REFERENCE BY MR. SPEAKER TO DISPLAYING OF EXHIBITS DURING SPEECHES

[Stage Direction]
On the order for motions:
Mr. SPEAKER:: I desire to draw the
attention of the house to a new practice which, in my opinion, should not become general in the debates of this house. I refer to members' displaying of exhibits when making speeches. On Monday last, an hon. member came in with two baskets of peaches and showed them to the house in order to make 47696-19
a point in the discussion. Yesterday, another hon. member unfolded a large flag and spread it wide over one of the gangways. I think the house will agree that such a practice is far from adding to the dignity and decorum of the House of Commons of Canada. The proper places for the production of exhibits are the standing and special committees where they may be required as evidence in certain investigations. If perchance the display of merchandise on the floor of the house should become part of our procedure, I am very much afraid it would create an atmosphere hardly desirable for a parliamentary institution, and I trust the house will bear with me when I say that hon. members should refrain from such a practice in the future.



MAXIMUM PRICE FOR EXPORT-ESTABLISHMENT OF LONG TERM FLOOR PRICE

[Stage Direction]
On the order for motions:
Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a brief statement on wheat prices.
The second world war has concluded with Canadian wheat producers in a particularly strong marketing position. Not only has the general disruption and bad weather reduced production in the war areas, but the Australian and North African crop failures and a small crop in Argentina have left Canada and the United States as the only countries at present having substantial export surpluses of wheat. This has coincided with the release of pent-up demands in the liberated areas.
In these extraordinary circumstances, Canadian wheat might well command for a limited period very much higher prices in the world market. The importing countries, nearly all of them our allies in the war, are buying out of necessity and, to a large extent, on credits. They would be compelled to meet through larger credits or through sacrifice of other food and rehabilitation supplies whatever higher price is demanded for Canadian wheat.
It is in the interest of Canada and of Canadian wheat growers that the importing countries should continue to obtain Canadian wheat at prices not in excess of those prevailing at the end of hostilities. Accordingly the government, by order in council, has instructed the Canadian wheat board to offer wheat for sale for export overseas at prices not higher than the current export price of $155 per bushel, basis No. 1 northern, in store Fort William/Port Arthur or Vancouver.
In asking Canadian producers to forgo such benefits as might be realized in the short run through higher export prices, the government

Wheat



*COMMONS

[Stage Direction]
recognizes the paramount need for relative stability of income to wheat producers. Toward this end, the government undertakes that in the five-year period ending July 31, 1950, producers will receive not less than $1 per bushel, basis No. 1 northern, in store Fort Wil-liam/Port Arthur or Vancouver on the authorized deliveries for each crop year. For the balance of the 1945-1946 crop year, at least, the Canadian wheat board initial advance will continue at $1.25, where it was set two years ago. By providing a long-term floor price of not less than $1.00 the government will protect producers against the consequences of any sharp reversal in the world wheat position during the next five-year period.
The government, in adopting this policy of a maximum price for overseas shipments for the present and a floor price for five years, is asking the producers, in their own interests, to forgo exceptional short-run advantages in favour of a long-run stability of income. In arriving at its decision on this policy, the government 'had the following fundamental considerations in mind:
Any further increase in wheat prices now would aggravate the problems of economic and political readjustment of the liberated areas to Canada's detriment in future trade with those areas. There is a moral obligation not to take advantage of our recent allies in their time of compelling need.
Higher wheat prices would encourage the importing countries in a hurried return to wheat production and pre-war wheat policies very directly to the detriment of the wheat exporting countries, particularly Canada. Moreover, production in a number of exporting countries would be unduly encouraged.
I wish to lay on the table copies of order in council P.C. 6122.
Mr. WRIGHT:: May I ask a question with regard to the statement the minister has read? Does it imply that the wheat board will continue to operate until 1950?


James Angus MacKinnon: It does not refer to that. The hon. member can deduce what he wishes from the statement, but there is no reference to the continuation or non-continuation of the wheat board. I anticipate and the government anticipates that the wheat board will continue indefinitely.


Mr. COLD WELL:: In view of the importance of this statement, with the material it contains, to the producers of western Canada particularly, will the government set aside a day when the matter might be discussed by members who represent the wheat growing 
areas of the country? The statement is so important that it should not be tabled without discussion.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Do I gather that deliveries of wheat in the years between now and 1950 are to be governed by a quota, as was the case during the war?


James Angus MacKinnon: I made no reference to that. If the hon. member reads the statement he will see that the point is covered.


Mr. SENN:: Does the statement apply to winter wheat from the eastern provinces as well as the western?


James Angus MacKinnon: The statement refers only to western wheat, wheat grown in the western provinces. Ontario wheat production is dealt with on another basis.


John Horne Blackmore: I gathered from the minister's statement that a quota was to be imposed on the amount of grain which could be delivered. Of what value would it be to the farmer to have a guaranteed price if the quota which he can sell is too small to enable him to live?


James Horace King: I must point out to the hon. member that the matter is not debatable.


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: The leader of the opposition asked if it would be possible-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I meant the leader of the C.C.F. party, who is also a part of the opposition. He asked whether the government would set apart a day to discuss the matter of wheat just referred to. First of all let me say, as to giving information immediately to the house, I hope the house will accept that as a mark of respect, if I may put it in that way, rather than as something to be criticized. The desire of the government was to have the house given information on this important matter at the earliest possible moment. As to setting apart a day, I think we should conclude the debate on the address before we consider fixing any time for other matters. Once the debate on the address is concluded there will be occasions, as for example when the house is moved into committee of supply, on which this matter could be brought up for discussion in a regular way. I think that would be preferable to fixing a special day at present.


Thomas Miller Bell: We will bear that in mind. May I ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce whether the government is also imposing the wartime ceiling on exporters of textiles, lumber and all other goods based

Labour Conditions
on our primary products? I ask this question because of the information I have in regard to textiles.


James Angus MacKinnon: I would appreciate
it if my hon. friend would put his question on the order paper; I do not think I can answer it offhand.


Mr. COLDWELL:: Very well.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. F. BROWN (Essext West):: Will the Minister of Labour please indicate what the present situation is in the Windsor area with respect to the arrangements made for meetings of boards of conciliation established as a result of applications by the UA.W-CJ.O. under the wartime labour relations regulations, P.C. 1003, and when the reports of such boards may be expected?


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: A number of boards have been constituted in the Windsor area on application of the United Automobile Workers of the C.I.O.
The boards of conciliation dealing with the disputes affecting Canadian Automotive Trim Limited! and Bendix Eclipse of Canada Limited have filed their reports and copies were transmitted to the parties yesterday.
The board dealing with the dispute affecting the Windsor Tool and Die Limited has concluded its sittings and its report is expected at the end of this week.
Two boards under the chairmanship of Judge Ian M. Macdonell of Toronto dealing with disputes affecting Dominion Forge and Stamping Company and Walker Metal Products Limited, and one board under the chairmanship of Judge E. Lowering of Toronto, namely, Truscon Steel Corporation of Canada Limited, have been fully constituted and I am advised that hearings have been arranged for next week.
Another board of conciliation has been established in the dispute affecting Chrysler Corporation of Canada Limited, but it has not yet been fully constituted, the company having nominated its representative only on Monday of this week. The nominees of the union and the company are now conferring with respect to the selection of a chairman.
I should like to point out to the house that there are certain time limits imposed by the regulations for the nomination of board members by employers and employees, for the selection of a chairman by both, and within 47696-19J
which the boards are required to report to the minister. This is made in view of the fact that sometimes the employers and sometimes the employees make certain observations with reference to delays in the constitution, the sittings and the findings of boards of conciliation. Once a board has been fully constituted the time set for hearings is a matter for decision by the board itself, that is, the representatives of employers and employees and the chairman of the board.



ADVERTISEMENTS SEEKING CANADIAN WORKERS AS POTATO PICKERS IN MAINE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. DONALD M. FLEMING (Eglinton): May I direct this question to the Minister of Labour? Is the minister aware that there have appeared in the press of Montreal and other eastern cities in recent days advertisements purporting to be inserted by the national employment service, unemployment insurance commission, for workers to offer their services as potato pickers in the state of Maine, at a time when there is a shortage of labour in the timber-producing areas of Ontario, where operators are not permitted to advertise for workers?
James Horace King: I must remind the hon.
member that the question shoud be short and to the point.


Mr. BLACK:: Mr. Speaker, may I-


Mr. FLEMING:: May I have the minister's answer? It is an important matter.


Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, I say this in a
kindly way; after listening to some of the speeches from the opposition in the last couple of weeks-


Mr. ROWE:: You are not making a speech.


Humphrey Mitchell: Just a moment. After
listening to some of the speeches delivered by hon. members of the opposition in the last two weeks I am glad to know that in some parts of 'Canada at least there is a shortage of labour. I thought there was a terrific unemployment situation all across the country.
Now, dealing with my hon. friend's question, for many years past, perhaps longer than many of us have been alive, there has been a natural movement of labour in certain parts of this country-I speak now of the Atlantic and the Pacific-across the border during harvesting time. In western Canada there is that movement from the Dakotas and Utah to assist in harvesting there. Last year, and as a matter of fact every year since the war broke out, we have had a movement of labour from
Khaki University

certain localities in Quebec and New Brunswick into the states of Maine and New Hampshire, and I hope it will always be that way. Even during war years we were able to man the lumber camps in this country, and I anticipate we shall be able to do the same thing next winter.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is it a fact that Ontario operators engaged in the production of timber and pulp are not permitted under existing regulations to advertise or canvass for men in the province of Quebec?


James Horace King: Order. The hon. gentleman should put his question on the order paper.


Donald Methuen Fleming: With great respect, I am told that this is a matter of very great urgency in the timber producing areas of Ontario.


James Horace King: From what I have heard there is no great urgency about the matter, and the question should be placed on the order paper.



CANADIAN NAVY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:	.
Mr. G. K. FRASER (Peterborough West):: Yesterday I asked a question of the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services with regard to the Royal Canadian Navy and the minister said he would make inquiries and answer the question to-day.


Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of National Defence for Naval Services):: I
apologize to my bon. friend; I overlooked making the inquiries. I shall make them this afternoon and give him an answer to-morrow.



KHAKI UNIVERSITY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. H. A. BRUCE (Parkdale):: May I ask a question of the Minister of National Defence? Has the defence department established a khaki university of Canada in the United Kingdom? If so, will the minister give full particulars as to the site, staff, cost and function?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall be glad to give the information, Mr. Speaker. Of course I cannot do it to-day. Whether I should do it in answer to a question on the orders of the

day, or whether it should be put on the order paper or be asked on the estimates, is a matter of opinion.


James Horace King: I should like to remind the hon. member that questions on the orders of the day should be short and to the point, and should deal with matters of urgency. If there is no urgency they should be placed on the order paper.
Mr-. BRUCE: I ask the minister to take it as notice of my question.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.



MERCHANT SEAMEN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON B. ISNOR (Halifax): I have received a large number of communications, telegrams and letters with respect to the war risk bonus being paid to seamen. I desire to ask the Minister of Labour the following question: Is it true that the war risk bonus paid to seamen is to be discontinued; and specifically has the Park Steamship company applied to the national war labour board for a wage reduction which would represent the elimination of the bonus?
Humphrey Mitchell: There are two questions involved there. I shall answer the last question first. The answer to my knowledge is "No". I should like to tell the hon. member and the house that no steps are being taken at the moment for the elimination of war risk bonus.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Peel):: I
should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister in his capacity as Secretary of State for External Affairs. In the press of this week there have appeared articles relating to the preparatory work being done by the interim commission for the setting up of the united nations organization. In these reports it is stated that two sites are being considered for the site of the united nations organization and the international peace centre. The two sites mentioned are Geneva and San Francisco. Would the Prime Minister be good enough to inform the house whether or not an invitation has been extended by the dominion government to the organization looking towards the choice of Canada as an international peace centre? It would seem to me, and I am quite sure to the Prime Minister

Live Stock
as well, that there are powerful and compelling reasons which could be advanced by way of argument to have the centre in Canada.


Right Hon.  W. L. MACKENZIE ICING@Secretary of State for External Affairs: May I say to my hon. friend that no formal invitation has been extended to the interim commission with respect to the matter to which he has just referred; but I think it is well understood by all the nations that are members of the united nations organization that if the interim committee should wish to have the whole or any part of the organization located in Canada, this country would regard a request of the kind as complimentary, and one which would be cordially welcomed and sympathetically reviewed. I understand that the interim commission is not considering any one locality but is considering the advantages of different countries. I have not the least doubt in the world that Canada is among the number.



MEAT RATIONING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Percy Chapman Black: I should like to ask the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Agriculture if they are in a position to make a statement as to what progress is being made in the conference on meat rationing, which I understand is proceeding at the moment. I have communications from my constituency and from the maritime provinces pointing out that it is difficult, indeed almost impossible, for them to carry on supplying meat and marketing meat products and at the same time adhere to the regulations. They are greatly interested in knowing whether the regulations are to be cancelled, modified or confirmed. I have been informed that as the regulations stand at the present time they will not continue marketing after the 24th of this month.


James Horace King: Order. I must remind the hon. member that questions should be short and direct, without any statement being added to them. Moreover, I should like to say that when there is no urgency they should be placed on the order paper.


Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: I cannot report on the outcome of the conference because it is not yet over.


Percy Chapman Black: The conference is in progress, however?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes.



LIVE STOCK


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. J. McGUAIG (Maple Creek):: In
view of the very critical drought conditions, the second worst in thirty-five years, in southwest Saskatchewan and south-east Alberta, would the Minister of Agriculture inform the house what steps the federal government is prepared to take to relieve the congestion in shipping and packing house facilities in those areas?


Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) :: I thank the hon. member for having sent me a copy of his question. As far as I know there has not developed, up to the moment, any serious problem in connection with shipping or the utilization of packing house facilities in the drought area of western Canada, but a very serious condition does exist there which may necessitate shipping the live stock from that area because of lack of feed. I have been in communication with the provincial governments, and more particularly with the government of Saskatchewan, for the last six weeks, since I made a trip through the area and discussed the matter with the provincial minister of agriculture. Since that time arrangements have been made for the distribution of feed, in regard to which I may have something further to say to-morrow, and both governments also have urged all those in that area who have live stock ready for marketing to get it out at an early day. In other words we have been urging farmers who have cattle on the grass almost ready for marketing to get those cattle out as soon as they are ready, and that may have something to do with the fact that up to the present time killings in the plants are running through at record rates as far as cattle are concerned. That is being done in order that there may not be an undue marketing of cattle next month, particularly toward the end of the month. I may add that this does not concern something we are going to do; we have already started to do it. We have had the cooperation of the provincial authorities in the matter, as they have had ours.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Alexander Bruce: Will the Minister of Finance make a statement at an early day as to the steps his department has taken to meet the acute shortage of housing
The Address-Mr. Belzile

throughout Canada and, arising out of that question, would the minister place on the table of the house order in council P.C. 5794 of August 30, 1945, dealing with amendments to the National Housing Act?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I table now the order in council referred to. As to the first part of the question, amendments will be proposed to the National Housing Act, at which time I will make a statement.



GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, September 18, consideration of the motion of Mr. W. M. Benidickson 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. Coldwell.
Mr. GLEASON BELZILE (Rimouski):: Mr. Speaker, since your election as first commoner you have received many congratulations, all appropriately expressed and all well deserved. You have even been complimented upon your wisdom in your choice of ancestors. I shall be very brief, because I do not want to repeat any of the things which have already been said much better than I could say them.
(Translation):	However, Mr. Speaker, I
wish to call forth your kind rcollections. I go back some twenty-five years, when I had the pleasure of being your fellow-student in the same institutions, first at the College Ste-Marie, and afterwards at the Universite de Montreal, and I take the liberty of telling you that, even then, your kind-heartedness and your intelligence, your industriousness and your thirst for knowledge were foreboding the high success which life held in reserve for you. In fact, you were among the few people about whom a poet said:
Aux ames bien nees, la valeur n'attend pas le nombre des annees.
Let me assure you that I am glad indeed to delve into that past and to recall those memories to you, because I am sure you will thus be prompted to deal kindly with your former comrade.
(Text): I also compliment the mover and the seconder of the address. The speeches they delivered in this house disclosed their sense of duty toward their fellow members in the armed services, and they may rest assured that in due time their representations will receive my most cordial support. All who participated in our victory are entitled to the

gratitude of their country. They deserve that peace be kind and consoling to them. They are entitled to a chance to forget all the horrors and atrocities they have suffered.
I also compliment the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) upon his election to this house. In the interests of my constituency I sincerely hope that his service in that capacity may be equal to or even longer than the service of the Prime Minister, which is something over twenty-five years.
(Translation): I am proud, Mr. Speaker, to act in this house as spokesman for the people of the constituency of Rimouski. However, that implies a heavy responsibility because my constituents expect me to represent them with dignity and courage; I dare hope that I shall deserve the confidence they placed in me. Unassuming and industrious, the population of Rimouski includes farmers, workmen and settlers who follow the traditions left by the pioneers of this country. During the last twenty-five years, twelve new parishes have been established in my constituency and they are to-day among our most populous and prosperous communities. There are other constituencies which cover a larger area, but there are few which are more outstanding in the field of cooperation and education.
(Text): In the cooperative field, the county of Rimouski compares most favourably with any other county either in Quebec or in Canada, except possibly the counties of Bonaventure and Gaspe. Every parish has its own agricultural cooperative and its credit union or caisse populaire, which to a great extent have contributed to its development and progress. We also have consumers cooperatives which rendered great service during the war.
Last year two professors of the university of Wisconsin came to Rimouski to study, on the spot, the working of these organizations. They were dumbfounded by what was revealed to them. They saw a consumers' cooperative founded five years ago with an initial membership of 80 and a capital of S800-$10 per member-doing business at the rate of $200,000 a year, in 1944, and in the midst of the labouring classes.
Since coming to the house I have heard practically every hon. member who has spoken deal with the housing problem in his constituency. I have read in the newspapers that this is an acute problem throughout Canada. I have pleasure in informing the house, however, that there is no housing problem in the town of Rimouski. Our credit union or caisse populaire saw to that. Since 1939 they have made 575 loans, ranging from $500 to $8,000 for the repair and building of houses.

The Address-Mr. Belzile
The professors from the university of Wisconsin, to whom I referred a moment ago, saw a whole suburb of Rimouski, comprising gome 3,000 people, living in houses built with those loans. This is how the caisse populaire system works. It pays for all the material and skilled labour, the borrower building the house with his own hands and with the assistance of his friends and neighbours whom, in turn, he helps. The result is that a loan of $2,500 builds a house which would be valued at $4,000. So that now the parish of St. Robert Bellarmin, thanks to the caisse populaire, forms a distinct community in the town of Rimouski. It has its own church, its own school and, of course, its own caisse populaire. It needs now only a post office, and I am now asking the Postmaster General (Mr. Bertrand) to grant them this much needed service.
(Translation): I have just mentioned the educational field. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, Rimouski's teaching institutions and schools are among the finest and most extensive in French Canada. The inhabitants of Rimouski riding are fully aware of the advantages derived from education as shown by their steady contribution to the building and maintenance of institutions devoted to spreading knowledge. The secondary schools of the town of Rimouski can hold their own with those of wealthier and larger cities. As a matter of fact, Rimouski, as far as statistics go, comes immediately after Montreal and Quebec for the facilities its puts at the disposal of young students. There you will find every type of school required by studious young people. I refer particularly to the Rimouski Seminary which ought to obtain the title it so well deserves, that of rural university.
Indeed, the Rimouski Seminary includes a school of theology, a classical college, a school of agriculture, a school of commerce, a naval school and also an arts and crafts school. This great French-Canadian institution receives each year over twelve hundred boarding pupils. I wish to emphasize particularly the contribution of our arts and crafts school and of our naval school to the war effort of Canada. Thousands of young men have received there technical training which enabled them to become specialists in the various branches of the army and the navy.
Here, may I express the wish that those who have lived among our people and who have learned to know them will make known throughout Canada the kindliness which has been shown them in our section of the country. They will thus contribute to strengthen
the ties which eventually must unite the exponents of our two cultures; part of their education will have been acquired among us, and we hope that their remembrance will be lasting and friendly.
I wish to pay a tribute to the teachers, both ecclesiastic and lay, who, for a mere pittance, have dedicated their lives to our young people, and I assure them of my utmost respect and gratitude.
Sitting for the first time in this house, I am now going through the ordeal which marks the initiation of a new member. I have conscientiously done everything prescribed. With the greatest care and attention I have followed and admired the impressive ceremonies which have taken place on the opening of this parliament, and I was quite moved when I heard His Excellency, the Governor General of Canada read the speech from the throne in the language of my forefathers. A deep feeling of piety and gratitude arose within my soul toward all those who, after the conquest, won for us the political freedom we now enjoy; I refer to Viger, Morin, Pap-ineau, Lafontaine, Cartier, and all those great patriots who laboured without respite so that the vanquished of 1760 might become the equals of their conquerors. May God forbid that I should forget the example of their devotion to their compatriots and their selfdenial in the fulfilment of their duty.
I listened with much attention to the speeches delivered on the address. Gradually, the emotion which at first gripped my heart was transformed into a feeling of surprise. Some speeches delivered from the other side of this house greatly amazed me. I cannot deal with all of them, but I shall mention a few.
An hon. member of the Progressive Conservative party has expressed his astonishment at the little support granted^ to his party in the province of Quebec. Yet, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the election of two members, one French speaking, the other English speaking, sets a record which should satisfy the hon. member. Nothing in the Progressive Conservative platform could appeal to the legitimate aspirations of the electorate in my riding to whom overbidding and exaggeration are distasteful. While they feel the deepest respect for His Majesty the King and the Crown, and are honestly proud to be part of the British Commonwealth of Nations, they object to obsolete imperialism and colonialism. They are content that Canada should be as free as the United Kingdom to direct its own policy so as to further its own interests; they ask but to be masters in their own
The Address-Mr. Belzile

home, and they well realize that the Westminster statute was the work of a Liberal government. Others, while expressing themselves satisfied to a certain extent with Canada's war effort, have severely criticized the Liberal administration of the past five years. I have a habit of looking back, and I recall that Canada was at various times under Conservative leadership; I also find that all crises and depressions occurred under Conservative administration. In 1890, when the rural parishes of Rimouski constituency were emptying into the American melting pot, were not the Conservatives in power? What had their government done to prevent that unfortunate exodus which deprived the country of millions of citizens? How can it be explained that industries which rise and expand in New England were not launched in our country? Yet, in those days, high tariff was the recognized panacea. At the time of the 1911 crisis, was Canada not governed by Mr. Borden? And who but the Conservatives were in power through the inflation and deflation periods of the first world war? Finally, how did the Bennett regime solve the unemployment crisis which sapped our country's fundamental strength? Yet, in those days, Mr. Bennett commanded a sufficient majority to implement his programme providing for continued prosperity and employment while remaining within the limits of the Constitution. How can it be explained that Conservative principles of government, legislation and control of the country did not prevent these disasters? To my mind, it is ill-advised to demand that such principles be applied to the present day administration of the country.
It cannot be claimed, Mr. Speaker,'that these unfortunate happenings were entirely coincidental and solely dependent on world-wide causes. A brief glance backwards shows that Canada's periods of greatness occurred under Liberal administration. Around 1900, we had the period which historians now call "the Laurier prosperity." It is sufficient to recall the revival which took place during the first term of the present prime minister, and it is sufficient to think of the record of the present administration, of the great strides made by this country, of its magnificent war effort and of the achievement of a truly Canadian spirit. And shortly we shall have a symbol which is necessary now that our country has attained the rank of a great international power.
It is unnecessary to dwell at greater length on this matter as everyone in this house

knows the position occupied by Canada in the international sphere; the greatest powers in the world have recognized the greatness of our country and have sent ambassadors to our capital. And Canada has her own ambassadors; she has sent trade commissioners to strategic places throughout the world and the international agreements which she has concluded with various countries have opened numerous outlets for the products of our industry and our agriculture. It is true to say that it is due to the policies of the Liberal party if Canada has, to quote the words of Andre Siegfried, risen to the rank of an international power. Those are the results of the application of the principles of Canadian liberalism.
And, Mr. Speaker, my amazement gives way to apprehension when I consider the programme of the C.C.F. party.
Basing their theories upon mere assumptions or resentment, the exponents of socialism attack the very foundations of social order. They consider the whole of civilization as being based solely upon economic factors, and establish on this shaky foundation the relations of individuals among themselves and with society. They subordinate man, composed of flesh and mind, to matter and place him- under the absolute control of an allpowerful state; there lies their grave mistake. It must not be overlooked that there is in the socialist movement some idealism' which might attract the mass of workers. Indeed some of its claims are partly justified and this may account for some of its successes at election time. But the social problem has other angles which make their whole programme absolutely unacceptable. Socialism stems from a false interpretation of values and it advocates a utopian organization of labour. The experiment already carried out in other parts of the world with a state which both produces and distributes shows how dreadful the application of this system would be in our country. Indeed, those who have tried to apply it fully are now abandoning their original uncompromising attitude and agree to return to the respect of individual rights, all of which shows the mischievous nature of this doctrine. The socialistic solution can only bring about ruin and general poverty; it will of necessity hold back production because the labourer who is deprived of the stimulus of personal interest will not have the courage to work. It still remains true that personal interest and the desire to better one's condition constitute the greatest stimulus to work and that . any attempt to abolish it is simply an idle fancy.

The Address-Mr. Belzile
This is so true that this house heard the remark of an hon. member when he humorously congratulated his brood sow for the freedom from work she enjoyed. Such irony when carried out to the extreme, amply demonstrates the utopian character of this theory. Work remains and will remain the lot of humanity.
Lastly, the socialistic solution is unjust because it encroaches upon the natural right of property which is anterior to society and inalienably belongs to the individual and the family. The state makes use of undue authority when it endeavours to restrict the exercise of this right, when not compelled1 to do so in the interest of the people.
It is absolutely certain that no government in Canada could put into practical application the socialistic principles. Such an experience would necessarily reduce our people to slavery and result in the loss of their economic freedom. All the pioneers and founders of this country came over here for the sake of freedom and with the will to enjoy it completely, and their descendants, whose needs are the same, would have nothing left but freedom of thought limited by the obligation of holding their tongue. The ideal situation is not that man should be wolf, to man, according to the English philosopher Hobbes, but should strive rather by the actual practice of justice and even of charity to create a more and more intimate relationship between capital and labour. They are indispensable agents in the same achievement and1 they are destined1 to cooperate rather than to oppose one another.
The time is riper than ever for the implementation of the doctrine of Canadian liberalism as advocated by Laurier. It is national in character and capable of application to all classes of society from one ocean to the other. Its ideal of freedom for all is its immediate field; social justice and security, the bettering of the living standard of the humble and the poor have been the dream of Sir Wilfrid Laurier. To-day, the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) is on the point of making it come true. Money has been relegated to its proper function, that of serving the interests of the human race. At this moment, I think of the achievements of the Liberal party in this field:	child welfare, national employment
organization, unemployment insurance, veterans relief, family allowances, old-age pension. In another sphere, there are the arbitration of labour disputes, the establishment of minimum wages, the granting of agricultural loans and the civil re-establishment of veterans of the armed forces.
Fairness in social relations flows from such legislation and their proper enforcement. Although defective, like all other human achievements, they nevertheless place Canada first among the civilized nations in the field of social legislation. It is through these measures that the Liberal party has shown its concern about the welfare and the betterment of living standards both for the individual and the family. In them are incorporated all the progress realized in other parts of the universe. Experience has taught the Liberals how to control traditional doctrines; liberalism hae remained faithful to the absolute and unchan-ing principles of individual freedom in society and of natural property rights; however, it has adapted their application to the new conditions that now prevail for the greater good of all our citizens. Thus, it was in a position to grant requests which, at first, seemed incompatible. It has endeavoured to reconcile authority and1 freedom, individualism and social sense; it has carefully avoided opposite errors and aimed at the maintenance of peace and harmony on all social levels and among all classes of Canadians. This ideal was so commendable that other parties are endeavouring to claim it as their own.
I find confirmation of these statements in the first part of the speech from the throne. It takes into account both the anxiety of the man on the street and the problems of the social worker. It raises politics on a level with human solidarity and the practice of social justice. Is it not astounding that some have found it vague and even incomprehensible? The speech from the throne is inspired by an ideal far above the economic and monetary planes and this may be why some people have not understood its implications. On hearing it, I remembered a short definition of civilization given by a contemporary philosopher, Mr. M. Daniel Rops:
Civilization is a state of equilibrium between a moral ideal and a practical economic and administrative system.
Mr. Speaker, the implementation of the principles enumerated in the speech from the throne is a guarantee of a sound and just administration of the country. I am proud, as representative of the people of the constituency of Rimouski, to give my unfailing support to a government who advocates such an ideal and gives such a guarantee. It is the assurance of a progressive and united Canada where living will be a pleasure.


Mr. RONALD MOORE (Churchill):: Mr. Speaker, I have listened with a great deal of interest to this debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I understand

The Address-Mr. Moore

it covers most of the legislation which the government propose to bring forward at this time to meet the conditions which confront the people of this country. It is to be regretted that more has not been brought forward in the speech from the throne because there can be no question about it, the Canadian people face the most crucial period they have ever experienced in their history.
The first condition with which I think we have to deal, and to deal with very shortly, is reconversion. I notice the Minister of Becon-struetion (Mr. Howe) told us that already plans had been laid for rebuilding Canadian industry to peace-time conditions. But what plans have been laid? I understand some industries have already been reconverted, but just last night we heard that reconversion will not be completed until 1948. That is a most serious situation and should receive the earnest consideration of this house. I have received letters, in this morning's mail, telling me that war workers who were laid off in the city of Winnipeg and received peace-time jobs in packing plants have already had to cash in on their bonds in order to keep up their standard of living. I think it is imperative that the government do something; indeed they should already have done something, to raise the wages of war workers who are going into peace-time work. According to the Toronto welfare board it requires $35.90 a week to live up to modern standards. What is the average wage of a war-time worker in one of our war plants? It is around eighty cents an hour. It may vary in different parts of the country, but generally speaking eighty cents an hour is a good average. The worker needs approximately $35 a week after all expenses by way of taxation have been met. I submit that that amount of money is not too much to receive for a week's work. So far nothing has been done by the present government to increase the rate of pay of those working in our peacetime industries, those industries which are going to become so important in the very near future, because we have now finished the war, and are on to peace-time work, peacetime construction. So much for the necessity of a more definite policy so far as reconversion is concerned.
I want now to deal for a few minutes with rehabilitation. I am very much interested in the rehabilitation policy of the present administration, because I, too, am a returned man.
I might say that from D-day on until the end of the war every Canadian service man was discussing the rehabilitation policy of the present government and wanting to know if he would have a job when the war was over. Not only that, but they wanted to know what 
was the chief issue in the election campaign, and whether they would be assured of full employment. During that period, the administration issued a pamphlet which was entitled "Back to Civil Life." First, I wish to congratulate the administration upon their war service gratuities. Taking them as a whole they are very fair, possibly higher than those of any other country in the world. No doubt some changes could be made. I do not think -the clothing allowance is high enough. Also, as regards the department's reference to the buying of power machinery for those who are going to take up farming, $1,200 is not sufficient to outfit a farm with power machinery. As I have said, however, taking the gratuities all in all they are, I think, very fair.
What about the carrying out of the policy? In the little pamphlet to which I have referred, and which I believe was issued by the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie), it is stated that the success of the government's rehabilitation policy depended, first, upon the initiative of the veteran himself, and second, upon the ability of private enterprise to supply jobs. If the success of our rehabilitation policy is dependent upon the ability of private enterprise to keep our soldiers employed, I venture to say that when the next depression hits this country the service men will go down like tenpins in a bowling alley.
I know there are hon. members who hold stem views as to the necessity of maintaining private enterprise as the basis of our economy. I respect those views, but just as honestly as I respect them, I want to make clear my opinion that it is impossible for private enterprise to solve the problems which confront our people. When the next depression strikes this country we shall have mass unemployment, because it is not the policy of private enterprise to supply employment; their interest is only in the making of profits; when there is no profit in a certain business private enterprise will take no part in further production in that line.
In order to prove that this is the case I wish to quote from the Bankers' Magazine for January, 1943. Listen to what it has to say about the necessity of unemployment to maintain the private ownership system of production:
And is there not also a tendency in much of this modern planning-not forgetting the Beveridge plan-to overlook the fact that, human nature being what it is, the workers <' the future, capitalists and wage-earners alike, will require the old spur of rewards and punishments (good profits and good wages, fear of losses and bankruptcy, and, yes, fear of unemployment and poverty) to ensure the necessary drive in this work of internal and international competition?

The Address-Mr. Moore
I am sure that hon. members would have to look through a great many magazines in the parliamentary library before they could find one paragraph containing as much nonsense as there is in that one paragraph in the Bankers' Magazine.
But that is not the most serious implication of the Bankers' Magazine. We must have unemployment and poverty, so they say, to maintain the efficiency of the capitalistic system; but what about the necessity for "drive" in the field of national and international competition? That is the most serious implication of this statement in the Bankers' Magazine. Obviously, if that is the case the Atlantic charter means no more to the international bankers than does the Beveridge plan or the Marsh report, for if we are to have "drive" in national and international affairs, how can we ever subscribe to the fourth and fifth paragraphs of the Atlantic charter? I wish to quote those paragraphs;
4.	They-
Meaning the United States and Great Britain.
-will endeavour, with due respect for all their existing obligations, to further the enjoyment by all states, great or small, victor or vanquished, of access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity.
How can any system of private individualism or private initiative subscribe to that? I do not see how they can do it.
5.	They desire to bring about the fullest collaboration between all nations in tbe economic field with the object of securing for all. improved labour standards, economic adjustment and social security.
These are noble commitments, but I earnestly submit that this government cannot subscribe to them and maintain the private system of ownership.
Let us consider for just a moment the great economic concentration which has taken place, a condition which applies not only to Canada but to the capitalist system generally. It is true of the United States and of every other country operating under that system. According to the survey of financial corporations for 1934, what do we find? Our three largest banks control seventy per cent of all the banking assets of the country, and in addition to that the same three banks control 832 directorships in 375 of the largest corporations in Canada manufacturing practically every known need of the Canadian people. I ask the administration, do they think that is a fair basis on which to build up an economy to bring about "a bright new world?" It cannot be done. The only solution to the problem is to begin right now to
47 096-20J
build a cooperative system in this country and I am suggesting to the government that they should begin the building of that system at once. We already have in some of the war-time controls, in our cooperative enterprises, a large measure of cooperation and I think the government ought to continue to extend that, because in cooperation lies the future of the Canadian economy.
In order to explain fully what I mean I should like to quote an article which appeared in the Ottawa Journal of September 5, 1945.
I am sure hon. gentlemen to my right will be very much interested in this article because it deals with one of the greatest socialist enterprises to be found anywhere in the British empire, and possibly it is as great as any socialist enterprise to be found in the Soviet Union itself. I am referring to the Ontario hydro electric commission. I quote the following:
There is little to be reviewed that is new; but it is well that the public mind should be refreshed sometimes with some of the salient facts about this great provincial asset, and the commission and its work. Established by the Ontario legislature in 1906, the commission is now nearly forty years in operation. An enterprise considered dubious in 1906, the commission has long proved a magnificent success. It now supplies cheap hydro electric power to over 900 municipalities in Ontario, to all the cities, 26. of Ontario, to 106 towns, 305 villages and 487 towmships. This service to the townships means service to a great part of the farming community of Ontario.
Here is the report itself, and I ask every hon. member to listen to it because we find here the very essence of C.C.F. policy.
The basic principle governing the financial operations of the undertaking is that electrical service be given by the commission to the municipalities (and by the municipalities to the consumer) at cost. The "cost" includes provision for eventual repayment of all capital expenditure. Notwithstanding this, Ontario has meanwhile the cheapest electric service in the world.
I think the Ontario government is to be commended for maintaining that system, and in fact it is hard for me to understand how the province of Ontario, for the past forty years first Liberal, then Conservative, and back to Liberal and then Conservative again, has been able to maintain, as a public enterprise one of the greatest businesses within that province. I suggest to the federal government that they continue the good work by carrying the principle of cooperation into the federal field. I wish to suggest where they could make a beginning.
I notice at the present time, because of the tempo of the war, that we now have in Canada $800 million worth of governments owned war plants, many of which could be
The Address-Mr. Moore

reconverted to peace-time production. I suggest to the present government that instead of handing over these war plants to private individuals for a song, or possibly less than that, they maintain the plants as public enterprises, run on the same basis as the Ontario hydro electric commission, to supply peacetime goods on the same basis as the people of Ontario are supplied with cheap electric power at cost.
I should like to make special reference to one of these very large industries, one which has been built up during the present struggle. I refer to Research Enterprises Limited, which I understand is located at Toronto. At its peak of employment it employed 7,000 men; at the present time, I understand, it is employing approximately 5,000 men. I believe that that plant is one of the most up-to-date scientific research plants to be found in the British empire and I wish to urge upon the government the necessity of controlling that plant. It is the only plant within the British empire which manufactures optical lenses. It is the only plant which can manufacture on a large scale radar equipment. Practically all the American radar equipment used in the west African campaign had to be made in that Toronto plant, and I think it is important that the present administration should maintain the plant for the people of Canada, retaining ownership and control of it. So much for that.
I fully realize that the present administration cannot go forward with any vast programme of socialism, but there is a great deal that they can do to relieve unemployment as it develops in the near future and as it is bound to develop because of the economic system under which we are operating. I suggest that they should begin as soon as possible the development of northern Canada. Northern Canada is the last frontier left to capitalistic expansion. Personally I do not like to see it developed under capitalism, but if that is all there is at our disposal we shall have to be satisfied with it. I suggest to hon. members that our neighbour to the north of us, over the north pole, the Soviet Union, is making marvellous developments in its northern land, and I should like to see Canada emulate that development by carrying out similar developments on our side of the north pole.
There are many things that could be done in that section of Canada to further private interests, to further private development. They could develop water power. On the Nelson river, for example-and this is only one example-there is a hydro electric power IMr. Moore.]
site at which there could be developed 700,000 horse-power which would supply all the mining area for 100 miles in radius. In addition to that, that electrical power could be transported to the northern part of Manitoba and Saskatchewan and used for rural electrification, something that ought to be done in the near future. Then I should like to see the government take on some form of reforestation programme. At the present time our forests are rapidly dwindling in every province, and I think the federal government, in cooperation with the provincial authorities, ought to establish as soon as convenient some kind of reforestation measure to replace our forests, which are rapidly diminishing.
I wish now to deal for a few minutes with education. Other speakers from the same group as that to which I belong have already dealt with the subject, but it is so important that another word along the same line will not hurt. I wish to deal in particular with the school at Churchill, Manitoba. The school at that point is in particularly bad circumstances owing to the fact that most of the property held at Churchill belongs to the federal government and is therefore untaxable. In connection with schools in unorganized territories such as this, I think the federal government should be willing to make a larger grant to carry on education.
There is something else in connection with education which ought to receive the consideration of this government. I refer to technical education. I take it that the present federal government is in an excellent position to provide technical education to the children of this countrj'. For instance, take the three armed services. They were provided with technical schools well furnished with the latest equipment. I see no reason why the federal government could not take the machines from these different technical schools and redistribute them throughout Canada to schools which would be much smaller, thus giving our bojrs and girls a chance to get technical education in the line of work they intend to follow.
I believe that we should have a more balanced economy in western Canada. To obtain that we should have a few more factories built in that part of the country. If we construct factories in western Canada I suggest that they be based on agriculture. Now that rubber is such an important industry in Canada, I see no reason at all why we should not have a synthetic rubber plant built in western Canada to make tires for motor vehicles from synthetic rubber produced from alcohol as a base. That is, grain alcohol

The Address-Mr. Moore
would be the base of the raw materials for the production of rubber. I understand that alcohol as a base for synthetic rubber is a much better raw material than oil which is now used.
There is something else I should like to mention with respect to western Canada, namely, the absolute necessity of keeping the Winnipeg grain exchange out of the picture. The Canadian wheat board, with the able assistance of the federal government, has dione an excellent job in marketing Canadian wheat.
I believe that they can do just as well in the future as they have done in the past, which would completely eliminate the necessity of reestablishing the Winnipeg grain exchange.
I come now to the question of taxation. We have heard a great deal about taxation in this house in the last few days. I am quite willing to admit that in some places taxation is unfair. I do not think salaries of $660 a year should be taxed; but I am not opposed to paying high taxes as long as the government can maintain the present tempo of employment. As long as they are abLe to do that, I for one am quite willing to pay my fair share of taxes in order to maintain our living standards at a very high level.
Another matter was mentioned in the house whioh I think ought to be dealt with. I believe the hon. member for Edmonton East (Mr. Ashby) suggested that we should have retirement from industry at sixty years of age at a pension of $50 a month. Another hon. member to my right said that that would be giving old age pensions to young people. There may be some reason to believe that, but I ask the house to consider what Henry Ford told us about the automobile industry a few years ago. Mr. Ford told us that in the automotive industry a man was considered old at thirty-five. When we get reconverted to peace-time production I venture to say with our mechanical production it will be very difficult for a man to keep a job in the automotive industry when he passes thirty-five years of age. Therefore I do not think the suggestion made by the hon. member for Edmonton East was wide of the mark.
I now wish to deal for a little while with housing. This is another subject which has received a great deal of consideration from hon. members. Once again I am not blaming the government for the housing situation that exists in Canada. That situation is the result of the manner in which we have been doing business for the past thirty-five years. It is the result of private initiative. Private initiative will not build houses if there is no profit in them. The working people of Canada have
not received sufficient money in the past thirty or thirty-five years to enable them to build adequate houses; therefore houses have not been built. You can go back to 1911 and you will find that a housing shortage existed in this country. At that time an editorial appeared in a Toronto paper deploring the condition which existed in the four largest cities, Toronto, Winnipeg, Vancouver and Montreal. It stated that there were developing in those cities slum conditions similar to those which existed in Europe. That was in 1911. Shortly after 1911 we had a depression. Then we had world war I. No houses were built during that time. Then we had another depression from 1919 to 1922, and very few houses were built. Then from 1922 to 1029 we had the wild spree which culminated in the great depression in 1929. Very few houses were constructed up to and including the present war and we now have the whole problem on our hands. Competent authorities tell us that we shall have to construct the same number of houses in Canada as exists now in four of our cities, namely, Calgary, Edmonton, London and Brantford. That means that we are short approximately 150,000 houses in this country, and it will take approximately five years to complete that construction. It will require an expenditure of $1,750,000,000. and will provide work for 190,000 men. That is one way in which we can help to solve our unemployment problem if the government see fit to find the money and go ahead with the construction. If we do undertake anything like that, I would suggest that we should resort to the use of brick instead of lumber for that construction, because it will be very difficult to get sufficient lumber and season it in time to go forward with the construction.
I shall mention just one other matter which has to do with my own constituency and which I think the house will hear more about later. I refer to the Hudson Bay railway and the port of Churchill. I am very much interested in seeing that development carried out. I want to see the whole north country developed because it is Canada's last frontier, and I think it ought to be developed if for no other reason than to keep abreast of our neighbour across the north pole. I submit that that route can be used for more than three months of the year because we now have newer and better equipment. We have radar, which can be installed both on the ships and at convenient points on islands in Hudson bay and along Hudson strait to warn us of the ice floes and of moves made by the ice coming down Davis strait.
The Address-Mr. Heon

In addition to that, we should build up mining throughout northern Manitoba and northern Saskatchewan. I do not think there is anything else I wish to say at the present time. I consider my remarks adequate at the moment and shall conclude them.
Mr. GEORGES H. HEON (Argenteuil): (Translation): Mr. Speaker, intentionally, I shall direct my first remarks to you in the French language in order to emphasize, once again, that it is one of the two official languages in this country. Unfortunately, in certain quarters, there is too much inclination to forget that fact. It is proper to recall it, even if only to awaken some of our compatriots whose faint-heartedness would make them partisans of eternal compromise. Our English-speaking friends like frankness, truth and virility. We rise very much in their esteem when we expound our legitimate claims in a firm but ever courteous and dignified way, because they like, as I said truth and frankness, while loathing every form of obsequiousness.
(Text): Mr. Speaker, I should like to discharge immediately a most agreeable duty. Congratulations being apparently in order, I extend them to you personally, sir, on your unanimous election as Speaker of this house. Heartily endorsing the remarks made by all the leaders of the different parties, and by the press, I would add that your varied and not inconsiderable experience in the Quebec legislature and in this house will prove immediately beneficial to all of us. We are assured that your unfailing courtesy, your particular generosity (which I have already experienced), and your indulgence, will render your tenure of office most pleasant.
Both the mover and the seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne are also deserving of our felicitations. The fact that they wore the universally honoured and respected uniform of Canada's armed forces greatly enhanced the significance of their words.
I feel also, Mr. Speaker, that in all sincerity I should warmly congratulate the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) and the Secretary of State (Mr. Martin), both of whom I hold in particularly high esteem, on having attained cabinet rank. I am convinced that the ability and personal distinction of both these gentlemen will greatly redound to the credit of their French-Canadian compatriots. They may not be sitting in the first row, but that matters not a whit since it is only by his honesty of purpose, ability and efficiency that a public man is judged by all intelligent, unbiased and right thinking men.
Finally-and this will rudely jolt those who

would carry bitter political feuds into this house-I extend felicitations to the leaders of all the political groups on their election. I am not so deeply ingrained with the red or blue pigment that I cannot readily acknowledge, the sincerity, earnestness and patriotism of our political leaders. We may not always agree with them. I for one may have respectfully to dissent more or less often. We may not agree with their ways of attaining the only true destiny for this country, that of a strong, united, prosperous and sovereign nation; nor may we always agree with their methods, which at times may seem to be highly unorthodox, and illogical to the common man, but who in this House will dare deny that they are all giving their time, their energy and indeed very often their health and whole life to better the lot of their fellow Canadians?
At this point I should like to make a suggestion which is not entirely new but is deserving of serious consideration. I believe it should be possible for the so-called boards of strategy-which appellation is very often a misnomer since sometimes they have turned out to be boards of blunders and errors-of the various political parties to reach a gentlemen's agreement whereby the election to the house of their regularly-chosen and nationally-recognized-and-accepted leaders would be assured, or at least greatly facilitated. The present situation is unsatisfactory and unfair to the leaders and to their constituents. We all know what a general election means to a party leader. It involves speaking engagements and conferences with party brain-trusters across_ the tremendous distances of this dominion in a very short period of time; the adjustment of innumerable clashes, differences and frictions among the faithful in various provinces, constituencies and even villages, with the inevitable result that the average leader will be lucky if he is able to spend twenty-four hours with his own constituents. This gives his opponent or opponents a tremendous and unfair advantage The evil of this situation has been abundantly shown, I think, by the predicament in which the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) found himself recently; and I am serious about this. Here was the leader of a party which had secured the largest number of votes, the man who thus was Prime Minister-designate of his country; yet when he signed at San Francisco on behalf of Canada he was a defeated candidate who had been denied a seat in the house where the nation had expressed some desire to see him direct and lead the government of the day. No one will deny

The Address-Mr. Heon
that this situation, in addition to giving him no particular cause for rejoicing, I imagine, was highly incongruous and paradoxical. The distinguished leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) was also similarly affected prior to me last general election. Although I did not attend the Winnipeg convention where he was unanimously chosen, I am informed that the convention was representative of all party factions in the nine provinces. The party he leads always has been and will remain a major factor to be reckoned with in Canadian politics. It might be argued that he was offered an opportunity to run in a by-election; but with the probability that the cleverly-conceived and smartly-executed York South strategy, which had so effectively beheaded his immediate predecessor, might again be brought into play, it was tantamount to jeopardizing his chances of election, and personally I think he was very wise in not falling into the trap. Yet on this account, the regularly-chosen and nationally-accepted leader of a dominion-wide party was prevented from leading that party in the house during the war years, when his leadership would have been most essential; and when I make that statement, I am not detracting from the highly-creditable performance of my old friend the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon), who discharged a most ungrateful obligation with a contagious and perpetual smile.
Canada has just emerged from its participation in two world wars in one generation. Our victory has been achieved through a tremendous sacrific of life which this young nation could ill-afford, and a national debt which has reached unbelievable and almost terrifying figures for a nation of twelve million people. The reward, however, lies in the satisfaction of complete victory; a job well done; a fair chance for a long era of undisturbed peace if our statesmen will rise to the oceasie and the still not-fully-implemented pledge of the four freedoms to all nations, powerful oi weak, and to all individuals, rich or poor. But this war has also left its scars on Canada, as all prevoius wars have done. One of the ugliest of these scars has been caused by the very nature and progressive degree of our participation. Let us call a spade, a spade. The conscription issue has been used again, as in 1914-18, by unscrupulous politicians to foster their own petty, personal, political advantage. Through it, racial and sectional animosities, not wholly-extinguished before the war, have been rekindled, and thus national unity and inter-racial harmony, which are so essential to the welfare of Canada, have been seriously impaired. Shall we ever get rid of the conscription bogey?
Frankly I do not know, although I must say that the present government, by almost imperceptible degrees, has successfully imposed a measure of conscription on the province which previously had been most violently opposed to it i.e., Quebec. If election figures mean anything, the electoral results on June 11 showed by the overwhelming number of government candidates returned that the voters, although perhaps unwittingly, had approved the principle of conscription as applied by the Liberal government. Personally, I feel that if, God forbid, this country should ever again become engaged in another total war, where our very existence was threatened, and universal service was resorted to by the government of the day, it should be done by something similar to the United States s' .tern, under which the millionaire and the pauper, the son of the president and the son of the labourer, the influential and the insignificant, the Republican and the Democrat, alike are called by number and treated on the same footing. If the number comes out, and if the holder is not entitled to an exemption- and these exemptions are clear and well defined-he is inducted into the services. But if his number is not drawn, he can still attend to his civilian duties and walk around in mufti, without taking the risk of having a white feather planted in his lapel by some patriotic but irate old maid.
Mr. Speaker, I have been elected in the old historical constituency of Argenteuil as an Independent Conservative, to preach and practise-but mostly to practise-principles which were in the forefront at confederation and inspired the real founders of the Conservative party, Cartier and Macdonald; equality among the races, discrimination against none, respect of the constitutional rights and sincere opinions of all Canadians.
7f the Progressive Conservative party will adnere to this doctrine it shall have my full support; and I express the hope that it will prove as easy for the present distinguished leader of the party to render the old Conservative guard as progressively-inclined as the progressive element is conservatively-rainded. Perhaps here, Mr. Speaker, the words o( De Tocqueville may find their application:
The political party I would call great, is the one which clings more to principles than to consequences; to general more than to special cases; to ideas and not to men. Such a party is usually distinguished by a nobler character, more generous passions, more genuine convictions, and a bolder and more open conduct than others.
Ho' aver, I cannot conceive that this parliament, which must unflinchingly shoulder the terrible responsibility of taking the country
The Address-Mr. Heon

over the hurdles of the immediate post-war period, with its greatly-aggravated problems of a temporarily-unbalanced economy, will try to do so through strict party lines. The tasks ahead transcend party advantage and, this time at least, it is not the party leaders who have set the real issues, and they can not evade them if they try.
The issues have "come out of the depths of that deep, which is called public opinion." That all-important group of Canadians which is not bound by party lines, and votes according to its common sense and calm judgment, has a right to expect that we shall legislate only in the national interest. Further, the little man and the little woman of no fixed political party, in my constituency and in all constituencies this dominion over, who have enlisted or who have generously given their sons and daughters to the services, forged the tools for war during long hours of the night and day, bought the bonds, given their generous blood at Red Cross clinics, and gladly borne the burden of back-breaking taxes, without even the shadow of a complaint, are entitled to be represented here. That is why, I for one, propose to reserve my independence and freedom of speech and vote, every time the social security, material prosperity and immediate welfare of this same little man and woman will be at stake.
The speech from the throne has many more omissions than commissions; and although it has its good points, such as, for instance, a Canadian flag and Canadian citizenship, which will help to put an end to the plague of divided loyalties, it is not sufficiently clear-cut, and far too nebulous as to what the government proposes to do in the way of helping our war veterans reestablish themselves in civilian occupations, and in reducing the burden of taxation which weighs too heavily upon the industries, the salaried white-collar worker, and the labour and agricultural classes of my constituency. I cannot accept it in its entirety, and therefore must withhold judgment until the measures implementing it are brought before this house. There is much with which I can agree in the opposition amendment, and even the sub-amendment as it concerns housing. These amendments are in the nature of warnings to the government that the Canadian people will brook no sidetracking or fence-sitting in the execution of reconstruction policies.
Mr. Speaker, one more word. In my constituency which is a perfect cross-section of this dominion, since it is half industrial and half rural, and is inhabited, almost in equal proportions by Canadians of English, Irish,

Scottish and French origin, we have made an honest and loyal effort to solve the problem of true national unity, through forbearance, respect and generous interpretation of one another's voiced opinions, and unbounded faith in Canada and Canadians. True, there still remain in Argenteuil, a few islands of resistance wherein dwell narrow-minded fanatics; but they are held up to the ridicule of, and held in contempt by their fellow men.
All the racial groups in Argenteuil have given me a majority vote, because I havfc pledged myself to fight sectionalism, and racial and religious prejudice, wherever I find it. T propose to rulfil my pledge and carry the fight wherever the enemy is, not excluding my own racial group, and behind whatever political party it may lurk, because, unfortunately, as Bulwer once wrote:
It is the misfortune of all miscellaneous political combinations, that with the purest motives of their more generous members, are ever mixed the most sordid interests and the fiercest passions of mean confederates.
May I therefore appeal to all hon. members gathered in this most important post-war parliament, where the destiny of this and coming generations of Canadians is at stake, to help heal all war-wounds by forgetting and forgiving past quarrels and dissensions, and by rededicating ourselves to the cause of a true and broad Canadianism, harmony between our two great races, help, cooperation, equality between all classes, and opportunities for all. This Canada of ours is big enough, rich enough for all of us to live in it, in equality, peace and plenty.
The countless thousands of our fellow-Can-adians who have given their lives in the war which has recently been brought to a successful conclusion, have traced with their generous blood the path along which lies Canada's glorious and only true destiny; a strong, united, proud and prosperous, sovereign nation, freely associated with the other peace-loving nations of the Commonwealth and, for that matter, all other peace-loving nations of the world to ensure peace to all men of goodwill, and the welfare of mankind.
To paraphrase a Churchillian expression: 'Let us all then to the task".


Mr. L. W. SKEY (Trinity):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to make my first contribution to the proceedings of Canada's twentieth parliament, may I commence by offering you my congratulations, and saying that I listened with interest to the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) when he spoke of your illustrious family record. I have read, too, with further interest, the tribute paid you in this week's issue of Time magazine.

The Address-Mr. Skey
May I also extend my congratulations, sir, to the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River (Mr. Benidickson) and the hon. member for Gaspe (Mr. Langlois) upon the excellent manner in which they acquitted themselves in their difficult duty of moving and seconding this motion.
As a new member of this house I must admit I face this task with more anxiety than I would a flying operation. However, may I begin by saying I hat I hope my contribution to the efforts of this house will be a useful one and that I shall at all times be able to keep faith with its dignity and high tradition. This afternoon I should like to speak for a few moments about my constituency, the services and Canada's future.
I speak as the new member for Trinity. My riding runs through the heart of Toronto, the second largest city in Canada. It extends from the harbour to St. Clair avenue. It has within its boundaries three great hospitals, two of them military hospitals. There is Christie Street and the Red Chevron as well as one Ontario hospital. It has as well the Canadian national exhibition grounds now inhabited by No. 4 release centre of I he Royal Canadian Air Force. It takes its name from the park where stand the beautiful but vacant buildings of the old college.
The people in my constituency are good Canadian citizens. They have sent thousands of their sons and daughters to our services and to fight with Canadian forces overseas. They are war workers; they are unionists; they are peaceful tradesmen. Their businesses are large and small and they have manufactured many war materials as well as peacetime products. The origin of the people of my constituency is Canadian, British, French and American. Besides this, there are large numbers of new Canadians of Polish, Ukrainian, Estonian and Scandinavian descent.
During this war they have laboured constantly, each in his own way, to accomplish the defeat of our enemy. They have for six years produced the supplies, the war materials, the men, the women, the money, the service comforts and the courage which go to make up a nation's war effort. If they could be here to-day they would ask me to express for them the hope that there might be some relief from the taxation which they have borne without murmur, so that mothers and fathers will be able to put asidle something for their own security and comfort in old age as well as to assist their sons and daughters who are returning from the services. They would ask for some relief from controls.
More than this, I think they would ask for leadership; they would ask to see a beacon
into our future. They want guidance and leadership from Canada's government and the lifting of the secrecy that has surrounded the proceedings of this great house for the past six years. They would like to know how to reconvert themselves individually and how to reconvert their businesses as best they can to Canada's advantage.
If I may pause here for a moment I should like to say that never in Canada's history has there been such a disposition among all our people, among our unionists and business men to accept clear and direct leadership from their government. These same people in my constituency would like to have peaceful homes with some security and assurance that they will be able to remain in them for a short time. But above all they would want me to express in this house that they desire not only unity in their local riding but in Canada as a whole.
If I may speak for a moment on the subject of political peace and unity I should like to liken the constituency from which I come to that of your constituency, Mr. Speaker, that of St. Mary in Montreal. I understand that it runs through the heart of your great city, and the two ridings are not dissimilar. In the last general election four political parties contested my riding. Three of the candidates finished within a few hundred votes of one another, while the fourth candidate received substantial support. During the campaign there was some exploitation of religious faiths, some exploitation of racial prejudice and a beginning of class consciousness among our labouring groups. While I have every sympathy with their efforts to reconvert to peacetime industry and their efforts to gain leadership and guidance from the government, I have no sympathy with any method or means they may use to exploit class consciousness in this free, democratic country of Canada. To show that other members of this honourable house are aware that this condition exists, I should like to refer to what has been said before in this house. One hon. member said that on the morrow of the conclusion of this great war there is a beginning of much that looks like efforts to itensify controversy in some of our domestic fields. Then again an hon. member said that those who lend their voices to unnecessary and unjustified agitators may help to create a situation which will be mtich more difficult to meet than they have reason to expect.
Last April the legislature of Ontario was dissolved and the (provincial government sought a mandate from the people of Ontario. But there were certain parties and groups in that house who did not seem to agree that it
rhe Address-Mr. Skey

was right to ask the lieutenant governor to dissolve the legislature and call a general election. Those groups came to the locked doors of the legislature, demanded admittance and asked that the session continue. When I refer to these class conscious elements in our community and these political methods I have in mind that that is an example of what We may expect in the future if the integrity and authority of the free parliament of Canada is not maintained by all its members.
In any urban riding in Canada I think we have in miniature a picture of the forces of disunity that are at work in the world to-day. Here the problems of peace are presenting themselves to us in our own communities. These problems are well understood by the new Canadians in my constituency, these new Canadians who come from European homes, who have lived under difficult and different and absolute political regimes, who have sought freedom and sanctuary in our great country, who have fled from the mass-mind control of states such as nazi Germany.
I would be the first to say that we should be very careful to guard the rights and privileges of a free parliament in Canada. These new Canadians know what we need for the future. They know we need a friendly exchange of goods, of cultural achievements, of news, of ideas, of friendship and free and open travel and press facilities. These new Canadians know we cannot enclose any part of this world behind barriers of thought or barriers of wire and steel, because they know well that behind those barriers fear, suspicion and mistrust must grow, fear, suspicion and mistrust which can destroy us and the peace of this world. That other hon. members are aware of the same problem is evident from the record of Hansard. As one hon. member has said, these problems will not be solved by pitting one group against another and by creating needless suspicion and hate. And the challenge of the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) extends, I feel, not only to the government but to all groups in this great House of Commons. As reported at page 26 of Hansard, he said:
. . . that we be worthy of these days. We must build an economy, in which our people will have faith; a democracy in which we can all have confidence and a programme for Canada in which, on its fundamentals, we can all be united.
I will now pass on to say a few words about the amendment moved by the Progressive Conservative party to the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I think in my previous remarks I have expressed well the feeling of doubt, which is prevalent in my constituency and must be prevalent in many 
other parts of Canada, that there is a lack of positive leadership for the future. I feel that we have well expressed in our amendment these doubts of the Canadian people as a whole, and that the desire for public leadership and the necessity of homes and jobs and quick reconversion has been fairly stated by my party.
The reinforcement issue is an old one to many hon. members, although it is a new one to many of us in the services. I do not propose to say a great deal about it to-day, but I would not be on this side of the house if I had not agreed with the stand taken by my party. I should like to add that I do not think the government of our country would be facing the great difficulties of demobilization had they followed what we consider to be a more enlightened policy with regard to the armed forces.
The problems of the services do not seem to me to be dissimilar from those of the civilians. The men must be released, and our civilian population would like to be freed from many controls. The men of the services require rehabilitation, and our civilian industries require reconversion. The men of the services will receive pensions and gratuities; our civilian groups would like to be able to enjoy lighter taxes. Both groups are concerned with homes and jobs. Previous speakers on this motion have dealt adequately with the subject, so that I shall leave it now and pass on to what I think the service men would like to be reassured about with regard to the attitude of this house and the present parliament.
I think they would ask first of us that we produce as much of a feeling of national unity as is possible in any community. I know they would ask of us a fearless approach to our national problems. In the past they have been controversial and they must be solved to help Canada's progress. I know the services would say to the government to-day, bring them down, bring them before every party and group in this house; let them see the light of day and let us face them fearlessly.
Many men and women in the services have obtained a wide knowledge of Canada during their time in the war. They have seen many provinces; overseas they have fought beside Canadians of all races and creeds from all parts of the dominion. They cannot tolerate any longer the petty divisions which seem up to this time to have been so easy of exploitation by politicians in this country. I know they would have us make an end of all these that can possibly be buried. If they have been as fortunate as I have they would have seen all the provinces with the exception of Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. They

The Address-Mr. Skey
would have enjoyed the friendliness of Prince Edward Island, seen its red soil and its potato fields and tasted its lobsters and oysters. They would have met the friendly people of Nova Scotia and formed an idea of the great contribution of that province to the building of our mighty Canadian navy. They would have seen the woods and farms of New Brunswick, and maybe they would have had the experience, which I had some months ago, of flying over that province and witnessing from the air a forest fire which was consuming the wealth of the province and apparently ranging unchecked. They would have seen the historic capital of the province of Quebec and cosmopolitan Montreal. I happen to have lived in Ontario; I was born there and have travelled over it widely; and for three years I was resident in friendly Manitoba. The rest of the provinces of Canada it is my intention to see before the close of this parliament, and I hope that other hon. members among us will travel as the hon. member for Davenport (iMr. MacNicol) has done and investigate all the provinces and become acquainted with the people of all provinces and tongues and faiths in our dominion.
Before I speak about my own service, the air force, I should like to pay humble tribute as an air force officer to our Canadian army and navy. The army, fighting for the first time as an integral unit, suffered a long, hard struggle in Italy, then gallantly marched into Normandy, and from there through the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany to the Baltic sea. They displayed in siege and battle the greatest powers of invention and endurance.
In my experience in the air force I have had a lot to do with the Canadian navy and with the 'Royal Navy. I have witnessed their phenomenal growth, their vigilance in the home waters and on the broad Atlantic, and seen the way in which they have admirably discharged their tremendous responsibilities of convoy escort.
Turning for a moment to our branch of the service, I should like to give this house a short description of it. It is young; it is lusty; it is imaginative and it is still growing. Its members have fought alongside the army and navy of Canada and of other countries, and I know those other services will appreciate a claim that can be made for the air force, that they should have a certain amount of freedom to digest their immense expansion and the immense power they achieved during war time.
I would commend to this house the stand that has already been taken by the government in allowing the ministry for air to remain separate for some time. It may take the air force as long as from two to three years to
get straightened away on its new path in peace, and I would commend leaving it to its own growth until it has achieved full manhood and adjusted the new factors which have so recently brought it into discussion again. The air force at present requires a policy for peace. Young men, good men, able men, technicians, pilots and men whose knowledge and duties cover all the services that it governs would like to stay with it. It has seized their imagination, and they would like to stay with it and play a part in the future defence of Canada, should that ever be necessary. They would like to know what the government has to offer them in the way of a career.
I should like now to pass on for a moment and speak on the subject of technical research.
I am sure that when the appreciation of this war is written historians will give to the technical capacity of the scientists of the united nations, England, the United States and our own great Canada, credit for a tremendous achievement, that they will judge that our scientific potential was, apart from the will of our people to fight, the dominant factor in our victory.
I feel that our scientific potential is the greatest factor in our peace-time recovery and in our continued prosperity. Were I not such a junior member of this house I might go so far as to recommend that we have a ministry of technical research to which the heads of all services could take their problems,. to which industry, agriculture, medicine and all our other professions in Canada could go with their problems for solution and help.
In summing up my remarks, I should like to leave with the house the thought that the services and civilians alike would ask of this government, and ask of us, unity in Canada. I would put forward the suggestion that perhaps our wartime information board and the national film board, controlled by a joint parliamentary committee, could be used as two great instruments to teach all parts of Canada about their neighbours, their friends, about the problems of other provinces, and to educate us to a national outlook.
I believe that science and scientific research and technique as an aid to all Canadian businesses and to our services is the great need of the future. With no desire to delay the house any longer, may I say that in a few days' time hon. members will be asked to consider grants for the armed services. I have no information and no idea as to what these grants will be, but I would leave with the house this one thought. I believe it is necessary that we should keep the weapons of war in the hands of the people who love peace.
The Address-Mr. Dorion


Mr. FREDERIC DORION (Charlevoix-Saguenay):: Mr. Speaker, I should like first to join with the other speakers who have taken part in this debate in offering you my most sincere congratulations on the high honour conferred upon you unanimously by the House of Commons. In the last few years we have learned to know you, and I am sure that, with the sense of justice and equity which characterizes you, you will maintain the tradition that has been established by those who in the past have so illustriously occupied the seat which you hold at the present time. There is no doubt that this honour reflects also upon your family, and especially upon your country and also upon our province.
Since we last met in this chamber there have been many changes as a result of the general election of last June. Among the newcomers, particularly those from the province of Quebec, there are many young men who will n'o doubt be a valuable asset to the House of Commons. I would call attention to the fact that the bar of Quebec is very highly represented among the members. Some of them have already been called to fill important positions, as, for example, attorneys for the crown, members of the council of the bar, and a president of their association. Allow me to mention the present batonnier of the bar of Montreal, the hon. member for Stanstead (Mr. Hackett). I have no doubt that all these members will make their contribution to the keeping up of the good reputation of our bar, which has already furnished this house with a great many prominent members.
If on one side new representatives from the province of Quebec deserve the honour that has been conferred upon them by their electors, I cannot forget that unfortunately we have lost some members who for one reason or another were very close to some of the members of the house. I wish to mention my friend Mr. J. S. Roy, the previous member for Gaspe, who for the past five years sat in this house commanding the respect of all his fellow members. Even if we did not share his political views, I am sure that every member sitting in the last parliament had the utmost consideration for my former colleague, and I have no doubt it must have taken a capital man such as the present sitting member for Gaspe to defeat him.
As many hon. members have said in the course of this debate, and as we have also read in the newspapers throughout the country, the speech from the throne contains a few good suggestions. On the other hand, it is noticeable for its lack of measures which 
were expected by the people of the country. I note with satisfaction that the government has finally decided to bring before the house a policy providing for a national flag. I am sure that this decision will be welcomed by all fair-thinking citizens, by those who hold Canada above everything else, and by those who want to see our country secure its share of sovereignty. I am also pleased to note that the government has decided to define Canadian citizenship. I really believe that this is a new step toward what everybody wishes, and I sincerely hope that these two measures, when they come before the house for discussion, will be discussed with broadmindedness.
Mention was also made in the speech from the throne of the international part that our country is called upon to play, and I expect that when the appropriate measures dealing with this question are brought before the house we shall have an opportunity of expressing our point of view. I may state now that the events of the last years and particularly of the last months have changed to a certain extent the ideas one could have with regard to the important role that our country is called upon to play in international affairs.
(Translation): Mr. Speaker, if Canada is to play the part she is expected to take in the international sphere, and even if she is to weather the difficulties of the post-war period, she must, to my mind, fulfil two essential conditions. The first is that we should continue our march toward absolute independence; the second, that, we should find a fair and equitable solution to our domestic problems.
In order to fulfil the first condition, I think it would be necessary to destroy some remaining vestiges of the colonial spirit of old. The first and one of the most important of those vestiges is, I believe, the view that is taken in the matter of amendments to our constitution. As is well known, under the terms of the statute of Westminster, we are still compelled to go to the London parliament in order to obtain consent to any amendment to this country's constitution which we may want to bring about. That clause of the statute of Westminster, which was supposed to guarantee the rights of minorities in Canada, has indeed become a grave danger.
I could not illustrate that better than by mentioning what happened in 1943 on the occasion of the last amendment to our constitution. In July 1943, the House of Commons, following a discussion and by a majority vote, passed a resolution whereby an address was voted to His Majesty the King, requesting him to have the kindness to amend

The Address-Mr. Dorion
our constitution so that the redistribution, of electoral districts might be deferred, and on that occasion, when the resolution came up before the British House of Commons, it was thoroughly discussed. I have in hand the British House of Commons report of July 22, 1943-the date on which the Secretary of State for the Dominions, who then was Mr. Attlee the present Prime Minister, made his submission on the matter-and I shall quote the following excerpt from that statement:
At the time of the passing of the Statute of Westminster, an express provision was made at the request of the government of Canada, taking out from the general powers then conferred^ any power to amend or repeal the British North America Act. and the procedure therefore for amending the British North America Act remains as it was before the Statute of Westminster.
And in order to indicate what is meant by that clause of the statute of Westminster, I shall refer to a speech delivered by Mr. Edmund Harvey:
Mr. Edmund Harvey (Combined English universities): Surely the whole question depends on section 7 (1), of the act of Westminster, which was expressly put in at the request of Canada. I think that meets the point raised by the hon. gentleman the member for Altrincham (Sir E. Grigg). It was put in in order to protect the interests of certain minorities in Canada who at that period desired that, in the event of any change being requested by the Canadian parliament which they themselves did not unite in, there should remain the possibility of this parliament protecting the interests of the minority. It is an entirely exceptional position placed in the act.
I believe therefore, Mr. Speaker, that such are the exact wording and the true meaning of that clause inserted in the Statute of Westminster; for that reason, we must now wonder whether that clause, inserted for the protection of the rights of minorities, still constitutes the guarantee for which it was intended. In order to answer that question, I shall quote the speech delivered, in that same debate, by Sir Edward Grigg, and I quote:
Sir Edward Grigg (Altrincham):	I suggest
that it is really improper in present circumstances for the house to question the discretion of a sovereign parliament in the Commonwealth of Nations. It is only owing to a technical legislative peculiarity that it comes to the house at all, and it is very improper that the house should question the discretion of a national and absolutely sovereign parliament. I hope that that will be accepted by the house and that this legislation will be passed without further comment.
Which means, Mr. Speaker, that each time the Canadian parliament adopted a resolution similar to another brought down before the British House of Commons, the latter considered themselves bound by the majority vote given in this House of Commons and consequently cannot and will not discuss the
question as to whether or not such a procedure endangers the rights of minorities in this country. We must remember that on that occasion, one of the provinces had signified its unanimous opposition to this amendment to the Canadian constitution, therefore, it is obvious that the protection which existed in the past was no more existent. Therefore I think I am right in saying, as I said then in the debate in this house on the proposed amendment that our constitution has simply become an ordinary law which a majority can modify at will and according to the good pleasure of the party in power. That is why it is urgent that this government set up an organization to inquire anew into this matter of vital importance to us. I would suggest, for example, that the federal government set up a commission of jurists, appointed not only by the Canadian government but also by the governments of the different provinces of the dominion. However, great care should be taken to include in this commission representatives of minorities in order that the sacred rights of minorities may be effectively protected. Such a commission I believe, could solve the problems that arise and would perhaps enable us to determine the procedure we would have to follow to amend our constitution ourselves without having to apply to the British parliament.
I said, Mr. Speaker, that the second condition we must fulfil to pass through what I would call the post-war crisis is to give to domestic problems the most equitable solutions. These problems, of course, are extremely numerous, but I believe that some are more important than others. There is for instance the problem of employment about which we have heard a great deal since the opening of the session. I do not intend to labour the point, but I wish to point out that last August, on the 20th to be exact, the Trades and 'Labour Congress of Canada sent to the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) a petition the conclusions of which I shall now quote. I believe that, if accepted by the government, these conclusions would go a long way to solve the problem. Here is the concluding part of that petition dated August 20:
We realize that it is impossible to do anything without funds; that is why we are in favour of maintaining war-time taxation, in accordance with our request of April last when we asked your government to raise the exemptions to $2,400 a year for married persons and $1,000 for single persons, during this crisis. To face the crisis we are now going through we urge:
The Address-Mr. Dorion

(1)	That every worker in an essential civilian industry be granted immediately a "reconversion salary" during this period of dislocation, namely one month's salary for each year of service up to three years.
(2)	In order that the greatest number may benefit from available employment, the adoption of a maximum forty-hour week without salary reduction is recommended;
(3)	To inspire confidence and maintain the purchasing power, all general salary reductions should be banned;
(4)	Restrictions on building materials should be lifted and a housing programme launched with the same energy, ingenuity and industry which were applied to the production of urgent war material;
(5)	The immediate launching of the required public works is suggested; as well as
(6)	The speediest reconversion of all war industries which can serve in peace-time production.
To this problem of employment, the housing problem is closely allied. During recent sessions, we passed certain legislative measures intended to help Canadians build themselves new houses; but I must draw the attention of the federal authorities to the fact that these enactments, while they might easily apply in Canada's important centres and large cities, are altogether inappropriate in rural areas and in ridings similar to my own constituency of Charlevoix-Saguenay. As a matter of fact, I wrote the housing administrator not very long ago to inform him of the difficulties encountered by the people of the Charlevoix-Saguenay constituency when they applied to insurance companies for loans provided by the said enactment. Unfortunately, no solution has been found to the problem and the people of my constituency who wish to build homes in order to take advantage of this act cannot do so because the insurance companies claim that their needs are not sufficiently important and that it is not worth while to send inspectors to examine the projects and to supervise the work.
I wish to call your attention to the following letter which I received last July from the director of housing:
Sir:
Replying to your letter of July 6, I regret to inform you that we cannot do anything in regard to the reluctance shown by lending institutions to make loans in more or less remote communities.
The national housing administration cannot avail itself of any legislative authority in order to dictate to the authorized lending institutions where and when they shall make loans.
However, steps are being taken in order to enlarge as quickly as possible the field of action of lending institutions.
And this letter is signed by Mr. U. Mignon for Mr. F. W. Nicolls, director of housing.

Mr. Speaker, at this session this housing act should be amended so that it may apply as fully to rural districts as to urban centres.
Now, Mr. Speaker, there is another matter	which	should	not be	overlooked,	amatter which comes up from time to time, but	which	should	certainly	be settled	if
we are to live in peace and in harmony in this country. I refer to the grievances that are continually being aired because the rights of the French population of this country are not always fully recognized. In this respect, may. I point out that too frequently official publications of the dominion government written exclusively in English are sent to Frenchspeaking centres, both to civil servants and to French-Canadian taxpayers, who have difficulty in understanding them. Thus, for instance, I know that in regard to the selective service, the representatives of this service in the province of Quebec receive a great deal of literature written exclusively in English, and on account of their insufficient knowledge of the English language, they cannot become sufficiently acquainted with such instructions to be in a position to reply to the enquiries which they receive.
I also know that, within the last few months the government have sent in French-speaking districts of Canada, some English forms for the use of the members of the armed forces who wished to be demobilized. In this case, however, I must give credit to whom credit is due. This state of affairs in the province of Quebec having been called to my attention, I asked for French forms and I was told that they were not quite ready, which fact explained the sending of the English version, but that I would receive them as soon as possible. I am glad to state that a few days later, a fortnight, I believe, the city of Quebec and all other French parts of the province, I suppose, were supplied with the French forms.
I bring this to the attention of the authorities, because I feel that all official documents distributed through the country should be printed in French and English, so that both versions could be sent to all parts of Canada at the same time.
Another point which has been the subject of numerous conversations and newspaper articles is the matter of family allowance cheques. It seems to me that it would be the simplest thing for the federal government to have all family allowance cheques printed in both French and English, and thus fulfil a general wish. To my mind, it would be only fair to the French-Canadian population of the dominion and I hope the federal auth-

The Address- Mr. Laurendeau
orities will very soon see that those responsible have these cheques, which are distributed through the whole of Canada, printed in both official languages.
There is another point which I believe should be discussed1 and' settled very soon, if we are anxious that peace and harmony be maintained in our midst.
A while ago, I referred to the amendment of the British North America Act, issued in 1943, in connection with the redistribution of electoral seats. All hon. members will have noticed that I have put on the Order paper a resolution concerning this matter and I hope we will be given the opportunity of discussing it in the house. I hope that this year, now that the war is over, all private members, resolutions may be discussed in this house. When the house passed this amendment in 1943 it was well understood that the delay was accepted on the sole condition that this redistribution of seats would be proceeded with at the very first session following the end of the war. At this session, the government should at least appoint a committee to study the matter so as to assure satisfaction to all groups of citizens.
Mr. Speaker, in all measures passed by the Dominion government and particularly in all social legislation, of ever growing importance, consideration should be given to the rights of each and every province. Of course, it may be difficult at times to conciliate provincial autonomy with all the social measures which this parliament is called upon to adopt, but care should be taken not to deprive the provinces of their rights, because, in my opinion, they are sacred and are the foundation of the structure of our constitution. Moreover, this autonomist feeling is certainly shared by the majority of our people throughout the country, and it is quite natural. As a matter of fact, if we are asked to state our preferences, we immediately think of our birthplace, of the places where we have spent our childhood, then of our district, of the region where we live, then of the province to which we belong. Therefore, in the matter of federal legislation, enactments must necessarily take into account the autonomy of the various provinces so that their rights may at all times be entirely respected.
Mr. Speaker, we are faced at present with another very acute problem to which I believe the federal authorities should give immediate attention. I refer to the status of young men who are on the blacklists of the Department of National Defence. I am concerned with those who, for some reason or other, did not answer the call to service or who, perhaps for
some excellent reason, did not report for duty after having obtained leave from the military authorities.
Mr. Speaker, the war is over and it seems to me the federal government should show leniency and generosity. It should see to it that these young men are not treated as criminals and hunted down as they are at the present time. As an example I need only to relate what happened last week in my county, in the parish of Chateau-Richer. During the night of September 12 the military police raided the parish and forced their way into private homes. Let me mention a pitiful case. The military police forced their way into the home of a sick woman to search the premises, with the result that this woman is now seriously ill in the hospital.
Mr. Speaker, such a situation should be ended. These young men who are not criminals, but who may have broken the laws of the country in wartime, should no longer be pursued. To-day, now that the war is over, we should consider giving them the benefit of an amnesty. Besides, the Liberal members should have no trouble in understanding my request, as I could refer them to the speeches they made in 1919. At that time, after the last war, when the government kept on hunting down the recruits, as we se it done to-day, the members of the opposition of the time clamoured for, and rightly so, the amnesty of the so-called deserters.
These questions may come up again for discussion during this session, but I thought I would bring them to-day to the attention of the house and particularly of the government.


Mr. ALDERIC LAURENDEAU (Berthier-Maskinonge) (Translation):: Mr. Speaker, it is customary for the hon. members of this house, at the beginning of a new parliament, to congratulate the Speaker on his election. I do so with much pleasure because he is a personal friend of mine who has had something to do with my entrance into public life, and who has studied in the same college and the same university. I am pleased to see him again to-day in the post which he now occupies in this house. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that you will preside over the debates of this house with tactfulness and judgment and that, true to Liberal traditions, you will give your rulings with justice and to the satisfaction of all members of this house.
I also wish to congratulate the mover and the seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
Now, Mr. Speaker, allow me to take up another subject. We have all seen in the
The Address-*Mr. Laurendeau


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, September 20, 1945.