July 16, 1946

?

An hon. MEMBER:

Order!

The Budget-Mr. Ashby

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
SC

Patrick Harvey Ashby

Social Credit

Mr. ASHBY:

Mr. Speaker, glancing behind him to see that his supporters were still standing there, said in a clear voice, "The people demand that all taxation on incomes of S2,000 for married persons and Sl,500 for single persons be immediately abolished, with no increase in the price of goods and no lessening of social services; that all women who survive to the age of fifty years shall be paid their rightful allowance of S50 a month; that all men who survive to the age of sixty years shall be paid their rightful allowance of S50 a month, and that there shall be no spying or prying into their private affairs, either, by guess, by gosh and by golly, so help me, amen." And he collapsed into the arms of his staunch and loyal supporters who held him up on his feet.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

James Horace King (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order. I regret to inform the hon. member that he has spoken for forty minutes.

Mr. IV. A. ROBINSON (Simcoe East): Mr. Speaker, I am afraid I shall have considerable difficulty in following the hon. member who has just spoken; but if he can convince the coal dealers in my vicinity that a ton of coal cost nothing, as he attempted to convince the house this afternoon, I should like him to pay me an extended visit next winter.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
SC

Patrick Harvey Ashby

Social Credit

Mr. ASHBY:

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member misstates what I said when he assumes I said a ton of coal cost nothing. I said it did not cost money.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

William Alfred Robinson

Liberal

Mr. ROBINSON (Simcoe East):

If I can get a ton of coal without money it is the same thing to me.

It is with some diffidence, Mr. Speaker, that I rise to offer a few remarks at this late stage of the debate, and I only hope I may be able to make a worth-while contribution. I have listened with a great deal of interest to the previous speakers, and I shall tty to avoid anything of a repetitious nature. I cannot, however, avoid making some reference to what appears to be the main criticism of the budget by hon. members immediately opposite, namely, the charge of lack of economy in public expenditures. This charge was levelled very briefly by the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Macdonnell) in the words, "spend, spend; borrow, borrow, but never save, save," as they appear at page 3215 of Hansard. This has been repeated in various forms, but unfortunately at much greater length, by many hon. members on the opposite side of the house.

It is extremely difficult for me, and I know it will be extremely difficult for the people of this country', to place any credence in a charge

of this kind, when it is directed at the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley). I recall clearly the first occasion upon which I heard him speak. It was some years ago, before he had assumed his present position, at a meeting of service clubs in my' own constituency of Simcoe East. His subject at that time was a comparison of municipal and governmental financing. I can still remember the homely reference he made on that occasion to a rural municipality in his native Nova Scotia. There each taxpayer examined each item of municipal expenditure with an eagle eye, and could calculate to the last penny the effect of such expenditure upon his individual'tax bill. Woe betide the municipal council which made unnecessary disbursements. Those who heard the minister speak on that occasion were convinced that he would apply the same principle of careful scrutiny of expenditures to the broader field of national finance. I am happy to say the people of Canada have given him an opportunity to do so, and in the last few years have entrusted him with the raising and spending of sums of money such as have never before been dreamed of in this country. I do not think there is present in the house, or outside it, anyone who would dare say that the minister did not do a magnificent job.

As I said before, I put no credence in this type of criticism, and I feel sure the people of the country still look to the Minister of Finance as the watchdog of the treasury.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
PC

Karl Kenneth Homuth

Progressive Conservative

Mr. HOMUTH:

Have you read the auditor general's report?

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

William Alfred Robinson

Liberal

Mr. ROBINSON (Simcoe East):

If the hon. member wishes to ask a question I wish he would rise.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
PC

Karl Kenneth Homuth

Progressive Conservative

Mr. HOMUTH:

If you will sit down, I will. Have you read the auditor general's report?

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

William Alfred Robinson

Liberal

Mr. ROBINSON (Simcoe East):

I do not know what that has to do with my present remarks.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
PC

Karl Kenneth Homuth

Progressive Conservative

Mr. HOMUTH:

A great deal.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

William Alfred Robinson

Liberal

Mr. ROBINSON (Simcoe East):

I can assure the hon. member that I have read as much of it as he has.

There is another trend in criticism of the budget to which I should like to refer. I have detected a tendency on the part of critics of the budget to consider it as a thing unto itself rather than as merely one link in our progressing economy. Less than a year ago we concluded the most disastrous war in history. In that war, to the everlasting credit of the people of Canada, we pulled our full share, or more than our full share if considered

The Budget-Mr. Robinson (Simcoe)

on a per capita basis. Following that war, and again to the everlasting credit of the Canadian people who submitted to every restriction and accepted every sacrifice, we find ourselves in Canada in a favoured and enviable position.

No one on the treasury benches in front of me has attempted to take unto himself any credit for this fortunate result. That credit has been and will be left to the people of Canada, where it belongs. But, from my secluded seat under the somewhat improved lights, I want to say it is high time that some of the gentlemen in front of me who directed and planned this great effort of the Canadian people should be given some small measure of approbation, rather than constant criticism. Further, not only did they plan and direct our war effort, but similarly they laid the foundation, well in advance, for our transition to a peace-time economy.

The present budget is, in my opinion, not a thing unto itself. It is in its essence merely one link in a far-reaching plan of transition for Canada, tempered by the exigencies of a devastated world where we must in all humanity go to the help of people less fortunate than ourselves-starving peoples, homeless peoples, naked peoples.

In this light I cannot agree with those critics of the budget who complain, for instance, that the income tax exemptions are not sufficiently high. I think every hon. member would like to see the tax exemptions greatly increased; but at the same time I should like to think there is no hon. member who would espouse such a proposal to the detriment of the national economy.

I have indicated previously that I consider the present budget merely a part of a continuing phase of our Canadian economy. I have no doubt that the minister has already fitted this budget to its proper place in this phase of transition, and is now looking to the future. I should like to commend to him at this time one aspect of the Canadian picture which I hope will have his serious consideration, and which I trust will fit easily and naturally into the Canadian economy. In this I refer to shipping and shipbuilding, and I hope I may be pardoned if I make somewhat extended remarks in reference to my own riding. In the riding from which I come we are proud, and I think justifiably, of our position in the shipping and ship-building industry. We are similarly proud of other things-our productive farms, our factories in Orillia, Midland and Penetanguishene, which helped so much, as the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Howe) well knows, to create the goods necessary to the winning

of the war. We are proud of our historic past and our scenic beauties, our lakes and islands and beaches, which attract so many visitors to the province of Ontario.

(Translation):

Allow me, at this time, to point out with pride to the fact that the northern part of my constituency is dotted with villages inhabited by worthy French-Canadian families who contribute to the prosperity of the district.

(Text)

I hope my constituents and hon. members will forgive me if I do not dwell at too great length on the beauties of my riding, but rather confine myself to the subject I mentioned earlier. Shipbuilding in my riding is centred in the town of Midland on Georgian bay. Our experience in this industry goes back many years, in so far as the building of wooden ships is concerned. In fact, I think even today there may be on the great lakes hulls built half a century or more ago by Ganton Dobson. We commenced the construction of steel vessels during the first great war, and launched at the Midland shipyards a series of vessels such as the War Fiend and certain sister ships with similar ferocious names. Following that war, the yard constructed a number of cargo ships, such as the Ashcroft, the Stada-cona, the Gleneagles and the Lemoyne. I con-not allow this occasion to pass without paying a well deserved tribute to the Lemoyne. Launched at Midland in the middle twenties, she was then and still is the queen of the great lakes. Built to carry huge cargoes of grain, being 633 feet in over-all length and the only ship on the lakes with 70-foot breadth, she has been unapproachable as a record carrier of wheat. Some of her records are as follows: wheat, 1929, 571.885 bushels; corn, 1938, 534,000 bushels; rye, 1927, 538,817 bushels'; soft coal, 1944, 18,116 net tons.

During the thirties the yard which produced such magnificent vessels was unfortunately closed, and it was only with the coming of war that we returned to something of our old position in the shipbuilding field. Then the big yard came to life again and we saw on its ways corvettes, mine-sweepers and powerful oceangoing tugs. Also, our smaller yards, which had previously been engaged in the construction of small pleasure craft, expanded rapidly to turn out Fairmiles and wooden mine-sweepers. I assure you, Mr. Speaker, we felt very close to one important phase of the war effort. We saw these vessels in course of construction. We saw young Canadian officers come to Midland, commission their ships and sail away with their first command. We took into our homes young English boys, made old by fatigue and strain, whose ships had sunk beneath them

3512 COMMONS

The Budget-Mr. Robinson (Simcoe)

and who only remained with us until a new one was launched and they could return with it to duty on the high seas. Yes; we felt very close to the war effort and I think we did a job. Here is the record:

Hunters Boat Works at Orillia produced seven Fairmiles.

Grew Boat Works at Penetanguishene constructed eight Fairmiles and two wooden

mine-sweepers.

Port Carling Boat Works at Honey Harbour launched ten Fairmiles and two wooden minesweepers.

Midland Boat Works at Midland produced eight Fairmiles and two wooden minesweepers.

Midland Shipyards Limited delivered five Western Isle trawlers, eleven ocean-going tugs and eleven corvettes.

I should like to give the names of these corvettes, although they are already well known in Canadian naval annals. They are the Midland, Brantford, Strathroy, Thorlock, LaMaria, Willowers, Lindsay, Cobourg, Whitby, Parry Sound and West York.

I wish now to turn for a moment from shipbuilding to shipping and to indicate our intense interest in the grain trade, which is the backbone of Canadian lake shipping. We have at Midland and Port McNicol five modern elevators with a combined capacity of 20.750.000 bushels. The individual units can handle grain at rates ranging from 12,000 bushels an hour to 40,000 bushels an hour. Our elevators play a large part in the annual grain movement. To illustrate, I have before me some figures for 1945 on the destination of the major grains and soy beans at ports in Canada and the United States, which customarily receive grain in large volumes. These are as follows:

Bushels

Grain received at ports in United

States 343,111,905

Grain received at ports in Canada 331.168,647

Total 674,280,552

Grain received at all Georgian bay

ports 172,123,052

Grain received at Midland and

Port McXicoll 131,297,923

In other words, out of a total of some 331,000.000 bushels of grain received at Canadian ports in 1945, two ports in my riding received some 131,000,000 bushels.

These immense cargoes were carried in our great lakes fleet, of which Canadians can be justly proud. This fleet consists of 226 vessels with an aggregate gross tonnage of 611,795 tons. Even at the risk of boring the house with figures, I should like to give a picture of the make-up and disposition of

that fleet among the various trades. According to the annual report of the Lake Carriers' Association, at the close of the great lakes navigation season in 1945, commercially employed vessels of Canadian registry were as follows: First, we had bulk freighters in the iron ore trade, including nineteen steamers in ore, coal and grain trades, and nineteen steamers in grain and coal trades. Second, classified as bulk freight, self-unloading vessels, we had nine steamers, self-unloading conveyors in the coal trade, and two steamers, self-unloading conveyors, in the cement and coal trade. Third, classified as bulk freight vessels in mixed trades, we had five steamers of the upper lakes fleet in coal and grain trades, eighty steamers in the lower lakes fleet in coal, grain and paper, and twelve other ships in various trades, including paper. Then we had twelve barges in coal, grain and pulpwood. Of package freighters we had twenty. Of oil tankers we had thirty-four. The remainder of the fleet was made up of car ferries, three, and passenger vessels, eleven: a total of 226.

I think this presents an impressive picture of Canadian lake shipping, but there is another side of the picture which should be told. Some of our ships are very old. To quote a few at random: James B. Bade, of the vintage of 1894: Algorail, 1901; Laketon, 1903; Bayton, 1904; Westmount, 1917; Matthewston, 1922, and Royalton, 1924. In other words, the average age of our fleet, and especially our upper lakes fleet, is high, and this means, at the least, increased cost of operation and, at the worst, actual obsolescence in some cases.

Although my remarks have been directed primarily at the role of my own riding in shipbuilding and shipping, I hope that two general points will have emerged. First, I think it is clear that we have in Canada shipyards which are ready, willing and competent to build ships of all kinds. Second, we have in Canada a great lakes fleet of which we can be very proud but which is in need of new blood. The inference seems to me to be obvious, and I commend to the minister and to the government that in any deliberations as to our future economy these two points be kept well to the forefront. Let us see to it that these related industries, shipping and shipbuilding, play an increasingly important part in the national scene.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
CCF

Edward LeRoy Bowerman

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. E. L. BOWERMAN (Prince Albert):

Mr. Speaker, I am afraid that my remarks regarding my constituency will not be quite along the lines to which I have just listened from the hon. member who has just spoken.

The Budget-Mr. Bowerman

I rise to take part in this debate because of a sense of responsibility to my constituents who will expect me to present to the government, through the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) in this budget debate, their reactions to his proposals as well as their pressing and immediate needs.

At this time it is not my purpose to deal in detail with the budget proposals, because I understand that we shall have an opportunity to do that in committee and my colleagues have also presented in an able manner our views as a group. My purpose this evening will be to present the views of my constituents as I see them in relation to pressing problems of a constituency nature.

First, may I express my support of the amendment which has been moved by my colleague the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis). I believe that by far the greater majority of my constituents feel as I do about this amendment, that it sets forth clearly and concisely their objections to what the Minister of Finance is pleased to call essentially a peace-time budget providing for the financial requirements of the first post-war year which is wholly a year of peace. I am quite sure that all the socialists and most of the Liberals and Conservatives of the riding of Prince Albert feel, as I do, that the minister's budget does not provide as it should and could for the peace, happiness and prosperity of our citizens. While I am sure that these are the views of my constituents, I am also sure that they would, as I do, want to express appreciation and admiration for the manner in which the Minister of Finance has so conscientiously and unhesitatingly given of his energy and talents to the winning of the war. True, it has been our privilege to view most of his efforts from a distance. Nevertheless we feel that we can say, and say it sincerely, that no one in the government is more worthy of the honours bestowed upon him than the present Minister of Finance.

I should like at this time to thank all other hon. members of this house for the kindness and consideration that I have received from them, especially from the various ministers of the government when I have sought information from them or their departments on behalf of my constituents; also the senior members of the house who have in so many ways assisted us newcomers to this parliament to find our way around, as it were. During my first session here there were times when I sat in what seemed to me a maze of formalities that tended rather to hinder than facilitate the business of the house. I say that it seemed that way to

me. Then there is a certain book in which the precise way for members of parliament to get in and out of difficulties is set forth, but what has puzzled me and still does is that there are times when its citations are to be considered in the light of one or more other books and previous rulings, depending, as I see it, on which side of the house the difficulties arise. Then the Speaker is called upon to rule on the matter.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

William Ross Macdonald (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER:

Order. The hon. member is reflecting on the action of the Speaker.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
CCF

Edward LeRoy Bowerman

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. BOWERMAN:

I am very sorry that Your Honour is taking that position, and I am sure that if you will wait for a moment you will be satisfied with what I intended to say. It was not my intention to reflect in any way upon the Speaker; but may I say with all deference and respect that I have not been at all times sure that the rulings given could be found in any of the books mentioned. However, let me hasten to add that the gracious manner in which the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker have given their decisions has gone a long way toward dispelling from my mind any thought but that their desire was to fulfil, in a fair and impartial way, duties of the high office placed upon them by this parliament. Having said that in all sincerity, I return to the amendment to the amendment.

We in this group look with grave concern and with a measure of regret upon the failfire of the government to implement their preelection pledges and to fulfil the promises made only a year ago to the Canadian people from coast to coast. By no stretch of the imagination can I agree with the minister when he refers to this year as being "wholly a year of peace." There is no peace, either abroad or at home, and there can be no peace in our land until this government, or some other, recognizes the fact that the labourer is worthy of his hire, be he farmer, artisan or what-not, and that he is entitled to a fair share of the national wealth and a voice in determining his hours of labour and the conditions under which that labour shall be performed.

It is, in my opinion, absurd even to think of calling this a year of peace, when at the very time of the preparation of this budget thousands were out of employment and thousands were out on strike, because that is the only means they know by which their demands are heeded. Further, thousands are homeless because this government has failed to plan for peace as it planned for war. Even as we continue this debate, thousands have just gone out on strike who have patiently and consistently for months, yes, all during the war,

The Budget

Mr. Bowerman

given of their best, hoping against hope that the conditions under which they laboured and the "take-home pay" they received might be improved to a point where there would be an assurance of a decent standard of living. In the face of all this, the government brings down a budget that leaves the burden of taxation upon the backs of those who can least afford to pay while, practically at the same time, it brought down a measure increasing the pay of all members of this house and of the other place, with tax exemptions for us in this chamber.

Without any hesitation, I affirm that every . married couple are entitled to at least $2,000 a year tax-free income, and every single person to at least $1,000 tax free. We have every reason, because of the pre-election promises, to expect jobs, housing and rehabilitation plans to a far greater extent than we have at present, and promised for the distant future, in this budget.

Mr. Speaker, because I have not had the opportunity or availed myself of the opportunity if I had it, I wish to say, in the light of this budget, a few words regarding the constituency I have the honour to represent. Prince Albert, a news commentator has said, and I quote:

... is the rightful electoral heir of the old federal district of Saskatchewan, Northwest Territories, and it was in the federal electoral district of Saskatchewan, Northwest Territories, in the year 1896. that a political leader by the name of Wilfrid Laurier was elected to parliament on a protest vote. The handful of Canadians in revolt against the double talk and double-dealing of the government that had been in office too long for its own honour or its country's good, did the job then by a majority of 44, and after forty-nine years Prince Albert has got back at last to pioneer form.

The territory of this constituency is as wide as from Ottawa to Montreal and stretches northward from the North and South Saskatchewan rivers to the Northwest Territories, a distance as far as. from here to Toronto. Within this vast territory are some of the finest agricultural lands to be found in Canada. In the northern parts are to be found hundreds of lakes and streams teeming with fish, and its forests are a hunter's paradise. Gateway to this vast area of unlimited, potential mineral, water and forest wealth, indeed to much more of the Saskatchewan great northland, is the city of Prince Albert, located on the banks of the North Saskatchewan river. All that has kept this enterprising little city and the surrounding territory which comprises the constituency from taking its rightful place as one of the leading industrial and recreational centres of western Canada is the fact that for

ninteen years it has been tied to the apron strings of the Prime Minister and a small group of Liberals, so-called. Lest it may be thought that I am alone in this opinion, and just to keep the record straight, I should like to quote from others who, both from a distance and closer up, have viewed the situation. First, may I read from Maclean's of July 15, 1945:

Prince Albert is a city of about 13,000, a bustling and ambitious little place with a Rotarian civic pride. But newcomers arriving by train would conclude, from looking at its railway station, that it was a none-too-enter-prising village. Prince Albertans are acutely conscious and ashamed of this eyesore.

Prince Albert is also on the North Saskatchewan river, a navigable stream which used to be the sole transport artery of the region. Bridges over such streams are a federal responsibility. Prince Albert has a bridge that looks like a museum specimen of the late Victorian era; it's ugly, grimy, rickety and inadequate to the traffic it bears.

Worst grievance, though, is the Prince Albert airport. Other western cities of comparable size and status have good, modern air fields with hard-surfaced runways. The Prince Albert airport looks like what it is, somebody's cow pasture. Two days' rain converts it into a swamp on which no plane can land or take off. But nobody ever persuaded Munitions and Supply to release the asphalt, or Transport to release the money, that would have made this piece of prairie farmland into a modern air station. Clamour on all these grievances met the reply, "now don't embarrass the Prime Minister."

This neglect has been rooted, of course, in Mr. King's honourable reluctance to give any favours or preference to his own riding. But resentful Prince Albertans, even Liberals, will tell you that he carried this policy much too far.

Next, I wish to quote from the Prince Albert Daily Herald of April 1 of this year. By the way, the Prince Albert Daily Herald editorially is Liberal, but in spite of that they publish a paper of which, for world, national and community news, any constituency might be proud. I quote:

For twelve days now Prince Albert has been cut off from the rest of the world by air mail. The Canadian Pacific Air Lines has been forced to by-pass the city because of the quagmire conditions at the landing field. Prince Albert is the only sizable place in the province in the unenviable position of not being able to provide a safe landing field for wheel-equipped planes at times of the year when water lies on the field.

Throughout the war the field was used under the commonwealth air training plan for the training of pilots for the war. It so happened that the type of training given in Prince Albert did not require hard-surfaced landing facilities. It was only because of this that the facilities which are essential if a city is to be of any importance on the air map of the country are lacking in Prince Albert.

During the election campaign, when Minister of Reconstruction Howe visited Prince Albert, he declared that if Prince Albert wanted hardsurfaced runways at the airfield, these facilities would be provided. The election did not go the

[Mr. Bowerman.1

The Budget-Mr. Bowerman

wav that Mr. Howe no doubt hoped it would when he made this promise, but a promise is a promise and now seems the opportune time to remind Mr. Howe of his pre-election commitment. ,

There are good arguments with which to support a request to the dominion government for the construction of hard-surfaced landing facilities here. One is that these facilities have been provided in Saskatoon, Regina, North Battle-ford and elsewhere out of dominion funds and it is not unreasonable to expect the dominion [DOT] to place Prince Albert on a footing of equality with these other centres.

Further, I wish to place on the record the fact that a delegation from Prince Albert did come to Ottawa, and briefs were presented to the Prime Minister and the ministers concerned regarding the airfield runway. In this brief they say:

The council of the city of Prince Albert and the board of trade respectfully request the immediate construction of hard-surfaced runways at the Prince Albert airport, and they further request that the Department of Transport take over the operation and maintenance of the airport.

The city of Prince Albert is located at the extreme north of the populated area of the province and is the starting off point for flying in the north.

During the war airports adjacent to small centres were hard-surfaced. We point particularly to fields at Davidson, North Battle-ford, Mossbank, and Dafoe, etc. In many instances we understand that these fields are not being and will not be used for civil aviation.

In view of the actual use of the field and its possibilities for future development it is felt by the city that a modern airport with hardsurfaced runways is indispensable.

The city accordingly urges that the matter be given immediate attention by the federal government.

I said that this delegation did come. They received the same promises, only extended, that were received prior to the election last year.

In regard to the traffic bridge, I only wish to remind the ministers concerned that this matter is urgent and that plans should be made for the starting of this project without delay.

There is another urgent matter confronting the citizens of Prince Albert as well as those of many other communities in Canada. I have received letters in regard to this matter, and, because I can get it before the Minister of Finance more quickly in this way, I shall again quote from an editorial appearing in the Prince Albert Herald of July 3, as follows:

The Prince Albert citizens' rehabilitation committee in resolutions passed at a recent meeting has drawn attention to the acute housing situation in Prince Albert which requires the immediate attention of government authorities.

About a year ago Wartime Housing Limited commenced the construction through a contractor, of fifty houses in the city. At that time it was said some of the houses might be

ready for occupancy by Christmas. Here it is six months from Christmas and not one family has been able to move in. Another fifty houses are to be built, but when? Wartime Housing Limited dwellings, in the meantime, have been completed in other cities. Some of them have been occupied for months.

The committee in its investigation found that there were approximately 275 veterans' families awaiting adequate living accommodation in the city. It is urgent that as many of these as possible be quartered as soon as possible in order to permit the occupants of the houses to obtain their winter's supply of fuel.

The situation will be made more acute this fall when additional vocational training courses are opened in the city.

The minimum demand should be that the fifty houses now being built and the additional fifty should be completed with the least possible delay. Wartime Housing Limited has priorities, but apparently these have been used for materials for houses in other cities.

I bring this to the attention of the minister, of the government and of those in charge of this particular project so that there may be some stepping-up of the completion of these houses for the benefit of the 275 families of returned men in Prince Albert. I also believe that the budget brings no peace or contentment to these 275 families. I have quoted and read at some length to place these matters before the house because, as I said in the beginning, Prince Albert feels that it has been neglected too long. I might add that now that the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has found safe retirement in the vales of Glengarry he need not have any scruples or reluctance in seeing that Prince Albert receives just and fair treatment from his government after these long years of hopeful waiting.

I should like to thank the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) and the Postmaster General (Mr. Bertrand) on behalf of my constituents for the intended improvements to the national park and postal facilities. These improvements are long overdue. Nevertheless they are gratefully appreciated.

In conclusion, may I say, as I said at the beginning, that I am supporting the amendment to the amendment because I am satisfied that by far the greater majority of my constituents of every political affiliation from the farms,, villages and cities find very little comfort or peace of mind in the budget now before the house, and that from their reaction I gather that the words of the amendment as proposed to be amended express their feelings when it says in particular:

That the budget does not provide for tax reductions in the calendar year 1946 by raising sufficiently the exemptions of those in the lower income brackets;

That the budget fails to provide for the investment of public funds to bridge the gap be-

The Budget-Mr. Dorion

tween anticipated private investment and the total national investment required to assm'e a high national income and full employment;

That the budget fails in the new offer to the provinces to provide for social security measures which will achieve a reasonable standard of economic security for all Canadians;

That the budget fails in its tax proposals to recognize the principle that cooperatives are non-profit-making organizations.

Mr. FREDERIC DORION (Charlevoix-

Saguenay): (Translation); Mr. Speaker, I shall confine the brief remarks I wish to make in connection with this debate to a few features of the speech delivered by the Right Hon, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley).

However, before dealing with the problems I intend to discuss, I wish to mention an event which, to my mind, deserves to be stressed, I mean the appointment of the Right Hon. the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) as acting prime minister.

That choice made by .the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has been unanimously applauded by the house and I am sure of voicing the opinion of my Quebec fellow-citizens in tendering the Minister of Justice my heartiest congratulations.

I am convinced that his Quebec compatriots and especially his Quebec East electors have been pleased to note once again that he enjoys the esteem and the confidence of his colleagues. Even though one may not share his political views, one cannot but recognize his great dignity and his perfect integrity and it must be admitted that he is a credit to his French-Canadian fellow-citizens, in his public life as well as in his professional capacity; to a lawyer, this is always a prime consideration.

However, I wonder whether the pleasure felt by the people of Quebec at this announcement will suffice to erase the impression of pronounced uneasiness created by the speech delivered on June 18, by the Right Hon. the Minister of Justice in the debate on redistribution. I am sorry he is not present at this" time, but I hope he will hear from this and will have some remarks to make on the subject.

Referring to Hansard of June 18, I quote the following from the speech delivered by the Minister of Justice:

The hon. member for Calgary West asked, what about section 133, which provides:

Either the English or the French language may be used by any person in the debates of the, houses of parliament of Canada and of the

houses of the legislature of Quebec; and both those languages shall be used in the respective records and journals of those houses.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

James Horace King (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order! I regret to interrupt the hon. member but he may not refer to a previous debate.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
IND

Frédéric Dorion

Independent

Mr. DORION:

I am not referring to the debate. If I am not allowed to read from the record the exact words of the Minister of Justice, I am at least entitled to say this: on June 18 last, the right hon. gentleman stated that parliament could forbid the use of the French language in the debates of this house and the Quebec legislature. This statement has dismayed and deeply disturbed our people.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

James Horace King (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order! I called the hon. member to order a moment ago, not only because it is forbidden to read speeches made during a previous debate but also because it is not permitted to debate a motion which nas been carried or defeated in the same session. I must call his attention to standing order 41 and paragraph 293, sub-paragraph (a) of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, second edition:

(Text):

(a) refer to any debate of the same session on any question not then under discussion . . .

(Translation):

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
IND

Frédéric Dorion

Independent

Mr. DORION:

Mr. Speaker. Are you

referring to standing order No. 41?

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

James Horace King (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

I have referred the hon. member to standing order No. 41, entitled "Decorum in Debate."

(Text):

In Beauchesne's Rules and Forms, second edition, citation 293 states:

Besides the prohibitions contained in this standing order, it has been sanctioned by usage both in England and in Canada, that a member,, while speaking, must not:

(a) refer to any debate of the same session on any question not then under discussion . . ,

(Translation):

The hon. member is referring to a previous debate, which is contrary to the standing orders of the house.

(Text):

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

Ian Alistair Mackenzie (Minister of Veterans Affairs; Leader of the Government in the House of Commons; Liberal Party House Leader)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE:

Would my hon. friend permit me to intervene for a moment?

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink

July 16, 1946