Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I was asked two or three days ago to make a statement about meat rationing in the light of the discussion with the representatives of the meat dealers who were here this \veek.
A meeting was held on Wednesday between officials of the wartime prices and trade board and a delegation representing the meat dealers' division of the Retail Merchants' Association of Canada. In the course of these meetings the members of the retailers' delegation adopted a resolution requesting the immediate suspension of meat rationing in favour of a plan to requisition the required percentage of Canada's productive capacity in meat and meat products sufficient to enable the government to meet its commitments to the United Kingdom and liberated Europe, permitting the balance to be distributed through the

regular channels of trade, subject only to the provision that the dominion government, through the wartime prices and trade board, use the board's existing facilities to ensure equitable distribution.
The resolution went on to request that this plan be tested out for the remainder of this calendar year and if it failed to function satisfactorily, the retail merchants' association offered its further cooperation in endeavouring to work out some other plan that would achieve the objective of both meeting our overseas commitments and ensuring equitable distribution to Canadian consumers.
The delegation of retailers made it quite clear that they were opposed to consumer rationing in any form. Without prejudice to their main recommendation, however, they also made a number of suggestions with respect to technical details of the rationing system.
The very sincere representations which were made by this group have received careful consideration. Hon. members will appreciate, however, that their main recommendation is not a new one, and in this connection I would refer to the statement which I made to the house on September 13, appearing on pages 140 and 141 of Hansard. As I said at that time, no one welcomes rationing, neither the officials who have to administer it nor the consumer, nor the industry, nor the trade. Before rationing was decided upon, both the officials of the wartime prices and trade board and the members of the government gave most careful and prolonged consideration to ways and means of achieving our objectives with the minimum of inconvenience to all concerned. Our dual objective is to reduce domestic consumption so that we may be able to provide the United Kingdom and liberated Europe with the meat which we contracted to supply and the additional amounts we undertook to endeavour to provide, and at the same time to ensure fair shares at fair prices to all Canadian consumers.
I do not want to repeat everything that I said here a week ago yesterday, but I should like to reemphasize the following points:
(a)	Only meat originating in inspected plants can enter into interprovincial trade or be exported. It is meat from these inspected plants which supplies a large part of the necessary meat requirements of deficiency-producing areas such as the maritime provinces, the northern parts of Ontario and Quebec and British Columbia, and in addition, the larger metropolitan centres in Canada.
(b)	The requisitioning of meats in sufficient quantity to fulfil overseas requirements would shorten the supplies, with the effect that areas of surplus production would have abundant

Meal Rationing
supplies, amply sufficient to meet the entire consumer demand, and the deficiency areas would go extremely short. Throughout these deficiency areas and large urban centres the serious maldistribution would breed 'black markets and lead to a breakdown of price controls.
(c)	The meat trade is a highly complex organization with highly complex channels of distribution. The wartime prices and trade board has been able to devise no practical means other than rationing whereby meat could be directed through these complex channels in any way that would assure fair shares to retailers and to consumers in all parts of Canada.
Members of the retail meat dealers' delegation which made the above recommendation are reported to me to have said that they were prepared ''to take their chances on getting their fair share of meat. We are convinced that in fact each would not get his fair share, and we believe that in a very short time the dealers in the areas I have referred to would be demanding redress as they did late in 1942 and early in 1943 and as they were beginning to do in the spring of 1945 when temporary shortages began to appear in certain eastern cities.
If the retailers were the only persons who would suffer by such an experiment there might be something to be said in favour of trying it. But the real sufferers, the final victims of the maldistribution which we are convinced would occur, would not be the retailers but the families who depend upon them for supplies. The government do not consider that they would be justified in gambling where the stakes at issue are the essential food of hundreds of thousands of Canadian families.
The policy of the government, therefore, is that meat rationing will remain in effect until it becomes clear that we can fulfil both our overseas responsibilities and our responsibility to our own consumers without it.
Hon. members are also aware that apart from the principle of rationing, we have been receiving many representations respecting the details of the rationing system. I believe that most of these complaints are the result of unfamiliarity with the details of rationing which is inevitable during the first week or two of its operation. Already we are receiving evidence that a great part of this misunderstanding is disappearing, and that both consumers and the trade are rapidly adjusting themselves to the new situation.
On a number of points it is still too early to form a fair judgment as to whether complaints are simply due to unfamiliarity or
represent actual defects which should be corrected. During the next few weeks numerous conferences will be going on, with a view to smoothing out both the real and the apparent difficulties.
The wartime prices and trade board, however, has decided to make one immediate change, and it has to-day issued an order temporarily removing from the ration what are sometimes termed "edible butchers offals' and sometimes "fancy meats," that is, such 'terns as livers, hearts, kidneys and tongues. The reason for this temporary suspension is that these meats are relatively more perishable than others, and that there appears to be evidence that their sales have slowed down in some areas to a point where actual spoilage threatens to occur.
It is estimated that in a full year the quantity of these meats normally available for consumption in Canada is about 50 or 60 million pounds. The permanent removal of these from the ration would therefore mean that consumers would have available to them 20 or 25 million additional coupons with which they could purchase other meats, which would in turn reduce the quantities available for overseas shipment.
The board therefore proposes first to reexamine the practicability of putting these items back on the ration at a date, say, six or eight weeks hence, by which time everybody will be readily familiar with the rationing system, or if that seems impracticable the board will take some other appropriate step to keep over-all meat consumption within the target set. such as widening to two weeks the gap between coupon validity dates once every three or four months.
In the meantime, the meat board, under the Department of Agriculture, which handles all export commitments, will be authorized to requisition such additional quantities of edible offals as may be necessary to fill export demands as they arise.
The wartime prices and trade board realizes that the lifting of the ration on these items will probably result in considerable maldistribution of them in many centres. In order to meet this difficulty as far as possible, the board is directing all inspected plants to maintain pro rata equitable distribution of their supplies of such products as between secondary meat processors, public eating places, hospitals and institutions, and- retail outlets. It will be impossible to guarantee equitable distribution between areas and between retailers, but the board will endeavour to see that undue proportions do not go to secondary processors or hotels and restaurants. It will be understood, of course, that public eating places will still
Meat Rationing

be prohibited from serving liver, hearts, kidneys, tongues and the like on meatless days.
Another question was asked by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) involving the presentation of certain statistics. I am afraid I shall not be able to make a complete presentation of those until Monday, but I intend to put them on record at that time.
With regard to the difficulties of the meat dealers, I may say in conclusion that the government has the greatest sympathy with the administrative embarrassment that the meat rationing system causes to members of this trade, and is willing to do anything within reason to help them meet their problems. But the considerations involved in meat rationing are so much broader and so much more important than this, that the decision to go on with it or to cease must be based on those broader considerations.



PACKERS AND DEALERS-FREEZING SPACE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. K. FRASER (Peterborough West):: I should like to ask the minister what arrangements have been made by the government to take meat from the packers or meat dealers so they will have ample freezing space. A report was broadcast over the radio, and also appeared in the press, that an official of the wartime prices and trade board told a meat dealer, Mr. Kline, of the civic abattoir in Toronto, that he could throw the meat into the lake if he did not have sufficient freezing space. Is the government taking that meat off the hands of these people, or what arrangements have been made?


James Lorimer Ilsley: To begin with, I do not know whether there is any foundation whatever for the report to which the hon. member refers.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The minister has heard of the statement?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I saw some reference to it in the press.


Mr. KNOWLES:: There are many things in the press.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes. I would be very doubtful if anything like that was said. In regard to the cold storage situation, I am not in a position to make a statement, but I am informed that there is some congestion in regard to the facilities for what is called sharp freezing, which they hope will be cleared up within a week. With regard to cold storage proper, I am told that the facilities are ample and there is no congestion.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: This statement is reported to have been made to Mr. Kline, manager of the killing plant of the Toronto civic abattoir.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order. The statement of the minister is not debatable.



WORKERS IN HEAVY INDUSTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ROBERT FAIR (Battle River):: Has
any action been taken by the wartime prices and trade board to make available to miners, loggers, threshers and others, increased quantities of meat? This question has been raised* on at least three occasions in the bouse, and I am wondering what has been done.


James Horace King: Order, I would ask the
hon. member to put his question on the. order paper,


Robert Fair: Mr. Speaker, only this morning
I received a telegram from Drumheller stating that some of the miners' unions out there intend to go on strike by Wednesday next, dr at least to consider going on strike if something is not done. A copy of the telegram has been sent to Mr. Donald Gordon. I suggest there is an emergency here.


James Horace King: If the hon. member would put his question on the order paper, even if it is urgent, it could wait a few days, and the minister would have, time to look into it.


Robert Fair: The question was asked a week ago, and on two different occasions since. I suggest we should have an answer.


James Horace King: I would call the hon.
member's attention to the fact that in giving my decision I am only following what the house itself decided.



BRITISH COLUMBIA LOGGERS

Mr. G. A. CRUICKSHANK (Fraser Valley):: May I have an answer which was promised by the minister in connection with the action contemplated or intended in respect of meat rationing in so far as the loggers of British Columbia are concerned?


Robert Fair: Order paper.


James Horace King: I would ask the hon.
member to put the question on the order paper.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Mr. Speaker, the
minister promised me an answer.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I wrote the hon. member two or three days ago giving him the information. I did not

Veterans Affairs
realize that he necessarily wanted it made public.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Yesterday I was asked by the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Bruce), who does not appear to be in the chamber at the moment, a question in reference to hospital accommodation for veterans in the city of Toronto, and particularly with reference to the question of congestion relating to outpatients at Christie Street. I may tell the house that a week ago we took active steps to meet and deal with that situation, by sending a senior medical officer and a senior administrative officer to Toronto. We are now endeavouring to obtain downtown premises in Toronto where out-patients may be interviewed and those screened who do not require to go to the hospital for treatment.
In regard to the general hospital situation in Canada, I intended to deal with this matter later on when my estimates were being considered by the house, but it may interest hon. members to know that we now have in Canada in this department a normal bed capacity of 9,603. with 7,226 patients and 2,379 vacant beds. There is either being constructed or about to be constructed accommodation for an additional 6,000 beds, of which 1,200 will be for health and occupational centres. It may also interest hon. members to learn that all battle casualties with the exception of twenty-six have been returned to Canada, which reflects tremendous credit upon the Minister of National Defence and his staff.
In regard to the second portion of the question asked by the hon. member for Parkdale, dealing with the progress of the construction of Sunnybrook hospital, I would ask permission to have that answered by my colleague the Minister of Public Works, who is in charge of that work.
Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works):: Last week the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church) and yesterday the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Bruce) inquired as to the progress of the construction of Sunnybrook hospital. I have now a report from our consulting engineer. This hospital is composed of six units, and I have been given a summary of the progress of the work.
The status of the work is as follows:
Boiler house. The building is completed, except for finished floors which are not ordinarily laid until all machinery and piping work is done.' The chimney is up to sixty per cent height, but work suspended awaiting more of the special brick. All three boilers are well advanced, and should be completed next week. Pumps and other equipment have been set on their bases, and piping up is proceeding. Most of the piping in the tunnel leading to neuro-psychiatric building has been installed.
As to the neuro-psychiatric building, the plastering is finished, except the putty coat on halls and a few rooms on two of the floors. Terrazo and wall tile work are substantially completed. Owing to delay in decision as to paint colours, this work has not been started. Heating, plumbing and electric wiring are substantially completed, except for installation of fixtures. Elevator guides are being set, and other work around elevator shafts is proceeding.
As to up-patients building, concrete subfloor in basement is ninety-five per cent finished, and considerable tile partition work done for storerooms and refrigerators. All concrete floors and roof slabs have been placed in north and east wings, except roofs of main and elevator penthouses. Stone, brick and tile work in exterior walls is about sixty-five per cent completed. This building should be closed in by about September 30.
As to the active treatment building, all the structural steel framework is erected, and about fifty per cent rivetted up. Three of the concrete floors in the east wing have been placed, and exterior wall stonework of the said wing started.
As to the out-patients building, concrete work in the basement walls and column shafts is proceeding, and erection of structural steel framework was started on September 10.
As to the Red Cross pavilion, the foundation concrete work is within about a week of completion, and brick walls of south wing are partly finished for a height of one story.
Services. Sewers, water and fire mains are all laid, except a few short branches to buildings. All this piping is now in course of being given final tests. Roadway grading is substantially completed, and sufficient base course has been laid for construction use. The permanent electric service to and including the substation is completed.


Mr. FLEMING:: Can the minister give us a projected date for the over-all completion of the work?


Alphonse Fournier: I would not
attempt to give that information, because of
Privilege-Mr. Mclvor

the labour situation and the difficulties in respect of materials we have had. However, I shall consider making a report to the house later on.


Mr. SKEY:: Perhaps the Minister of Veterans Affairs would permit a supplementary question on the subject of Christie Street hospital and the new facilities the department is endeavouring to provide. I understand that the difficulty in connection with out-patients at Christie Street hospital in Toronto arises from lack of facilities for medical dispensation, rather than floor space.


James Horace King: Let me remind the hon. member that he cannot make a statement when asking a question, nor can he set out particulars. He may ask only the simple question.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: I regret having transgressed the rules of the house. May I ask the Minister of Veterans Affairs if additional facilities for medical dispensation are planned for the outpatients at Christie Street hospital, Toronto?


Mr. MACKENZIE:: The answer is yes.



PRIVILEGE-MR. McIVOR POST-WAR INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS-CANADA CAR

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. DANIEL McIVOR (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. On Tuesday last I quoted the hon. member for Cartier (Mr. Rose), who had. quoted a statement from the Montreal Standard which was detrimental to President Drury of the Canada Car. These are the words I quoted at that time:
The party is over. Not only will there not be enough jobs but wages will have to be brought down to former peace-time levels. If the employees won't take a cut in wages, the plant will have to close down. We can't afford to have our profits cut into by paying the high war-time wage levels.
I find now that the Standard has corrected that, with these words:
The inaccurate interpretation of the interview referred to above appeared in the September 1 issue of the Standard. The Standard regrets the error.
My own statement at this time is that from the time I first met the late President Butler, to the present time, I have been proud of Canada Car. I am thankful now that President Drury is not in favour of low wages or fewer jobs, but rather of going all-out to work in cooperation with the Minister of Reconstruction.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. G. HANSELL (Macleod):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Prime Minister. Inasmuch as questions on the order paper cannot be answered until this debate is concluded, I wonder if he would not make some motion reversing the order, so that questions on the order paper may be answered at regular intervals-say even as early as Monday. Otherwise, since the debate may go on for another week, questions now standing on the order paper will not be answered until that time.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Order paper.


James Horace King: May I call the attention of hon. members to the fact that at the opening of the session it was the House of Commons that decided to give precedence to the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne. That decision was made by all hon. members. Therefore I believe the hon. member will have to wait until the debate on the address is completed.



TRUCKS AND TRACTORS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. E. JAENICKE (Kindersley):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Reconstruction (Mr. Howe). Was the sale of army trucks and field artillery tractors to farmers in Markham, Ontario, by the War Assets Corporation, as set forth in a Canadian Press dispatch of September 20, held with the approval of the government? Is it the intention to hold sales of such trucks and tractors on a similar basis . . .


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


James Horace King: The hon. member's question should be brief and to the point. I think this is the type of question that should appear on the order paper.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: In view of the urgent need of trucks and tractors I should like to ask the Minister of Reconstruction a question.
I may say that I sent him notice of this question. Is it the intention to hold sales of such trucks and tractors, as was recently held in Markham, Ontario, on a similar basis in western Canada? Has the government given consideration to conferring priority in the purchase of such trucks and tractor* upon returned veterans-

Imperial Conference


James Horace King: The hon. member is out of order. I would ask him to put his question on the order paper.


Mr. COLDWELL:: Mr. Speaker, I am not disputing your ruling, but I would point out that this is a matter of urgency. Trucks are needed to take the grain away from the combines.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Major James William Coldwell: The hon. member is simply asking if some arrangement could not be made to facilitate the sale of trucks so that farmers and others in western Canada may get them. It is a matter of urgency.


James Horace King: I have given my ruling and the hon. member must abide by it.



IMPERIAL CONFERENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. JOHN BRACKEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether or not any discussions have been entered into in the last three months between the government of Canada and the government of Great Britain or any of the members of the commonwealth with regard to the holding of an imperial conference at Ottawa or elsewhere?


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: In reply to my hon. friend I would say that there have been no discussions between the British government and the Canadian government during the last three months with respect to the holding of an imperial conference at Ottawa or elsewhere. My hon. friend will recall that when the council of foreign ministers was about to meet in London to take up matters which arose out of the Potsdam conference, the Prime Minister of Great Britain sent a communication to the prime ministers of the several dominions. Mr. Attlee said it would be of help to himself and his colleagues and mutually advantageous if the prime ministers of the different dominions might be in London at the time that the council was meeting, but he recognized that probably in all cases that would not be possible. He suggested that where it could be arranged conveniently a representative who could speak in the name of the Prime Minister might be present to ensure closer consultation and continuous discussion.
The council of foreign ministers is a body composed solely of the foreign ministers of the five great powers. There was no invitation extended to any dominion to be represented 47696-24
at the council. I should like to make it clear, because there seems to be misunderstanding in some quarters on this point, that the council is not authorized in any way to conclude treaties of peace or territorial settlements. It is a body called together for the purpose of doing essential preparatory work on draft treaties and draft proposals which will be submitted later to all the united nations concerned with the settlement of the peace.
In reply to Mr. Attlee I said that I regretted that it was not possible for me to be in London for purposes of consultation with him while the council was meeting. If it had been possible at all I should have been happy to go over to be in England just at this time, as there are a number of questions about which I feel it would be desirable if at all possible to have personal conferences with the members of the new government, the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister and the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs. I have been turning over in my mind what might be possible in that way, and it may be that when the house gets along a little further with its business I shall ask the house to allow me to visit London for that and other purposes which I may take occasion to mention later on.



TEXTILES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. S. HARKNESS (Calgary East):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. In view of the present shortage of textiles and the fact that demobilization is going on rapidly, why have monthly requirements of battle dress only been reduced from 75,000 to 70,000 units and-


James Horace King: This question should not be asked on the orders of the day.


Douglas Scott Harkness: May I ask the question in this form?


James Horace King: I have already ruled that this question is of the type that should be placed on the order paper.



GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, September 20, consideration of the motion of Mr. W. M. Benid'ickson for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Bracken, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Hansell.
[Stage Direction]
362	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Matthews (Kootenay)
Mr. J. H. MATTHEWS (Kootenay East):: Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River (Mr. Benidickson) was moving the address in reply to the speech from the throne he spoke of himself as taking his first faltering steps in national politics. I believe those words found an echo in many of our hearts, for there are many of us who are here for the first time. We are indeed taking our first steps in national politics. We have much to learn about the rules, regulations and privileges of this house, but I am sure that under your gracious guidance, sir, we shall be kept on the right track.
I want to say that our work here is not made any easier by the bad acoustics of this chamber. Many hon. members speak in conversational tones, and consequently much of their wisdom is entirely lost to us. I hope the hon. member will forgive me for using his name as an illustration, but I do want to confess to a very high regard for the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley). I think he has done a remarkably good job in a very difficult period, and I hope he will maintain that fine record during the life of this parliament. But I am afraid he will fall from the pedestal upon which some of us have placed him unless he speaks louder. I have noticed that when he rises to speak, members lean forward, and the visitors in the galleries cup their ears to hear what he has to say. The same shortcoming might be imputed even to the right bon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King). Surely, sir, if there are two men in this house who ought to be heard well and correctly, they are the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance. Fortunately there is a remedy. We are living in a scientific age. Why, then, not put to full use our scientific discoveries by placing amplifying equipment in this chamber?
I noticed in the press recently that in the new British houses of parliament both loud speakers and air-conditioning units are to be installed. If Great Britain in her war-impoverished state can go that far, surely we in Canada, with all our wealth, can do the same.
Ministers of the gospel, Mr. Speaker, are sometimes criticized for being long-winded in the delivery of their sermons, especially if they go beyond the usual twenty-five or thirty minutes. I am afraid that if some of the ministers of the crown were to occupy the pulpits of this dominion they too would be criticized for taking the whole of forty minutes, the time allowed them here. Be that as it may, I can assure hon. members that I am not going to transgress the rules, neither am I

going to be longwinded. In fact, I may establish a record for brevity. There are one or two things in which I am deeply interested, of which I should like to speak.
First I would suggest to the government that there is need of immediate revision of the Indian Act to bring it into conformity with present-day requirements. Some hon. members may think I am speaking on a subject with which I am not familiar, but I do know something about the Indians in this dominion, because I have spent some twelve years of my life as an Indian missionary, living on their reserves and ministering to their needs. I am speaking now particularly of the Indian tribes of the northwest Pacific coast, particularly the Tsmpsheans of the Prince Rupert area, the Bella Bellas, the Kitamaats and the Haidas of the Queen Charlotte islands. Some people think it is very funny to say that the best Indian is a dead one. With that I must disagree, because among our Indian population there are many very worthy people indeed. They are thrifty, honest, industrious, intelligent, and very ambitious.
At. this point, Mr. Speaker, I should like to pay a tribute to the splendid work that is being carried on among the Indians of Canada by the various Christian churches of this dominion, which over a period of years have consistently tried to lift up the economic, moral and spiritual life of these wards of the government. In this endeavour I believe they have succeeded to a very remarkable degree. The time has come, or is fast approaching, when we should give earnest consideration to changing the emphasis, and thinking not so much of building up the Indians to our own standards of living, as of developing a programme that would prepare the hearts and minds of our own people to receive the Indians on a basis of equality-because, sir, there are many Indians who are our equals now, in knowledge, in ability and in courtesy. Indian young men and young women from our reserves have gone through our high schools; some of them have gone through our normal schools and have received their teachers' certificates and joined the teaching profession. Yet these young people are not citizens; they have not the right to vote. I believe, sir, that the time has come when a large section of our Indian population should be enfranchised and given full rights of citizenship. I would suggest that a standard of education be set up; that our Indian young men and women should be encouraged to reach up to and to pass that standard, and that the prize for so doing should be full citizenship. I am satisfied that if that were done, many of cur Indians would

The Address-Mr. Matthews (Kootenay)
do just as much honour to our citizenship as many of our other citizens.
May I remind the house that many Indians in the Dominion of Canada have served, and served splendidly, during this war. I have in my hand a news letter emanating from the Windermere district of the Columbia valley. It tells me that Mr. J. Coleman, inspector of Indian agencies for British Columbia, has been visiting in the Windermere district and says:
Mr. Coleman, giving credit where credit is due, emphasized that well as the Indians throughout British Columbia have responded in the war, those from this Cranbrook agency have exceeded all others by far. The corollary, of course, is that more Indian veterans are among the men returning to this area. It is up to the council and the community to see that these men who have worn the king's uniform with credit and distinction and who have been correspondingly treated in English and Scottish homes are not forgotten with the indifference, which would appear from Mr. Coleman's talk to be part of the reason for the backward life of our local Indians to date.
In this connection too, sir, I would also suggest, when you are thinking of full citizenship rights to the Indians, that they be conferred without forfeiture of any of their rights on the Indian reserves. I know there are many people in this country who think that Indian rights are non-existent, or were surrendered when treaty agreements were entered into. As a matter of fact there never have been any treaty rights so far as the British Columbia Indians are concerned. Not one dollar of treaty money has ever been paid to the Indians of British Columbia. Let us, then, give to those who are deserving the full rights of citizenship, whether they live on reserves or whether they do not.
I should like to say a word concerning the constituency of Kootenay East, which I have the honour to represent. It was created in 1914. thirty-one years ago, and like many of the other electoral districts it has given to the parliamentary life of this country men of high distinction. First of all I should like to mention that East Kootenay is justly proud of Hon. J. H. King, who is now Speaker of the Senate; also of Hon. H. H. Stevens, who served the Conservative party so ably and so well; and last but not least, my predecessor in office, Mr. G. E. L. Mackinnon, of Cranbrook, who I am sure is held in high esteem by hon. members on both sides of this chamber.
East Kootenay is one of those glorious areas of country of which one might almost say that "every prospect pleases, and only man is vile." For beauty of landscape and abundance of resources, Kootenay East stands unbeatable. We have coal in abundance, coal 47696-2il
to burn. Why, sir, I know of one seam of coal which has been burning for the last fourteen or fifteen years. It would be difficult to say how many thousands or millions of tons have been consumed in that time. The fire is still burning, and will burn, because apparently it is no one's business to put it out. We have gold and silver; we have lead, and zinc, and many other of the base metals. Our big game areas are something to dream about; and I can assure you, sir, -that the wonderful and luscious fruit which comes from the Creston valley is equal in quality to anything that comes out of the Okanagan valley or from Ontario. However, I am not going to bring any peaches in the house to-day. It is enough to speak of them to make your mouths water.
But despite the beauty of the landscape of the. Kootenays there are a few blots on it. We have some company towns, communities where every house is identical in construction and where all are alike as far as dilapidation is concerned-houses which lack all the modern conveniences which help to make for a happy home life.
The hon. member for Edmonton East (Mr. Ashby), addressing the house on Thursday of last week, spoke of the four freedoms of the Atlantic charter, and of their relationship to the animals upon his farm yonder in the far west. I believe he made his point quite clear, that those four freedoms had been achieved for the animal world but not for the world of men. To use a current phrase, "that will be the day" when those four freedoms are made a reality for mankind. He would be a bold man indeed who would dare to say that we now have freedom from want or freedom from fear, even in Canada. I know very well that in the coal mining area of the Crowsnest pass we have not freedom from fear. The coal miners in that area have vivid recollections of those depression years which we speak of as "the hungry thirties", when the coal mines were operating only two days a week, and now they are beginning to fear very much the threat of the "hungry forties". And why, sir, should this be? We have coal in abundance, the mountains are full of it; and we have the miners, as brave and heroic a band as you will find anywhere, men who go down into the heart of the mountains day after day to dig the coal, always under a strain, always risking life and limb.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) spoke on Monday evening of the casualties among the workers in the coal mining industry. I know something of what he was talking about, because it has been my
The Address-Mr. Winters

sad duty to bury many of their broken and mutilated bodies.
What we need now in the Crowsnest mining area, and all of British Columbia as far as that is concerned, is an expansion of our markets. We have the coal, we have the miners, but we need an extension of markets even as far as Ontario. I hope some day to have the privilege of addressing a question to the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) asking for the figures as to the amount of coal which is imported into Canada, especially into the Ontario market from the Pennyslvania coal mining areas. I know that there is a point somewhere between our western coal fields and the eastern coal market beyond which it is not economically sound to bring our western coal because of the increased subsidy which would be required; yet I also know that it is not economically sound to continue importing coal from the United States and have our own coal miners idle, our coal mines not operating, and the miners existing on relief allowances, as they did during those depression years.
I have brought down with me to-day the copy of the brief presented by the Western Canada Bituminous Coal Operators' Association at the Calgary sitting of the coal commission on April 7 of this year. I have no thought of wearying the house by reading all of this brief-that would be imposing on good nature indeed; but I should like to read, if I may, one paragraph from the summation, which is as follows:
In dealing with the industry we have emphasized chiefly the production of our products. We need hardly point out that in its relation to the economy of western Canada, that is only one part of it.
Around our coal mines have grown up towns housing the mining population, and businesses catering to them. Railways and bus lines serve these communities, and the products of the mines goes out in revenue freight. Railway employees share in the created work, and when the product reaches its destination other hands take over and in turn find their livelihood in distribution, in turn enabling them to take their places as citizens in the communities of their choice.
Prom all go a portion of the receipts of their activities to support government, municipal and rural districts, and from the mining communities with which we are most intimately connected, none can say that it has not been freely and generously given.
It is the coal industry, but it is also an integral and vital part of the life of Canada.
Before taking my seat I should like to refer to one other subject, namely, the Prime Minister's plan to beautify the city of Ottawa as a national war memorial. With this plan I am in fullest agreement, provided that it does not in any way detract from an over-all

plan to give our Canadian people, no matter where they live, decent and desirable homes. It is all very well to make Ottawa a city that will compare with, or even surpass, other foreign capitals, but let us first of all make Canada a land worth fighting for, and a land to love. That will be a memorial indeed of which we can all be proud.


Mr. R. H. WINTERS (Queens-Lunenburg):: Mr. Speaker, you will note that I brought my notes along with me, so that, despite what you said to the contrary, I hope you will not be too harsh on me if I refer to them occasionally and perhaps somewhat closely.
So far I have had the pleasure of listening to a great many speeches in this house, both by new members and by seasoned veterans, and I must say that I find the quality uniformly high. One gets the impression as a new member that he is among orators. I gather that a great many of the speakers have had experience outside the house owing to the fact that they are lawyers or clergymen or have other backgrounds. I should like to say at the outset that I am an engineer, and I feel sure that other engineers in the house will agree with me when I say that engineers generally are not expected to rise to any great heights of oratory.


Mr. WEIR:: You are doing very well.


Robert Henry Winters: At this point, Mr. Speaker, if I am not too late, I should like to compliment you on your elevation to your high office. It is gratifying to note that recently you were selected in a prominent Montreal weekly paper as the "man of the week."
I would join with the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Gibson) in congratulating the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Bridges). I freely admit that we cannot compete with British Columbia in the size of our timber. Some of the finest production methods I have seen anywhere have been in the sawmills of Alberni; but I think when it comes to fish we can put up a fair race.


Mr. REID:: Just fair.


Robert Henry Winters: I said "a fair race." The biggest single source of income in Queens-Lunenburg is the fisheries. In my opinion, to have a Minister of Fisheries from the maritime provinces is clearly justifiable on the grounds that the maritiines produce more fish than any other single province in Canada. I think that statement is fair when size and density of population are considered.
As hon. members know, I have the honour to represent the constituency of Queens-Lunenburg where the people for generations

The Address-Mr. Winters
back have the reputation of being sincere, hard-working and industrious citizens. To the rest of Canada they are known as sea-faring folk. Indeed, many derive their living directly from the sea, and others depend indirectly on undertakings associated with the sea such as shipbuilding, ship repairing, fish curing, fish packing, and the like. Manufacturing, which was carried out only on a small scale before the rvar, flourished during the war, and this constituency made a worth-while contribution to Canada's over-all manufacturing war effort. In my opinion there is every reason to believe that, given the same facilities, this constituency could do just as good a job in manufacturing as the larger centres of Canada.
Farming, too, plays an important part, particularly in those regions remote from the sea-coast. I do not know whether it is generally known, but there are many fine apple orchards in the Queens-Lunenburg constituency, and although they have suffered the misfortune of having a poor crop this year, as has the rest of Nova Scotia, the orchards are normally very productive.
Hon. members who sat in this house in former years have heard all this before; they have heard of the wonders of this constituency from the former stalwart members, now senators, Duff and Kinley. My point in bringing this up at this stage is that since September 6 I have listened to a great flood of criticism of the government from opposition members, and I feel it is worth while to reiterate these points at this time because the constituency represents a fair cross-section of Canada. It is significant that a constituency representing a fair cross-section of Canada can still decide to place its faith in a Liberal government. Then, too, as a new member I find this criticism carried to the point where to me it is amazing. When opposition members rise in their places they invariably say that they want to be constructive. All of us, regardless of party, profess our good faith in working toward the common interest of Canada. There would appear to me to be no good reason to believe that all the good faith should be on one side of the house; yet, despite what the government does and proposes to do, there are those who rise and immediately criticize the government for falling down on the job; shirking its responsibility; doing too little or doing it too late.
I believe that everybody realizes the value of constructive criticism; but I sometimes wonder whether hon. members of the opposition, who criticize the government for not carrying out the programmes which are being pursued with all possible vigour, can convince
themselves that they are being constructive. In this connection I recall an incident which occurred in a large industrial plant where I once worked. The department head called a meeting of his staff to try to get to the bottom of some irregularity, and each member in turn blamed some other department for falling down. Finally the department head cut in and said, "Don't try to tell me that all the brains of this company are in my department, because I don't believe it." I think that statement should be applied in this house. I have found it helpful and I believe we might all learn something from it.
There is no doubt in my mind that this government is doing the best it can in the interests of Canada. I have seen no evidence in any of the departments that they are not willing to get on with the job. It has been recommended by hon. members in the opposition that what may be needed with respect to programmes such as housing and reconversion are "expediters." In this regard may I say that both as a civilian and as a member of the armed forces I have had very close contact with the Department of Munitions and Supply, particularly in those trying days when supply was tight and production was hard to get. Most of us feel that this department and "expediters" are synonymous. Officials of this department have, in my opinion, been chosen for their ability to crack the whip and get things done. Those of us who know these "expediters" and realize what they have done under trying conditions can hardly believe that the Minister of Reconstruction (Mr. Howe) is pulling his punches now or has taken off the pressure.
May I now say a word about the armed forces. We have all watched the navy, the army and the air force grow from a small nucleus to the large forces they are to-day. I think my own corps is a good example in that regard; that is, the Royal Canadian Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, commonly known as R.C.E.M.E. It was not in existence at all at the start of the war; the functions it now performs were carried out by engineers and other technicians in ordnance. But with the growth of technical equipment and the mechanization of the army it was found that some other way was necessary to keep this equipment in operation. The British army experimented and finally formed a separate corps, the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers, commonly known as R.E.M.E., which proved itself in North Africa; and based on this experience we formed our own
The Address-Mr. Winters

corps on May 15, 1944. It is a good example of the growth of all the forces, that this corps grew from nothing to the point where at one stage the first Canadian army had more than 20,000 R.C.E.M.E. personnel alone under its command. It is true that there were controversies on various points in connection with the armed forces, such as those best known to the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Pearkes), but the net result was that, in every case, the force did more than was required of it, and brought great credit to Canada.
These forces are now being repatriated, demobilized and rehabilitated. I compliment the ministers of national defence on the efficient way these troops have been returned to Canada. It bears repeating, too, that Canada's rehabilitation programme ranks with the best in the world. There is one point, however, on which it appears to me that more specific and definite action should be taken by the government; that is, in the declaration of policy regarding its permanent forces. Many really good men who are thoroughly trained on army equipment and in army methods, and who would undoubtedly remain in the army if that policy were clear, are now being lost to the army. The two-year interim establishment does not provide sufficient inducement to these men because the policy beyond the two-year limit is not clear. This is particularly true in technical corps when tradesmen are in great demand by industry. In these corps, too, the army has a heavy commitment of work; they are still held responsible for getting out the job. Yet because of the demand from industry for tradesmen and the absence of a clear-cut permanent force policy we cannot hope to hold them, and we are losing them at the present time. I suggest that all possible action be taken by the government at the earliest day to clarify this policy. I think, too, that in the field of development and research as applied to army equipment, a policy should be laid on as quickly as possible. The present state of scientific development can be attributed to a large extent to the armed forces, and we should not take any chances on losing ground at this time.
I will pass on now and say a few words on reconstruction. In this connection the problem in Queens-Lunenburg is far from easy. There was little manufacturing before the war; but, as I have stated, a good effort was put forward during the period of the war. In particular, several well equipped plants expanded and assumed responsibility for the repair of naval ships. They carried a

heavy load, and carried it well. A great contribution was made in the building of wooden ships of all types. Since the constituency of Queens-Lunenburg is well adapted to work of this kind and is not blessed with the allround facilities of the larger centres, any work along these lines will be welcomed in the post-war period. I do not think it is sufficiently well known that several plants in this constituency manufacture gasoline engines complete. These engines are designed locally for rugged use, and there are few complaints that they do not stand up under what may be conservatively termed adverse conditions.
I now come to fishing, which is the real core of our existence in Queens-Lunenburg. It is well known that Lunenburg in particular is the home of the fishing fleet on the east coast. I have no doubt this house has been reminded of this fact a good many times. Most of the industry and enterprise is allied to fishing, either directly or indirectly. In the past few years great strides have been made in modernizing fishing methods, improving ways of marketing fish in a more attractive way. Cold storage methods have, of course, helped a great deal in this regard. I would recommend to the Minister of Fisheries that a programme of research be pursued with a view to improving facilities and conditions for fishing and providing advice on marketing. It is suggested that a great field of development in the use of fish byproducts remains to be explored more fully. I would expressly urge that all possible action be taken along these lines, on the ground that it will play an important part in the reconversion programme, and will prove in future a good investment for Canada. In this regard I was interested to see this morning an editorial .in the Ottawa Citizen dealing with the Department of Fisheries and placing it perhaps more in the spotlight than it has been previously. In time I think this department will grow in the eyes of the public and assume its rightful position, higher than has been the case in the past.
Apart from the deep-sea fishing, for which my constituency is best known, there is a great potential source of revenue in the inland fisheries. The Medway river, for example, in Queens county, is one of the best salmon and grilse streams to be found anywhere. It attracts many tourists, most of them from' the United States; and I am told that the ratio of money coming into Canada because of this stream, in proportion to the pounds of fish taken out, is very high. This particular river also provides water power for a number of

The Address-Mr. Winters
small industries along its course. I think it oouLd well be termed a multipurpose river. I mention this river only as an example. The government is well aware of its potentialities.
I believe that a development programme is already on the books, but that during the war it has been held in abeyance. I would urge that now we should lose no time in exploiting this river to the full, and getting on with the development. The same may be said, of course, for many other equally productive streams in Nova Scotia.
Further, in connection with fishing it is urged that a complete and thorough survey be made of the coast-line, with a' view to providing adequate and satisfactory shelters, harbours and wharves and other docking facilities for fishermen operating small boats along the coast. These fishermen receive little or no publicity but contribute in great measure to the economy of Canada.
Complete dredging facilities to be used where and when required should also be provided; buoys, too, should be provided and located on a more generous basis. I feel, Mr. Speaker, that these matters are already in hand, and will be carried out when more facilities become available after the pressure of war time production is terminated.
I should like now to say a few words about communications-and by communications I mean what is known in the trade as communications of intelligence by electrical means. With the exception of1 the United States, Canada has the greatest number of telephones, per capita, of any country in the world. In my opinion the telephone companies have done an outstanding job in providing service under most adverse conditions. There have been practically no serious break-downs or even delays in having communications established and maintained.
Manufacturers of communications equipment have given an exceptionally fine account of themselves. They have met their commitments well, and have done so under adverse conditions of tight schedules and shortages of materials. In most instances, it must be remembered, that they have been dealing not with routine items, but rather with highly complicated technical devices, including radar. These points have complicated their problems to a considerable extent.
My point in discussing communications is that I feel that at this time we should consider extending the facilities to localities lying on the fringe of the present systems, and to the small islands lying off the coast which, at the present time, have no means of twoway communication, with the exception of their boats and, in some instances, horse-and-buggy communications.	[DOT]
Off the coast of my constituency there are many islands. I have in mind two in particular, those of La Have and Tancook, which are practically isolated during the winter months. The coast-line is rugged; the weather is severe, and there are days on end when they find themselves quite out of touch with the mainland and with other centres. The developments resulting from the war, and the simplicity achieved in electrical communications, whereby we have means for putting many messages on one pair of' wires, or of using one wireless or radio set to transmit many messages at the same time, bring these means of communications within easy reach of all. I would urge the government to take whatever steps are necessary and possible to make these facilities more adequately available.
In this I would also include communications to lighthouses, which are notoriously isolated. Then, too, I believe there is a field to be exploited more fully in connection with radio location devices for ships, and even in the application of radar for meteorological uses, and other uses which are now reasonably well known because of the publicity recently given to the development of radar.
In conclusion, I believe it is fair to say that the constituency of Queens-Lunenburg has demonstrated during the war, as did the rest of Nova Scotia, that it can rise to an emergency. We, too, are anxious to hold what we have gained. We are looking forward, beyond this period of transition, commonly called a reconstruction or reconversion period, and to the fullest extent we will cooperate with this government in its efforts to improve our common lot.


Mr. W. G. CASE (Grey North):: Mr. Speaker, until the amendment to the amendment was moved last night I had not intended taking part in the debate. Now that the opportunity is offered to me, however, I should like to join with those who have preceded me in the debate in paying my compliments to you, sir, upon your elevation to the highest office within the gift of the House of Commons. I feel that you have already given ample evidence of your willingness and ability to discharge the duties of your high office with dignity and dispatch, and to the satisfaction of all.
I have listened with much interest to hon. members who have spoken in the debate, and must say that I have been impressed. I
The Address-Mr. Case

believe all hon. members after hearing these special references to the various constituencies, their advantages andi their special features, will have a greater appreciation of this great Dominion of Canada.
I was interested, too, in the remarks of the hon. and gallant gentleman, the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Winters), who has just addressed the house. May I say to him that criticism is not in any sense of the word confined to His Majesty's Loyal Opposition. His observations indicate that there is reserved to members supporting the government the right to criticize the opposition -and I suppose that is as it should be. But as a loyal subject of this great British commonwealth I am always prepared to bow before and pay tribute to constituted authority.
I have never been a narrow partisan, and I am sure I will not be misunderstood if I say that under the present administration we are likely to enjoy reasonably good government -even though I might reserve the right to say that I believe we would have had better government had my own party succeeded in its appeal to the people of Canada. The fact remains that we shall have government, although we differ, largely in the matter of policy. Our basic approach to government varies but little from that of those who occupy the treasury benches.
This is not so with my C.C.F. friends. I do not want to appear to be too critical, because in the few years it has been my privilege to enjoy some degree of public activity I have learned to appreciate more and more those who have ideas. However, when one approaches the problem of a radical change in government I wonder sometimes if it is realized that of the twenty-eight members in this house, twepty-five of them do not enjoy the majority support of their constituents. They may believe that they have the system that will produce pie in the sky of utopia, but as yet they have failed to sell themselves in their various constituencies. I am not unmindful of the fact that there are other minority representatives; as a matter of fact we have no less than 149 minority representatives in the house. In the main, however, we are not advocating a radical change in the system of government.
It would appear that the C.C.F. would seek to have hon. members believe that they are friends of labour. I am not going to deny that, because why should they not be friends of labour ? I would remind them that the labour unions are the greatest evidence of freedom, that they exist only in democratic countries. That is something we should consider care-
fully. Where other forms of government have been adopted, governments of a dictatorial or totalitarian character, labour unions have soon become submerged. Under those governments labour lost much that they had gained.
I would say that business is the heart of our social life, and profits are the vital incentive to enterprise. I have listened to my friends refer to the profit system. If it was all a profit system we would all soon become very wealthy. However, there is another side to 'the picture which is seldom mentioned by those who are ready to cry down big business and soak the rich. I refer to the loss possibility. When I view this great country of ours-and it has been my privilege to see quite a lot of it-I cannot help feeling that we owe something to those who have been willing to take a chance and willing to pioneer. I want to be a twentieth century citizen; I want to be able to recognize the need for social security, because I realize that freedom is an empty farce if our people do not enjoy some sense of economic security. Yet I wonder if in our determination to fix things so that everyone will enjoy the good things of life we may not rob the people of their individuality and finally become a nation of leaners rather than a nation of leaders. As those who have studied ancient history would tell you, the pattern of 'the past may be repeated in the future and we may cause a deterioration of our greatest asset. I have heard reference made to our streams where fish are in abundance, to our forests, to our mineral wealth and to our great agricultural fields, but the greatest asset that any nation can possess is that nation's people.
We must indeed be on guard. We learn more as we travel into the future, because the future only is ours. Some one has said, "I expect to spend the rest of my life living in the future." That is very true. We always expect a great deal, but we do not always attain that which we expect. It is only when the forces that seek to hold you back are actively at work that the best you have comes forward. There is a story told of a farmer who took a hog to market. When the hog was weighed he turned to the purchaser and said, "Well, it does not weigh as much as I thought it would, but I did not think it would." I suppose that is exactly our own position in life. We do not get exactly what we expect, but I doubt if any of us expect that we will get as much as we do expect.
As far as our Social Credit friends are concerned, I feel that I can speak kindly of them, because they provided an opponent for me in the immediate past general election. Cur

The Address-Mr. Case
people were thus able to hear something of the theories they are putting forward. As I said before, I like to think of myself as one who admires people with ideas. I do not know why they call themselves the Social Credit party, because there has never been much sociability in any credit that I have ever enjoyed. They say that if you want a short winter just give your banker a three months' note in the fall. You will then find out how much sociability there is to it.
With reference to their amendment, which I think has considerable merit, I wish to say to my hon. friends that I do not think Canada, of all countries in the world, is in a position to give leadership in monetary reform. We produce a tremendous volume of goods in this country, and we must find a market for them in the markets of the world.


Mr. KUBL:: How about the home market?


Wilfrid Garfield Case: The home market could never
consume the amount of goods we produce, because we produce enough for 50,000,000 people. The productive capacity of this nation during the war absolutely staggers human imagination. If those with whom we seek to trade were t-o discover that we were using a monetary base which resulted in subsidizing our goods to the detriment of their standard of living, I am sure they would soon find means of applying dumping duties or an embargo to prevent us from finding our way to their market. The whole matter is greatly involved. I am glad that there are those who have the courage to come forward with these ideas. I like to think of myself as being a student of monetary reform-sometimes I think our system should be reformed-but I have yet to be convinced that Social Credit policies will fit in with our plan of world affairs.
I feel I would be remiss in my duty if I failed to pay tribute to those who have made it possible for us to enjoy the advantages of a free parliament. This, after all. is the greatest monument to freedom, to liberty and to civilization, that one has the right to be able to express oneself in a free parliament as the representative of people who have selected him by their ballots on election day. I happen to be a majority representative. There were many candidates running in opposition to the Progressive Conservative candidate in Grey North, and two of them failed to get their passports out; they lost their deposits.
I am not unmindful, Mr. Speaker, of the tremendous sacrifices that have been made by our service personnel for you and for me. It is difficult indeed to assess their great contribution; but we can, I believe, prove ourselves
worthy of that contribution, by seeking to bring about the Canada they felt they were fighting for, a country of golden opportunity, a country that will be a challenge to every red-blooded Canadian. I only hope that we shall capture something of the spirit of the pioneers and seek to roll back our far-flung frontiers and tap the treasure chest which remains hidden in the bowels of the earth in our great hinterland. Here we are, a population of a little over eleven millions, blessed with a great country, the prize indeed of the civilized world. I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that this country is worthy of us and of our best traditions, and I simply ask myself: Am I worthy of Canada?
There are some things that can be done for our service personnel. I believe-and I have mentioned this before in the house-that the reestablishment credit should be made available to a soldier's widow. Had he survived he would have received the reestablishment credit. Having lost her husband, the sacrifice of the widow is all the greater, and she needs this reestablishment credit. Many of our lads who have fallen were married shortly before going overseas. Others have left several little children who need a mother's care, and they need to live in better surroundings than they have at the present time. Therefore I would urge the government to give consideration to making the reestablishment credit available to the soldier's widow.
Another matter which might well engage the attention of the government is the granting of loans to soliders to help establish them in some small business. I know that a grant is made to help the soldier acquire farm land, and that is good in itself, but all soldiers are not going to be farmers. At the present time many soldiers are using up their gratuities to acquire a small business, and the government might well give consideration to the making of loans to help the soldier play some part in rehabilitating himself in some small business enterprise.
There is another matter which has come to my attention more recently. Transportation should be granted by the government to soldiers who desire to reestablish themselves in some particular part of Canada'. I am sure that the soldiers would appreciate this. They have rubbed shoulders with their fellows from various parts of Canada, and many may wish to reestablish themselves at some place other than the point of their enlistment. Every effort should be made to provide them and their families with transportation to the point where they feel they can best reestablish themselves.

The Address-Mr. Case
We have heard from speakers on the government side of the house and many others, and in the main the suggestions offered have been constructive. But in two instances that I have in mind, members apologized for sitting on the government side of the house. I do not know exactly why they did this, but it is perfectly all right with me. One of the most courageous statements made in this debate was made by the hon. member for St. Boniface (Mr. Viau), and I offer it as an answer to those who suggest that this party would interfere with unity in Canada. Nothing could be further from the truth, because we are all loyal Canadians desiring to bring about unity within this country.
The hon. member for St. Boniface said, as reported at page 99 of Hansard of September 11:
If the government will implement this programme and assure the house that one or two years of military training will be given, we shall have better citizens, and we shall not witness those incidents which took place in the House of Commons when some members from Quebec, those ultra-nationalists, were ready to betray their country when it was at war and the enemy almost at its shores, and insisted that we take no part whatsoever in a war which was then in progress. That attitude in the House of Commons will remain a blot on Uie history of our country. As a Canadian of French descent, who has lived in western Canada, I say that attitude was sorely felt and will never be forgotten.
I have never pleaded that I have been misquoted in anything I have said during an election, but I know that sometimes my words have been improperly transposed. No member of this house has a higher regard than I have for our brother Canadians in the province of Quebec, and I have never criticized them at all. All that I have criticized has been the leadership to which they were subjected, and not the French Canadians themselves. I think there is a challenge to this house and every loyal Canadian to seek to bring about that sense of national unity which we all profess to admire. No doubt an opportunity will present itself before very long to do something for national unity when we come to consider some major items having to do with our national life.
I said earlier that I had not intended to take part in this debate, and I believe I should not detain the members at great length. But I must say this. Outside this chamber, outside this building, there is in Canada a vast army of business men, industrialists, farmers, soldiers seeking to be rehabilitated, labour men, all of whom want to know what this government's taxation demands are going to be. They will find that out only when the budget is presented to this house. I hope that the budget will

have some regard for our position at the present moment. I believe that the country will become very critical, and in a sense properly so, if the bringing down of the budget is unnecessarily delayed. Further, the government will soon be seeking to sell a post-war victory loan of immense proportions, and they will be appealing to all classes of our people, to business men, industrialists, farmers, our service personnel and labour to subscribe to the loan.
We shall do well to consider the matter of taxation. Ability to reduce our taxes will place us in a more competitive position to take advantage of market conditions in the post-war period. In my humble opinion our problem has never been one of overproduction, it has been one of distribution. Statisticians to-day, by means of modern facilities of communication and transportation, can make an accurate estimate of world production and world1 consumption; and we know now that in the dark thirties-when our granaries were bulging with wheat and we were slaughtering our cattle and wasting -them on the prairies-in distant China, which is now one of our gallant allies, they were living on locusts, and in India they were starving; so that statisticians will tell us now that a falling off in world production of ten per cent means that millions of people will be in distress, and that with a falling off of twenty per cent, millions will starve. Therefore, with the tremendous productive capacity this nation enjoys, a tax structure which will encourage private enterprise to give of its best, with some feeling of confidence in its planning, will do more to see us through this reconversion period than anything else I can think of.
I also recommend that controls be removed as rapidly as possible to give the individual a chance. At the present time wartime housing have practically a monopoly on building material. In my home city, Owen Sound, they are going to erect fifty of their houses, and every one will be built on posts. The building by-laws in our city would not permit a private builder to build a house unless it was put on a concrete or stone foundation, but this is the concession we have had to make to wartime housing in order to have them go there and provide shelters which I am told will cost around $3,900 per house. Whether those figures are accurate or not I do not know, but I know that private enterprise in the building trades of this country could give wartime housing spades and aces if they had the leadership and an opportunity to do so, and we would have a better class of construction.

The Address-Mr. Campbell
So that I say that we have an opportunity now to prove our real worth. We are here charged with a definite responsibility. I wonder how many of us realize how critical this hour is in Canada's history. If we allow our people to become uneasy, to lose their confidence, wondering whether they are to be unemployed- and what the country has in store for them, the responsibility will be largely ours. We must so apply ourselves as to give the necessary leadership and encourage all our citizens to play their full part. After all, the history of Canada for the years which are before us will be largely written in this chamber. I realize that a country's history is largely a story of sacrifice, particularly on the field of battle in war time, but now the responsibility is in our hands. The history of the world is nothing more or less than the history of the world's peoples, those who have played their part in the onward march of civilization.
Reflect for a moment on the contribution which this young country has been privileged to make, and the wealth of leadership that has been provided by this greatest of all empires, the British empire. It is time we were a little more "chesty", a little more proud of the great position we occupy in world affairs; and when someone would dare to suggest a lessening of the ties which bind us to the motherland, I say, and I want it to be clearly understood, that if we ever lose our British connection we shall lose the greatest bargaining power we ever had. With the British empire everything is possible of attainment. It gives us strength; it gives us moral courage. I am proud to say that where the great old union jack flies, there you will find freedom. That is something which we possibly value lightly; yet it is the most precious possession we have.
During the war days we had in the city of Owen Sound a Polish legion. Those who know the history of Poland know that for 120 years prior to 1917 they were a subjugated race. As a matter of fact the flag which flew over the Polish camp at Niagara-on-the-Lake in 1917 was the first Polish flag to fly from the masthead in over 120 years. Following the great war they hastened to obtain their freedom; and it is to the credit of the Polish people that the Fuehrer, Herr Hitler, was never able to set up a puppet government in Poland.


Thomas Reid: It was the influx of Scots which helped.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: The Poles were prepared to die to the last man rather than part with their freedom. One thing I always appreciate
about the Scottish people is their faculty of making themselves heard and understood. I believe I can say that with the kindliest feeling toward my good friend, because of the little bit of Scotch that is in me, and of which I am very proud.
I was saying that freedom is something you must cherish and guard; if you ever lose it you may never recover it. Many great sacrifices have been made for it in the years which have passed. Do we, I wonder, fully appreciate all that it means to us.
I believe, Mr. Speaker, that the amendment moved by my honoured leader is indeed fair and has a claim to the support of all those who are not already pledged to support the party in power. Let me reread it so that you will know we have tried to make constructive suggestions while criticizing the government's neglect to give effect to matters contained in the amendment:
We respectfully submit to Your Excellency that Your Excellency's advisers have:
(a)	failed to demobilize our armed forces on a fair basis and, in particular, have failed to prevent serious disadvantage to overseas service personnel;-
I have ample evidence to support this, and I would be absolutely remiss in my duty and unfair to those who depend on me if I did not support that clause of the amendment.
(b)	failed to provide a speedy and effective plan of reconversion from war to peace, and failed in particular to join in partnership with labour and industry in devising a workable scheme to provide jobs, with fair wages, for discharged service personnel and war workers; -
There is concrete evidence that the government has not taken labour and industry into its confidence in planning for reconversion.
Paragraph (c) of the amendment is as follows:
(c)	failed to take adequate and timely action to meet the ever-mounting housing crisis.
I think I have substantiated that in my reference to wartime housing in my own community; therefore, Mr. Speaker, I propose to support the amendment, and I leave it to the good judgment of my hon. friends to my left to rally to our cause in this instance.


Mr. MAX CAMPBELL (The Battlefords) (Translation):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate you for having been selected to preside over the debates of this house. Your high qualities and your parliamentary experience give us the assurance that you will discharge your important duties with dignity and impartiality.
I also wish to congratulate the hon. members who respectively moved and seconded the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
The Address-Mr. Campbell

(Text)
I am not trying to impress the house with my limited knowledge of French, but there is one thing that I have been trying to do for many years, namely, to bring about national unity. I was born in the city of Montreal a great many years ago, too long a time to think about. I left there as a boy and have spent the last forty-one years in western Canada as a grain grower. I had a great many French-speaking friends while I was in eastern Canada as a boy, and I have also made a great number of French-speaking friends in the west. I have tried to say a few sentences at the beginning of my speech in the French language.
I thought possibly that I might find time to study the French language after I came here. As a boy I did have a smattering of French; but since I came here I found that if I start learning the French language I may possibly have to learn some other language. We had a demonstration of a peculiar sort of language last night, and I thought that if we could just have a Swede from Saskatchewan make a speech here now it would make me feel more at home in this house.
At my nominating convention and during the election campaign I emphasized this point of national unity. I said during that campaign, and I have said it for a long time, that one of the things that Canada needed before we could have national unity was Canadian citizenship. I am pleased to see that at last the government realizes that, and I hope that we are going to have our own Canadian citizenship in the very near future.
One other great need in the bringing about of unity in Canada is an economic policy that will give all of the people of Canada a square deal. I like to call myself a socialist. I may say that I did not arrive at the decision to believe in the socialist philosophy overnight, and I did not do so because I listened to soapbox orators. I possibly had pretty much the same sort of environment in my early days as most hon. members. I was brought up in a good home where we had modem conveniences and modern comforts. Then I went to a new country, a country where settlers from practically all over the world went to build up a home for themselves. I went through the struggles with those people; I have studied some of the reasons why those people had to suffer so many hardships and get so little for the things that they produced, and I came to the decision, after I studied the different monetary reforms that have come on up during the last years, that what we needed was a different sort of economic system, an economic

system that would put human values first. In this country we have a system that puts the dollar first; we have a dollar economy. I say, and we in the C.C.F. say, that that must be changed.
I am pleased with the fact that we have a large number of new and young members in the house. I think youth is the great hope that this country has. In the future I believe we have to look largely to our young people because they are the ones who will have to solve the problems that our older people were not able to solve.
I was interested in hearing the last speaker say that we must have foreign markets. We in the C.C.F. realize that we must have foreign markets, we realize that we produce great quantities of natural products that we cannot possibly consume in this country; but practically all of the politicians of the old parties have emphasized for the last fifteen or twenty years the necessity of foreign markets, and they have absolutely overlooked the tremendous potential market we have right here in Canada.
We went through a good many years of todng times in Canada, especially in the district from which I come. During all these years, from 1930 until the war started, we had all the things that the Canadian people needed to have a very high standard of living; we had natural products, natural resources, all kinds of man-power, machinery and practically everything that we needed to give the people of this country a high standard of living. I ask hon. gentlemen who have been in this House of Commons in the last twenty year* why have the Canadian people not had these things?


An hon. MEMBER:: Lack of purchasing power.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: It was mentioned here last night that the people of the old parties gave the C.C.F. the opportunity to ask "Whv were these things not done?" Of course we are asking that question. We realize that the whole motive for keeping our machinery going in the past and to-day is the profit motive. We contend that we must get away from the profit motive to where people's whole ideas are not based on the making of profit.


An hon. MEMBER:: What about the farmers?


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: I should like to say something about what was more or less a bombshell which was thrown into this house yesterday, when the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. MacKinnon) told us that the floor price of wheat was to be set at not less than $1 a bushel. For twenty-five years the farmers of the west have been trying to get an agricultural policy. Now we have a policy of a kind, but I can say that a floor price of $1 a bushel for wheat is not satisfactory to the western wheat growers. I am not going to rehash all the arguments which were presented so well yesterday by one of our members, but I wish to say that I do not believe the farmers of this country should be called upon to make a sacrifice in this connection. I believe that in every possible way we should help the nations needing this wheat; but if any sacrifice must be made, then all the people of Canada should be asked to make it. In the past the farmers have been sacrificed all the way through to build up an industrial Canada. We who live in the west know that only too well, because we have had to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in higher costs for all the things we have had to buy. This has been the result of tariff protection given to industries in eastern Canada.
Not only that, but if we are to make loans to these countries to buy the wheat, the sacrifice should not be made only by the grain growers of western Canada. The government would have been well advised had it placed a floor price on wheat of at least SI.25 per bushel.


Mr. GARDINER:: Under the legislation up to date, $1.25 is the only floor price that has been placed.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: I should like now to say a few words about taxes. Certainly I am in favour of a reduction in taxation, and I am prepared to make a suggestion as to where we can get money to make it possible to reduce taxes. I find that in the report of the Bank of Canada, dated February 10, 1945, the net profit from our operations in the central bank for the year 1944, after providing for contingencies and reserves, amounted to $20,312,659.68. There is one instance where the government through the operations of the central bank made a profit of that much money.
^Then, again, in the report of the Canadian National Railways security trust for the year ended December 31, 1944. the surplus earnings of the system are set out at page five as $23,026,924.35 less the abandonment of dock facilities at Seattle valued at $626,871. I do not think that figure should be taken into consideration.
I Mr. Campbell.]
Something was said a few days ago about the machinery of production. I believe people throughout the world realize to-day that the machine has displaced man-power. Millions of men have been replaced by machines, and this means that we are faced with the necessity of changing some of our ideas. I contend that the machinery of production should be owned by the people of Canada, for their benefit. Whoever controls that machinery also controls the economic life of the people. I contend that if the machine is to be started only when someone can make a profit, there will be many times in the coming years when it will be idle.
There is no reason why we cannot produce enormous amounts of wealth in Canada under a planned economy. If the people throughout the country do not plan the economy for this high production, it will not be attained. I understand that in 1932 Canada produced only a little over three billion dollars worth of wealth. But when during the war years we had a plan to win the war, to build ships, to build jeeps, tanks, trucks and the like, we went to work with a plan to win, with the result that our production jumped up to around nine billions of dollars.
To-day we hear a great deal about full employment and a high standard of living for our people If they are to have that standard of living we must produce great wealth. If it was possible for us to produce wealth to the value of nine billions of dollars in 1944, when 750,000 of our boys and girls were in the armed services, and when a large percentage of our people were engaged in war factories-and of course they were producing part of that wealth-I do not see why we should not set our sights for at least nine billions for the next year, and increase our production during coming years to the point where we can supply the needs of all our people. If we plan our economy with that in view we must see to it that those wrho produce the wealth will receive enough purchasing power to buy it back.
That cannot be done under a profit-system, because under that system one group of people get too much purchasing power, and this means that there will be a large group who will not have sufficient purchasing power. If we are to have a condition where wages are knocked down-and it looks as if that is taking place to-day

and if we are to look to foreign markets to get rid of surpluses, I am afraid that Canada is in for a lot of trouble. Not only will this country be looking for foreign markets, but every country in the world producing surpluses will be looking for them. Those countries which to-day are

The Address-Mr. Campbell
not producing surpluses will no doubt produce them in the near future. Under those circumstances what are we to do?


An hon. MEMBER:: War.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: Of course. The tremendous competition for world markets in the last forty years has to a great extent resulted in the last two wars. More than anything else, those wars have been wars to get markets. I do not see why we cannot get down to a policy of production for use. All people cannot make a profit. If that were possible I would favour the profit system. But, as I said before, if someone makes a profit, someone else must make a loss; that is an absolute fact. I believe that more than anything else the people of Canada are concerned first with security and, second, with a high standard of living. Can we give those two essentials to them under a private enterprise system?


An hon. MEMBER:: Yes.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: If we can, why have we lot done so?


George Alexander Cruickshank: We have.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: Few people in Canada rave a high standard of living.
During this debate mention has been made if the grain exchange. Let me say that one can go to the city of Winnipeg and, if he will go to a certain district, where the members of the grain exchange live, he will find the finest houses in Canada. They have done well through the grain exchange, and have attained a very high standard of living. One can go to the city of Toronto and find in that city thousands of beautiful homes. They, too, have a high standard of living. One can go into other places where there are good homes and where people have high standards of living. But one can also go into sections of this city, or go on to many farms throughout the country and find people living in abject poverty, and they will have to continue to live under those conditions as long as we have the so-called private enterprise system.
I like enterprise and I like initiative. I like private enterprise as long as it is private enterprise, but the people of Canada will not be fooled much longer by being told that we have private enterprise. We have not private enterprise except in a few cases. There is one thing I have been watching for in this house but as yet I have not seen it. Before very long, possibly during this debate, I hope to hear something said about the abuses of capitalism and the abuses of the free enterprise system. No one in this house, outside this group and the little group to my left-
I do not agree with them but they have ideas-has any idea as to what is to be done about the abuses of capitalism or the abuses of the private enterprise system. No one has any idea as to how private enterprise is to be made to work. I hope that before this debate is over or before I have finished serving my constituents in this parliament somebody will rise in his place and tell me and this group just how this can be done.
Are we to continue under this so-called private enterprise system? I call it "so-called" because it is not a private enterprise system. Our industries in Canada have largely reached the point where they are controlled by a small group of people. We have not private enterprise in Canada; what we have is monopoly enterprise. This small group of people who are directors in banks, insurance companies and industries of all kinds control the whole economic life of this country. When people think parliament is running this country they are just fooling themselves. I have no illusions as to that.
We in the C.C.F. talk about a planned economy. We say that we must plan our economy to produce such wealth as it is possible to produce and distribute that wealth to the people in the form of wages and costs of all kinds. We have had a planned economy in this country; the small group I have mentioned have planned our economy for their own benefit and the people of the country have suffered as a result. If we allow this small group of people to control this country we are condemning our youth as well as the present generation to the same kind of conditions that existed during the thirties.
I am going to vote against the subamendment and I am going to vote against the amendment. Why? Each of these amendments simply says that the government have failed here or failed there or somewhere else. Perhaps they have. I feel quite sure that they will fail, and they will fail because they will not do the things that must be done to make a success of the things that they want to do.
I wish to say something now in their favour. We have heard a good deal of criticism in connection with bringing home the boys from overseas. I do not claim to know enough about how to get these boys back and give them a fair deal to say whether the government have failed or not. I do not want to brag about my boys, but three of them are in the active forces-two in the air force and one in the army-and one came home from
Provincial Legislation

overseas a few days ago. He told me that the treatment he got all the way back was wonderful and I want to thank the government for what they have done. I think they are entitled to that. The boys coming back are well satisfied with the treatment they are getting. They have been treated like kings on board the vessels and the trains have been met all along the way by the different service clubs. These boys were given a royal welcome. That may have nothing to do with the government, but the government had to see that there were ships and that the boys were looked after on the ships and I wish to give them credit for that.
On motion of Mr. Beaudry the debate was adjourned.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie the house adjourned at 5.40 p.m.
Monday, September 24, 1945.