand the situation, it goes outside the department of the Postmaster General but it is something in which he is vitally interested, in his efforts to improve the postal service. I understand that there are under consideration plans which will involve the completion by March, 1937, of the ground services, airdromes, lighting and so on, from Winnipeg to Vancouver. Then, as to the prairie air services, which are in fairly good shape now but need reconditioning, parts having been abandoned-that is, the jump from Winnipeg east and west, to the mountains in the west and to the northern Ontario country in the east-that will involve a certain amount of installation of wireless in the mountainous sections and the completion of certain airdromes, and that work

Supply-Post Office
is well under way. I understand-I should like to have corroboration of this-that by the spring of 1938 the scene will be all set for a coast to coast air mail service. I am told that the run can be made in one day with machines in their present state of development, and at the present rate of progress we can expect something much faster by 1938. At any rate, at the present time the run from Halifax to Vancouver, can be made in twenty-four hours, or so I understand.
I would urge on the minister and on the government the extreme desirability of expediting this program if it can possibly be done. The airplane to-day is to the railway train what the railway train was to the oxcart one hundred years ago, and there never was a country on the face of the earth that needed a properly developed air service from coast to coast as this country does. It will do more to weld the west and the east together than anything else; and although, as the hon. member for Gloucester said, back in his day there was a certain degree of hesitancy in taking advantage of this service, I think that has been very much overcome. I believe the business world is more than ready for a daily service from coast to coast. I am convinced that it will grow from an air mail service to a modern passenger service. Of course air transportation as far as passengers are concerned is not a future possibility but a present actuality. One is far safer in the air on any standard line than on a highway in a motor car, no matter how good your driver on the highway may be; and one is very nearly as safe-I think the figures will show that one is actually as safe -flying with Imperial Airways or Pan-American Airways as one is in a train.
This country, because of its geographical situation, needs an air sendee as much as it needs anything. Consider also the future of the young people-young men and even young women-who have been learning to fly and who would be employed should the service be adequately developed. I know something about that at first hand because I had the honour to serve for some years on the board of directors of the London Flying Club, and for one year as its president, and I know the sacrifices that are being made by young Canadians in learning this new science. Last year London had the honour to be first in this respect in the dominion; we had ninety-one young pilots under instruction and we qualified seventeen. These young men are not the gilded youth of the town; most of them work for their living. They will come to the club and use the money they earn to take, perhaps,
one hour's instruction. You will not see them again for perhaps a month; they will be working and saving; then they will come back, and eventually they will qualify. That is happening right across the dominion, and with very little government assistance. A few years ago the system was that when a flying club acquired a plane the department would provide another plane equally good. That arrangement was done away with, and the present system is that the Department of National Defence will give one new plane every three years to a club which complies with certain conditions. If you have ever tried to teach young men to fly you will soon realize that one plane every three years does not go very far, because planes are fragile, and this means that these clubs have scraped along through the efforts of their members and of public-spirited citizens. That spirit has been displayed by flying clubs right across Canada, and justifies the Post Office, National Defence and every other department in getting behind this work, because the men in the ranks, if I may put. it in that way, have done their part and the government can and, I think, should do more. I believe I may say without offence that we had during the war the finest pilots in the world. We still have the same type of young men. They are making sacrifices to be allowed to take their part in this great means of transportation. Anything that the postmaster general can do along these lines will have my most hearty cooperation. I wish him Godspeed with this work.


Thomas Alfred Thompson: Does the item under
consideration contain any appropriation for rural mail deliveries?


John Campbell Elliott: If my hon.
friend will look at the item under mail service he will notice "mail service by ordinary land conveyance, including rural mail delivery, 86,200,000."


Thomas Alfred Thompson: I wish to protest against the present method of employing rural mail carriers. It is nothing less than a shame to ask people to tender for these positions and have them competing against each other with the understanding that the lowest tender will be accepted. That is the case at the present time, and it means that the department always has a man drawing the mail who has put the lowest value upon his own services. Why should this be when every other officer or employee of the department is appointed by the civil service commission? Take the caretaker who sweeps the floor and dusts and generally looks after a post office. A
Supply-Post Office

salary is set, applications are invited, and the civil service commission selects from among the applicants one who, they consider, is the best man. But when it comes to choosing a farmer to be employed on the rural mail the department says: Go to it, boys, we will give it to whoever will do the job the cheapest. I maintain that every rural route should be carefully gone over. Some are worth more remuneration than others. Take a rural route along a highway where t'he snow is ploughed oif in the winter time so that you can run a car. The service could be done more cheaply on that route than along a back-country road. A fair estimate of the cost per mile of running the rural routes should be placed upon each individual route, say $30, 840 or $50 a mile, as the case may be, for so many miles. Then let the department apply for contractors to carry the mail and have the civil service commission select a man who, they feel, is the best man to do it. To-day we are not getting the best class of men because we always take the lowest tenderer, the man who places the lowest value upon his own services. Many of these people are carrying mail to-day for less than it takes to feed their horses. That is absolutely wrong. I brought this point to the attention of the Postmaster General and of the Minister of Justice in the late government, and their answer was that at that time the finances of the country were not in a position to carry an extra burden. But I say that it is absolutely unfair to expect the rural people to be employed in this way and to make a discrimination against them in comparison with other employees of the department. I know the minister will realize the position and I ask him to take it into his serious consideration. I believe that the country at large is of the opinion that an injustice is being done under the present system of awarding rural mail contracts.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I should like to revent to my former question; but does the minister wish to answer the previous speaker's question?


John Campbell Elliott: A great many people entertain somewhat the same idea as has been expressed by the hon. member for Lanark with regard to rural mail carriers' remuneration. I cannot agree with him that this is something that should be left to the civil service commission, any more than I would agree that contracts for the erection of a building, which are now let by tender, should be placed under that commission. I think exactly the same principle applies to
[Mr Thompson.]
both. Unfortunately conditions in the country to-day are such that the tenders are very low. I regret that they are as low as they are, but that is because they are comparable with what men in the rural parts of Canada are receiving for similar services. I would say to my hon. friend that I know of no rural mail contract to-day which you would not be able to get many farmers in the district to carry on for the amount we are now paying.
Then my hon. friend suggested that we should set a minimum rate. I regret to say that these men obviously feel it is in their own best interests to carry the mail at the amounts of their tenders, and surely no man can complain very much if he gets the work at the price for which he offers to do it. My hon. friend knows what would happen in the rural districts to-day if legislation were enacted providing a rate for rural mail delivery out of all proportion to the amounts paid other people performing similar services in the district. Let me give a case in point. Tenders were called for not long ago in connection with a route for which, in the old days, there were usually six or eight applicants. In this instance forty-two tenders were sent in, many of them from the best farmers of that community. That contract was let for much less than the amount of the previous contract. As a matter of fact the highest tender was well below the amount of the former contract. But let me point out the great difficulty in saying that there should be a minimum amount per mile, and that contracts should not be let for smaller amounts. There may be just as much difference between the value per mile of two different mail routes as between the horses that are used to deliver the mail. There is a great difference in conditions in this country. In some parts we have snow for only a short time while in others we have snow for a much greater length of time. I appreciate my hon. friend's interest in the matter, and it is a question to which a great deal of consideration has been given by the department, but I do not see how we can devise any means that will give the people interested a fairer opportunity than they have at the present time, if the contracts are let fairly.


Thomas Alfred Thompson: I cannot follow the minister's argument when he compares a rural mail contract with the contract for a public building. There is no comparison whatever. I venture to suggest that if the position occupied by the minister to-day were put up for tender many men would offer to do it for less.


John Campbell Elliott: Or my hon. friend's position.

Private Bills


Thomas Alfred Thompson: Yes, or my own position. I ask the minister if he thinks this system is fair, at present when times are hard and farmers are trying to beat each other for these little jobs, taking them on for much less than they are worth. I know of two rural mail routes, with deliveries three times a week, which were tendered for last winter at the rate of eighty-seven cents a day. I said to the man, "Why, you are foolish. Why do you do it?" He replied, "Well, I am hard up. I have a boy at home and we have a horse there, and he can make that eighty-seven cents a day. It will be that much money coming in." I say it is absolutely wrong that people in this position should be asked to tender for these jobs. I agree with the minister when he says that different routes should command different prices. Some routes are much more difficult; road conditions vary, but an estimate could be made of the fair value per mile for any particular route. Tenders could be invited, and then either the minister or the civil service commission could select the very best man from among the applicants. To-day the lowest tender is accepted, which is the tender of the man who puts the lowest premium on bis own services.


John Campbell Elliott: There is just one word I should like to say with regard to a previous remark made by my hon. friend, though I am anxious to make some progress with my estimates. If my hon. friend thinks we are not getting at the present time a good service from the rural mail carriers he is under an erroneous impression, because my officials tell me that at this time, as a general rule, these men are rendering excellent service.


Mr. BOULANGER:: I want to say that I am in agreement with most of what has been said by the hon. member for Lanark in regard to these rural mail men. It is evident that the system now in existence is illogical and unjust. The government should set an example. We are trying to force those in industry and trade to pay their employees fair wages, and we are trying to stamp out cut-throat competition. The government should set an example by paying a decent remuneration to those who are in the service of the state, and by stamping out cut-throat competition among those who desire jobs or positions with the government. The trouble in regard to mail contracts is that very often people tender when they have no idea whatever of the value of the service. They may not have the remotest idea of what the work is worth, so they put in ridiculously low tenders and under the act the Postmaster General is bound to award the contract to the lowest tenderer, even though it may be absolutely out of proportion to the amount of work involved and the service to be rendered. I have been told that in days gone by it was possible to make some arrangement to avoid, in some measure, giving contracts to men who tendered at ridiculously low rates, but as a general rule I think it can be said that contracts are let to the low tenderers. Very often the low man has no idea of what the service is worth and he cuts the price, if I may so express myself.
At six o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair and the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 29, for the relief of Sonya Shenk-man, otherwise known as Sadie Shenkman.- Mr. Factor.
Bill No. 30, for the relief of Louisa Mark-land Molson Blaiklock.-Mr. White.
Bill No. 31, for the relief of Rita Constance Beatrice Gurd Rykert.-Mr. Lennard.
Bill No. 32, for the relief of Helen Elizabeth Ham Lilley.-Mr. Davidson.
Bill No. 33, for the relief of Mary Kaydouh Massabky.-Mr. Hyndman.
Bill No. 34, for the relief of Dora Louise Gustiana York.-Mr. White.
Bill No. 35, for the relief of Violet Charlotte Dyke Duiven.-Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 36, for the relief of Irene Louise Penny McKee.-Mr. White.
Bill No. 37, for the relief of Esther Shapiro. -Mr. Lennard.
Bill No. 38, for the relief of Thomas John Howard Eox.-Mr. Lennard.
Bill No. 44, for the relief of Ruth Fitz-randolph McMaster.-Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 45, for the relief of Agnes Mercer Daniels.-Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 46, for the relief of Gerald Thompson Miltimore.-Mr. McKay.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 48, respecting The Pension Fund Society of the Bank of Montreal.-Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 49, for the relief of Birdie Louise Coleman Wilson.-Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 50, for the relief of Solomon Hyman, otherwise known as Saul or Sam Hyman.-Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 51, for the relief of Lewis Gould. -Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 52, for the relief of Hyman Stot-land.-Mr. Hanson.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Post Office
[Stage Direction]


The house in committee of supply, Mr. Bradette in the chair.

Joseph-Arthur Bradette: When the committee rose at six o'clock we were considering item No. 263, the outside service of the Post Office Department, 830,927,727.50.


Joseph Oscar Lefebre Boulanger: Mr. Chairman, when the committee rose at six o'clock I was saying that the government should set an example in fair wages and fair competition, and I hope that the Postmaster General (Mr. Elliott) will take my remarks and those of the hon. member for Lanark (Mr. Thompson) into consideration and, when the financial conditions of the country permit, do something to improve the position of the rural postmen.
The point which was raised before six o'clock by the hon. member for Lanark is not a new one in this chamber. It has been raised, I think, at every session since I have been a member of the house. In 1929 it even formed the subject of a motion of want of confidence in the government, moved by the Hon. Mr. Guthrie, and we had a full dress debate upon it lasting two or three days. At every subsequent session the matter has been discussed and hon. gentlemen on both sides of the house have endeavoured to persuade the Postmaster General that something must be done for the under-dog, the rural postman, but we have not succeeded yet. I shall not take the time of the house to read the opinions which were expressed by hon. members, but as I said a moment ago from both sides of this chamber came expressions of opinion in favour of improving the conditions of the rural postmen. In the debate on the motion that was moved by Mr. Guthrie I might mention by name a few of the members who spoke in favour of the rural postmen: Hon. Mr. Guthrie; Hon. Mr. Stewart, the former Minister of Public Works; Mr. Anderson, representing one of the Toronto divisions; Mr. MacLean, representing Prince, Prince Edward Island; Mr. Jenkins, also representing Prince Edward Island, Mr. Pouliot, representing Temiscouata; Mr. Boyes, and Miss Macphail. With the permission of the house I think I might quote the opinion of one member who was loved by everybody in this chamber and who passed away only a few days ago. I refer to the late Mr. Spotton, who was one of the most genial members of the House of Commons, and I am sure that all of us who knew him regret very much his untimely death.

In the session of 1931 this question again came before the house. It will be remembered that one of the promises which were made by our friends the Conservatives during the 1930 campaign was to improve the lot of the rural postmen. Circulars were sent to postmen and rural mail carriers everywhere in the country, and it was promised that if they voted for the Conservative party, and that party were returned to power, something would be done to improve the conditions under which they worked. In the session which followed the change of government in 1930 the matter was brought up; some member of the house asked the then government if they were going to carry out the promise which they had made during the campaign to improve the lot of the rural postmen, and our friend the late Mr. Spotton on that occasion used words which I make my own. He said:
It is true, as the ex-Postmaster General has said, that a square deal for the rural mail carriers was advocated by many on this side of the house, and I suppose I really led in that matter. It seems too bad that of all the public servants in the Post Office department, the rural mail carrier is the only man who has, every four years, to tender for his position. The men in the city who to-morrow morning dons a suit of clothes paid for by the Post Office Department, walks around a few hours, goes out in the afternoon and walks around a few hours more, receives $1,409 or $1,500 and two suits of clothes a year and has a retiring allowance; but the fellow who hitches up the old mare and drives over the muddy roads or snowbanks gets the least consideration of all. I have advocated a square deal for these rural mail carriers. The exPostmaster General is correct when he says that this party is on record in this respect, and when the finances of the country become more buoyant, when the deficit in the Post Office Department is wiped out, wre shall look to the present government to give some relief to the rural mail carrier.
The Postmaster General has stated before in the house that it would take from four to five million dollars to bring the remuneration of the rural postmen up to thirty-five cents a mile, which is not an exorbitant figure.


John Campbell Elliott: Ten million dollars.


Joseph Oscar Lefebre Boulanger: I do not remember
the figures exactly; I tried to find them in Hansard but I could not. It will require this amount to bring the remuneration of these rural mail carriers who perform a useful service for the state up to thirty-five cents per mile. I repeat that this is not an exorbitant figure. If that is true, it means that the

government of Canada is doing these men out of $10,000,000. Such a state of affairs cries out to heaven for relief. We should not allow these people who perform such a useful work to be so underpaid. I repeat again that in the matter of fair wages the government should set a good example and do something for these rural mail carriers.
It has been stated that the difficulty is the tender system. Certain people tender for contracts without knowing what they are worth and under the act the minister must award the contract to the lowest tenderer. If the Post Office Act needs amending, it should be amended. The Postmaster General stated that there was a great diversity in climatic and road conditions and geographical locations. That may be true, but I think it would be possible to classify these rural mail services into certain well defined classes. There are thousands of civil servants who vary according to competence, training and so on, and it is possible to grade these people according to their capacities and the work they perform. If that can be done with the tens of thousands of civil servants, I am sure it can be done with the rural mail carriers. It should not be any more difficult to grade and classify these services than it is to grade and classify the general civil service.
_ I hope the minister will give serious consideration to the plight of these men. As I said at the beginning of my remarks, I agree almost entirely with what the hon. member for Lanark has said, but I dc not agree with him when he suggests putting these rural mail contractors under the control of the civil service commission. The civil service commission, the Civil Service Act and the so-called merit system are three of the greatest jokes in this country. The proof of this statement is the fact that whenever a new service is created, such as the national employment commission or the national harbours board, it is placed outside the control of the civil service commission. This shows that the government, whether Liberal or Conservative, have no faith in the so-called merit system, have no faith in the Civil Service Act and have no faith in the civil service commission. If the civil service commission and the Civil Service Act were working according to the intentions of those who framed the system, I would be the first to speak in favour of them. The fact is that more patronage and favouritism are to be found in the civil service now than existed before.
12739-138J
.Supply-Post Office


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The minister stated that the revenues from the Weyburn, Saskatchewan, post office amounted to about $21,000. What income would the postmaster receive from that post office?


John Campbell Elliott: He would
receive seventy per cent on the first $1,000, seventy per cent of the stamp revenue, thirty per cent of all revenue over $1,000 to $10,000 and twenty per cent up to $20,000. Since the committee rose at six o'clock I made an estimate of what that would be, based on the total revenue, and I find that it works out to a little over $6,000. This would pay the postmaster and his assistants. Perhaps 1 could answer another question, which I have no doubt the hon. member has in mind, as to why this is not a civil service post office. The fact that the revenue is over $3,000 would make this a civil service appointment, but it must first be graded in that way at the request of the officials of the the department. As long as that post office can be run as apparently it is being run, according to the reports of the inspector who visits the office from time to time, it is more economical to run it as a revenue post office and that is the reason why it is still being run in that way. It will still continue to be run as a revenue post office until a request is received from the department to have it put into grade 2B.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: What revenue would
that post office have to return before it would be made a civil service post office?


John Campbell Elliott: That is quite an arbitrary figure. As- long as it is run as it is now being run, as long as the inspector reports the service as being satisfactory, theTe is economy in running it as a revenue post office. When it reaches a size which in the opinion of the department makes it advisable to place it in grade 2B, the request will be made to have it graded in that way.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I should like to urge
upon the minister the placing of that office under the civil service. What I am about to say is not meant as any reflection upon any person who has occupied the position of postmaster. The present incumbent of the office is retiring and the office is now practically vacant. The present system lends itself to a great deal of abuse. The postmaster need not be a resident of the city for a good part of the year; he can pay very low wages to his assistants with practically no holidays; he sets the hours which the staff
Supply-Post Office .

must work and yet may make more out of the post office than the entire staff combined. He may be absent for six or nine months in the year and never handle a single piece of mail. I am not casting any reflection upon any person, but I know this can be done; I know it has been done. I think it would be more satisfactory to the staff from the standpoint of the hours they would have to work, the holidays they would get, the pay they would receive and the service they would give, if the office was brought under the civil service.
I submit that for the consideration of the minister, particularly in view of the fact that the office of the postmaster in the Weyburn post office is to be vacant in the near future.


Jean-François Pouliot: I support the hon. member for Weyburn, and I would ask the minister kindly to consider his request and do his best for the postmaster at Weyburn, paying him in sound money, because if he is paid in Aberhart money he will get nothing.


Mr. PELLETIER:: Does the hon. member for Temiscouata know where Weyburn, .Saskatchewan is?


Jean-François Pouliot: I know, because it is in the district which is being flooded more than any other part of the country with false promises.


Mr. ROBICHAUD:: The statement has been made that with a view to increasing postal revenues there should be an increase in postage rates. I cannot agree with that suggestion. In my opinion the best way to increase the revenues of the post office is to reduce postage rates and give us the penny postage which we had after 1896 and again after 1921. I hope this government will give us that, for it has been proved in the past that the lower rate brought in a greater revenue. The same applies to post office boxes. Some years ago, in my town at any rate, the charge for the smaller box was SI and for the larger $1.50, and the rates were increased to S2 and S3 respectively, but instead of the revenue increasing it decreased and half the boxes are not used. What is the use of having boxes if the people are not using them? After all, the Post Office department is running a public service and in my opinion we are all wrong in increasing rates if we think this will result in increased revenues. This is true of customs tariffs; whenever you reduce the tariff you get an increased revenue and vice versa. I urge the minister to take this suggestion into serious consideration with his colleagues and give us the penny postage. The people are waiting for it.


Mr. TUSTIN:: In the first part of the item, salaries and allowances, I notice a decrease of almost $125,000. Does this mean that salaries of employees have been reduced or that there has been a reduction in the number of employees, or does it mean that the service will be curtailed to that extent?


John Campbell Elliott: It does not mean that salaries have been reduced; the onR1' reduction is the five per cent cut.


George James Tustin: What is the minimum salary paid to male employees in the post office?


John Campbell Elliott: It depends of course on the range of employment, starting with the office boy, who gets $420 to $660, increasing $30 semi-annually for the first eighteen months and then $60 annually. It runs from there right up to the salaries of city postmasters which I gave the committee this afternoon. It all depends on the grade.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Some observations have been made this evening with reference to rural mail carriers. I sometimes wish that something could be done to do away entirely with this competitive system of awarding contracts and if at all possible to have men working on a permanent basis. I do not know whether it is possible to evolve such a scheme, but I hope the minister will take into consideration something of that sort, because I believe that in conjunction with the officials of the department it might be possible to work out a scheme whereby in connection with mail delivery in the rural areas the men would work for something approaching a decent living wage. I understand that in certain parts of the country the Post Office Department has abolished mail collection by the old method of horse and buggy and has adopted the use of automobiles. Has the minister any information with regard to that new method of collecting mail in some of the larger urban centres?


John Campbell Elliott: There are
only two places where the collection has been made by motor and that is in part of the Ottawa collection, and in Toronto which was done by officials in the service. In other cases it is left to the individual contractor to take mail from one point to another in such conveyance as he sees fit. It is quite apparent, however, that in a city like Montreal, in taking mail from the point of arrival to the point from which it is distributed some trucks should be used. A number of trucks are used to cover the distance. The rural mail carrier however can use, and in fact in a part of the season has to use, on a

Supply-Post Office
great many roads, horse and buggy and, for a part of the time, horse and cutter; frequently he uses a car if he can afford it and the roads lend themselves to the use of a car. There is no regulation.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I suppose it makes no difference to the Post Office Department whether they collect the mail by automobile or by horse and buggy, but those who can collect by automobile can tender so low as to wipe out all opportunity of the man with horse and buggy. From what the minister has said it appears that in Montreal and Toronto the department itself collects the mail. Am I right in that assumption? Is the collection in Toronto done by contract?


John Campbell Elliott: Most of it
is by contract but part of it is by motor service.


Abraham Albert Heaps: A motor service owned by
the Post Office Department?


John Campbell Elliott: Yes.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Is there any reason why
the department itself should not continue to operate its own collection agencies with its own motor vans which it has in different parts of the country?


John Campbell Elliott: There has
been a change in recent years. In a number of instances where formerly the department owned its trucks and had the service performed by men hired by the department, it is now letting to contractors who own their trucks carry on the service themselves. The department finds it is cheaper to let the contracts by tender than to buy the trucks and engage the men to service them.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Do I understand that it is
cheaper for the government to let these contracts by tender than to operate its own services?


John Campbell Elliott: That has
been the experience.


Abraham Albert Heaps: how long. I think a proper system of accounting could, with very little effort and very little delay, give parliament a full, concise and clear statement of the position of the department. It was shown this afternoon that there is an apparent surplus of $3,000,000. Would it be asking too much to request the minister to promise the committee at this time that he will assign some one in the department to the preparation of a proper financial statement showing the number of buildings which the government has, the actual cost of maintaining those buildings, and the interest charges on them? I think the information would be of value to the Post Office Department, in addition to giving us knowledge which we now lack. The minister stated this afternoon that it might be difficult to obtain this information because other departments occupy space in some of the post office buildings. It is true that in some of those buildings space may be taken by the Department of Public Works and the Department of National Revenue. But I should like to know why the Department of National Revenue should have space given it by the Department of Public Works when the former is a department which collects revenue. Is there any reason why the Department of National Defence, if it occupies space in these post office buildings, should not pay its share of the cost from its own appropriation?
It might take a few minutes to get the information, but, once obtained, it would be available for all time to come and could be supplemented or subtracted from as time and conditions might determine. So I make this appeal to the minister to put together for the benefit of the house and the country a proper statement showing the actual condition under which the Post Office Department is working from year to year.


Mr. MARSHALL:: As a new member, I should like to direct to the minister a question which, when answered, will enable me to avoid asking a lot of unnecessary questions. It has reference to the financial statement which has been read, and in which I am interested. In the reports of both the auditor general and the Postmaster General there is a large mass of information. On pages 6 and 7 of the report under discussion I find a general financial statement covering the year ' ended March, 1935. To my mind, at least, it is as clear as some of the financial statements issued by banks and other financial institutions. I find-to quote from this statement-that the net revenue for the year 193435 was $31,248,324.47, and that the expenditures for the same period were $28,974,316.53.
fMr. Heaps.]
In other words there was a profit of $2,274,007.94. This statement goes on to say that if the Post Office Department had been indemnified for the expenses imposed upon it through the franking privileges enjoyed by the various departments of government the revenue would have been increased by approximately $750,000, thereby increasing the surplus to the same extent. I see no reason why that sum should not be credited to the revenue account and charged up to the Minister of Finance. This report goes on to say that there is also a direct charge against the Post Office Department for carrying on savings bank business. This costs the department over $60,000 yearly, for which it receives no remuneration whatever, but its expenditure is increased by that amount. Again I see no reason why the Post Office Department should not be credited with that amount, which could be debited to the Minister of Finance.
The question I should like to ask at this time is this: Supposing there was added to the expense account an amount equal to the rents of the various buildings throughout the country, would that give a true picture of the financial situation of the Post Office Department? In other words, taking this mass of information which we find in the auditor general's report, plus the information in the Postmaster General's report, if we add to the expense account the amount chargeable to the Post Office Department for buildings, would that, in the opinion of the minister, give us a true picture of the whole situation?


John Campbell Elliott: That would be substantially so, I should think. I am not quarrelling greatly with either of the two hon. gentlemen who have spoken in regard to this matter. Of course these expenses and rentals for buildings were small matters in the early years, when this system was commenced, but they have grown to great proportions since that time. The hon. gentlemen said I had stated that this was an antiquated system, but I think he has in mind what someone else said. I say this is a system that has been in force practically since confederation. That may make it a little antiquated. As far as this statement is concerned, I think it is a fairly accurate statement-it is carefully audited-of the finances of the Post Office Department apart from any charge which might be made for the rental of the buildings and the services of the caretakers.
I do not know whether the hon. gentleman who last spoke was in the committee when this question was discussed this afternoon, but we went into the matter at considerable

Supply-Post Office
length at that time. I quite agree that it would be of value to this committee, particularly in times like these, to know as closely as we can get it-and we can get it fairly accurately-what this service costs. There is no question about that. There is, of course, the depreciation, which runs into many millions of dollars. There is the heating of ' all these buildings-


Charles Avery Dunning: The equipment.


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, the equipment, some of it very expensive. There is all the belting and all that sort of thing which is put into a building originally, and a great deal more which is put in subsequently. That is all supplied by the Department of Public Works and is not charged against the Post Office Department.


Charles Avery Dunning: And tractors.


John Campbell Elliott: Yes, there are tractors and a great many other kinds of equipment. I notice the alacrity with which my colleague the Minister of Finance refers to the enormity of that cost, and it is just possible that we have reached the time in the history of the finances of this country when we must take drastic steps to try to balance the departmental budget if this is to be reasonably close to a service at cost. From what I have heal'd in the chamber this afternoon it is quite apparent that the feeling of this committee is that in a department such as this, producing a revenue of $39,000,000 annually, we should not have too large a deficit as between actual revenue and actual cost.


Charles Avery Dunning: There should be no
deficit.


John Campbell Elliott: The Minister of Finance tells me, as he has told me before very positively, that there should not be any deficit.
Sir	GEORGE	PERLElY:	Has	not	the
minister overlooked the fact that his department does a good deal of work for other departments without getting paid for it?


John Campbell Elliott: Oh, yes, there is no doubt about that.
Sir	GEORGE	PERLEY:	Has	not	the
hon. gentleman overlooked that fact?


John Campbell Elliott: An hon. member has just referred to the fact that it costs $750,000 a year for the franking privileges enjoyed by the various departments and by the different branches of parliament. There
is no question about that. I do not think the request that has been made is unreasonable, and I may say to my hon. friend from Winnipeg North that after the committee met previously I asked the Department of Public Works if they would be able to furnish us with an estimate, as accurate as it could be made, of just what was the cost that has not been taken into account in the figures appearing in this statement. I think it is only fair to members of the committee that we should have that information, and in making that statement I am not criticizing the system which has prevailed in the past. Looking over the history of the Post Office Department for many years, I think it has had a creditable record. From time to time the postal rates have been changed, and in answer to my hon. friend from Kent, N.B., who wished to get back to two cent postage may I say that we can get back to two cent postage when the business of this country gets to the point where we shall be able to secure the revenue which will enable us to reduce the rates to that point. We cannot do that at the present time. It may be that we shall have to make a more strenuous effort to balance our budget than we have ever been required to make in the history of the department. The Minister of Finance tells me that we must do so, and I am satisfied he is right. In connection with the information for which I have asked, however, I am bound to say that I know the Department of Public Works is very, very busy at the present time, and my own department is equally busy. If any of my hon. friends visited any of the branches of the Post Office Department and saw how the employees are working, like bees in a hive, not only during the week but also on Saturday afternoons and very often on Sundays, during the session, I think they would be confirmed in the belief, which I think they hold, and which has been generally expressed this afternoon, that the employees of the department are working very hard.
With regard to having the accounts show exactly what the deficit is, I may say to my hon. friend that I shall endeavour to get an estimate, just as accurate as can be obtained, and shall be glad to show it to him and to discuss the matter with him at any time. If there are many other matters which hon. gentlemen wish to discuss I am afraid that discussion will have to be deferred until another time. I am bound to say that I am now trespassing upon the time that has been allotted to the Minister of National Health. I had hoped that we were about through,
Supply-Post Office

but if that is not so we may have to take another session for this item. However, if it is the feeling of the committee that we have almost exhausted the ground. I should be pleased to give any information which any hon. members desire.


Grote Stirling: I have one question
apropos of what the minister said this afternoon. He referred to air mail services, the majority of which were under contract. Are those which were not under contract instances where the mail was carried by Royal Canadian Air Force planes in the north? What were the instances of those which were not carried under contract?


John Campbell Elliott: If I am correctly informed, we pay for the carriage of all mails carried by aeroplane.


Grote Stirling: Yes, but the minister said that the majority of them were under contract. What were those which were not under contract?


John Campbell Elliott: I was distinguishing between contracts for a definite period and those which were merely temporary.


Grote Stirling: They are all carried at a pound mile rate?


John Campbell Elliott: Generally, yes.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I take it that the minister will do his best to obtain the statement as requested. I have no desire to get it at this session, but I hope that when the estimates come down at another session the information will be available.


John Campbell Elliott: I shall
endeavour to get it.


George Halsey Perley: On what basis are revenue post offices operated?


John Campbell Elliott: In the revenue offices the postmaster provides the assistants. The total pay, to cover the postmaster and his assistants, is seventy per cent on the first $1 ,000, thirty per cent of the stamp revenue up to $10,000, and twenty per cent on all revenue over $10,000. To give the hon. member an idea as to how that works out I shall give him the figures with regard to Weyburn, about which information was asked this afternoon. In that instance the revenue is slightly over $22,000, and the total which goes to pay the postmaster and his assistants is a bit over $6,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
European war pensions-Naval, militia and air forces after the war, $41,650,000.
George Halsey Perley: I should like to be reasonable about the matter, but only a few moments ago we were discussing the estimates of the Post Office Department, and some hon. members on this side of the house who wished to ask some questions concerning pensions and national health have stepped out for a moment.


Hon. C. G. POWER (Minister of Pensions and National Health):: If the right hon.
gentleman does not mind my saying so, there will be other items dealing with pensions, and I would have no objection at all to a discussion on those items.


George Halsey Perley: Is the minister going on with other items to-night?


Charles Gavan Power: Could we not reserve item
181,	and the hon. members in question could discuss pension matters under that item?


George Halsey Perley: I do not understand why the minister could not leave item
182,	as well as 181.


Charles Gavan Power: It does not make the slightest difference to me.


George Halsey Perley: What other item will the minister take to-night?


Charles Gavan Power: As many as I can.
Sir GEORGE PERLEY. Has he taken any of them?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, some of the items have been taken up. For the moment I should prefer to deal with the pensions items proper, and come to the general items later. The grant to the Canadian Legion has been passed, and the Last Post Fund grant has been passed. I could take up the vote for pensions payable to men on active service in the Northwest rebellion, if the right hon. gentleman desires, or I could hold any one item with the understanding that anything might be discussed on it.


George Halsey Perley: I suggest that we begin at the top of the page and take the items on the understanding that one will be left and that anything relating to pensions or national health may be discussed on that item.


Charles Gavan Power: I should not like to do that at the moment. I should like to discuss all the items which relate only to pensions.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


George Halsey Perley: Does the minister refer to item 174?


Charles Gavan Power: No, that involves both
pensions and health. I could take item 181, if the right hon. gentleman desires.


George Halsey Perley: That will be
all right.
Item stands.
Pensions payable to men on active service, Northwest rebellion 1885, and general pensions, $20,000.


George Halsey Perley: It would seem to me that this amount would reduce fairly quickly after so many years. I suppose the men entitled to the pension are long lived.


Charles Gavan Power: The vote is for $20,000, and is payable to ex-members of the militia who incurred disabilities during the Northwest rebellion of 1885. In the fiscal year 1932-33 there was a vote of $25,000, of which $21,500 was spent, and in the fiscal year 1933-34 there was a vote of $25,000, with an expenditure of $20,000. This is an annual expenditure, and owing to the death of the men who served in the rebellion it is reducing gradually.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Employers' liability compensation, $40,000.
George Halsey Perley: What does this item cover?


Charles Gavan Power: This item has been in the estimates for a long time. Shortly after the war it was urged upon the government of that day that it was extremely difficult for soldiers who had suffered injury to obtain employment in civilian life, on account of their disabilities. With that in mind arrangements were made whereby certain premiums were to be paid to insurance companies on workmen's insurance. At the present time nearly all the provinces have workmen's compensation acts, and the arrangement is that if an ex-soldier who suffers from some disability is employed and is injured owing to his disability, in certain cases there is a pension paid to the board or to the insurance company by the government.
There has been some question as to whether this is a very useful item, and at the present time I do not believe it does very much by way of procuring employment for ex-soldiers. Whatever good it may have been immediately after the war, it is not of very much use to-day, although it has been continued. This is set up under order in council, and from year to year since 1921 the orders in council have been continued.


George Halsey Perley: How much of it was used last year?


Charles Gavan Power: Last year the expenditure was $23,000. I understand it is the railway companies who profit, if anybody does, by this. It is not a factor in giving employment to ex-service men.


George Halsey Perley: The minister is rather doubtful whether the item should not be dropped.


Charles Gavan Power: The minister is seriously considering whether or not it should be dropped.	[DOT]


George Halsey Perley: I suggest that he go into it further before another year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
European war pensions-Naval, militia, and air forces after the war, $41,650,000.
George Halsey Perley: Before this finally passes I would like the minister to agree that any member who wishes to speak upon it may do so upon some other item.


Charles Gavan Power: I have no objection at all, and if the right hon. gentleman wishes we can allow some item to stand when we get to the end of the evening.


Howard Charles Green: Would the minister explain the decrease in this item?


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know that there is any great reason for the decrease except possibly that we overestimated in other years. The amount is very much the same as it was last year. I can give the votes in other years, in round figures. In 1932-33 the vote was $48,000,000 and the expenditure $43,141,000; in 1933-34 the vote was $45,000,000 and the expenditure $41,839,000; in 1934-35 the vote was $42,000,000 and the expenditure $41,953,000; from April 1, 1935, to January 31, 1936, the expenditure was $34,440,000 and the appropriation for that year was $42,000,000, there being an unexpended balance of $7,559,000. The total number of pensioners from April to December, 1935, increased by 446, and the annual liability increased by over $20,000. The trend of cost is now, I think, fairly stationary. It is estimated that there may possibly be a saving of $350,000 in the 1935-36 appropriation, but this is more or less of a guess, as my hon. friend knows.


Grote Stirling: Could the minister, without going into a great deal of detail, give the trend in other allied countries? I think it is the case that in the United Kingdom the figure is gently dropping now.
2160	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health


Charles Gavan Power: I have not the statistics before me, but I think it can safely be said that in the United Kingdom the figures are dropping very considerably; in Australia they are pretty constant. I believe Australia began proportionately higher than Canada, but at the present time I think that in proportion it is lower than Canada. I am speaking now of the expenditure, let us say, per capita in comparison with the number of men enlisted in the Australian' military forces and in out Canadian forces. There were 617,000 men enlisted in the Canadian forces and 410,000 in the Australian forces, if my memory is correct.


Frederick Cronyn Betts: How many men are at present drawing pensions under this vote?


Charles Gavan Power: The number of disability pensioners is 79,000 flat, and there are about 18,000 dependents' pensions. There are all told 97,200 pensions, distributed as my hon. friend knows among approximately 250,000 people.


Frederick Cronyn Betts: The minister in the bills which he has introduced, and which are now before the pensions committee, contemplates certain possible reductions in the total pension
bin.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know that I can
say that. On the contrary, if my hopes are realized I imagine that this year, at any rate, and perhaps for some years the pension bill may be increased because I hope to get as many pension cases before the tribunals and before the courts as possible so that we can see some finality to the matter.


Mr. LENNARD:: Does the minister think
it is wise to make this reduction in view of the more sympathetic attitude that may be adopted toward the ex-service men?


Charles Gavan Power: The money will be found
anyway. It is statutory that pensions have to be paid, but I do not see very much use in inserting in the estimates items that may not be used. As I have indicated, in 1932-33 there was $5,000,000 unexpended. There is really not much use in putting in figures that we may not reach.


Frank Exton Lennard: In other words, if additional sums are necessary, the minister implies that ways and means will be found of providing them?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.
rMr. Stirling. 1


Frederick Cronyn Betts: I am trying to understand
the saving of $350,000 which the minister mentioned. If, as the minister says, the pension bill may be higher, why do we not budget accordingly? I am asking simply for information.


Charles Gavan Power: A large number of pensioners' children are now reaching the age where they go off pension. Children reaching the expiry age are a very important factor in the decrease. During the year 1936 there will be 8,787 children reaching the age when they will be no longer entitled to receive pensions, and naturally the pension bill will be lower on that account.


Major James William Coldwell: The minister has mentioned children attaining their majority. That reminds me of one particular class which I wish to bring to his attention. I know of one or two returned men who subsequently to the war adopted a child, having no children of their own, and these adopted children, I believe, are not entitled to any consideration under the act or by the board either as veterans' children or for their education as other classes of veterans' children are. I draw this to the minister's attention with a view to getting these cases, few in number, looked into, because I believe in some instances the adoptions that were made were in the public interest because otherwise the children would have become public charges. I have in mind one case particularly which was brought to my attention,


Charles Gavan Power: It seems to me that there
is some such provision in the Pension Act. Section 22, subsection 6, does cover, I think, generally cases of children who have been adopted. It states:
When a child has been given in adoption or has been removed from the person caring for it, by a competent authority and placed in a suitable foster home, or is not being maintained by and does not form part of the family cared for by the member of the forces or the person who is pensioned as the widow, divorced wife, or parent of the member of the forces, or by the woman awarded a pension under subsection three of section thirty-two of this act, the pension for such child may, in accordance with the circumstances and in the discretion of the commission, be continued or discontinued or retained for such child for such period as the commission may determine or increased up to an amount not exceeding the rate payable for orphan children, and any such award shall be subject to review at any time.
The children are carried on for educational purposes after the age of eighteen provided they have shown certain progress.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


Major James William Coldwell: My understanding is that nothing could be done as the child was adopted subsequently to the discharge of the soldier. I brought this matter to the attention of the board, but I shall do so again.


Charles Gavan Power: That is a matter for the pension commission to decide. The hon. gentleman realizes that I have no more to do with the awarding of pensions than he has.


Mr. MUTCH:: I understand that that
would apply only to the children of a returned man.


Charles Gavan Power: I am speaking subject to correction, but I do not think it is restricted to the children of returned men.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: They do not pay pensions to adopted children.


Charles Gavan Power: Probably my hon. friend knows.	,	.


Mr. MacNEIL:: Will the minister permit one item to stand over until the report of the special committee is tabled? Possibly more satisfactory answers could be given at that time to the questions now being asked.


Charles Gavan Power: I see no real reason why that should be done. My hon. friend will have ample opportunity to discuss the report of the committee or any legislation which might be brought down as a result of the labours of the committee. I am a little perplexed as to why he wants this done.
Mr. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle) [DOT] How many new applications were received last year?


Charles Gavan Power: There are about 10,000 outstanding and they seem to stay just about that. About 500 per month are heard every year by the quorums. It is hard to define just what is an application. We know there are a number of cases outstanding; we know at the present time there are over 3,000 cases ready for hearing, but we do not know how many men have made up their minds to apply for a pension and have written to their members of parliament or to the pension commission.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Salaries-staff, $3,428,000.
Thomas Reid: I should like to bring a very serious matter to the attention of the minister, a matter relating to cancer. I should like to quote from a bulletin issued by the Vancouver Medical Association, dated June, 1935. The importance of this problem is
pointed out by Doctor Robb who states that this is the greatest of all public health problems. The bulletin reads:
Cancer is now second among all causes of death. The mortality is higher than that due to all infectious diseases combined (excluding pulmonary tuberculosis), and has ben rapidly increasing during the past ten years. During that time cancer has increased thirty-three per cent and tuberculosis has decreased twenty-five per cent. In 1920 there were 7,614 deaths from cancer in Canada, and in 1933, 10,646- an increase in the death rate from eighty-one to one hundred per 100,000. In 1933 one in every ten deaths was due to cancer. British Columbia is in an even worse situation as it has the highest cancer death rate of all the Canadian provinces. This has increased from 457 in 1924 to 836 in 1934 and there is almost an identical increase in Vancouver itself. There is a similar rise in mortality rates all over the world. The Metropolitan Life statistician thinks that 1933 may be the peak year but this cannot be accurately confirmed for several years to come.
This rise in mortality constitute the biggest problem facing organized medicine to-day and is the direct result of our failure to face the situation. Measures now available, if properly applied, would reduce the mortality to less than one-lialf the present figures.
Cancer differs from all other diseases in that there is no natural cure. There is but one opportunity to cure. This opportunity overlooked or ineffectively seized, the patient is doomed.
The point I want to bring to the attention of the government is the high cost of radium. While other cures are being tested, I believe the use of radium is the method most universally used. I have before me a newspaper article stating that the government of British Columbia is guaranteeing the pur chase of $105,000 worth of radium, about three or four grams. It has been stated to me by members of the medical profession that at the present time radium is in the hands of an international ring, and I suggest to the government that this should be investigated. The treatment of cancer is a very costly affair to those of moderate means and I bring this matter to the attention of the government in order that a thorough investigation may be made.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I cannot allow this
item to pass without expressing a few words of appreciation of the staff of the Department of Pensions and National Health. In my riding are a large number of returned soldiers, and for the past six years a considerable portion of my time in Ottawa has been spent in making calls on the department on behalf of returned soldiers and their dependents. One thing that stands out strikingly in this department is the fact that
2162	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
the staff look upon everything pertaining to returned soldiers in a non-politieal and non-partisan manner. In my opinion every returned soldier receives fair play from the staff of this department. The appointment of Judge Taylor has been blessed all over the country. I might say the same for the deputies and assistant deputies; I found them in every case most anxious not only to do what they thought was right for the country but to consider in a sympathetic manner every case presented to them. I am more than pleased to take this opportunity to express my commendation of the way in which the Department of Pensions and National Health has measured up to what has been expected of it in treating our returned soldiers with sympathy and consideration.


Jean-François Pouliot: Would the minister be kind enough to tell the committee how many men are employed in the patent medicine branch. Who are they?


Charles Gavan Power: At the present time in the patent medicine branch there is only one man with three assistants, Mr. Teevens, but in the operation of this act the inspectors of the food and drugs branch are used by the patent medicine branch.


Jean-François Pouliot: I understand that it is very difficult to discuss matters with Mr. Teevens. I wonder whether he makes special tests of any particular medicine. Does he make tests when the formula is submitted without checking the product afterwards?


Charles Gavan Power: All tests are made in the departmental laboratories under the charge of Mr. Lancaster in Ottawa.


Jean-François Pouliot: I want to know whether several tests are made at different times or whether just one test is made when the patent is obtained.


Charles Gavan Power: Tests are made any time suspicion warrants this. I assume my hon. friend is referring to some patent medicine which the officers have found requires tests in order to see that the proper formula is followed.


Jean-François Pouliot: Let me illustrate. Eno's Fruit Salts is advertised as fruit salts. In the United States the matter has been checked up and it has been proved that Eno's Fruit Salts is made of tar; it is made with citric acid from tar, and there is no fruit at all in it. It is not made with lemon or orange or grape juice or anything of that sort. In fact, in the United States the matter has been looked into and they had to change the libel 
-I mean the label. It may not be a libel to use that label in this country, but it is false representation and I wonder whether the matter could be checked. It is a real farce now. A druggist goes to this official and submits the formula of a cure-all of some kind. This is analyzed and then an entirely different product is made. I would ask the minister to get some bottles of Eno's Fruit Salts, so-called, from different druggists, and have the contents analyzed. And I suggest that this be done not only with this particular brand of salts but with all salts that are called fruit salts, in order to ascertain whether the people are being deceived or not. I submit that it is most important to have an analysis made.


Charles Gavan Power: Although I am not an expert on either fruit or salts, I am informed that the product mentioned by my hon. friend does contain fruit and salts, such as tartaric acid and citric acid, and therefore I imagine that this would be considered enough to give them the right to call it fruit salts. I frankly admit, however, that I am not sufficiently familiar with chemistry to discuss the matter with any degree of exactness, and if the hon. gentleman will make a complaint to the department with respect to any medicine or drug or product which he thinks is wrongly labelled, we shall be glad to have a complete analysis made.


Jean-François Pouliot: I thank the minister, but I would point out to him that while there may be some citric acid in the salts, there may be just a drop of lemon to a large quantity of tar, and tar is much better on the roof of a barn than in the human body. I lodge my complaint right now and I suggest that the minister should spend a few dollars to buy a dozen bottles of Eno's Fruit Salts in different drug stores and have it analyzed for the good of the country.


Frank Exton Lennard: What in the world has this to do with the item under discussion?


Thomas Reid: I regret that the minister had not time to refer to the matter I brought up.


Charles Gavan Power: The government of Ontario is making some endeavour to bring to the people of that province radium at a lower rate and is encouraging a private company, either by subsidy or in some other way, in order that the so-called monopoly may be broken. On the other hand, the price of radium is coming down because the countries that control that product have now come to the conclusion that it might possibly be found in other places and they are not holding so tightly to the monopoly they had. In any case I shall be glad to look into the matter.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


Jean-François Pouliot: Another gentleman in whom I am interested is the officer who reviews pensions. I understand he has a good war record, but it is not satisfactory when it comes to reviewing the decisions of the board with respect to the health of veterans. I am told that owing to his war service he was given the privilege of missing a few years in university and he has very little hospital training. I wish the minister would be kind enough to give us some information with regard to Doctor Shields, the reviewing officer. How long has he been in hospitals? I understand he is an office man, and that is a poor qualification for reviewing the decisions of the board with regard to the condition of soldiers and the degree of their incapacity.


Charles Gavan Power: Doctor Shields, who was appointed in 1933, has had a very good war record. So far as I can ascertain from soldiers generally and from observations made by them, they would appear to be quite well satisfied with the work he has been doing. He has replaced the commission counsel who were in the habit of appealing from the tribunal quorum in a large number of cases. So far as I am aware he does his work in an able manner; and to do his work he need not necessarily be a doctor, though I am informed and have every reason to believe that his record as a medical man is excellent. He had been medical examiner for the pension board for many years and he discharged his duties very well. In the duties he performs, though, he could just as well be a lawyer or a layman. His duty is to review from the standpoint of justice and equity the cases which have been awarded pensions. He carries out the duties imposed on him by statute, in so far as I know and in so far as I have been made aware by any of those particularly interested in these matters, in a proper manner.


Jean-François Pouliot: I thank the minister, but
I regret I do not share his views about that, because if this official has to review the decisions of the board with regard to disabilities of veterans he must be familiar with the medical art; not only that, he must have had actual practice. It is most important that a man who is a reviewing officer of the board of pensions should know whether a man has been incapacitated by a wound or by gas or by any kind of disease contracted during the war. I was much surprised by the case of a man who was indicated as having been wounded and having suffered the preliminaries of the disease which affects him now, and in respect of whom the decision of the board was far from being satisfactory. I cannot see how a man who has no practical
experience in hospital can be a reviewing officer for cases like' that. The minister very ably did not answer my question fully. I asked him how long the doctor had been in hospitals for training, and I would appreciate it very much if he would be kind enough to give me that information.


Charles Gavan Power: I have not that at the
moment. I think my hon. friend entirely misconstrues the duties of Doctor Shields. Doctor Shields does not review decisions of the pension board. The pension board have at their disposal a very large number of doctors. The department also has a number of doctors. But when certain cases have been passed by what is now known as the pension board quorum, whereby pensions have been awarded to applicants, Doctor Shields, as representing the crown, reviews them to see whether or not on legal grounds, on medcial grounds, grounds of evidence or any other ground they should be appealed to the pension appeal court. He could do his work just as well were he a lawyer, capable of weighing evidence. In any case I wish to assure my hon. friend that Doctor Shields has a very good war record and a very good medical record, and so far I have never heard of his competence being called into question.


Jean-François Pouliot: Again I thank the minister, and after the explanation he has given I regret very much that Doctor Shields is not a doctor of law. Having reference to some doctors of the department, may I bring to the attention of the minister a case that occurred under his predecessor, the present Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick. A man was sent to Bellevue with a disease of some kind, and there the doctors decided to extract all his teeth. They sent him home without replacing them, and I had to correspond with Doctor MacLaren to show him the stupidity of these doctors in order that he should give instructions to the dentist down home to give the man a plate. There may be some good doctors on the staff, but they are not all alike, surely.


Mr. HOWDEN:: Is it agreeable to the minister to discuss the Department of National Health under this item?


Charles Gavan Power: Surely.


John Power Howden: There are a few things I should like to bring to the attention of the minister, although 'he is probably aware of them. The first is that the Department of Pensions and National Health is really a department of pensions, national health practically playing no part. The Department of
2164	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
National Health was instituted in 1919 and was given a fair start. At that time its chief duties were the administration of the Food and Drugs Act, the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, the Proprietary or Patent Medicine Act, venereal disease control and child welfare. It is true there were other divisions, but these were by far the most important branches of the National Health department. The department still administers the Food and Drugs Act and the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act-very important, I grant you- also the Proprietary or Patent Medicine Act; but what seems to me, as a medical man of some thirty odd years standing, by far the most important features and functions of the Department of National Health, namely venereal disease control and the maternal and child welfare departments, have been dissolved and are, apparently, no longer factors in connection with the National Health department. Not only from a medical stand-aoint, but so far as the people of Canada ire concerned, the divisions of maternal and child welfare and of venereal disease control were far more important and far-reaching than any others.
When the department was instituted in 1919, largely in response to a luetic condition prevalent among soldiers and inmates of hospitals, the federal health department proceeded with a program in collaboration with the provincial departments and established a fund of $200,000 annually to be divided amongst the provincial governments for the control of venereal disease. In 1925, when it appeared that the government of Canada would withdraw this appropriation, interested parties busied themselves and made representations to the government, with the result that the amount was reduced to only $150,000. In 1926 it was cut to $125,000, and in 1927, to $100,000. During the administration of the last regime it was done away with altogether. Not only were the grants to provincial governments for the control of venereal disease withdrawn, but the departments of child welfare and venereal disease control were entirely abolished. The leader of the opposition, speaking on March 13, stated that the grants to the Canadian National Committee for Mental Hygiene, which is a voluntary medical association for the purpose of informing the public on matters pertaining to mental hygiene, the Canadian Tuberculosis Association, the Canadian Social Hygiene Council, and the Canadian National Committee for Mental Hygiene, should be withdrawn and given to the provinces because the provinces w'ere in need of funds 
The right hon. gentleman was in power for five years, but during that period no moneys were devoted to the provinces for the control of disease. He was not long in office when the only grant the provinces were getting was withdrawn. This brought about a surge of protest from a number of the most important societies and associations in Canada. The Canadian Medical Association, the National Council of Women, the Canadian Pediatric Association, the Canadian Social Hygiene Council and the Canadian Public Health Aassoeiation all protested vehemently against the withdrawal of this grant. At their meeting in Toronto the National Council of Women resolved:
That representation be made to the Prime Minister regretting the discontinuance of the division of child welfare of the Department of Pensions and National Health.
Also:
That the Prime Minister or federal government he asked for a statement of policy of the Department of Pensions and National Health in relation to national health as a whole and in particular in relation to maternity and child welfare.
Tho national executive of the Canadian Social Hygiene Council resolved:
That in the opinion of the Canadian Social Hygiene Council the relinquishment by the dominion government of official leadership and responsibility for child welfare throughout the dominion is most regrettable;
And that as the true function of voluntary associations is to supplement governmental action, the delegation of an important part of the work of dominion department of health to a voluntary association is a retrograde step.
I will speak of that more fully a little later on. The Canadian Society for the Study of Diseases of Children, meeting in Brockville on June 1, 1934, passed the following resolution:
Be it resolved that in the opinion of the Canadian Society for the Study of Diseases of Children, the relinquishment by the dominion government of official leadership and responsibility for child welfare throughout Canada is most regrettable; and that as the true function of voluntary associations is to supplement governmental action, the delegation of an important part of the work to a voluntary association is a retrograde step.
This reference to a voluntary association, I believe, arises from the fact that when grants were withdrawn from the associations I mentioned in the first place, namely the Mental Hygiene Council, the Dental Hygiene Council, the Canadian Social Hygiene Council, and others, those grants were diverted to the Canadian Council on Child and Family Welfare, which was not a medical association

Supply-Pensions and National Health
at all but a purely voluntary association not under the control or supervision of medical authorities.
I am bringing these matters to the attention of the minister because, since our Department of National Health was instituted in 1919, it has been steadily dwindling. That has been true under two regimes; it is still on the dwindle, and unless the matter is given some serious thought and consideration by the present government the department might as well shut up shop and be discontinued entirely. If it is the opinion of this committee and the government that the Dominion of Canada does not need a National Health department, then there is no need to make a farce out of it; we might as well do away with it altogether as pretend to the people of this country that we have a National Health department when as a matter of fact we have not. As a medical man of the Dominion of Canada I am making my protest and bringing these matters to the attention of the minister for his consideration.


George Halsey Perley: Could the hon. gentleman, who has given a great deal of thought to this question, explain to us in a few words his idea of the division of work between the provincial and dominion health authorities?


John Power Howden: Yes. Ever since I have been in this house, for the last ten years, I have maintained that the federal government should lead in medical matters; that it should correlate the efforts of the provinces and lead the way in order to secure uniform services for all the provinces of Canada.


George Halsey Perley: Does the hon. gentleman mean in an educational way or to supersede the functions of the provinces?


John Power Howden: No, not to supersede the provinces but to control the provinces and bring about a uniform administration of health.


George Halsey Perley: In what way does the hon. gentleman suggest that the provinces could be controlled?


John Power Howden: The provinces could be controlled very easily by the establishment of suitable grants. If such grants were made by the federal authority to the provinces, with the understanding that certain standards had to be conformed to and certain measures put into force, there is no question that the grants would be readily accepted by the provinces if this were made worth while by the dominion.


Mr. BLAIR:: I hesitate very much to
differ with my hon. friend from St. Boniface, but while I share his enthusiasm in behalf of public health I cannot altogether approve of that matter being brought under any department of the federal government. That was about the only thing which was done by .the former government and of which I approved, and I have often wondered whether I was wrong. I supported the action of the previous government in abolishing these grants; it seemed an unnecessary duplication of services. Why should we have a tubercular clinic controlled from Ottawa and another tubercular clinic controlled from Toronto? Neither do I approve of Toronto doctors coming to Ottawa and gathering voluntary subscriptions. Thousands of dollars are collected, without the books being audited, all in the name of national health. No doctor in Toronto should claim that name as his own.
I believe these matters should be dealt with in a businesslike way, and I do not approve voluntary organizations in relation to health. We have a right to protect the health of our people, but this should be done in a proper way. It may be every man's duty to see that it is done, but I believe it should be done under the provincial departments. Why, we might as well interfere with the provincial departments of education! Education is a very important question, but it does not come within the sphere of the dominion government. I consider that there is a great deal of unnecessary duplication. Can anyone imagine national health coming under the jurisdiction of a lawyer? That, in itself, is enough to condemn it from a federal standpoint.


Charles Gavan Power: To condemn the lawyer
or the department?


John Knox Blair: Well, the minister is all
right in his place, but do not ask him to supervise national health. I do not think that is his work. I have no complaint to make in that regard, but I suggest that if we wish to assist in this work we should make grants to the provinces. It is with a good deal of hesitation that I rise to offer a contrary opinion in regard to these matters, but this is the stand I have taken on two other occasions, once in support of the previous government. We seem to have a sort of voluntary division of this work in connection with child welfare. I say that is something of a farce and I believe we should abolish the grant that is given to Miss
2166	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
Whitt-on's organization. I should like to see this question of national health dealt with in the proper way, and I should like this government to make grants to the provinces to assist in that work. That would do away with much unnecessary duplication.


Mr. YOUNG:: I suppose if we were lawyers we would bring in -a judge to settle the matter. There is one thing I want to say to-night, and it is that the present system of national health is entirely and absolutely unsatisfactory. I agree that it should be either improved or discontinued, but I do not believe it can be discontinued. It would take a long time to go into the question fully, and I do not intend to do so to-night. I recognize that the present minister is a lawyer, but of course he is not to be blamed in any w'ay, particularly since he is a new minister, so I am not going to attempt to say anything that will embarrass him. But I want to say to him and to the government that this matter is of such vital importance that it should be given serious consideration, and that not later than a year from now, during the next session, we should decide to make drastic changes towards betterment, or we should decide to discontinue it and I do not think it should be discontinued. When I think of the people who have come into this country during past years, and of how little attention was given to the various physical and mental conditions, and when I look throughout the country and see what is taking place, I say that there was not given to examinations the attention which, in my judgment, should have been given, in connection with immigrants coming into the country.
I could go down a whole list of affairs which really should come under the Department of National Health but I am not going into that to-night. With regard to what the two hon. members have said about child welfare let me say that the usual procedure is that some voluntary organization undertake what they believe to be of interest, and if they can carry on that educational work to the extent where they establish some vital interest ip it, then it may be passed over to the Department of National Health, or to some provincial department. But to reverse the process and take an established department out of the Department of National Health of the dominion and leave it to some voluntary organization to carry on the work, not even under medical supervision, is certainly getting the cart before the horse. If there is anything like getting into reverse gear, then we surely have it in -that instance.

I say these few words merely to express my opinion, without arguing it. The matter is of such vital importance that it must be investigated, and changed one way or the other.


Jean-François Pouliot: I hope the minister will
accept the following suggestion: On the lists of the unemployed there are some doctors, and there are other doctors who do not find their work as profitable as it should be, or as it was 'before. Why not send some of them to the new settlements where doctors are badly needed.


Charles Gavan Power: Is one to be the minister?


Jean-François Pouliot: No, I am satisfied with
the minister in charge of the department. I believe some time ago I congratulated him upon his appointment, and he does very well. May I tell him that the highest quality in a minister is that of common sense, and he seems to have it. I hope he will show us that he has plenty of it. He has technicians to assist him, and if the doctors in his department are as good as he has said they are, then he has plenty of good advice at his disposal.
Sometimes people in the new settlements are living far away from medical assistance to which they are entitled. In some parts of Quebec the provincial government has placed nurses, but in other centres no medical assistance is available, although the promise has been given that some medical men or nurses will be sent. I suggest that the minister give serious consideration to the fact that the settlers need this medical assistance, and should have it. It would be an easy matter to have a doctor in attendance at a reasonable salary to look after all these people who are in need of medical assistance. The settlers should have every consideration, and anything done for them would meet with general approval.


Major James William Coldwell: I have looked up some correspondence and I find that subsection 4 of section 22 of the act has been interpreted to exclude children of the type to which I have referred. I suggest that if the act is being amended this particular feature of the subsection might be considered.


Charles Gavan Power: I am sure hon. members of the committee will be glad to hear that if they appear before the committee their suggestions will be heard. If the hon. member will appear before it he could offer his suggestion.


Major James William Coldwell: I am attending another committee which sits coincidentally.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


Alexander MacGillivray Young: I should like to ask one question. The minister of the department has had wide experience, and I agree with the hon. member for Temiseouata that he has given a marvellous display of common sense, and that he has the sympathetic attitude which every minister should have. I understand the reviewing officer takes appeals on behalf of the crown to the court of appeal, after the quorum has decided in favour of the soldier. That seems to me a most peculiar process. When a quorum of the board sits and hears evidenoe, and after weighing it carefully gives judgment in favour of the soldier by granting a pension, I wrant to say that so far as I am concerned I do not believe the crown should take an appeal from the decision of that board. I am asking the minister to give that matter serious consideration, to se,e whether that right should not be removed, provided it now exists. I believe it does the soldiers an injustice. It seems to me that they have to fight hard enough in many instances to have their cases properly presented to the quorum, and if they receive favourable consideration and are granted a pension I say that so far as the crown is concerned the matter should be allowed to rest there.


Charles Gavan Power: The matter has been brought to the attention of the committee which is now sitting. As the hon. member knows it is not permissible to discuss outside the committee matters which have been discussed in it, but I can assure him that the whole matter is being reviewed.


John Power Howden: I should like the minister to make a statement with regard to the venereal disease question.


Charles Gavan Power: I was under the impression that the hon. member was going to make a statement and that he was not particularly anxious to hear from me. I gathered that he did not think I had the qualifications to make a statement on a matter of this kind. As my hon. friend has said, it is true that the venereal disease grant made to the provinces for a number of years was cut off in 1932. As I gathered from him, that matter and the one dealing with the child welfare branch were the two most important questions he had to bring to the attention of the committee, and because in his opinion these have been neglected he has suggested that the whole department should be abolished, but perhaps he was exaggerating.
As such, the department deals to a great extent with national and international obligations. For instance, there is the quarantine division; there is the food and drugs division which covers our obligations under the Geneva
convention respecting narcotics. In the past we have had a certain number of doctors attached to the immigration service, and may I point out to the hon. member that when these immigration examinations were being carried on the head of the department was himself a medical man, and if there was any fault to be found it would not be beyond the knowledge of the head of the department. When the branch dealing with child welfare was taken away from the department there was a distinguished member of the medical profession at the head of it. In the same way, when the venereal disease grant to the provinces was discontinued there was another distinguished member of the medical profession at the head of the department. So evidently any sins or crimes which have been committed by the department have behind them some medical knowledge and experience, and some medical reason possibly other than the ground of pure economy. I quote from the remarks which Doctor Beland, then minister in charge of this department, made in this house on July 18, 1924. He said:
When a grant for this purpose was first voted by parliament it was made clear that the appropriation would be only for five years at the rate of $200,000 per year. The first appropriation was only $100,000. For the second, third and fourth years $200,000 was annually voted. This vote is to complete the $1,000,000 which was intended to be appropriated in order to help the provinces in combatting venereal diseases. We were only called upon to appropriate $100,000 this year but representations were made to the government-to myself in particular-from the different provinces in favour of maintaining the vote as it formerly stood. We have cut the difference in two and are making the appropriation $150,000. The object of the appropriation in the first place was to enable the provinces to establish a service to combat venereal diseases. This was a new work and the provinces were called upon to furnish of their own money an equal amount, as they did After five years it is now found that the service is well organized throughout the country, and it is felt that the federal exchequer should not be called upon to pay as much money as it did before.
Nevertheless, as has been stated by my hon. friend, the appropriation continued to be made until 1931-32. I have received representations from a number of doctors to the effect that it would be a good thing if we could renew this appropriation or provide another.


Eugène Fiset: Has the minister received any representations from the provinces that the grant be renewed?
Mr. POWER; So far as I am aware, we have not in recent years received any renre-sentations from the provinces to that effect.

2168	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health


John Power Howden: There were representations made by the provinces when the grant was first withdrawn.


Charles Gavan Power: I said none in recent years. Some of the provinces are highly organized in this respect and there is no necessity of federal assistance; for example, Ontario, Quebec, and some other provinces are looking after their own affairs, although no doubt they would be very glad to receive a grant of fifty or a hundred thousand dollars.


John Power Howden: Most of them have had to discontinue their efforts in this direction in many cities.


Charles Gavan Power: I am informed that that is so; that they have had to curtail their expenditure owing to the fact that there has been no appropriation made by the federal government.	.
With regard to child welfare, the money expended on that branch amounted, I am told, to approximately 313,000 per annum. Those in charge of the department within the last four or five years have in their wisdom decided that this work can be carried on just as well by voluntary organizations, but as my hon. friend informed us to-night-and he seemed to have good authority for what he said-it is perhaps not considered advisable by the great weight of medical opinion that private organizations should carry on this work. Medical men, including the hon. gentleman himself, consider that this work is essentially a government, and not a private function. While the amount of the grant was cut down in 1910, the grant to the Canadian Council on Child Welfare was 310,000, and the expenditure therefore, I take it, was reduced by approximately S3,000; in 1931-32 the expenditure was $10,000; in 1932-33, $9,000; in 1933-34, $9,000; in 1934-35, $12,600; in 1935-36, $12,600, and this year the amount is $13,100, bringing the amount expended for this purpose to approximately the same amount as was expended prior to the time when this branch of the department was done away with. Quite frankly I cannot say from my experience up to the present that it would be preferable to have this money expended by the department itself rather than by this voluntary organization but I have no objection to studying the matter and taking the best advice I can get, and then possibly next year we may be in a position to please my hon. friend.


George Halsey Perley: Not being a medical man I do not intend to express any opinions on the best way of handling this matter, but I would say from the experience

we have had in the last five years that this is one of the knotty problems of government. It is one of those questions which arise between the dominion and the provinces and which it is not easy to settle.
Last year it will be remembered that the then Minister of Pensions and National Health called a meeting at Ottawa of the representatives of the provincial health departments, and they had a very satisfactory meeting here. I know that Doctor Sutherland told me afterwards he had great hopes that some way would be found to coordinate their efforts to produce the best results possible. The object he had in mind at that time was to find some way in which the dominion and the provinces could cooperate in this very important work. The health of the people is something in which we are all vitally interested, and naturally medical men in this house have always discussed the question from that point of view because we all want to do what we can for the health of the people of this great dominion. There is nothing of greater importance, but it is in the first instance a provincial matter. The provinces are charged with that duty. This government has no power to make any regulations or to carry out any administration in regard to health anywhere in this country. We all know that.
Whether some plan can be found by which the federal Minister of Pensions and National Health can cooperate in a reasonable way with the health ministers and officers of the different provinces I do not know. Naturally the dominion would have to give some money for that purpose; this would1 be expected. But the efforts at cooperation that we have made from time to time in other fields in which the federal government as well as the provinces have an interest have not been very successful. We have tried to cooperate in a comparatively simple matter like the Companies Act, for instance, which is a much easier question to handle than that of health, but we have never been able to arrive at any conclusion or arrangement with the provincial authorities. I am sure that the present Minister of Pensions and National Health has it at heart to do anything he possibly can in a reasonable way to improve the health of the people of this great dominion, and I sympathize with him in the fact that there is great difficulty in connection with the provisions of the British North America Act, and in the fact that this federal parliament has no real authority to act unless the action is taken with the consent of the provinces. And so I think this question is one which

Supply-Pensions and National Health
requires a great deal more consideration before it is possible for anyone to suggest a plan that would be of any particular service in clearing up this rather knotty problem.


Charles Gavan Power: May I say to my right hon. friend I was informed that it was extremely difficult to arrive at any specific arrangement with the provincial ministers of health because they were not prepared to give up any function or control which they at present exercise. However, possibly because I have no prejudices in the matter, and because I desire to have another try, I have asked the provincial ministers of health to come to Ottawa on June 16 in order that I may discuss this matter with them in the hope that we may be able to find some means of coordinating our general efforts.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Administration expense - Department and Canadian pension commission, $681,758.
George Halsey Perley: Will the minister explain the reason for the increase?


Frederick Cronyn Betts: The whole problem of the returned soldier is being discussed very fully in a special pension committee in which opportunities are offered that are not available here for the hearing of evidence. That committee is spending more time on these items pertaining to returned soldiers than can be spent here. While all these items are of vital interest to me and to my constituents, I feel that the proper place to discuss them is in that committee. I do not want to appear uninterested in these items, because I am very much interested, but I think they could be better discussed in the committee. I do not propose to suggest to the minister how he shall conduct his estimates, but I am wondering whether these items could not be submitted to us after the committee has made its report.


Charles Gavan Power: It is not a standing committee of the house; it is a special committee set up to deal with three pieces of legislation. In most years there is no pension committee and these estimates must be voted every year. This is the normal way of voting estimates. Except in one or two instances, the whole administration of this department has never been submitted to the scrutiny of a committee. The committee now set up is to report specifically on certain legislation. My hon. friend knows that no limitation has been placed upon the discussions in that committee.


Frederick Cronyn Betts: That is my point. There have been no limitations and the result is that there is ample opportunity to scrutinize these items. I think the items could be discussed more intelligently after the committee has sat.


Charles Gavan Power: I have no objection to holding over one item for discussion. After all, there are only a few hon. members who are members of that committee. That committee is dealing with certain legislation and when its report is before the house, hon. members will have ample opportunity to discuss the legislation. If there are any other matters that hon. members desire to bring up before the committee for discussion, I have no doubt the members of the committee will be very glad to have them discuss them. I cannot see any helpful purpose to be served by holding up these estimates until the committee has made its report. That has not been the practice in other years.


George Halsey Perley: I may have misunderstood the hon. member for London (Mr. Betts), but as I understood him, he suggested that perhaps hon. members could ask their questions about the estimates more intelligently after the pension committee had reported. In other words, some of the matters which they might want to discuss might be settled by the committee and it would not be necessary to discuss them here. However, if the minister is going to leave one item open for general discussion, hon. members will be able to bring up any question.


Charles Gavan Power: I have no objection to leaving an item open for discussion. This committee is investigating every phase of returned soldier activities. Witnesses are being brought in from outside and members of that committee, whether they are in order or out of order, carry on conversations for hours about these matters. I cannot see that the matter can be made more clear in the House of Commons than before that committee. I do not think any minister has refused a request to hold open an item, and I am quite willing to do so.


Frederick Cronyn Betts: That would meet my point
exactly.


Eugène Fiset: After all, we are
discussing the estimates of the Department of National Health as well as of the Department of Pensions. Anything brought out before the special committee has no bearing upon the estimates before the committee of the house at the present time. The special committee is dealing with an amendment to a specific act and witnesses have come from all over Canada to give their evidence. When that committee reports there will be ample opportunity to discuss legislation in committee of the whole as well as in the full house.


Frederick Cronyn Betts: I cannot make it any clearer than it has been made by the hon. member for Argenteuil (Sir George Perley) Certain
2170	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
information has come out in the committee and will come out at future sittings which will enable those interested to discuss these very items more intelligently.


Charles Gavan Power: I would be prepared to
leave item 175 open. If the committee has no objection to passing the remaining items, it will be understood that any matter pertaining to pensions or returned soldiers can be discussed under that item.


George Halsey Perley: Or national
health.


Charles Gavan Power: Is it intended to continue
the discussion on national health? The point raised by the hon. member for London (Mr. Betts) and my right hon. friend does not apply to national health. We are not discussing health matters in the committee.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Item 175 is very important and I should think the minister would want to get it through. I am heartily in accord with this item, because I know splendid work is being done under it. I suggest that the minister have this item passed and hold over a smaller item so that discussion may be had later on.


Mr. KINLEY:: Considerable difficulty has
been encountered in connection with sick mariners landed from ships, but I believe the Canada Shipping Act contains a provision that will settle these difficulties. This act is to come into force on August 1 and amendments are to be submitted to the house in an effort to cure any difficulties that may be [DOT]encountered in the administration. Can the minister make a statement as to how men landed by an indirect route and brought to Nova Scotia or to any other part of Canada will be treated in the future?


Charles Gavan Power: I do not know that I can
say what is going to happen in the future. After all, the act to which the hon. member refers will be passed and doubtless it will be interpreted in the broadest possible manner by the officers of the department. I cannot undertake to lay down the line of conduct as to just what is going to happen after this legislation is put through.


John James Kinley: Is the minister aware that under the new Canada Shipping Act there is a section 308, subsection 5, which provides that a seaman being a fisherman may enter hospital even if he is taken ill or injured outside of Canada and arriving in any of the said provinces other than in a ship to which he belongs.


Charles Gavan Power: I am inclined to think so, but frankly I must say that I did not read the Canada Shipping Act when it went through the house. As my hon. friend will remember, it was christened the Anthony Adverse of legislation and went through in two or three hours. I did not take the trouble to read it and I do not believe that even the seafaring members of the house did so. I cannot speak from personal knowledge as to what is contained in that act.


John James Kinley: As a matter of fact I know that provision is in the act, and I thought a public statement would be made advising our fishermen as to their rights and privileges at the present time, because they are at sea now and there may be a sick mariner at any time, and they would know that they could land him at Newfoundland or have him transferred to another vessel and so come under the act.


Charles Gavan Power: I cannot even guarantee that the act will become effective within any given time.


John James Kinley: It is proclaimed.


George Halsey Perley: It was stated by the minister who had charge of the matter that it had been proclaimed for a certain day in the future.


Charles Avery Dunning: My hon. friend from Queens-Lunenburg will have an opportunity to direct attention to the matter inasmuch as there is on the order paper a bill to amend the Canada Shipping Act. This will enable him to ascertain the exact place in Anthony Adverse where this particular trouble is dealt with.


Charles Gavan Power: He knows where it is.


John James Kinley: I want the minister to be aware of it so that the officials will remedy the difficulty.


Charles Gavan Power: They will interpret the act to the best of their ability.


Mr. RYAN:: How are these grants made in connection with sick mariners?


Charles Gavan Power: We administer part 5 of the Canada Shipping Act and give surgical and medical attendance and treatment to the sick and injured. We maintain one departmental hospital and make provision at other ports for care and treatment at contract rates in local hospitals. The revenue is obtained by a compulsory levy on the registered tonnage of ships arriving in the ports of Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and British Columbia. Such dues are

Supply-Pensions and National Health
paid not oftener than three times during any calendar year. In order to be eligible for sick mariner benefits, dues shall be paid by vessels engaged in the fishing industry prior to the first voyage of each season and on each subsequent voyage not exceeding three in the calendar year. Certain grants are made out of the fund to the Navy League of Canada, the Sailors' Institute, Catholic Sailors' Club, and a number of other institutions. I have the list before me.


Alan Webster Neill: Is the minister quoting from the Canada Shipping Act?


Charles Gavan Power: 
William Michael Ryan: I understood that these grants were made to hospitals. Speaking on behalf of the medical profession, which at times in this chamber does not take kindly to the legal profession, I do know that there are some complaints. In the hospitals doctors give their time gratuitously in the performance of certain services, and among other things they attend to sick mariners in hospital who are on the sick mariners' relief fund. They are forced to give service to these men gratis, and if this contribution is made for a specific purpose I should like the minister to see to it that the doctors who treat these soldiers in hospitals receiving grants, get some remuneration for their services.


Charles Gavan Power: The arrangement we make with the hospitals is on a contract basis, and the amount we pay per patient covers medical care in the hospitals and the fees of doctors. I imagine, therefore, that the hospitals decide which doctors they will have, and it would be difficult for us, short of taking the drastic step of cutting off the grant altogther, to insist that a hospital should employ one doctor rather than another.


William Michael Ryan: That is not the point; I am not asking for one particular doctor. But doctors generally in the city give their time gratuitously to the hospital in certain cases and the hospital gets the total grant and keeps it, while the doctors who give their time do not get anything.


John James Kinley: That is not so in Nova Scotia.


William Michael Ryan: It is so in Saint John, I understand.


Charles Gavan Power: We have an arrangement with the hospitals and they make their own arrangements with the doctors. It would render the administration of the act difficult to make separate arrangements with all the doctors.
Mr. NEILL; I understood the minister to quote from the regulations that where it was not convenient for men to go to the hospital maintained by the department, arrangements were made with local hospitals. Is that correct? How about the case which I brought to his attention? It was suggested that the man ought to be sent to Lunenburg.
Mr. POWER; My hon. friend sometimes has the minister absolutely on the hip. I have not been able to explain the matter to myself, but I have some hopes that if I receive many more enlightening communications from my hon. friend I shall finally begin to understand it. The fault to be found with my hon. friend's friend was that he allowed his vessel to sink under his feet before he reached the shore.


George Halsey Perley: I asked the
minister to explain the increase this year.


Charles Gavan Power: There is an increase of $12,968 due to paying more inspectors in the food and drugs branch. In public health engineering there is an increase of $2,764. There is being opened a new office at Vancouver for the district comprising British Columbia and Alberta, and that requires extra provision for equipment and travelling expenses.


George Halsey Perley: Is that the Department of Health?


Charles Gavan Power: Public health engineering. In marine hospitals there is an increase of $23,000 over last year. As I pointed out, the amount required last year for marine hospitals was underestimated by $20,000. In quarantine and leprosy there is this year a decrease of $9,103. During the last few years the demands upon the department in connection with quarantine, leprosy and the fumigation of ships were considerably less than the estimates.


George Halsey Perley: Are the number of leprosy cases decreasing?
2172	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health


Charles Gavan Power: We have at present seven In the east and four in the west; there is a decrease of one in the east, at Tracadie. In immigration, medical inspection, there is a decrease owing to the fact that we have closed three offices in the old country and brought the physicians back here and assigned them to other duties.


George Halsey Perley: Could the minister explain what is public health engineering? I am not conversant with the term.


Charles Gavan Power: It largely deals with international traffic on the great lakes and inland waters of Canada, in checking the water supply for ships and boats and matters of that kind. It is an appropriation for the enforcement of the regulations approved by orders in council of June 19, 1923 and February 25, 1930, concerning water for drinking and culinary purposes on vessels navigating on the great lakes and inland waters, and on common carriers engaged in international and interprovincial traffic. There is a constant supervision of vessels and cooperation with ship owners.


Jean-François Pouliot: Before this item is carried
may I state that I understand that there is an item for the Food and Drugs Act. It is not only Eno's Fruit Salts that I have to complain of, there is also the J. N. de Kuyper gin. On the label it is stated in big letters that it is distilled in Holland, which is untrue. It is made in Montreal. It is a kind of concoction made of syrup that they mix with alcohol. I wonder whether the minister will not take steps to have the label rectified, so that people will not be under the impression that they are drinking pure Holland gin when they have only that concoction made of syrup by a liquor company in Montreal.


Charles Gavan Power: I am almost inclined to share my hon. friend's indignation at the thought that J. N. de Kuyper gin, which was a staple in the province of Quebec some years ago, has deteriorated. If such is the case I shall most certainly make such inquiries as I can in order that it may be brought up to the standard which we were led and taught to expect from that great concern.


Jean-François Pouliot: Thank you. There is
something else. In the United States they have a wonderful publication which indicates the cost of patent medicines to the producers. For instance there is Vapex, which is sold at around SI a small bottle, and it costs the producer about twelve cents. It is an exploitation, of the public, and if the facts were made known to the Canadian people there would be much less of such exploitation by the makers of medicines.
TSir George Perley.l


Charles Gavan Power: I had the pleasure of reading the same book as my hon. friend has read. I think it is called a Hundred Million Guinea Pigs, and reference is made in it to the matters to which he has drawn my attention.


An hon. MEMBER:: It is almost as bad as the law.


Charles Gavan Power: According to A Hundred Million Guinea Pigs, the book to which my hon. friend refers, the poor people of the United States of America were being deluded, through heavy advertising, into buying worthless preparations. But I am informed that the regulations of the Department of National Health provide that if a commodity or a product is required to be registered and the price of the product is found away in excess of its real value, registration is refused.


Jean-François Pouliot: Hear, hear.


George Halsey Perley: Does that mean that when they ask for registration the department demands to be shown the cost? Is that what is done?


Charles Gavan Power: I understand that an estimate is made from the formula. The application form states the price.


George Halsey Perley: And the cost price too?


Charles Gavan Power: It states the sale price, and
the department makes a careful study of the cost price.


Jean-François Pouliot: Therefore there will be a great saving in our drug stores?


Charles Gavan Power: Certainly.


Charles Grant MacNeil: There is a matter which
lies outside the scope of the inquiry of the special committee, but which I think should receive the attention of the minister. I refer to the circumstances of a large number of imperial service men wh,o are in Canada and who were not domiciled here at the outbreak of the war. Their needs are dealt with, of course, through the Canadian representative and the Canadian office of the British Ministry of Pensions. Nevertheless circumstances are such at the present time that their needs are being referred to various municipalities, and in the constituency which I represent a number of municipalities have had reason to complain, feeling that these men should be dealt with by the Canadian government. It has been difficult to explain the situation, and it has been difficult also, in referring the matter to the Canadian Office, to secure a review of their claims such as we usually secure from the Canadian

Supply-Pensions and National Health
pension commission. I should like to ask the minister if he has considered the advisability, in view of the vast array of often disgraceful evidence as to the condition of these men, of making suitable representations to the British Ministry of Pensions that these men may secure redress.


Charles Gavan Power: The matter to which my
hon. friend refers was brought to-day to the attention of the committee on pensions, although it came up indirectly in connection with another matter; the representations covered the point raised by my hon. friend. The request of those representing the imperial veterans is that they be treated on exactly the same basis as Canadian veterans. At the present moment, as my hon. friend knows and as doubtless the committee is aware, soldiers who served in the imperial army but who were domiciled as citizens of Canada prior to the war are treated on the same basis as Canadian citizens, in that the pension which is granted to them by Great Britain, and which is very often below that which is granted by Canada, is augmented to the Canadian level. The point now raised is whether persons who have come to Canada since the war and who did not serve in the Canadian forces, but served in the imperial forces, shall receive the same treatment as those who served in the Canadian forces. The question is a difficult one to settle. As my hon. friend well knows, it is one for negotiation as far as possible with the British Ministry of Pensions. In any case I should be very glad to take the point up again with the British government, though I understand it has been discussed many times, as to whether they are prepared to make an additional allowance to their soldier pensioners now residing in Canada.


Jean-François Pouliot: Before this item is carried would it be possible to know how many veterans in armies other than the British army had the preference over Canadian citizens in the civil service. I wonder whether the minister can answer that, or if he cannot, would he be kind enough to tell me from what department I can get that information?


Charles Gavan Power: I will, with great pleasure,
refer my hon. friend to the civil service commission.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Charles Gavan Power: If my right hon. friend
(Sir George Perley) is satisfied I will hold open item 173. The hon. member for Davenport suggested that perhaps item 175 could
be passed at once. There are two large items, one for $2,600,000, the other for $3,000,000. I am quite willing to leave the $3,000,000 item open and pass the one for $2,600,000.


George Halsey Perley: I do not think
it makes any difference.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Unemployment assistance, $2,600,000.
Howard Charles Green: What imperial veterans are
eligible for assistance under this particular item?


Charles Gavan Power: Those who arrived in
Canada prior to 1924 and who are pensioners or who have commuted their pension.


Howard Charles Green: Is there any reason why
that date should not be carried forward, for the benefit of men who arrived after 1924?


Charles Gavan Power: I think it would be rather
a big question to discuss at this late hour. I assume that the regulations were made in 1924 and they took the situation as it was found at that time. No government since then have thought that their duty lay in looking after imperial soldiers of another country. They took the situation as they found it at that time, and since then no government have considered it to be their duty to look after soldiers of another country. As a matter of fact, as my hon. friend knows, these men are being looked after by the municipal authorities of the municipalities in which they reside. They are not starving.


George Halsey Perley: Unemployment assistance, as I understand it, is assistance given by this government to ex-service men in lieu of the ordinary relief which is given by the municipalities.


Charles Gavan Power: It is given to small pensioners who are unemployed. Only small pensioners are in receipt of it.


George Halsey Perley: To all pensioners who are unemployed?


Charles Gavan Power: To unemployed small pensioners whose pensions are not sufficient to bring them up to the scale laid down by the department as the scale they should receive.


Howard Charles Green: What would be involved if that date were carried forward to January 1, 1936?


Charles Gavan Power: I have not the faintest idea and I do not think we could get an estimate of it, because I do not think there are any figures available anywhere to let us know how many British ex-soldiers have migrated to Canada since 1924.
2174	.	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health


Howard Charles Green: Could that information be obtained from the municipal relief lists?


Charles Gavan Power: It might be obtained in some way. I am in hopes that if a classification of ex-service unemployed is made by the veterans' assistance commission all these facts and figures will be available, but certainly they are not available now.


Howard Charles Green: I suppose the dominion
government is now paying a large share of the cost of relief for these men, in any case?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


George James Tustin: What amount of assistance do these men get? Is it on a sliding scale?


Charles Gavan Power: There is a basic rate of $18.75 per month for a single man. The basic rate was laid down in the famous Hyndman report, and it is now in effect. It increases for a married man and for pensioners with children. If their pension is less than the municipal rate of relief we supplement it in order to bring it up to the municipal rate or to this basic rate of $18.75 per month for a single pensioner; $30 per month for a pensioner with one dependent, $34 per month for a pensioner with two dependents; $39 per month for a pensioner with three dependents, and so on. For a pensioner with seven dependents it is $51 per month. As an incentive to the pensioner to endeavour to secure employment casual earnings up to $10 per month are not deducted, and the earnings of any child living with the pensioner are exempted up to $40 per month.


George Halsey Perley: Does the rank of the ex-service man make any difference at all in the scale?


Charles Gavan Power: No, not at all.


George Halsey Perley: What amount was expended last year?


Charles Gavan Power: Last year we expended
$2,042,000, and as a result of the findings of the Hyndman commission the amount will be considerably increased this year.


George Halsey Perley: Does the minister expect to have to spend $2,600,000?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


George Halsey Perley: Because of the increase recommended in the Hyndman report?


Charles Gavan Power: Yes.


George James Tustin: Do I understand the minister to say that returned men get this relief providing they are already receiving a small pension, in order to bring it up to a certain amount, or do they have to be on relief in the municipality in which they reside in order to have their income supplemented in this way?


Charles Gavan Power: The returned soldier who is a pensioner has no connection with the municipality at all as far as relief is concerned; he is not obliged to apply to the muni ipality. He applies to this department, and if his income is not as high as this basic rate or as the rate of the municipality in which he lives, then we supplement that amount. So far the government of Canada has not considered it to be its duty to look after exsoldiers who are not pensioners.


George James Tustin: I have in mind a pensioner who is receiving a small pension; no doubt the minister will recall the case, because I have spoken to him about it. I think this man has a pension of about $30 per month, and he has a family of four children. He strenuously objects to applying for relief,, either from the municipality or under this scheme, and I was just trying to get it clear as to whether he should be on municipal relief.


Charles Gavan Power: If he receives a pension of $30 per month he would probably have that amount brought up to the scale I mentioned a few moments ago.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
War veterans' allowances, $3,200,000.
George Halsey Perley: I would like some explanation of this increase, but it is almost eleven o'clock.


Charles Gavan Power: It will not take me a moment to explain. The war veterans' allowance was introduced in 1930. At that time a very good estimate was made as to the annual amount that would be expended, and the estimate has been pretty closely followed since then. As the soldiers grow older and reach the age of sixty more of them come under this act. Some of them grow less capable of looking after themselves and also come under the act. That is the reason for the increase.


George Halsey Perley: That is a reasonable explanation, but I should think their numbers would be growing less.

Questions


Charles Gavan Power: Not in this particular
category. There are more reaching the age of sixty than are dying. In 1930 it was anticipated that by 1959 the expenditure under this item would reach $12,000,000 annually.


George Halsey Perley: Is this allowance made only to those over sixty?


Charles Gavan Power: To those sixty or over or to those holders of small pensions who are permanently incapacitated.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Monday, April 27, 1936