Mr. REID:: 1.	How many houses have been constructed by Wartime Housing Limited, in north Vancouver, B.C., including staff houses?
2.	What has been the total cost of these houses, including cost of land, supervision and office overhead?
3.	How many of these houses are rented and what amount of rent is being charged for the various types of houses and rooms?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	In North Vancouver, B.C., Wartime Housing Limited, as of February 28, 1943, completed 546 houses, two staff houses and one commissary. The complete programme provides for 750 houses, two staff houses and one commissary.
2.	The project being incomplete, it is impossible to give exact figures showing the detail asked for. Total payments as of January 31, 1943, are $1,869,904.29. This sum, of course, includes payment for some uncompleted work.
3.	There were 519 houses rented as of February 28, 1943. There were 162 beds occupied in the two staff houses.
Rentals are: for houses H-l and H-2, $20 per month; for houses H-21 and H-22, $22 per month; for houses H-41 and H-12, $27 per month.

Questions
The rates in the staff houses are $4 per week for a single room and $3.25 per week each for double occupancy rooms.



WARTIME HOUSING LIMITED-PURCHASE OF LAND IN NEW GLASGOW, N.S.

Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	Did Wartime Housing Limited purchase land in New Glasgow from A. D. McCormack? If so, what price was paid?
2.	Did Wartime Housing Limited erect staff houses or other buildings on such land or in New Glasgow?
3.	If so, were tenders called giving name and amount of each tender?
4.	To whom was contract let stating what sums have been paid contractors and total sums they claim to have earned?
5.	What is the cost of grading and other improvements to property?
6.	What is the cost of equipment and furnishings?
7.	What is the total estimated cost of the project completed and equipped?
8.	How many lodgers will the buildings accommodate?
9.	How many lodgers were in residence on February 1, 1943?
10.	How many persons were on the operating staff on February 1, 1943?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Yes. 2T4 acres were expropriated under date of July 15, 1942, and settlement was made with the former owner Mr. A. D. McCormack for the sum of $1,861.85.
2.	Yes. On the McCormack property mentioned in 1, Wartime Housing Limited erected three staff houses and one commissary. On other property in New Glasgow Wartime Housing Limited erected 136 houses.
3.	Wartime Housing Limited attempted to secure but could not obtain tenders on this work other than from the contractor, Eastern Woodworkers, New Glasgow, Nova Scotia.
4.	The contract was let to Eastern Woodworkers, New Glasgow, Nova Scotia. As of January 31, 1943, the amount paid to Eastern Woodworkers amounted to $506,555.64.
5.	In New Glasgow for the construction of 136 houses, 3 staff houses and 1 commissary, Wartime Housing Limited paid for grading and other improvements to property including sewer, water, roads, etc., $69,328.57.
6.	The cost of equipment and furnishings for all our construction in New Glasgow is $31,991.68.
7.	The total estimated cost of completing 136 houses, 3 staff houses and 1 commissaiy
in New Glasgow as of January 31, 1943, is the sum of $568,762.
8.	The 3 staff houses will house 88 men each, or 264 in all.
9.	On February 1, 1943, there were only 10 beds occupied in the 3 staff houses. The first one was only completed on January 15, 1943. The second was completed on February 13. The third one is still incomplete. The commissary was completed as of January 12.
10.	Wartime Housing Limited had on its payroll in New Glasgow for an operating staff for the 136 houses, the 3 staff houses and the one commissary a total of 15 people, as of February 1, 1943.



NATIONAL DEFENCE TAX

Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	What amount was collected through the national defence tax during the period from July 1, 1941, to December 31, 1941?
2.	What amount was collected through the national defence tax during the period January 1, 1942, to July 31, 1942?
3.	What amount was collected through income tax from those in the income bracket of $3,000 and less per year during the years (a) 1939,
(b)	1940, (c) 1941?


Mr. GIBSON:: 1.	$57,135,942.92.
2.	$87,686,629.10.
3.	(a) 1938-39, $2,594,387.
(b)	1939-40, $2,650,404.98.
(c)	1940-41, $3,142,823.45.



FIRES AT JOHN INGLIS PLANT, TORONTO

Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: 1.	Has the government knowledge of the occurrence of two fires recently at the plant of the John Inglis Company, Limited, Toronto, about the 18th of February?
2.	If so, has it caused any investigation to be made?
3.	Has any investigation been held?
4.	What was the result of the investigation?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes.
3.	Yes.
4.	There were two small fires on the premises of the John Inglis Company Limited, Toronto, during the month of February, one in a contractor's shack caused from an overheated stove; the other in a new building in which the contractors were working. In
Questions

the latter ease salamanders were used to dry out the building and a tarpaulin blown by a strong wind caught fire from a salamander. Both fires were termed as accidents by fire chief Moody of the John Inglis Company Limited and the damage does not exceed $150.



INCOME TAX-REQUESTS FOR REMISSION

Mr. BLACKMORE:: 1.	During the last five months of 1942, in each of the nine provinces, how many income taxpayers have requested a remission of all or part of their income tax on the plea that payment of the full income tax assessed against them would seriously impair their ability to meet their unavoidable financial commitments?
2.	In the cases of how many of those taxpayers was the request granted?
3.	In the cases of those whose requests were denied, how many were refused because the collector completely established that the applicant was able to pay the impost -without seriously impairing his ability to meet his unavoidable financial commitments?


Mr. GIBSON:: 1.	Information not available.
2.	None.
3.	Information not available.



CANADIAN FLAG

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaCROIX (Quebec-Montmorency):
1.	Has it been found necessary in England to adopt a special flag for the Canadian army to distinguish it from that of England and the sister dominions?
2.	Will the Canadian flag adopted in England be the one used in Canada after the war? If not, what will then be the Canadian flag?
Mr. RALSTON:: I can answer that verbally, Mr. Speaker. The answer is no. It may be that the hon. member has in mind a pennant which was presented to General McNaughton when he was general officer commanding the first Canadian division. That banner has no official status as a flag.



TRANSPORT CONTROL-LEAVE FOR TROOPS

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Has leave for troops in training been cancelled by order of the transit controller?
2.	If so, how long will such regulation continue?
3.	Is any weekend leave granted such persons at present? If so, on what basis?


James Layton Ralston: The answer is no. It was cancelled for the month of February at the request of the transport controller. The

cancellation was on account of bad weather and to enable a very heavy freight congestion to be handled. As to how long the regulation will continue, there is no such regulation; and the cancellation was for February. To the third question, as to weekend leave, the answer is yes; weekend leave has been resumed to the extent to which railway facilities are available.


Mr. CHURCH:: Civilians can travel, why not soldiers? Why cannot soldiers have the ordinary leave?



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. BENCE:: 1.	Has the government purchased a property in the city of Windsor, known as the Marketorium ?
2.	If so, for what purpose has this property been acquired?
3.	From whom was the property acquired?
4.	On what date was the property acquired?
5.	What was the total purchase price of the property ?
0.	Was an agent employed in connection with this purchase?
7.	If so, wrhat -was the name of the agent; and what amount was paid to him by way of remuneration?
8.	Are alterations required on this property to make it suitable for the purpose for which it was purchased?
9.	If so, what is the estimated cost of such alterations ?


James Layton Ralston: Return tabled.


ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY-OFFICERS IN SERVICE SINCE 1939
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	What are the names of all persons who were serving as officers with the Royal Canadian Navy on September 1, 1939, and what rank did they hold at that time?
2.	What was the total pay and allowances received by each such officer at that time?
3.	What is the present rank of each such person?
4.	What is the total pay and allowance received by each such person at the present time?


MEDICAL PROCUREMENT BOARD
Mr. SHAW:: 1.	When was the medical procurement board established?

Motions for Papers
2.	Who are the members of this board?
3.	What powers were vested in the board?
4.	Has the medical procurement board undertaken a nation-wide survey to ascertain a correct picture of the situation with respect to the number and distribution of medical men?
5.	If not, is any other agency carrying out such a survey?
6.	Will the result of such a survey be made known to the public?
7.	Has any plan been adopted for the freezing of doctors in their present locations and for the transfer of others to centres without doctors?
8.	Has the government given consideration to the carrying out of a survey to determine the number and distribution of dentists?
9.	Have any plans been adopted to meet the shortage of dentists in certain Canadian centres?


CONDENSED MILK
Mr. SHAW:: 1.	What was the total production of condensed milk in Canada during 1942?
2.	What portion of Canada's 1942 production of condensed milk was purchased by the Canadian government or any department thereof for use by, (a) the armed forces, (b) others than the armed forces?
3.	Was any part of Canada's production of condensed milk exported to the United States during 1942? If so, what quantity?
4.	Has the government taken any steps to encourage the increased production of condensed milk in Canada? If so, what was the nature of the action taken?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Thomas Langton Church: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, correspondence and other documents in the possession of the government, dated during the past three years, relating to the granting of a pension to the surviving members of the Northwest field force (1885); also a copy of any reports and proceedings of any committee in relation to this matter.



RESTRICT IONS ON CONSUMPTION OF BEER, WINES AND SPIRITS

Mr. NICHOLSON:: For a copy of all correspondence received by ministers of the government from individuals or firms engaged in the manufacture of beer, wines and spirits, regarding liquor restrictions, since the broadcast of the Prime Minister on December 10, 1942.


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: If the house is to have the correspondence from individuals and firms engaged in the manufacture of beer, wines and spirits, it would I should think also wish and ought to have the correspondence from individuals and firms other than those
engaged in the manufacture of beer, wines and spirits. I suggest that if the motion is to carry it should carry with an amendment which would cause it to read:
For a copy of all correspondence received by ministers of the government from individuals or firms regarding liquor restrictions, since the broadcast of the Prime Minister on December 16, 1942.
That would mean striking out the words which restrict the return simply to the communications from manufacturers. I will say further to my hon. friend that I doubt if he can begin to realize the extent of the correspondence. Some of it is very illuminating, some not quite so enlightening or edifying. But I should think it might be advisable to have the entire correspondence brought together in the office of the Secretary of State and my hon. friend given opportunity to look it over and see what if anything there is in it that he would like to have brought forward.


Mr. HOMUTH:: He would probably want it all.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: If he did he might have to wait a long time for it, because it is a very considerable correspondence. What I wish to bring to the attention of the house is that to copy all that correspondence and have it produced means considerable expense, the employment of a stenographic staff for some little time. At this time of war public money might be spent to better advantage. I suggest to my hon. friend that the correspondence might all be brought together and that he might look it through and then if there is any particular correspondence he wishes brought down it can be brought down. If at all possible I think it advisable to avoid copying the whole of this correspondence.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: My question was limited for the very reason given by the Prime Minister. However, I shall be glad to comply with his request and examine the correspondence.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Does the hon. member
accept the suggestion of the Prime Minister? Question dropped?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: No; the Prime Minister's suggestion was that the correspondence would be brought together. I should like the motion to stand.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Well, does the hon. member reject my suggestion?-I have
Rationing

undertaken to have the correspondence brought together in the office of the Secretary of State where he can look it over-surely my word as Prime Minister should be accepted in that respect.


Mr. COLDWELL:: I think the Prime Minister misunderstood my colleague. I do not think he doubted the word of the Prime Minister, but he wished the question to stand-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: He can restore the motion later if he is not satisfied. I do not see why this motion should be carried from day to day and week to week on the order paper.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Dropped.
Motion dropped.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. H. A. BRUCE (Parkdale):: I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister in regard to a dispatch published yesterday in the press dated at London, Ontario, March 1:
Rev. John Coburn, chairman of the executive committee of the Ontario Temperance Federation, told the United Church ministerial association


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend has given me no notice of this question. If he wishes to advertise himself, all right, but I submit that he should at least have had the courtesy to submit his question.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: Mr. Speaker, this question is simply in regard to an item appearing in the press, and I wished to inquire as to its accuracy.



RATIONING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: I should like to give an answer to a question asked by the hon. member for St. John-Albert (Mr. Hazen) on Monday, March 1. I should have taken the point of order that this question ought to have been placed on the order paper, but I did not do so. I would have done so if I had had time to give adequate consideration to it. However, this is the answer:

On Monday last the hon. member for St. John-Albert quoted a press dispatch respecting a recent order of the wartime prices and trade board permitting public caterers to charge five cents extra for non-alcoholic beverages served with meals, and asked me to inform the house what purpose this order is intended to serve.
Public caterers purvey nothing but foods, and since the basic period have borne the "squeeze" incident to the higher cost of foods, with respect to some of which there is no ceiling. The business is highly competitive and has never been regarded as a highly profitable one. The situation had become almost impossible for many of the smaller restaurants, and the board, after full investigation, decided that some relief would have to be given in order to maintain the essential service which is provided. It was felt that the situation was not one in which a subsidy could be recommended. The solution found avoided an over-all increase in the price of restaurant meals and gives the customer a chance to decide whether or not he wishes to add to the cost of his meal, or to give up the beverage on which the price increase has been granted.
An additional consideration was, of course, that the order should have the effect of conserving tea and coffee, for which ration coupons are not demanded from the consumer in restaurants.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Langton Church: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Usley) and the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe), in regard to the grave housing situation in the city of Toronto. The minister promised to make a statement a few days before the house closed last August and again this session. Will the minister make a statement by next Monday as to the situation regarding both peace-time and war-time housing?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not think I will. The Minister of Munitions and Supply is in charge of Wartime Housing Limited, which is the only agency carrying on government housing. So far as I know it is not proposed to carry on government housing in the city of Toronto. I do not know that there is anything I can add to that statement.

War Appropriation


Thomas Langton Church: Last Saturday the Toronto members were requested to meet the mayor and the board of control with the provincial members. We were not given any information, because the Department of Munitions and Supply turned the whole situation over to the real estate administrator. I have a letter here from the president of Wartime Housing Limited-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Thomas Langton Church: -saying that further discussion in regard to housing in Toronto will have to be carried on with the administrator of real property.


James Lorimer Ilsley: If the hon. member will put exactly what he wants to know on the order paper I will try to see that an answer is given, in so far as the real estate administrator has jurisdiction over the matter.


Thomas Langton Church: It is a dreadful state of affairs, one of Canada's worst scandals, and nothing is being done.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide, inter alia,
1.	That sums not exceeding $3,890,000,000 be granted to His Majesty towards defraying any expenses or making any advances or loans that may be incurred or granted by or under the authority of the governor in council during the year ending March 31, 1944, for-
(a)	the security, defence, peace, order and welfare of Canada;
(b)	the conduct of naval, military and air operations in or beyond Canada;
(c)	promoting the continuance of trade, industry and business communications, whether by means of insurance or indemnity against war risk or in any other manner whatsoever; and
(d)	the carrying out of any measures deemed necessary or advisable by the governor in council in consequence of the existence of a state of war.
2.	That the governor in council be empowered to raise by way of loan under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931, such sum or sums of money, not exceeding in the whole the sum of $3,890,000,000 as may be required for the purpose of defraying such
expenses or making such advances or loans, the principal and interest of any such loan to be a charge upon and payable out of the consolidated revenue fund.
3.	That the governor in council be empowered to reexpend, advance or loan moneys that may be received by way of refund or repayment of advances, loans or expenditure under the War Appropriation Acts of 1939 (second session), 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1943.
He said: Mr. Speaker, this resolution asks for authority to introduce a bill which is designed to provide the appropriation we shall require for war expenditures during the fiscal year 1943-44. The bill will be in exactly the same form as the main war appropriation of last year except for the amount of the vote to be asked for.
The magnitude of this vote and the fact that it is to provide for our direct war financial programme for the new year makes this by far the most important measure with which the house will have to deal during the present session. It will provide an opportunity for discussing and appraising not only the war programme which we are proposing for next year, but also the record of war activities and expenditures during the fiscal year now drawing to a close. In view of the courtesy of the house in refraining from extended debate on the supplementary war appropriation which was voted a week or ten days ago, every opportunity will be given to hon. members to make such inquiries and comments as they may wish to make in regard to the expenditures of the current year.
To facilitate such inquiries and debate, I will now place on Hansard a break-down by the main categories of expenditure, in more detailed form than previously, of the estimated expenditure of $3,890,000,000 for 194344. I would also call the attention of the house to the fact that the comparable amounts of estimated expenditure on the various items during the current fiscal year will be found on pages 17-24 of the white paper which I tabled in connection with the budget last evening.
The table showing the break-down of the estimated war expenditure for 1943-44 is too long to read, and if the house will permit me, I will merely place it on Hansard and then direct attention to some of the major items. The table is as follows:
War Appropriation, 1943-44
Summary of Estimated Expenditures by Departments
National Defence-
Army services	 $1,764,000,000
Naval Services	 489,144.967
Air services	  l,129i42L414
Sundry services	 22,500,000
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation, 1943-44-Con.
Summary of Estimated Expenditures by Departments-Con.
Munitions and Supply-
Administration	,....$ 9,300,000
Expansion of industry and production of
war supplies	 307,000,000
[Stage Direction]
Less: Estimated amount recoverable from production allotment funds	 150,000,000
[Stage Direction]
$	166,300,000
Other Departments-
Agriculture	 $	14,240,309
Auditor General's Office	 281,500
Civil Service Commission	 597,443
External Affairs	 545,000
Finance	  143,852,000
Fisheries	 578,000
Justice	 50,700
Labour	 21,558,192
Mines and Resources	 10,288,135
National Harbours Board	 53,750
National Research Council	 2,114,708
National Revenue	 4,000
National War Services	 11,651,878
Pensions and National Health	 15,622,130
Post Office	 183,020
Privy Council Office	 727,858
Public Works	 4,490,000
Royal Canadian Mounted Police	 6,091,320
Secretary of State	 44,950
Soldier Settlement	 13,000
Trade and Commerce	 7,296,555
Transport	 8,435,215
Provision for contingencies	
Total estimated war expenditure	
Active assets	
Grand total chargeable to war appropriation	
Estimated Expenditures by Departments and Services
Department of National Defence Army services-
1.	Civil salaries and wages	
$ 8,832,6872.	Pay and allowances	
539,730,2113.	Travel, transportation and freight	
74,190,7604.	Construction, purchase, repairs and operating
expenses of properties-
(a)	Capital expenditure	 62,780,482
(b)	Repairs, operating expenses and
rentals	 46,620,690
5.	Personnel supplies and services: food, medical
and dental stores, clothing and personal equipment	 185,868,300
6.	Signal and wireless equipment, line construction, etc	
27,826,7517.	Ammunition and bombs	
273,325,8908.	Armament including rifles, machine guns,mortars and guns of all descriptions	
123,070,9079.	M.T. vehicles: trucks, tractors, trailers, tanks,A.F.Vs., and repair parts	
371,853,67410.	Operating cost of mechanical transport: fuel,
maintenance, etc. (not including repair parts) 35,187,833
11.	Sundries including printing,-stationery, telephones, telegrams and other costs not included
in above items	 14,711,815
[Stage Direction]

[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation
War Appropriation, 1943-44-Con.
Estimated Expenditures by Departments and Services-Con. Department of National Defence-Con.
Naval services-
1.	Civil salaries and wages	
$ 6,192,0542.	Pay	and allowances	
89,565,1193.	Travel, transportation	and	freight	
6,978,0004.	Construction, purchase, repairs and operating
expenses of properties-
(a)	Capital expenditure	 36,579,608
(b)	Repairs, operating expenses and
rentals	 6,267,182
5.	Personnel supplies and services: food, medical
and dental stores, clothing and personal equipment	   22,015,072
6.	Signal and wireless equipment, line construction, etc	
4,592,1887.	Ammunition and bombs	
14,245,8908.	Armament including rifles, machine guns, navalguns, etc	
42,415,5489.	Fuel cost of ships	
25,257,79810.	Acquisition, construction, charter, repair andupkeep of ships	
167,571,20211.	Naval stores: small boats, minesweeping, degaussing, anti-submarine, fire-fighting andtraining equipment, etc	
57,651,11012.	Miscellaneous stores and services: printing, stationery, laundry, office machinery, teletyperental, etc	
6,552,95913.	Sundries: postage, pilotage, prize funds andother costs not included in above items	3,261,237
489,144,967
Air services-
1.	Civil salaries and wages	
$ 18,620,6372.	Pay and allowances	
238,023,2323.	Travel, transportation	and	freight	
20,838,0684.	Construction, purchase, repairs and operating
expenses of properties-
(a)	Capital expenditure	 93,421,100
(b) Repairs, operating expenses and
rentals	 13,482,925
5.	Personnel supplies and services: food, medical
and dental stores, clothing and personal equipment	 50,451,918
6.	Signal and wireless equipment, line construction, etc	
26,838,7737.	Ammunition and bombs	
23,990,0008.	M.T. vehicles and marine craft: capital costand repairs	
10,508,4059.	Fuel costs for aircraft, M.T. and marine craft..	29,368,63610.	Aircraft, engines and spares including overhaul 231,846,29611.	Miscellaneous stores and equipment, includingmachine guns and other armament	
26,623,16012.	Flying training contracts	
33,805,82913.	Maintenance of overseas squadrons	
303,783,729
14. Sundries including printing, stationery, telephones, telegrams, teletype rentals, and other
costs not included in above items	 7,818,706
[Stage Direction]
 1.129,421.414
Sundry services-
Departmental administration	 $	1,526,405
Dependents' allowance board	 657,700
Internment operations	 8,430,895
Dependents' supplementary grants fund	 1,285,000
Inspection board of the United Kingdom and Canada	 10,600,000
22,500,000
War Appropriation
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation, 1943-44-Con.
Estimated Expenditures by Departments and Services-Con.
Department of Munitions and Supply
Departmental administration	 $	9,300,000
Expansion of industry and production of war supplies	 307,000,000
[Stage Direction]
Less: estimated amount recoverable from production
allotment funds	 150,000,000
[Stage Direction]
 $	166,300,000
Other Departments
Agriculture
Agricultural supplies board-
Administration	 $	43,500
Programmes to encourage the production of
essential war supplies	 177,500
Assistance in disposal of agricultural products
rendered surplus by war	 1,080,000
Feeds administrator-
Administration	    45,000
Freight assistance on western feed grains....	8,000,000
Payment of eight cents per bushel in respect of western wheat used exclusively as feed for
live stock	  2,000,000
Flax fibre administrator-
Administration	    30,500
Fertilizers and pesticides administrator-
Administration	   31,600
Fertilizers subventions and freight allowances. 1,000,000 Seeds administrator-
Administration	 16,500
Joint seed programme-1941	 180,000
Bacon board

Dairy products board-
Administration	
Special products board-
Administration	
To provide for the purchase of butter in order to maintain the price established by the wartime prices and trade board and to pay necessary storage, insurance and freight charges thereon. ..
Auditor General's Office Audit of war expenditure	
Civil Service Commission Supply of personnel for war services
External Affairs
Administration and passport office..
Representation abroad	
Sundry services	
Finance
Comptroller of the treasury	
Wartime prices and trade board-
Administration	
Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation- Subsidies due to application of order placing a
ceiling over all prices	
Wartime Salvage, Limited, administration and
losses	
Canadian wool board, administration	
Sundries
[Stage Direction]
$	12,604,600
71,300 14,950 49,459
1.500.000
[Stage Direction]
 14.240,309
281,500
597,443
270.500
111.500
163.000
[Stage Direction]
 545,000
7.950.000 14,300,000
120,000,000
1.000,000
500.000
102.000
[Mr. Itsley.l
143,852,000

War Appropriation
War Appropriation, 1943-44-Con.
Estimated Expenditures by Departments and Services-Con.
Fisheries
To provide assistance in the construction of vessels
of the Packer-Seiner type for use in the fishing
industry in British Columbia	 $	250,000
To provide for assistance in the construction of fishing vessels of the dragger type and for the
conversion of fishing schooners to draggers	 250,000
Sundry services	 78,000
Justice
Expenses in connection with the administration of
the defence of Canada regulations	 $	35,000
Expenses in connection with the prize courts	 10,000
Sundry services	 5,700
Labour
War emergency training programme
[Stage Direction]
Administration	$	48,000
Payments to the provinces re training for skilled and semi-skilled occupations connected with
war work	 5,200,000
Payments to the provinces re training for aircraft
manufacturing and ground mechanics	 1,950,000
Vocational training of discharged members of
Canada's armed forces	
Assistance in meeting extra costs of universities in accelerating certain courses and to provide loans
to certain students	
National war labour board	
Expenses in connection with general labour transference in war industries and agriculture	
National selective service programme	
Removal of enemy aliens including Japanese nationals and other persons of the Japanese race
from protected areas in British Columbia	
Payments to the provinces in connection with organizing and operating day nurseries and like
facilities	
Assistance to the provinces in recruiting, transporting and placing labourers upon farms	
Wartime bureau of technical personnel	
Personnel management training programme	
Sundry services	
7,198,000
525,000
440.000 468,445
500.000 8,680,225
3,000,000
120,000
250,000
220,500
70,000
86,022
Mines and Resources
Mines and geology branch-
To provide for development work to be undertaken by Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company of Canada Limited, in connection with tar sands located in the province of
Alberta	 $	150,000
Investigations of petroliferous deposits and of
potential petroliferous areas in Canada	 500,000
To provide for special exploration and development work in connection with the supply of
strategic minerals	  500,000
To provide assistance to provincial governments in construction of transportation facilities into
strategic mineral, including oil, properties..	200,000
Bureau of mines
[Stage Direction]
Construction of new metallurgical laboratory..	115,000
Metallic minerals division-
Services to war departments	 210,000
Sundry services	 80,500
578,000
50,700
21,558,192
$	1,755,500
War Appropriation
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation, 1943-44-Con.
Estimated Expenditures by Departments and Services-Con.
Mines and Resources-Con.	,
Lands, parks and forests branch-
Bureau of Northwest Territories and Yukon Affairs-
Expenses of liaison officers in connection with
the Alcan and Canol projects	 $	10,000
Dominion forest service-
Internment and prisoners of war operations...	42,445
Forest products laboratories	 34,435
Alternative service work camps	 79,000
National parks bureau-
Alternative service work camps	 500,000
[Stage Direction]
$	665,880
Surveys and engineering branch-
Alternative service work camps	
$	140,600Prince Rupert-Terrace-Cedarvale	highway	
5,000,000
Employment of persons of the Japanese race
and/or Japanese nationals	 2,200,000
Sundry services	 22,735
Immigration branch-
For expenditures in connection with looking after Canadian interests in enemy and enemy-controlled territory	 $	150,000
For expenditures in connection with looking after Canadian interests abroad, apart from enemy
and enemy-controlled territory	 25,000
Assistance to the national advisory committee for children from overseas, to supplement funds the
committee has obtained by public appeal		75,000
To provide single minimum cost of transportation, ocean and rail, of wives and dependents of
members of the Canadian forces overseas		100,000
To provide for ocean and rail fares and other expenses of Canadian citizens who are being
returned from the far east	 100,000
Sundry services	 53,420
National Harbours Board
Halifax harbour-operation and maintenance of fire tug Rouille	
7,363.335
503A20 
[Stage Direction]

National Research Council Special war activities .
National Revenue
Censorship of newspapers and other periodicals._____
National War Services
Departmental administration
War charities division-
General	 $	46,000
Auxiliary services	 7,000,000
Salvage division	
Corps of (civilian) Canadian fire-fighters for the United Kingdom	
Censorship division-
General	 19,000
Information and records branch	 174,900
Postal censorship	 1,070,800
Censorship of publications	 127,400
Telegraph and cable, etc. censorship	 346,970
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation-Short wave
station	
[Mr. Ilsley.l
91,335
7,046,000
396,965
957,850
1,739,070
640,000
10,288,135
53,750
2,114,708
4,000

War Appropriation
War Appropriation, 1943-44-Con.
Estimated Expenditures by Departments and Services-Con.
National War Services-Con.
National film board-
Special war film library	
Acquisition of film prints for sale	
Revolving fund for purchase of supplies for the
production of films for war departments	
Wartime information film programme	
Sundry services	
Pensions and National Health Pensions branch-
Treatment and pension examinations-members and ex-members of the defence forces (present
war)	
Treatment-Royal Canadian Mounted Police .... Pensions-defence forces, fishermen, seamen, special constables R.C.M.P., civil servants,
auxiliary services and A.R.P. workers	
Detention allowances on behalf of Canadian
seamen	
Investigations-dependents'' allowance board .... Post-discharge reestablishment-payment of outof-work benefits (P.C. 7633)	
Sundry services	
$	40,000
30,000
100,000
550,000
[Stage Direction]
 $	720,000
60,658
[Stage Direction]
$	8,430,000
Health Branch-
Air raid precautions	
Industrial hygiene, including inspection of industrial plants	
Laboratory analyses and services for the Department of National Defence	
Public Health Engineering-inspection of camp sites and airports for the Department of National Defence in connection with sanitation
and water supply	
Quarantine medical service-at the ports of Halifax, Quebec, Sydney, Montreal, Saint John,
Lunenburg and other ports	
Processing, storage and distribution of blood for
transfusion	
Maintenance, medical and other care of incapacitated non-resident seamen pending deportation Grant to the Canadian nurses' association to increase the supply of qualified nurses in Canada
[Stage Direction]
Post Office
Canadian postal corps
11,651,787
15,622,130
183,020
Privy Council
Statutory orders and regulations division-
General administration	 22,608
Wartime information board	 658,000
Advisory committee on reconstruction	 47,250
Public Works
Chief architect's branch-
Repairs, alterations, operation and maintenance
of buildings occupied for war purposes	 $ 1,530,000
Rental of premises occupied for war purposes..	1,500,000
Furniture, etc. for	war	employees	 700,000
Sundry services	 15,000
[Stage Direction]
 3,745,000
Chief engineer's branch-
Esquimalt, B.C.-additional operating cost	$	20,000Seymour Narrows, B.C.-Removal of Ripple Rocks Nos. 1 and 2, including the construction of a rock dam	across	Maude	island passage..	200,000
Saint John harbour (Courtenay bay) N.B.-
dredging	 100,000
727,858
320,000
War Appropriation
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation, 1943-44-Con.
Estimated Expenditures by Departments and Services-Con.
Public Works-Con.
Telegraph branch-
To provide for 24-hour service on the Pacific
coast	 $	75,000
Ottawa-telephone service	 300,000
[Stage Direction]
 $	375,000
Contingencies	 50,000
[Stage Direction]
 $	4,490,000
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Increased activities of the force due to the war..	6,091,320
Secretary of State
Department generally	 39,950
Commission re revocation of naturalization certificates	 5,000
Soldier Settlement
Alaska highway-legal and survey fees, fencing and miscellaneous	
Trade and Commerce Export permit branch-
Administration	
Canadian shipping board-
Administration	
Revolving chartering fund	
Shipping priorities committee-
Administration	
Gift of wheat to Greece	
Steamship subsidies war stabilization fund
[DOT]	144,160
$	92,435
500,000
[Stage Direction]
 592,435
59,960
6,000,000
500,000
44,950
13,000
7,296,555
Transport
Departmental administration Transport controller's office.
Director of merchant seamen-
Headquarters, administration	 73,190
Manning pools, operation	 519,680
Nautical schools and training centres, operation.	379,300
Welfare facilities for merchant seamen-supervision of, and assistance to, merchant seamen's organizations and institutions	 26,500
Air Service-
To provide for special radio services, weather
observation and teletype services-
Radio service	 1,761,325
Meteorological service	 1,366,000
Civil aviation division-
Extra airport traffic control	systems	
680,000Operation and maintenance	of	airports	
336,600
Addition facilities, Moncton to Newfoundland
airline	 976,700
Montreal airport-improvements including lighting and radio facilities	 500,000
Canals service-
Canals generally	 15,000
Welland canals	 32,000
26,960
211,000
998,670
5,620,625

47,000

War Appropriation
War Appropriation, 1943-44-Con.
Estimated Expenditures by Departments and Services-Con.
Transport-Con.
Marine service-
Marine service steamers	including	ice-breakers.. $	275,000
Aids to navigation	 50,000
Nautical services	63,460
Compensation to masters and crews of Canadian
vessels for loss of	personal	effects	  100,000
To provide for the cost of fitting all Canadian registered ships, as well as foreign flag vessels either seized in prize or requisitioned by the Canadian government, with special defensive apparatus	 300,000
Design, construction and operation of additional harbour and transportation facilities at the
port of Halifax	 $	281,000
To provide for assistance to the Canadian National Railway Company in the development of the iron ore deposit owned by the Steep Rock Iron Mines, Limited,, near Atitoken, Ontario (P.C. 8423 of September 18, 1942)	 400,000
Government Employees' Compensation Act- Administration	
Provision for contingencies	
$	788,460
681,000
61,500
[Stage Direction]
 $	8,435,215
4,887,292
Total estimated war expenditure
[Stage Direction]
Active Assets
Purchase of railway equipment, Canadian National railways-
1941	orders	
$ 4,883,6641942	orders	
24,543,000
Loan to the Canadian National Railways for the development of the Vermilion, Alberta, oil field
Canadian Wool Board, Limited	
Wartime Salvage, Limited	
Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation	
Advance re purchase by Russia of Canadian wheat and flour	
$	29,426,664
600,000
19,500,000
6,500,000
5.000.	000
4.000.	000
65,026,664
Grand total chargeable to war appropriation
[Stage Direction]
It will be noted that, in round numbers, the aggregate expenditures of the three defence services are estimated at $3,320,000,000 for 1943-44 as compared with an estimated $1,913,000,000 for the current fiscal year. Breaking down these totals, we find that army services account for $1,764,000,000 in 1943-44 as compared with $1,061,000,000 in 1942-43; air services, $1,129,000,000 as compared with $627,000,000; naval services, $489,000,000 as compared with $208,000,000; and sundry services, $22,500,000 as compared with $17,600,000.
The substantial increase for the air services reflects not only the expansion of the air training plan and the increased air force activities on both coasts of Canada but also the acceptance by Canada of full responsibility for maintaining and equipping thirty-eight
Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons overseas and for the pay of all R.C.A.F. personnel overseas. In the naval estimates we see the effect not only of gradual expansion of our navy but also of the increased naval shipbuilding programme. The estimated increase in the expenditures of the army is accounted for not only by expanding programmes but by the substantial increase in deliveries of finished equipment and war supplies now coming from Canadian war plants and the probability of more active operations overseas. However, it would not be appropriate at this time, and I will not attempt to give detailed explanations for any of the increases or for the programme as a whole, because when the bill is before the house detailed estimates of the proposed expen-
War Appropriation
[Stage Direction]
ditures by various departments and functions will be given by the ministers who are individually responsible.
In the case of the Department of Munitions and Supply the estimated net expenditure for 1943-44 is $166 million. This compares with an estimated expenditure for the current year of about $689 million. The latter figure, however, included $200 million for the purchase of the British interest in Canadian war plants and provided for an expansion of plant and equipment much larger than will be required during the coming year. For the war activities carried on by all other departments or agencies of government the estimate for 1943-44 is $254 million as compared with an estimated expenditure during the present year of $200 million. In this connection I may point out for the information of the house that the largest single item in this category is $120,000,000 to provide for subsidies under the Commodity Prices Stabilization corporation. In view of the recent clarification of functions in regard to subsidy payments as between the wartime prices and trade board and the Department of Agriculture, part of this requirement will be assigned to the Department of Agriculture, but it is not at the moment practical to make the allocation. The remaining $65 million requested by the appropriation is an estimate of the amount required to cover cash outlays charged to active assets rather than to expenditure, and for contingencies.
I shall not now say more about the details of these estimates by departments and functions. That would be needlessly confusing to the house, before it has had time to study and digest the salient features of the table which I have placed on Hansard. Nor do I think it is necessary to attempt at great length to consider these proposed war expenditures in the light of our over-all financial picture. I had an opportunity of doing that only last evening in the budget address. Let me touch very briefly on a few salient points and then examine in more detail one or two general points which have been raised in the house during the last few weeks.
In the first place, I wish to enphasize that Canada's war expenditure for 1943-44 is not covered by this war appropriation of $3,890,000,000. To that should be added the billion dollar appropriation to be requested in the mutual aid bill. It is the sum of these two appropriations which represents the estimated cost of our war programme for the new fiscal year. That sum is $4,890,000,000, which, hon. members will note, is almost eighty-nine per cent of the dominion's estimated aggregate expenditure for 1943-44. It

may be added that it is also nearly three times the estimated total cost of Canada's war effort during the great war 1914-18.
In the second place, I want to say that the total represents a very careful estimate of the cash outlays involved by the war effort which we believe we can accomplish during the twelve months beginning April 1 next. As I said last evening, it is not a financial programme but merely the financial counterpart of the physical or economic programme, the measure in dollar terms of the amount of man-power and resources which we believe we can throw into the war effort as our contribution to victory during the coming year. In the early years of the war the estimates of war expenditures in this country as in other countries tended to run ahead of actual accomplishments "because everybody tended to underestimate the time it takes to get plants built, production under way on a large scale, and organization completed. Even last year, as the house will remember, I asked for a war appropriation substantially less than the departments estimated they could spend, but I warned the house that I would probably have to come back before the end of the year for additional funds for our direct war expenditure as well as for additional funds to enable the United Kingdom to continue her purchases of foodstuffs, raw materials and munitions in this country. Actually the departments were able to spend all they estimated and, indeed, somewhat more in some instances. Our programme was expanded in accordance with changing conditions, and early this year we decided that it would be wiser for us to meet Britain's needs for dollars during the remainder of this year not by a further gift but by purchasing outright her interest in Canadian war plants and thus getting title and full control of these plants in the name of Canada. These things, therefore, are the explanation of the supplementary war appropriation of S858 million, and not as one hon. member has said, the lack of careful planning by the government with respect to war financial expenditures.
As time goes on, the tendency to which I have referred, of expenditures to lag behind estimates, disappears and a very substantial proportion of the increased expenditures for the new year estimated by the three defence services are based on the expectation of receiving largely expanded deliveries of mechanized equipment, munitions and supplies which mark the fruition of the able and aggressive planning of production by my colleague the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe), and the capacity for

War Appropriation
achievement of Canadian business management and Canadian labour. As I have said, I think we can spend during the year all of the huge sums for which we are now asking, because I believe we can achieve the production of war goods and the diversion of manpower to the armed services which our programme calls for. I am asking for all I think we can spend, but I must add this, that if before the end of the year it should prove that we shall need something additional that will be because we have actually been able to divert more of our resources to the war effort.
There are some who think that we are trying to do too much, or even already doing too much, and that we are going to bankrupt the country. Well, I want to say that we cannot do too much; that nothing which the Canadian people can do is too much to throw into this struggle for the right to survive in freedom and decency; that the way to wreck this country and bankrupt civilization is for Canada and her partners to do just a little less than enough to win. Unless I am gravely mistaken, that truth is plainly evident to the Canadian people as a whole.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: That is what we have advocated from the beginning.


James Lorimer Ilsley: In this connection let me turn to a statement made by the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson) on February 15, which to be found on pages 407 and 408 of
Hansard.
The minister expressed amazement that the people of Canada could sustain the weight of a war expenditure of the size and scope they are being asked to sustain. The answer is that this government is asking the people of Canada to bear a greater ratio of load in proportion to the national income than is the case in either of the other two large belligerent nations.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Right.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I have before me a review contained in a federal reserve publication issued just prior to January 15 which reveals that the proportion of the national income devoted to war purposes is considerably less in the United States than it is in either Great Britain or Canada. This bulletin shows that the war effort in the three countries is absorbing the national income according to the following percentages: United States, 24-5 per cent; Great Britain, 36-8 per cent, and Canada, 39-1 per cent. If these figures mean anything, and if I correctly interpret them, they show that the Canadian people are being asked by this government to contribute to the war effort a greater proportion of the national income than either our rich neighbours to the south or our very hard-pressed blood brothers overseas.
These figures do not show anything of the kind. There was a' grave error in quotation of the publication.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Not by
me.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Oh, yes. I have looked up
that issue of the federal reserve bulletin, and I find that the article cited by the hon. member refers to taxes rather than to the amount of effort devoted to war purposes. I am surprised that the hon. member did not make this clear, because it is an important distinction and one that is sufficiently understandable that there should be no need for confusion.
I would not undertake to vouch for the accuracy of the figures quoted in respect of the United Kingdom and the United States. The publication in which they appear is a reliable one and the figures are carefully described and qualified. However, it would appear that in the case of Canada the figures for taxation and for national income are probably both a little on the low side, although the relationship between the two does not appear to be seriously in error, and although, furthermore, we cannot speak with any great assurance in regard to our own statistics of national income. I understand that efforts are being made to bring about substantial improvements in our own national income figures, and I hope that before long we can make comparisons of this kind with much more assurance.
However, the essential point is that the table throws no light at all on the relative proportions of their national incomes which the three countries are devoting to the war effort. They were talking about taxes; they were not talking about the relative parts of their production that they were devoting to the war effort. If the table has any significance it is as to the light which it throws on the financial policy of the three countries. In Canada, as the house knows full well, we have endeavoured to carry the "pay-as-we-go policy" as far as practicable, and in this I believe we have had a greater measure of success than most other countries. That is a reason for pride and rejoicing rather than a point to censure. Canadians will have many occasions in future years to look back on this record with satisfaction.
What is relevant for the point which the hon. member for York-Sunbury had in mind is a comparison of national incomes with total war expenditures rather than merely with the amount financed through taxation. Particularly in view of the state of our national income statistics, I would not wish to compare the three countries on this basis, even if we had such reliable figures, and I am not referring to statistics kept 'by any particular department, because several agencies of

War Appropriation

government are keeping national income statistics. In fact, it is extremely difficult to get an estimate which is accurate, and I think it is found that way in other countries, as well as in Canada. Even if we had such reliable figures, the subject is one which bristles with technical difficulties, and it is by no means easy to be certain that we are comparing like with like. Many qualifications would be required before we could get a proper basis of comparison. Let me give only one example. The rates of pay for the armed forces in the United Kingdom and in other European countries are substantially lower than our rates of pay. Consequently the expenditure upon pay and allowances for the armed forces of these countries is made to appear less in proportion than it is for us here , in North America, although in fact the proportion of man-power and of real economic resources may be higher. Hence war expenditures are by no means a reliable guide in themselves when one is making a comparison between different nations.
However, we do not need to attempt such complicated statistical comparisons to get at the real truth of the matter. As I pointed out in the budget, we do not need to go beyond Very elementary statistics or even common observation to realize that we on the home front in Canada are still away behind the people of Britain in the degree to which we have cut down our civilian consumption for the sake of the war effort. It is fantastic to say that the moderate decline we have suffered from the peak of war-time consumption, and the increase in the inconveniences we have suffered in shopping and travelling, compare with the belt-tightening and the personal sacrifices and hardships of the British people. Furthermore, we should want to make this type of comparison rather than compare what we have done with what has been achieved in the United States which was a neutral country prior to December 7, 1941. That country has been mobilizing with tremendous speed; it has pointed its sights very high indeed, and if it is able to translate into action the $108 billion budget for which the President has asked, we may have cause for envy rather than for self-complacency.
We are doing our utmost to avoid waste or extravagance and to get as much as we can for each dollar of expenditure. I realize that in an undertaking as vast as our war programme we cannot achieve perfection in this regard, but I feel that within the inevitable human limitations we are getting good value for our money. We have put into effect a great variety of controls over expenditure, and wherever we see, or someone tells us, that one

of the human cogs in a huge machine has slipped, we do our best to correct the mistake and safeguard against its recurrence. I try to avail myself of every opportunity for criticism of any expenditure that appears to be unessential or unnecessarily large, and I trust the house will do likewise. It is only by such self-criticism and such constant vigilance that we can secure economy and efficiency in any democratic, cooperative effort.
If, therefore, it be true that w'e are getting reasonable value for our money, it follows that those who argue that our war expenditures are drawn on too large a scale really mean that we are attempting to devote too much effort to the war. Apparently they wrant us to go slow, to limit our war effort, to cut down on man-power and materials. They want us to have a war effort under which we can all be comfortable rather than one which would stretch our energies and our resourcefulness to the limit. In this way they would seek to solve problems of shortages of butter and beef, and restaurant seats, and pullman cars. I for one do not believe that to be the wish of the Canadian people. That is not the type of war effort which would enable the Canadian people to hold their heads high in the family of nations. That is not the policy to -which the government and this country have committed themselves.
Finally, I turn more specifically to the question:	are we bankrupting the country?
The hon. member for Beauce (Mr. Lacroix) appeared to build up a bogey of the country somehow running out of money, of our coming to the end of our financial resources. That is a situation which might confront one individual, or a group within the community, or even a nation in regard to its resources of foreign exchange; it is not a situation which confronts a nation in regard to its own production and internal financing. We do not pay for the war out of some hoard of money that we have accumulated in the past. We pay for it out of the taxes and savings that we obtain from the current income of the whole nation. We shall not run short of money. Indeed, our danger is the very reverse of that, namely, that we may pile up too much money in the pockets and bank accounts of Canadians, unless we strive with every effort to promote the sale of victory bonds and war savings certificates.	[DOT]
If we are bankrupting the nation, is it not indeed a strange type of bankruptcy? How can we use such a term to describe the process under which this country has doubled its national income in three years, has wiped out unemployment, has multiplied its production of many things and learned many types of new

Social Security
skills, has expanded and diversified its production equipment, has multiplied its governmental revenues by more than four times, has enabled millions of its citizens to acquire a nest-egg for the future, has mobilized its full strength as a producing machine, and has developed a sense of productive achievement not hitherto known? No country goes bankrupt in this way; no country goes bankrupt by increasing its production and devoting part or all, or more than all of that increase to a supreme cause.
Of course our huge war expenditures do pose difficult financial problems during the war, and as I have often stated they make careful economic and financial management imperative. They involve a very large increase in our national debt, but it is a debt which we owe to ourselves, and it will be well within our capacity to manage if we follow sound policies. They make high taxes necessary if' we are to share the financial burdens and the real burdens fairly and effectively. But these taxes are essentially just a reflection in financial terms of the inevitable sacrifices of goods and services which we must make if we are to wage war on the scale that is necessary to defeat the enemy, and defeat him with the least possible loss of life. Given the scale of our national war effort in terms of men and materials, lower taxes would mean only that we would have a less equitable distribution of the burden, more danger of inflation, more danger of a break-down in our economic controls. Willingness to accept high taxes and other ' controls; willingness to deny ourselves now in order to avoid greater self-denial tomorrow is not really a test of the strength of our war spirit or the size of our war effort, but rather a test of our intelligence and foresight in allocating the burden of the cost of war.
Let those of us who are inclined to fear the economic consequences of our war expenditures remember that these expenditures have 'developed and brought to light an enormous increase in our Canadian capacity to produce-an increase greater than any of us had ever before suspected. Let them think of the future in terms of maintaining and still further developing that enlarged capacity, that potential of a greater national income. We can and must make use of that increased capacity after the war. We must develop that potential to the maximum. If we do, we can develop a far higher standard of living for the average Canadian than he has ever known before and with these higher incomes we can readily carry any debt, any debt to ourselves, that we shall accumulate
72537-59J
during the war. Our war expenditures are both a great medium of national achievement and a great investment in our own freedom and future. To suggest that they will bankrupt Canada is to suggest that Canadians lack ability and good sense to make intelligent use of their own future. I am not so lacking in faith in the mental and moral qualities of our own people.


Mr. GRAYDON:: Before moving the
adjournment of the debate I wonder if I could inquire to what extent the minister is bringing down detailed break-downs of the various departments involved?


James Lorimer Ilsley: It is hard to describe; I shall send a copy across to my hon. friend.


Gordon Graydon: In the meantime I shall move the adjournment of the debate.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned. SOCIAL SECURITY



APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SOCIAL INSURANCE

William Lyon Mackenzie King: That a select committee of this house be appointed to examine and report on a national plan of social insurance which will constitute a charter of social security for the whole of Canada, and, to that end,
To examine and study the existing social insurance legislation of the parliament of Canada and of the several provincial legislatures; social insurance policies of other countries; the most practicable measures of social insurance for Canada,' including health insurance, and the steps which will be required to effect their inclusion in a national plan; the constitutional and financial adjustments which will be required for the achievement of a nation-wide plan of social security; and other related matters.
That the said committee have power to appoint, from among its members, such subcommittees as may be deemed advisable or necessary to deal with specific phases of the problems aforesaid, and call for persons, papers, and records, to print such papers and evidence from day to day as may be ordered by the committee for the use of the committee and members of the house; that the said committee report to the house from time to time; and that the said committee shall consist of the following members: Messieurs Adamson, Blanchette, Bourget, Breithaupt, Bruce, Casselman (Mrs.) (Edmonton East), Claxton, Cleaver, Cote, Diefenbaker, Donnelly, Fauteux, Gershaw, Gregory, Hatfield, Howden, Hurtubise, Johnston (Bow River), Kinley, Lalonde, Leclerc, Lockhart, Maelnnis, MacKenzie (Neepawa), Mackenzie (Vancouver Centre), MacKinnon (Kootenay East), Macmillan, McCann, McGarry, McGregor, McTlraith. Mayhew, Mitchell, Picard, Shaw, Slaght, Telford, Veniot. Warren, Wood, Wright, and that the provisions of standing order G5, limiting the number of members on special committees, be suspended in relation thereto.
Social Security

He said: Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of the session my hon. friend the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon), expressed the hope that the government would establish the various committees as early in the session as possible. On a subsequent day my hon. friend made particular reference to the committee on social security. He will agree I think that his wishes have been met as far as it was possible for the government to meet them. All standing and special committees of the house have now been established with the exception of this one and two others, notices of which appear on the order paper.
I should like to point out that in respect to the establishment of committees a new custom seems to be growing up in the house- I do not think it existed to any extent in previous parliaments-of having a lengthy debate at the time the resolution is moved. The custom in the past has been, unless strong exception were taken for some reason or other to a committee being appointed, to have the committees appointed practically without discussion. I am not taking exception to the tendency to debate at length resolutions for the appointment of committees but wish to make it clear that it is a departure, and also that it does take up a very considerable amount of the time of the house. The discussion of the subject referred to a committee usually takes place when the committee has made its report. I realize that in some sessions the reports have been late in coming down and probably hon. members have had that in mind in wishing to discuss some of these subjects at an earlier stage.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Many of the reports are never discussed.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There have been cases where that has happened. However, this year the committees will have been established at an early stage of the session and I hope will be able to report in plenty of time for such discussion as hon. members may wish to have.
I have a second reason for not wishing to discuss this resolution at any length at this stage.' It is that hon. members have already devoted a very considerable time to the resolution dealing with reestablishment and reconstruction. I believe all hon. members are interested in matters pertaining to post-war conditions and to a better social order and have felt that they would wish to place on Hansard their views with respect to some of the features of the new social order and some of the reforms which they feel should be speedily introduced. That has been done, I believe, by hon. members in the debate on

the motion respecting reestablishment and reconstruction. If we start a debate on social security at this stage it will I think lead to a repetition of much that has already been said in debate on the other committee. Reconstruction and reestablishment are of course not identical with social security but all three are part of a larger whole which relates to the social order-to social conditions as they exist at the present time and methods of improving them. Of the three, reconstruction and reestablishment cover a wider range and to that extent there would be the less necessity for discussing social security at any length at the moment.
I have also another reason, which is that I think members of the house generally are agreed upon the necessity of improving upon our measures of social security, increasing, enlarging and coordinating them. I do not think there is any difference of opinion among the members of the different groups in the house as to the objective to be aimed at. I believe we are all of one mind in that particular. There will inevitably be differences with respect to the means to be used to achieve those ends, but the question of the means to be adopted is a matter which is to be referred particularly to the committee and might therefore better be discussed when the committee has made its report. To start a debate at the present time might only serve to prejudice the larger objective by permitting a discussion that might develop into political controversy. I would hope that in this allimportant matter of social security this House of Commons might be able to give a lead to other representative institutions by being as nearly unanimous as possible with respect to the measures which it may feel should be put into force.
There is, of course, the further point I have mentioned at different times, the importance of not taking up too much of the time of this particular part of the session with a discussion of measures other than those that relate immediately to the all-important war measures which have to be discussed. Were it otherwise, I am sure the impression in the country would be that parliament was devoting too much of its time at this stage to post-war matters rather than to the immediate questions of the war itself.
The resolution, as hon. members will see, is an implementation of one of the undertakings set forth in the speech from the throne, the undertaking being:
. . . a comprehensive national scheme of social insurance should be worked out at once which will constitute a charter of social security for the whole of Canada.

Social Security
The government accordingly proposes to recommend the early appointment of a select committee to examine and report on the most practicable measures of social insurance, and the steps which will he required to ensure their inclusion in a national plan. Among matters which will be referred to this committee for study and consideration will be the establishment of a national system of health insurance.
I might say to hon. members that the speech from the throne in its references to social insurance and to reconstruction and reestablishment seeks to set forth the place and significance of those problems in relation to the larger question of the existing social order and the means by which that particular order may be improved. I should like to refer more particularly to the paragraphs in the speech from the throne which have this objective in view. The speech seeks to put the significance of these measures in their true light, first of all by making clear the magnitude of the question itself, and in the second place its complexity. It seeks to follow a logical sequence in setting forth the matters which have to be considered in relation to any plan of social security. Here may I point out that these social problems are first of all in the nature of world problems and that they are also all in the nature of human problems. I emphasize these two aspects because to lose sight of either is to lose sight of what is involved in trying to reach a solution of the problems themselves or how best to improve conditions.
The speech makes reference first of all to what to-day must be the first and immediate objective of any scheme which seeks to free the world from the evils of either fear or want. Obviously the first objective is to end the fear of war.
The immediate object of the united nations

I am quoting from the speech from the throne:
-is the defeat of the axis powers. Joint planning of operations on a world scale has accompanied preparations for intensive warfare. The united nations also aim at rendering aggression impossible in the future. Their governments, in addition to planning jointly for the prosecution of the war, have already entered into consultation regarding post-war problems. Achievement of their aims requires the establishment of conditions under which all peoples may enjoy equality of opportunity and a sense of security.
In other words, no solution of the question of social security can be effectively carried out so long as the axis powers continue to wage war against the free countries of the world. Until the axis powers are defeated all other tasks must necessarily be secondary.
But there is not only the task of defeating the axis powers; there is the further task of
seeing that aggression is rendered impossible in the future. Surely we have realized as the result of two world wars in the last quarter-century that all reforms may be set pretty much at naught so long as there remains the danger of aggression on the part of great powers. If aggression is to be rendered impossible in the future it is necessary that all countries join together in carrying out some policy which will make for more in the way of cooperation between the different nations and more in the way of equality of opportunity between the peoples of the different nations. It is necessary therefore that, as a background of social effort related to national purposes, there should exist a world policy which will have the effect of maintaining good and friendly relations between the many countries of the world.
When the governments of the different countries have done what lies within their power to bring about a larger measure of cooperation between nations as a whole, there will remain the problem within the individual nations themselves. It will then soon be seen that the problem of any one nation is bound up in a very close way with the position of other nations as well. If low standards of living exist in many parts of the world and high standards in a few parts, international competition, unless regulated effectively, will soon bring the high standards down to the level of the lower standards. That is why in any post-war period an effort must be made on the part of all nations that are seeking to improve their own conditions to realize that the countries of the world are members one of another, and that cooperation and mutual aid between nations will have to replace the system whereby relations between them are governed by force.
Obviously, before undertaking new measures of social security in Canada to be made applicable to all classes, our first thought must be particularly of the men who are fighting Canada's battles and the battles of freedom at the front. That is why the committee on reconstruction and reestablishment was set up at an earlier stage in this parliament than the committee on social security which is being set up at this time, and why it is proper that the committee on reconstruction and reestablishment should demand prior interest on the part of hon. members of the house. That is why in the paragraph following the one I have just read, the speech from the throne contains this statement:
Every effort must be made -to ensure, after the close of hostilities, the establishment, in
Social Security

useful and remunerative employment, of the men and women in our armed forces and in war industries. My ministers have already begun to explore the international agreements and domestic measures which will help to secure adequate incomes for primary producers and full employment after the war. With your approval, the select committee on reconstruction and reestablishment, appointed at the last session, will be reconstituted.
In. the course of the debate on the address some comment was made on the wording of that section. The question was asked, why seek adequate incomes for primary producers and full employment for the period after the war? It is apparent I think that during this war period there is a scale of employment such as has not existed in Canada at any previous time. Also, with respect to the incomes of primary producers, that they are being dealt with in several ways under the war measures of the government. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) indicated in his speech the other day the different agreements that were being entered into at this time of war which helped to ensure markets abroad for the farmers of the country and demand for their products. But what tomorrow will be seen to have been necessary above all else is that to-day we should seek to prepare the way for ensuring a continuance of markets abroad and also a continuation of full employment once the special war conditions have passed away.	[DOT]
The next paragraph is as follows:
It is in the general interest that freedom from fear and from want should be the assured possession of all. A nation-wide plan which would provide insurance against the inevitable consequences of major, economic and social hazards is essential if this objective is to be attained.
I have noticed that that paragraph has been referred to, not so much in this house but in the press of some parts of our country, as being mere platitude, that to speak of freedom from fear and from want being the assured possession of all is just talking generalities so vague as to be of no value whatever. But that is not what the clause in the speech from the throne which I have quoted really means. It sets forth what I submit is obviously in the general interest. It is the general interest that freedom from fear and from want should be the assured possession of all. That may be an ideal; it is an ideal, but it is one to be aimed at; and no one, I think, can dispute the point that if we wish to have freedom from war in the future, if we wish to have a social order whereby the men and women of our country are going to have equality of opportunity in larger measure,

the assurance of employment, and the like, then all parts of the world that are in competition with each other must also more or less be free from fear and from want.
Coming from the international aspect down to the national aspect, coming from a consideration of world conditions down to particular conditions in individual countries, the one set of hazards that is inevitable through life is, those hazards which arise out of economic and social conditions whereby individuals and families in countless numbers throughout the nation may at any time be reduced to a position, if not of destitution, at least of want, and certainly be held continuously in fear alike of both destitution and want. There are certain hazards which do exist under the industrial organization of society as it has come to be in our time, and which exists not through any fault of employers, not through any fault of employees, but simply from the condition in which organized society finds itself at the present time. There may be in a highly industrial organized state such as ours is, a situation where a financial crisis in another country may bring about industrial depression over a long period in our own. We all know how that fact has been verified by experience between the period of the last war and the present time. It cannot be put down to the fault of employers or of employees that thousands of men and women in our country are thrown out of work in periods of depression, when the depression arises not from conditions as they exist in our particular country but from conditions as they exist in other parts of the world. For many years past it has been recognized that a cotton famine for example in the southern United States can throw large numbers of workers out of work in the cotton textile industries in Britain. That Is but an example of what in our day takes place in all parts of the world at all times. The competition of foreign labour, some new invention, high tariffs suddenly imposed, all these and many other things may affect the lives of countless men and women and leave them in a position not only of fear but very soon in a position of want and destitution.
Society having created-I put it in that particular way-conditions which permit of that sort of thing, society has to find some way to remedy it. I use the word "society" instead of "the state" because I want it to be seen that what I am saying relates to the social organization of human beings in the different countries of the globe, under an industrial system such as we have to-day. What social insurance seeks to do is to find a means whereby these inevitable hazards will be met

Social Security
in some part at least through the action of the state and through action prescribed by the state.
These hazards are well known. The most common of course is unemployment. Other hazards are those arising out of old age, blindness, sickness and invalidity, the death of the breadwinner, birth and burial, where the funds to meet the obligations that arise out of these cannot be provided for in advance. Unemployment may come at any time, on a small or large scale, through no fault of their own on the part of those affected.
Any constructive system of social security is based on the theory that all industry is, or ought to be, in the nature of social service; that industry is not merely a means whereby capitalists may increase profits, or workers find the means of gaining a livelihood through wages; but that there exists also the right of the community, which makes possible the carrying on of industry, to expect that the interests and well-being of the community and its members will also be considered in the rewards of industry. In other words, industry exists to serve a social end, as well as to serve the needs of individuals. Under that view men and women are the great asset of the state. The well-being of all the human resources, the men and women, who supply the labour, the thought and skill essential for planning and carrying on industry ought to be the first concern of the state. And where the state makes possible the carrying on of industry, they are entitled to have the state see that they are protected against inevitable hazards.
May I pause to say a word as to the part the state plays in permitting industry to be carried on. Have in mind any of the large manufacturing industries, and ask ourselves the question: could these industries be carried on at all except for what organized society in the state does to make their existence possible? In the first place the state maintains law and order, without which no industry could exist for any length of time. Law and order are maintained at the expense of the taxpayers of the community. The state makes possible trade and the maintenance of foreign markets through its diplomatic and consular services, its subsidies to transportation companies, through the permission it gives transportation companies to construct their ways across the territory of the nation. The state controls inventions and patents. One could go on indicating many things to show that the carrying on of industry is made possible through the fact that the state is organized as we know it to be.
But above and beyond all that, the material resources of a country exist within the confines of the country and it is only by the implied expressed permission of the state that the institution of private property can exist. The justification of private property lies in the fact that it has been thought that because of what private property ensures' of initiative, self reliance and the like, the good of the greatest number will thereby best be served. But if as a result of the institution of private property, whether it be the ownership of land or of capital, a social condition may develop which is inimical to the community as a whole, that institution has either to be modified in some particulars, controlled in some directions, or make way for some other system.
Social security does not seek necessarily, or, at all, in some cases, to abolish the institution of private property. It seeks rather to ensure that the benefits of private property will be secured to the community at large, and that through an inequitable distribution of wealth the institution of private property shall not be made a means whereby a very few may become increasingly rich and a great many suffer because of the inequalities that exist. Everywhere there are vast inequalities of circumstances and of opportunities. There is no doubt that society as it is organized to-day does enable those who are economically strong to become stronger, and at the same time does have the effect of causing the economically weak in many of the great struggles of life to become weaker while the wealth of the world has vastly increased, its distribution has become increasingly disproportionate. Community considerations afford opportunities to some, and impose handicaps on others. We -see everywhere evidences of the fact that those that have large abundance find it possible to survive all the existing hazards, find it possible to go on increasing their wrealth; while those who possess very little of this world's goods are the first to go completely to the wall when a condition arises such as has arisen from time to time through depressions and extensive unemployment.


Mr. MacINNIS:: That is because they did not save when they had the opportunity!


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As my hon. friend is aware, all depends on how much chance there is to save. Great care has to be taken in any scheme of social insurance not to discourage saving, and I think social insurance plans will have that carefully in view. But I wish to re-emphasize that in the order of things as they are to-day emphasis is put in very large part upon position rather than on human personality; is put upon wealth rather
Social Security

than upon life; and that under any scheme of social security it is life and personality which it is intended should be the first consideration of the state and of those who are exercising authority in the carrying on of its affairs. Industrial policy must be founded upon recognition of human personality and upon recognition of community well-being.
I should like now to say a word as to the procedure set forth in the resolution. It is suggested that a committee should be appointed to consider the whole question of social security and to consider it in different aspects. Some one may repeat, as has already been said I think in the course of the debate on the address, that the government should not have to -have a committee to advise, or rather to give it a policy; that the government ought to have a policy of its own. Well, the government has a policy, a very definite policy, which is set forth in the speech from the throne, and which I have already read. The government's policy is to bring into being a comprehensive national scheme of social insurance.
Why has the government deemed a reference of the matter to a select committee the most essential first step in seeking to deal with so large a measure of social security? The reason is that already in Canada we have a large number of social security measures which have grown up in a more or less haphazard manner. They have to be correlated and coordinated in one plan if progress is to be made on a national scale. They have not been introduced one in relation to the other; they have not been introduced in the one assembly. They have been introduced at one time in this parliament, at other times in provincial parliaments, but they have never been coordinated into one scheme. It is obvious that where there are social measures of that character, each having the same objective, unless they are correlated there is bound to be a great deal of overlapping and a great deal of additional cost in administration, and certain to be a great deal of confusion. It would seem, therefore, that the first step in moving further in the direction of social security would be to study carefully the existing measures of our own country and then study carefully the existing measures in other countries and the proposals that have been put forth by those who have given special study to the question of social security.
Had it wished to do so the government might have appointed a royal commission to undertake this task of surveying conditions here and presenting a national scheme. It might have called in experts and been advised by them, but it was felt that this, together
	.
with reconstruction and reestablishment, is the largest question the country is likely to have before it for our generation, and that it would be in the public interest, and particularly in the interests of members of parliament themselves, that they should have an opportunity of familiarizing themselves with the various factors bearing on this allimportant question. And it was felt that this could be best effected by having a select committee of the house to study the whole matter. I should think it would be advisable for this committee to retain experts. Speaking for the government I may say that it will afford whatever in the way of facilities for effective study and research the committee itself may deem necessary and essential.
The resolution suggests that there should be subcommittees as well as the one main committee; that is because of the extent of the study that will have to be made. It will be noticed that special reference is made to health insurance. It was felt there was need to make perfectly clear some aspects of social security which perhaps were deserving of more immediate consideration than some other aspects. It has seemed to the government that the question of health insurance was in that position. That is so for this reason, that already we have on our statute book a plan of unemployment insurance and a system of old age pensions, both established by the federal parliament; we have a system of government annuities, also established by the federal parliament; we have pensions to veterans, pensions to the blind and other forms of pensions, also established by this federal government. Then in the provinces they have a series of different social measures, some of them related to accidents and others to sickness, hospitalization, widows' and mothers' allowances, maternity benefits and so on, all of which are in the nature of social security measures but which differ greatly as between the several provinces. They are not correlated in one great national scheme, and if Canada is to make progress in this field the first step now is to have the whole field surveyed and in some way as far as may be possible, a national scheme outlined.
In stating to the British people what he had found necessary in the way of study for his report Sir William Beveridge said he had been closely following all social legislation for a period of something like thirty years. Happily the committee will have the benefit of the thirty years' experience of Sir William Beveridge. I mention this simply because Sir William felt it necessary to draw the attention

Social Security
of the British people to the careful study he had given the question before making his report.
I wish to draw attention to an attitude toward social security measures that has been taken in some quarters since the government's policy was announced in the speech from the throne. When the Atlantic charter was proclaimed it met with universal acceptance in this country. I have yet to find a newspaper in Canada which had not a good word to say for the Atlantic charter. One of the things most prominently proclaimed in connection with the Atlantic charter was the fact that among other things it did aim to bring about an increased measure of social security in the post-war period. I have been looking at the journals of this country, and I find that to-day some are inclined to belittle, at least, the idea of social security, as being something vague and general, something that will involve outlays greater than any country may be able to meet. Sir William Beveridge has said that he regarded social insurance as the first step to be taken toward meeting the main objectives of the Atlantic charter in so far as it had to do with social conditions. It is, I think, from that point of view that we should view questions that relate to social security.
The committee has been asked not only to give the study which I have suggested, but to report to the house on the most practicable measures of social insurance, the steps which will be required to ensure their inclusion in a national plan. Let it not be said that the committee is simply to make a study and do nothing else. If this resolution carries, the committee will have a very definite instruction from this house to do something positive, as set out in these words: to report on the most practicable measures of social insurance and the steps which will be required to ensure their inclusion in a national plan. I need not emphasize the importance of what will be involved in effecting that particular end. There are questions of finance that will have to be very carefully considered. It is not going to help any scheme of social insurance for the government to bring forward a measure that in the end may not prove practicable. So that what may be possible will have to be studied in relation to the obligations that already exist in several directions and what it is felt can be carried on in conjunction with other obligations.
Questions of jurisdiction will arise, questions between the provinces and the dominion as to whether in a national scheme the dominion should attempt to carry out all social
security measures, or whether those measures in part should be under the jurisdiction of the dominion and in part under that of the several provinces. So far as administration is concerned there are some measures which, at least for a time, the provinces will I believe wish to retain. There may be others they will be prepared to hand over to the federal government.
Then there will arise immediately the question as to the source from which revenue is to be derived to carry out the different measures. That is something which will require careful consideration. The purpose of the government in this whole matter is, as quickly as may be possible, to reach an immediate improvement in and enlargement of social security measures in our country. But we realize that that cannot be done effectively until the whole position or field receives careful study.
The only other feature I might mention is the size of the committee. It is a large committee, consisting of forty-one members, to be exact. That, again, has been thought advisable for the reasons I have already indicated. So long as those of us who are in this chamber to-day continue to have any part in public affairs we shall find, as a main interest in our lives and in the life of our country, this problem of social security. The more hon. members can familiarize themselves in an intimate way with this question in all its bearings, the better it will be not only for hon. members themselves in rendering the kind of service they would hope to render to the state, but the better it will also be for the state itself. Members of this parliament have an exceptional opportunity to render a great service to their own and future generations.


Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, in attempting to
speak in connection with the setting up and constitution of this important committee, one which will deal with the whole subject of social insurance and social security, I should like to say that with some parts of the Prime Minister's (Mr. Mackenzie King) address I am in agreement.
The House of Commons must realize that the winning of the war is the first, the major consideration of our deliberations. We must not at any time allow any other issues to interfere with our winning of the war, nor must we permit other considerations to come first. But inextricably woven into our whole war effort is the undeniable fact that there are scores of thousands, yes, hundreds of thousands of men and women who to-day, both overseas and in Canada, are fighting our

Social Security

battle of freedom, and who are anxious to know that while they are fighting and are indicating their willingness to give life and limb we, here, shall be doing something to prepare for that better world for which they fight.
As far as social security and our whole scheme for a better world order are concerned, it seems to me it is not possible entirely to separate our plans for peace from our actual movements in the field of war itself. I believe almost every hon. member who has talked to younger men enlisted in his majesty's forces must have heard a statement which, on many occasions, I have heard. They must have heard it from our war workers, and the challenge it presents cannot be escaped. During the years of depression through which every nation in the world had the misfortune to pass, during those terrible years of privation and suffering with which, for some reason or another our society and our system were not able to cope successfully; during those years when we were not able to operate with full employment for our people, certain thoughts developed in the minds of our people. The result is that to-day our young men-yes, and young women, too-are considering this thought: When it comes to a war of destruction, we find the money to fight it, but when a few years ago we were faced with a war for better conditions for our people somehow or another we were not able to put our people to work. And that, let us remember, was a condition which was not confined to any one country, but was found in every nation. Perhaps at times this thought is exaggerated, and some may think too great emphasis is placed upon it; but it is a view which parliament must not lightly toss aside.
The House of Commons cannot overlook this challenge. It is a challenge to which we must give every consideration because, linked with our whole problem of social security and post-war conditions, is the thought that somehow, by some system, we must find jobs, work and wages for our people. That is the first objective toward which we must move.
There are different views as to how this can best be accomplished. Perhaps none of us in these changing days can be so dogmatic as to say that our solution-and I believe each individual has one; certainly almost every hon. member seems to have one-without the help of others will solve the problem. But the pooling of the best thought, thought which reflects the anxious minds and the most sincere desires of our people, will in my opinion eventually solve our problem and meet the challenge.

May I point out; however, that there is a feeling throughout Canada, one which will show itself in any movements which lie ahead, that when the war is over we shall have a higher sense of human values and shall give lesser emphasis to material things than we have done heretofore. If we fail in this it is my belief that we shall not win the peace for which we have longed in these years of war. The days of reaction have gone and I hope they have gone for keeps. There is no room for reactionary ideas in a w'orld that is moving perhaps more quickly than most of us realize.
In keeping abreast of that moving world, let us not forget that we as members of this parliament must take our stand in the forefront of aggressive and progressive reform. Not only must we keep abreast; we must give leadership to that movement. In connection with this further post-Winnipeg reform which the Prime Minister brought down in the speech from the throne I should like to congratulate him upon being perhaps a converted reader of the programme and the policy laid down by the Progressive Conservative party on that occasion. .


Mr. MACDONALD (Brantford City):: You got the idea from the Prime Minister and you should thank him for it, not congratulate him.


Gordon Graydon: I only wanted to congratulate the Prime Minister; I hope the hon. member for Brantford City will not think I am doing anything other than that. I wish to say that in so far as our programme is concerned, it was a result which came from a great movement emanating from all parts of this dominion and leading toward a reformation of our economic and social structure.
Referring to the remarks made by the Prime Minister in connection with this motion I should like to point out to him that it will not be enough for the people of Canada simply to have the government set out in a speech from the throne the objectives to which they are moving. We all know the objectives to which they are moving, or toward which they should move, but we are entitled to more than that in a speech from the throne; we are entitled to be told the policy of this government. With great deference to the Prime Minister I must say that I do not think he made a very good job this afternoon of explaining the difference between the objectives of his party and the policy which the government of that party adopts. I hope in all earnestness that the report of this committee will not be brought down so close to the end of the session that there will not be time to bring in legislation

Social Security
which may be founded upon the recommendations of the committee. Canada will not be satisfied with just a report of a committee with respect to the whole matter of social security. Canada will be satisfied only with, first, the bringing down of a report by the committee and then the introduction of legislation dealing with the recommendations contained in the report.
As far as health insurance is concerned, it seems to me that we should have had the health insurance bill in this house before any such legislation is considered by the social security committee. That is not going to be done, and I do not intend to deal further with that at the moment. Our unemployment insurance law forms one of the great parts of our social security scheme, but there are many things still to be desired with respect to that law. I point this out in order that this committee may consider how we can improve the whole system of unemployment insurance.
One question is being asked by the working people of this country, and it should be answered. I am sure this question is being asked of other hon. members who must have the support of labour to retain their seats. The labouring mail likes the principle of the act, and we all have endorsed that principle. Here is what he is saying: If I am fired I do not get the benefits; if I quit I do not get the benefits; if I am sick I do not get the benefits-when do I get the benefits?- Of course the answer is obvious, but on the other hand I think the committee should consider this particular aspect of unemployment insurance.
There was a point I raised in the unemployment insurance committee which I raise, again. I do not think any act can be perfect, but it is our job to make these acts as perfect as human brains can make them. Our working men should be assured that when they are out of employment, when they are ill or incapacitated, some benefits will be made available to them. This is what the working man is asking for to-day, and I think it is one of the subjects that should be dealt with by the committee.
When the report of the unemployment insurance committee was brought down it was pointed out that this legislation was only a- step toward an objective, and the house was cautioned at the time not to expect too much from the Unemployment Insurance Act. Up to the present we have not needed the benefits available under this act to the extent that perhaps the act contemplated, but at the best it can constitute only a token 72537-60}
piece of security for the working man and his family. We must do better than that for him.
When a working man becomes sick and loses his job there is no machinery under the Unemployment Insurance Act to provide him with benefits because he cannot meet the test of availability for employment. Where is his security? That man may be anywhere between the ages of forty and seventy years, and he must depend largely upon the charity of his friends or those who will come to his rescue. This is another matter that should be considered by the committee.
I was interested in what the Prime Minister said about not having forgotten the old virtues of thrift and saving. We must not forget those. The character of the people of this country is such that they are imbued with the idea of saving for a rainy day. However, there are many people who through no fault of their own are not able to provide the necessary umbrella for the rainy day of sickness and old age and incapacity. I refer more particularly to the necessity for improvement in our old age pension scheme. In Canada we adopted the principle of old age pensions, and I find that throughout the dominion there is very little criticism of that principle. It is a principle which the people of Canada believe in, that of securing to our older people a better deal for their old age, and once having adopted that principle we must carry it out in practice in such a way as to meet the conditions under which our older people find themselves from time to time. I am hopeful that the committee in dealing with old age pensions will first of all consider a reduction in the present age limit. There are many reasons for that, but I emphasize it largely on account of our experience since the act first came into operation. People for one reason or another seem to be burning out at an earlier age. Perhaps it is the speed at which our modern life is conducted. It seems to me that the -age of seventy is now outworn as the standard age for granting the old Tige pension, and I should like to see the committee give serious consideration to reducing the present age limit.
Furthermore, I should like to see the committee do something else which is almost just as important as reducing the age limit. I should like them to give consideration to the many increases that have taken place in the cost of living and to readjust the amount of the old age pension so that our older people will feel that their security has been protected as not only in principle but also in actual practice as far as parliament is concerned.
Social Security

I do not want to labour the point, but I believe that our older people in Canada also deserve a word of encouragement from this parliament. These men and women through the years have borne the burden and heat of the day and the toil of the years. We owe them a great deal more than sometimes we are prone to admit. I should like to see these men and women in the evening of their life not subjected to the petty investigations that are sometimes made by all kinds of organizations, governmental if you like, and carried to the point where many of our older people are almost afraid to apply for an old age pension because of the many inquiries that are made into their circumstances from time to time. I should like the committee to give serious consideration to this whole question of the means test for old age pensioners and to the question of what I fear are sometimes unnecessary petty investigations into their circumstances generally.
Another matter correlated to old age pensions is pensions for the blind. I remember well when Mr. Dunning, then Minister of Finance, brought in his bill for pensions for the blind in one of the years following 1936. The House of Commons on that occasion lived up to its highest traditions in endorsing unanimously this measure for relieving the sufferings of those who had become incapacitated through blindness. It appealed not only to the minds but to the hearts of hon. members. But there again an age limit was fixed for pensions for the blind. I hope that the committee will give serious consideration to reducing that age limit. There may have to be some age limit, but it seems to me that a man who, at thirty years of age, is incapacitated by blindness from earning a living is in the same position, as far as incapacity goes, as a man who is incapacitated by blindness at forty.
But blindness is only one form of incapacity. I should like to see the committee make a special effort to bring into our great social security scheme another group of men and women in Canada who are too often forgotten by governments and by our people generally. I refer to those men and women who for other reasons than blindness, it may be paralysis or other causes into which I could go in greater detail had I the time, are wholly incapacitated from earning a living and unable to take their place in the social and economic world of to-day. Let us not as a nation overlook those men and women. Their plight has been brought before the house on a previous occasion, and I am bringing it before the house again to-day in . the hope that the committee which will deal with the

whole broad matter of social security will not forget the plight of those men and women because, if we are subscribing to the new order as we should be doing, we must never forget that the new order comprises a great many classes and that this is one of them.
May I say a word on health insurance. The Minister of Pensions and1 National Health (Mr. Mackenzie) is prone, as are other members of the government, to refer from time to time to a draft bill as a memorandum. In dealing with the question of health insurance the minister called the draft bill on health insurance a memorandum. The minister is not in his seat at the moment; otherwise I might pursue the matter further. Suffice it to say that the rumour has been rife throughout Canada that for a considerable time there has been in the minister's department a draft bill or several draft bills on health insurance. After the many consultations there have been with men who have made a study of this subject, I believe this country expected that the Minister of Pensions and National Health would have brought down legislation on the subject at the beginning of this session. Instead, however, we find that a different policy has been adopted, whereby this and the other matters in the social security programme have been lumped together to be dealt with by the social security committee. I fail to see why the government did not bring down health insurance legislation at once. When it had been dealt with by the house and had gone through its various stages here it could1 if necessary, have been remitted to the social security committee, but I think this house ought to have had legislation on health insurance brought down before it had to run the gamut of the social security committee. The reasons for this, in my opinion, are fairly obvious. As far as I know, all the other matters which will be dealt with by the social security committee are the subjects of acts which are already on the statute books of the provinces or the dominion. But with regard to health insurance, although it will constitute probably the most important and far-reaching of all the enactments to be dealt with by the committee, a bill has not been brought down to the house. That angle should not be overlooked, and I draw it to the attention of the government.
The problem of health insurance is an appalling one for the citizens of Canada. .It is also one which will not be entirely devoid of danger; and I think that, since the committee is to deal with it before legislation is brought in, any standardized or dominionwide scheme should give special attention and the most exacting care to the problems of

Social Security
localities-municipalities and the lesser units of our dominion legislative jurisdiction-so that when the health insurance measure comes in, it will be found to be workable having regard to the various localities in which it will have to operate. In this country we have wide divergencies, occupational, geographical, and other, among our people. For that reason care must be exercised in the general scheme so that our health insurance act shall have sufficient elasticity to be workable. Anything less will not meet the situation.
Throughout Canada there is an insistent demand for action on this matter. For many years we have had this spectre in our midst Men who do not make a lot of money, people in the low income brackets, have a fear not only of unemployment but of the ravages, dangers and cost of sickness and ill health. Who among us has not had that fear from time to time? One may be able- some are-to prepare for the day when he is out of work; he may provide for many other eventualities and contingencies. But the great fear which haunts many people and has haunted them for a long time, particularly those who are not able to put away much for a rainy day, is the apprehension that they or their families will be subject to a long and serious illness and that they will not be able to meet the doctors', nurses', hospital and other medical bills which accumulate by virtue thereof. How many people within our own knowledge have been financially ruined almost for life through that very condition? Therefore, it seems to me, this health measure is probably long overdue, and this government and this parliament, if they can do something to alleviate the existing conditions and assure our people in the lower income brackets of some freedom from fears of sickness and of long periods of unemployment as a result of such conditions, will do something for the country in general which will be thoroughly worth while.
I hope that when a general health scheme is embodied in the form of legislation we shall not forget that some emphasis, perhaps the major emphasis, should be placed upon preventive medicine. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Those simple words, which have been used many times during the last scores of years, contain as important a truth and carry as much weight as they ever did. The health of our people is one of the most valuable of our national assets, and in preserving it we not only avoid sickness but escape the additional cost which inevitably follows if earlier preventive, steps
have not been taken. As far as is humanly possible we should have social conditions in which every child and adult will be able to develop a sound mind and a sound body. I know this is not fully possible, but it ought to be one of our objectives, one to which the committee should give its constant, energetic and earnest attention. Health must be no longer regarded as a wholly private responsibility. Being, as it is, essential to our national development, there must be public responsibility as well. In this regard I say to the minister in charge of the committee that we shall expect legislation which will meet with the approval of the people and will prove workable from the point of view which, we are endeavouring to attain.
In connection with the social security committee I would say this to the Prime Minister. He mentioned bringing experts in to guide and advise the committee in its work. Probably that will be necessary. Perhaps, when he speaks of having in mind a comparison of schemes of social security in other parts of the world, he is thinking of bringing to Canada authorities from elsewhere who can give advice on that point. But in the newspapers last week there appeared this rather interesting item, dated from London on February 25. It said:
Sir William Beveridge, whose recent "cradle-to-the-grave" social security plan created a wide rift of opinion in parliament, will visit the United States and perhaps Canada on a non-government mission, he disclosed to-day.
He revealed he intends to make a private survey of the causes and remedies for unemployment.
I suggest that the government should, if it has not already done so, avail itself of the services and the advice of Sir William Beveridge. If he is in this part of the continent and can find it convenient to attend a meeting of the committee, I suggest that he be invited to give his advice with respect to the problem which he has been studying in the old land. I realize that the Beveridge report can be only a guide in a certain way with regard to our problems here. On the other hand it may well be, as I think the Prime Minister or someone else pointed out in the debate on the address, that conditions in the old land and conditions here are not entirely comparable. Whether or not that is the situation, the general principles for which both countries are working and the objectives at which they are aiming make it important that if possible this committee should have the benefit of the advice of one who has made a study not merely of the British system, and has been responsible for this much talked of report, and that he should be available as far as our

Social Security
committee is concerned. Therefore, in closing, I wish to indicate to the Prime Minister, in case he has not given as Close study to it as the speech from the throne would rather indicate he had, the stand of the Progressive Conservative party with respect to one or two items in connection with our whole social security programme which I think are of importance at this time. This is what is said in that platform:
A social security programme, the adoption of which we advocate, would include in a unified system:
(a)	Unemployment insurance;
(b)	Adequate payments for the maintenance of unemployables;
(c)	Retirement insurance.
To which I should like to see the committee give serious consideration.
(d)	The payment of increased old age pensions, at a reduced age, until such time as the retirement insurance scheme becomes fully operative;
(e)	Adequate pensions for the blind;
(f)	Adequate mothers' and widows' allowance.
This in general sums up the feeling of those many men and women who attended that great convention:
We recognize the obligation of government to make available to every citizen adequate medical, dental, nursing, hospital and pre-natal care, and to further advance public health and nutritional principles so that health may be safeguarded and preserved. This programme is to be financed under a contributory system supplemented by government assistance.
May I close with these words: The adoption of a widespread and comprehensive system of social security in Canada will to my way of thinking be a definite step toward the objective of a new world order and a new order for the Canadian people jointly. It has been well pointed out that at this stage of international affairs we cannot, with respect to our own domestic problems, rely entirely upon what other nations do. One of the best jobs we can do in putting the whole world in order is to see to it that our own house is put in order, as well as the others. I do not think our job is first of all to put everyone's house in order, nor do I think it is our job to have everyone come here and put our house in order. The best job we can do, at least in a preliminary way, is to see to it that our house in Canada is put in such shape that we can fit into a broad international picture which will ensure peace, good-will and the brotherhood of man in the years that lie ahead.


Mr. S. H. KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: I rise to speak on this motion because of its great importance, and because I feel that 
the people whom I have the honour to represent would want me to take part in this debate. I say that despite the admonition given to us a short time ago by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) to curtail if possible this discussion. As a new member in this house I confess I have been disturbed by the frequency with which it is suggested to private members that discussion should be boiled down to a minimum. That is not my conception of my duty as a member of this house, particularly when an important matter such as this is before us; and in view of the fact that some of us are not on the committee I feel it is our duty to make our contribution to the work of this committee when it is being set up.
The motion that is before us arises out of a deep conviction on the part of a great majority of our Canadian people, and indeed of the people of all the united nations, that the time has come to rid this world not only of fascism but also of want and of fear. That our people want us to do this is beyond all argument. Our job is to get down to brass tacks and do something about it.
Another point about which there should be no argument is that social insurance is one means of defence against want and fear. In a moment or two I want to emphasize the fact that because social insurance is a second line of defence we must pay some attention to the front line as well. But first of all I want to make perfectly clear the attitude of this group towards the Prime Minister's motion. It calls for the setting up of a select committee "to examine and report on a national plan of social insurance". To propose anything less at this stage of our history would be unthinkable. We shall support the motion. But we urge the government to go further and to bring down during this session legislation that will provide for the immediate establishment in Canada of social security at least to the extent that is now being enjoyed in our sister dominion of New Zealand, as it was so well outlined in Ottawa last May by Hon. Walter Nash.
I shall not dwell on the political consequences of failure on the part of the present government to bring down such legislation without delay; that can be left to the electorate. But I should like to emphasize the fact-I know it has been said time and again in this house, but it can be underlined- that our people are putting everything they have into the present conflict. Its cost in human life, in sacrifice, in all kinds of changes in our standards and ways of life, is immeasurable. If after this conflict is over, after all these sacrifices, we find ourselves with no adequate defences against want and fear, this

Social Security
government if it has failed to provide those defences will have betrayed the people of Canada in a most critical period of their history, and in particular they will have betrayed those in our armed forces. To say at that time that back in 1943 a select committee was set up will not suffice. The government must face its responsibility to introduce legislation now. Pious language about a " charter of social security for the whole of Canada " will not do. It is not good enough for lion, members opposite to say, as many said in the course of the debate on setting up the committee on reconstruction and reestablishment, that they agree with many of our ideas for post-war security. The Liberal party is in power now. It is its responsibility, not to tell us what it will do five or ten years hence, but to bring down legislation now that will protect the people of this country against want and fear in the post-war world.
Now, Mr. Speaker, without lessening in any way my insistence that the government should bring down legislation during this session along the lines I have suggested, I want to urge upon the house a realization of the fact that social insurance at best is only a second line of defence against economic hazards, and that in the long run it will fail unless it is established in its proper place in our economy. I refer again to the statements along this line made by Sir William Beveridge in his report. At page 6 he says:
Organization of social insurance should be treated as one part only of a comprehensive policy of social progress.
Earlier on the same page he makes this significant statement:
A revolutionary moment in the world's history is a time for revolutions, not for patching.
On page 163 Sir William Beveridge makes some statements which have been made in this house already but which I feel warrant repetition. He is discussing, as a necessary condition to the workability of his own plans, the necessity of maintaining employment. He gives five reasons for his contention, of which I am going to quote the last two:
Fourth, and most important, income security which is all that can be given by social insurance is so inadequate a provision for human happiness that to put it forward by itself as a sole or principal measure of reconstruction hardly seems worth doing. It should be accompanied by an announced determination to use the powers of the state to whatever extent may prove necessary to ensure for all, not indeed absolute continuity of work, but a reasonable chance of productive employment.
Fifth, though it should be within the power of the community to bear the cost of the whole plan for social security, the cost is heavy and,
if to the necessary cost waste is added, it may become insupportable. Unemployment, both through increasing expenditure on benefit and through reducing the income to bear those costs, is the worst form of waste.
So, Mr. Speaker, I wish to emphasize that the first and all-important line of defence against the hazards with which we are concerned is the ordering of our economy so that it will provide employment for all, together with the production of the goods and services necessary to provide a high standard of living, and the distribution of those goods among our people according to need. As I understand it, the purpose of social insurance, and of certain forms of social security which are on other than an insurance basis, is to provide protection when and where the economic system fails. But if the economic system is so full of contradictions that it is certain to break down time and again, resulting in mass unemployment with all of its hazards, it is impossible to devise a scheme of social insurance that will protect our people.
With reference to health insurance I should like to point out that if our economic system condemns millions of our people to malnutrition, to living in slums and substandard houses, in city and country alike, it is economically impossible to work out a health insurance scheme that will take care of the ill health of our people under those conditions. So that if we in this house mean what we say when we set out to devise a "charter of social security for the whole of Canada," I insist that we must give our attention to the setting up of an economic order in which social security can be maintained and in which so-called social insurance schemes will work. Social security will be a fact only when the total economy is one of security. Social insurance will work over a long period of time only when the need for its benefits is incidental and not wholesale. This means, as I see it, that our primary task is to establish an economic order which will make possible the production of an abundance of goods and services, which will distribute the nation's necessary work among our people according to ability and capacity, and which in turn will distribute the abundance that we produce amongst our people according to need. It is true that even in that kind of economy there will be certain cases of need, and properly speaking that is where social insurance should come in; those are the conditions under which social insurance can be expected to work. In other words, when social insurance functions as it should, as a second line of defence against want and fear, it can be set up in such a way
Social Security


Mr. MacNICOL:: Who made that statement?


Stanley Howard Knowles: The suggestion was made by someone sitting close to me, that the leader of his group was asking for all kinds of things for everybody, as though no one would have to work, and as though no one would have to pay for them.

Social Security


John Ritchie MacNicol: The hon. member should say who made the statement. He has charged this whole group, and the doctrine he is announcing is not that of the Progressive Com-servative party.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am sorry I cannot say who made the statement.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The hon. member should not repeat it, then.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Withdraw.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If that transcends the rules of the house, I will withdraw the statement. Nevertheless the statement is made in many quarters that any programme such as we are suggesting costs money, and because it will cost money it cannot be considered, particularly in view of the large amount we are spending just now. It is said that our war programme will leave us brankrupt at the end of the war. I am sure the Minister of Finance will agree with me when I say that such a statement is sheer nonsense, and that after all the spending of money even on the scale we are proposing to spend it during the forthcoming fiscal year is only an index.
The reality of the present situation is that we have increased our production tremendously, and that we are waging war out of our current production. Similarly we can build a million new homes after the war ends, and we can feed and clothe our people, out of our then current production, if only we will produce according to our capacity, and not within absurd financial and profitmaking limitations. If we try to go back to the old order of unrestricted exploitation, the best we can look for from any form of social insurance set up within such an order is the "rationed poverty" which has been mentioned of late by certain political leaders in the country. But I insist we of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation are right in maintaining that neither "rationed poverty" nor "pockets of unemployment" are good enough for the people of Canada in the post-war world. If we can produce materials to the value of nine billions of dollars a year, while the war is on, we can do likewise, in peace time, and thus provide a good life for our people.
I wish to say further in connection with this matter of cost that sometimes we who hold the views I am presenting are accused of wanting the people of Canada, and particularly the farmers and the workers for whom we speak, to be given something for nothing. This charge is levelled at us particularly when we ask for certain social services and benefits such as a larger old-age pension at an earlier age, adequate provision for war veterans, and for widows of war veterans; for a national plan for the care of our health, including preventive measures, and for a national housing programme. Let me make it clear that in our view none of these things can be had for nothing. We are not asking that they be provided out of thin air. These things call for expenditures. They cost. But, Mr. Speaker, what is it that they cost? They cost the human effort of our people, applied to raw materials. Our workers, farmers and fishermen, including our scientists, technicians and white-collar workers of all kinds, in their daily toil, are paying the real cost of our present national production, so far as human beings are concerned.
I say again that our nine-billion-dollar level of national production has been achieved because the necessary expenditure of human effort is being made by the citizens of our country. What we ask is that this volume of production, the cost of, which is being met by the labour and toil of our people, be distributed among our people according to equity and need. At the present time a large portion of our national production, which represents an expenditure of effort on the part of our people, is being applied as our people want it applied, namely, in their interest, in the defence of our country, and of freedom itself. All right; we ask that when peace comes the same principle be carried out, and that a similarly large portion of our national production, the cost of which our people as a whole will gladly pay through their daily toil on the farm, in the factory, in the office, in the schoolroom and laboratory, be channelled into the things that will provide security and a good life for all our people.
Someone asks where a million new houses will come from. They will come out of our then current production in the same way that our vast war supplies are coming out of to-day's current production. When we ask for old age pensions of at least $30 a month- and I see no reason why the figure should not be $40 or $50 a month-starting at the age of sixty-five, or even younger, someone will want to know where the money will come from. It will come out of our then current' production in the same way that we are maintaining our armed forces, 700,000 strong, out of today's current production.
We ask that the men and women in our armed forces be kept on regular pay and allowances until they are adequately reestablished after the war, and that medical care be
Social Security

made available to them for life, thus avoiding the difficulties in this connection encountered by the veterans of the last war. The question then arises in some quarters, where will the money come from? It will come out of our then current production, just as we are providing pay and allowances and medical care out of to-day's current production.
All of this will depend upon our maintaining our present volume of production, which I understand is nine billions of dollars to-day. Ten years ago I believe it was less than three billions of dollars. If we have any intention of going back to unrestricted exploitation which produces only for the sake of profit; if we have any intention of going back to an annual production of five, four, or three billions of dollars, then there will not be the slightest chance of any social insurance scheme that we may devise being of any value.
Social security calls first and foremost for the maintenance of a high level of production and for the distribution of that production, or shall I say the channelling of it into the things that will provide a good life for all our people. This good life, as I see it, should include other things, but at least it must include homes to live in, adequate food and clothing, care of health and a fair measure of life'* luxuries for everyone, with dignified security in old age. Nothing less than such a programme is good enough for the Canadian people when the war is over.
I was interested in some of the comments made to-day by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley), and I endeavoured to jot down one sentence in particular with which I thoroughly agreed. I believe Hansard will bear out the sense of what I have jotted down. He said that no country goes bankrupt by increasing its production and devoting a large portion of that production to a supreme cause. We are doing that to-day, to the supreme cause of the present struggle. We ask that the same thing be done to-morrow, to the supreme cause of establishing and making possible a good life for the Canadian people.
There was a day when the vested interests through their newspapers and in other ways could treat the farmers and workers of this country a though they were a class apart, as though they should be grateful for the crumbs given to them from Canada's economic table. That situation does not hold any longer. Our young men for whom a few years ago there was no place in our life are to-day in positions of defence vital to our national existence and freedom. I sometimes think when I see these young men going away with "Canada" on their shoulders that in a very

real sense they are Canada. They are full participants in the great struggle in which we are engaged. When these young men come back it is not going to be possible to shove them out into the cold to wait until something comes along. They are participants in this great struggle, and they deserve to be full participants in our economic life after the war is over. That means that they deserve to have jobs and to receive income sufficient to make it possible for them to share in the wealth which we hope they will be producing.
I sometimes wonder if hon. members have realized the change that has taken place in the thinking of our people. During the course of this war we have had to learn to pool our resources and work together, to think in terms of the larger community of which we are a part. That has been true both on the home front and on the battlefront. The result is that our people expect that after the war they will all be able to participate in whatever life it is possible to establish in this country. As I see it, that is what the people look for now when they envision social security.
There might have been a day twenty or thirty years ago when unemployment insurance, the providing of a few incidental benefits and a few dollars a week, would have been acceptable as social security. But that day is gone. As the previous speaker, the leader of the opposition, pointed out, our people to-day agree with the principle of unemployment insurance, but when you tell them that this legislation will provide only a few dollars a week under certain conditions, that to them is not social security. It may have been a form of social security twenty or thirty years ago, but to-day social security involves the establishment of a national economy of a high order, full production, and the provision that everyone who is willing and capable of working shall share in that production. Those who through no fault of their own are not able to share in the work are entitled, as human beings in a civilized society, to share in the goods and services that are produced. Social security is much more than the incidental schemes the government has suggested. I feel it is even more than the comprehensive scheme of social insurance to which the immediately preceding speaker referred. It calls for comprehensive changes in the whole nature of our economy, and that is what we in this group are advocating.
The people of this country are apprehensive about the future. The forces of reaction are already getting arrayed for a show-down after the war is over. The people realize that private enterprise, in spite of all the excess profits taxes that are being paid, is to-day

Social Security
being given control of Canadian industry, with its greatly increased plant and equipment, to a far greater extent than before the war. Newspapers, such as the famous one in the city from which I come, the Winnipeg Free Press, are doing their best to confuse the issue by idealizing the old order and using abusive language to describe the kind of economy which we in the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation advocate, a Canadian economy which the people will own and control so that there will be for all an income to enable every worker and every farmer to own his own home and to have for his very own the necessities of a good life.
The people are no longer disturbed or deceived by the old argument that socialism interferes with personal living and initiative and freedom. Socialism in fact is the only possible basis for full employment, for adequate incomes, for homes for everyone, for care of our health and real security in our old age. These things spell real freedom. These things make life worth living. These things inspire people to creative effort. These things draw out initiative. You cannot turn people away from their desire for these things by trying to tell them in this day and age that that is socialism. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, these things are what democracy ought to be seeking to achieve. As I sit in this house and hear hon. members suggest that government should not interfere with the economic life of our country, I wonder what they were sent here for. I feel that I was sent here by the constituents I represent to work on their behalf, and definitely to seek in the name of the people to control and direct the economy of this country in such a way as to make possible good homes and a good life for the people of Winnipeg North Centre and of this entire country. I think it is our duty as members of this house to give our concern and deep thought to this whole question of controlling the economy of this country in the interests of the people that they may enjoy a good life.
I have urged upon the house the desirability of this committee giving its attention to our whole economy if it is going to establish a measure of social security that will be worth while. If I have hoped for too much, I hope that the committee will at least recommend the bringing down of legislation this session to increase old age pensions, to take care of our veterans and war widows, and put into effect a national programme for the health of our people. These things would give to our people a measure of confidence that when this war is over we are really going to have a better day.


Thomas Langton Church: Mr. Speaker, the predecessor of the last speaker (Mr. Knowles) representing Winnipeg North Centre occupied this seat when I first entered the house. I think we both entered on the same day. In those days we both had a resolution for social insurance, unemployment insurance and health insurance. Those resolutions went to a committee, just as it is proposed to send this question of social insurance, and what was the result?
It was found, in the first place, that owing to the constitution of Canada, dominion, provincial and municipal jurisdictions, such a scheme could not then be carried out; second, that the government of Canada, or any government, had no funds except what it raised from the taxpayers, and that to put such a scheme into effect the dominion would . have to come to the taxpayers to get the necessary funds, and the provinces would have to do the same thing and the municipalities the same.
We have come through two wars, and the taxpayer to-day has already pretty heavy burdens. The Beveridge report has been often referred to in this house; I have read it half a dozen times. Sir William Beveridge was a professor, a teacher at Oxford university. I do not see how it came about that the government of Great Britain took the action they did; for it is well known that a teacher or a professor is a theorist, not a practical man.
I have been a pioneer in this work for many years, Mr. Speaker, and I believe that the government of the day here is taking the wrong stand. We should- have, as they had in England, a two or three days' debate in the house on this subject to survey and chart a course of action. Recently I asked the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) to have a one day debate so that we might chart a course of what should be done about social security. In the first place there can be no security without, first of all, the returned soldiers having some security when they return. The first duty of parliament in any national scheme of insurance is to insure our soldiers, to take care of them and their dependents for three years after the war.
I have long advocated that, since the war began, by a resolution on the order paper, but nothing has been done about it. Nor can there be any security without an adequate housing scheme.. In England- the debate centred on housing. But nothing has been done to house our soldiers when they come home, or to house their dependents now. The armed forces can occupy mansion houses
United Nations Leaders

in the city from which I come, the old Flavelle property and one on Crescent road, for instance, while the soldiers' dependents have to live in cellars and all that kind of thing. Some cannot find a house. If this question of social security is referred to a committee of this house I believe that that will be the end of the whole question for this session.
As I shall require about ten or fifteen minutes more to finish, Mr. Speaker, I move the adjournment of the debate.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, March 4, 1943