October 17, 1951

IND

Raymond Bruneau

Independent Liberal

Mr. Raymond Bruneau (Prescott):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to associate my voice with those of the other members who have taken part in the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne, in congratulating the mover and the seconder.

(Translation):

Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to subscribe to the noble thoughts expressed by the hon. member for Beauharnois (Mr. Cauchon) on national unity in this country.

As a representative of a constituency where two great races live side by side, it is heartening to hear harmony and understanding preached on the very floor of the house. How proud we are, therefore, to be able to march under the banner of a leader who has undertaken the forging of a link between French and English-speaking citizens.

(Text):

While listening to the seconder of the address, the hon. member for Yukon-Mac-kenzie River (Mr. Simmons), it was comforting to hear that probably never before in history has our country had the natural resources at her disposal for becoming a great nation that she has at the present time, thus fulfilling the prophecy of Sir Wilfrid Laurier that the twentieth century would be that of our country.

One of the main items under study during the current session will be a measure to provide increased security for our older citizens through payment of pensions. I would like to see my government study the possibility of including with old people the invalids, the needy ones who are incapable of providing for themselves. We have a duty to assist those whom nature did not favour, and I think that the people we would include in our security program would be forever grateful. In voicing this opinion I am sure I also voice that of a good majority of the members of this house. A lot of the cases that are brought to our attention are those of people who through mental or physical deficiency see themselves at the mercy of charitable institutions or relatives to ensure a meagre subsistence. Life is already gloomy enough for them and I should think that if we were to bring a ray of sunshine and some hope into their existence, we would have accomplished something.

In reading in the speech from the throne that "our national effort to provide for the security of our country in co-operation with other peace-loving nations continues to receive the constant attention of the ministers", it is most comforting to know that we are doing our utmost, in these troubled

times, to achieve peace through preparedness. We are giving lull support to our Canadian forces in Korea who are upholding the ideals of the United Nations which have pledged themselves to defeat aggression, and we can be proud of the fact that following the deliberations at the NATO conference held in this house the nations are steadily increasing their combined strength in their determined effort to maintain true principles of democracy throughout the world. Let us hope that before too long Greece and Turkey will join the north Atlantic alliance, thus reinforcing the position of the free world, so close to the iron curtain, in the vicinity of the Mediterranean world where at present serious trouble is brewing. I could not help but think how fortunate we are to be living in a free country, where our Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) can go about without bodyguards, while every one of us here was stunned to hear yesterday of the assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan, Prime Minister of Pakistan, who paid the supreme sacrifice for upholding those same principles of democracy which we are doing our best to achieve.

Another item of great importance under study will be the rising cost of living. We are given the assurance by the Prime Minister that every measure will be taken to counteract inflation. I am sure that no effort will be spared to make possible a stabilization of our economy.

As regards the seaway and the power phases of the St. Lawrence project recently discussed in Washington by the President of the United States and our Prime Minister, I am sure this question is of vital importance to the security as well as the economy of the two countries, and let us hope that this project, long debated, will be implemented. While dealing here with a question relative to the Department of Transport, I wish to tell the minister of that department how grateful the members of the Hawkesbury flying club are for the beacon he has provided them with for the purpose of night flying in the region.

I should like at this point to ask the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton) to have the people of his department undertake a study of the possibility of re-opening the two airports of St. Eugene and Pendleton in my riding. With the tenseness of the present international situation there is no doubt that these two airfields, ideally situated in the Ottawa valley, could best be used for the training of our airmen.

The Address-Mr. Bruneau

One other question not mentioned in the speech from the throne but which I believe is of great importance is the decentralization of industry. With the ever-growing possibility of a third world war I am sure our heavy industries, concentrated as they are in the main cities around the land, would suffer a terrible blow from air attacks and our national economy could be wrecked in no time. For that reason I am sure it would be wise to spread industry across our vast continent where there is certainly no scarcity of space. Prescott county, ideally situated on a flat stretch of land, half way between the two most important cities in Canada, the capital, Ottawa, and the metropolis, Montreal, offers immense possibilities for the establishment of such industries.

When we study the recommendations submitted by the royal commission on national development in the arts, letters and sciences, I should like to see a debate initiated as to the suitability and opportunity of implementing a program, or setting up a department, for the purpose of helping our young people in Canada. We have great possibilities in our country if our citizens of tomorrow are properly coached and allowed to carve out for themselves a future suited to their aptitude in different fields of learning. We have able young men who, given a chance, would be in a better position to help themselves and the country at large if they had the means at their disposal to improve along the lines for which they are best suited. Such a department already exists in different European countries and has proved to be of very great importance.

There is also another group of people in our country to whom we could lend a helping hand. I have in mind the agricultural class. The main industry in my riding is dairy farming, and for some time now I have received quite a number of postal cards calling to my attention the danger of large imports of vegetable oils for the manufacturing of substitutes for dairy products, thus reducing the yearly income of farmers. I would ask the government to adopt, at its earliest convenience, the necessary measures to give the dairy industry sufficient protection, by levying a duty on the import of such oils.

Keeping in mind the implementation of a program of security for our old people and invalids while studying the possibility of helping and preparing our citizens of tomorrow, let us spare no energy in developing the natural resources with which Providence has endowed us to such an extent. Let us also go all-out on a preparedness

130

The Address-Mr. J. A. Ross program, thus enabling the free nations of the world to continue to enjoy this liberty so long and dearly sought after by the unfortunate people now living under a regime of terror behind the iron curtain. Our country, young in years but rich in promise and realization, has already taken a firm attitude in her determination to see that truth prevails and freedom is spread to the four corners of the earth. This is an achievement of which I am sure every one of us here has reason to be proud.

We have barely started a new session and I am sure that our deliberations, carried on in this house in the spirit of good will under the guiding light of democracy, will be those of a government of the people, for the people, by the people.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PC

James Arthur Ross

Progressive Conservative

Mr. J. A. Ross (Souris):

Mr. Speaker, I desire to offer a few remarks in this debate on the address in reply. First I should like to congratulate the mover (Mr. Cauchon) and the seconder (Mr. Simmons). In my opinion they both made excellent presentations on behalf of their constituencies and the nation as a whole.

In the speech from the throne mention is made first of the fact that our country is now being honoured by the visit of Their Royal Highnesses The Princess Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh. It then proceeds to comment upon the public satisfaction in the speedy recovery of His Majesty the King. In these matters I am sure there is universal accord throughout the nation.

It then states that the primary reason for summoning parliament for a second session in the present year is to consider a measure to provide increased security for our older citizens, through the payment of pensions. On this general principle there is agreement among all parties. I should imagine, however, that the method of financing may become somewhat controversial, and there may be some reference to the hardship experienced by the smaller and less fortunate provinces in taking care of those citizens between the ages of sixty-five and sixty-nine years. I trust the contributory system shall always be kept before us in our deliberations when legislation in respect of this important measure is before us.

I was disappointed that at this session, with the matter of inflation of such great importance, there is not to be the introduction of a budget. Under this condition it may be difficult for us to thoroughly debate matters affecting various government departments. I was impressed by the remarks of my colleague the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) when he said that this session would be known in history as the inflationary

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

They may get more.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PC

James Arthur Ross

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Ross (Souris):

I think they will. However, I would point out that the initial payment for this crop was reduced by 20 per cent over the initial payment of a year ago. While they were making that reduction, the United States government increased their payment by nineteen cents.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

The initial price was the same.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PC

James Arthur Ross

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Ross (Souris):

It has been reduced. I want to support what was said by the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) about the marketing of wheat. There have been two bad years in the west for which no one is to blame, but I think something should be done about grading and storage. Just before I left I saw a copy of a wire which had been sent to the elevator companies by the general manager pointing out that grain should not be purchased even though they were able to send a sample in and get certain grades because when the grain came forward the government officials were setting it back one or more grades. You can understand the great difficulties that arise from such practices. I support the request made by the hon. member for Lake Centre that an advance payment should be made on grain properly stored on the farm. This practice has been followed quite satisfactorily for a number of years by the great nation to the south. As I pointed out, while our government has decreased the initial payment by twenty cents per bushel, even though our price is much below theirs,

The Address-Mr. J. A. Ross the United States government has seen fit under a guaranteed loan to increase the price to the producer by nineteen cents per bushel over the previous year. Farmers in the United States are able to obtain a loan of $2.18 per bushel on this year's crop for grain properly inspected and stored. They are also allowed storage rates of a cent or a cent and a fraction per bushel per month up until next April. At that time they can let the government take over the grain at that price or they can sell it if the market should be above that price. That has worked out very well and I think such a plan should be followed in this country.

That loan of $2.18 per bushel is considered to be 90 per cent of the parity price for wheat stored in that country There is a complete lack of parity for our western farmers. Under our set-up the government dictates what the cereals shall be sold at. I understand that somewhat the same situation exists in the dairying industry. At the same time there is no control over the prices of the things these people must purchase. According to the bureau of statistics farm wages have increased fourfold since 1941. Some people still find it necessary to use binder twine, and I find that the price of that has increased fivefold since 1942. Farm machinery and many of the other items absolutely necessary to farm production have doubled or more in cost during those years. There is no parity for these farm producers. We should be following the same practice followed in the great nation to the south. I support wholeheartedly the request made by the hon. member for Lake Centre that a similar system be instituted for the grain producers of at least the prairie provinces. There is not as much wheat produced in the east; the grain is not sold through the wheat board, and therefore they receive a better price.

There is another matter I should like to take up with the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe). Many people in the west are interested in this. I do not know whether any solution can be found to take care of the frozen and low-grade grain from last year's crop which is cluttering up our storage capacity in the west at this time. The fact that a transport controller has been appointed is all to the good, but there seems to be a difference in the statements he is issuing, those being issued by Mr. Mclvor of the wheat board, and the statements issued by the heads of the pool in the prairie provinces.

Another matter I should like to refer to is this carrying charge of six cents per bushel which has been so confusing since it was announced last June. Many people have felt that if this could be made under the international wheat agreement it should

have been possible under the original agreement. I have not been able to find out just exactly what it covers and I should like to have an explanation on the record by the Minister of Trade and Commerce for the benefit of these producers.

During the wheat debate last session I asked that a royal commission be set up to study and report on the grading, marketing and storage of Canadian grain, both here and abroad. During the debate on the $65 million payment I asked that a commission be set up- and my leader made the same request-to determine the losses suffered by the farmers under the agreement, and what the final settlement might have been.

We have had many royal commissions in the past, some of them quite a few years ago, but considering the complex conditions that exist today I submit the government should appoint a royal commission to make a study and report to parliament on the grading, marketing and storage of Canadian grain in Canada and abroad. I again make that personal appeal to the government. Wheat is a most important item in Canadian exports and it cannot lightly be set aside.

I said that I would be brief, but as we are not to have a budget debate I realized that I might find it difficult to debate matters pertaining to various departments, some of which are quite urgent. I wanted to take advantage of this debate to make an appeal on behalf of the veterans and the Canadian Legion whose requests deserve the consideration of this government. I want to point out that very difficult situation, and also the situation in which a great portion of the farm population of Canada now finds itself. It is a situation that is getting rapidly worse. I am one of those people who believe there is racketeering going on in our nation today. Never at any other time in our history have more big businesses been running rampant and fixing their charges as they please. As the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) said during the last session, they are getting all set for a period of control. I think it is a most unhealthy situation when a very important section of the country is tied down under control as to the prices of what they sell, yet have to buy their machinery of production under such a set-up. I am sure that in certain cases deliberate racketeering is going on. I make this appeal to the government at this time through the only medium we may have during this session.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Donald Ferguson Brown

Liberal

Mr. D. F. Brown (Essex West):

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my constituents may I be permitted to introduce a subject which is not only vital to the constituency I represent but

also to the whole economy of the Dominion of Canada. Before doing so, however, may I be permitted to extend my congratulations to the mover (Mr. Cauchon) and the seconder (Mr. Simmons) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. It is gratifying and pleasing to all in this group that these members have been chosen by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) from the largest group on the opposition side of the house but which of course is loyal to the Prime Minister. Caucuses of our group are usually held around the dinner table with the full knowledge and consent of our distinguished leader, and the hon. member for Beauhar-nois (Mr. Cauchon) and the hon. member for Yukon-Mackenzie River (Mr. Simmons) have not only distinguished themselves in our caucuses but also in this house. May I express to them my very best wishes for their continuing success in serving the public of Canada.

The matter to which I wish to refer is what has been lightly referred to in this house as "the Windsor situation". First of all I think we should determine some of the geography of that part of the country as well as the economics. I have the unique distinction of representing the only constituency in Canada which is Wholly and directly south of the United States, in that Detroit aind other parts of the United States, including the state of Michigan, are practically on three sides of it-

The industries which operate there are chiefly the automobile industry comprising the Ford Motor Company, the Chrysler Motor Company, a large plant of General Motors, and some fifty or more feeder plants which supply parts and accessories to the three main industrial concerns. These feeder plants are important in their own right. They are large, and they employ a great many people. Referring only to a few, there is the Kelsey Wheel Company, the Auto Specialties Manufacturing Company and the Canadian Automotive Trim Company and others. There are over fifty of them. Many of them are in my constituency. Many of them are in the constituency of Essex East. Our industrial life is also enriched by the fact that we have the largest pharmaceutical industry in the British, empire. I believe the concentrated industries in that line constitute in the whole the largest group in the British empire manufacturing drugs and allied products. We also produce chemicals. We have large salt deposits from which come caustics, chlorine and other products shipped to all parts of Canada.

The Detroit river provides easy access to the area. It has been termed, and I believe

The Address-Mr. D. F. Brown rightly, the busiest inland waterway in the world so far as river travel is concerned. We have always considered that at the peak of the season there is never a moment when there is not a lake freighter in view plying the waters of the river. The community is also serviced by several railroads including the Canadian National, Michigan Central, Canadian Pacific, Chesapeake and Ohio, Wabash, and also the Essex Terminal Railroad, providing a terminal operation. Access is obtained to Detroit and the United States by means of a bridge and a tunnel, over and under the river.

It is not my purpose to quarrel with certain policies the government has adopted, because in our part of the country we are prepared to do that which is considered best for the welfare of Canada as a whole. We regret that we sometimes have to suffer, but we are not coming here crying for assistance. We merely ask for an opportunity to take our place in the economic life of our country. The situation in Windsor is indicated by the records of the unemployment insurance benefit claims, which would indicate that on September 10 last, due to policies which have been inaugurated, there were 4,312 males unemployed. Five days later, on September 15, 1951, that figure had dropped to 3,035 males. On September 25 it had risen again to 3,488 males, and as of October 6 last the figure stood at 4,249 males.

Now, Mr. Speaker, that is a rather sizeable number in a community of about 125 or perhaps 150 thousand people, including the environs. The figure of 4,300 on September 10 dropped to 3,000 because the unemployed went into the surrounding country to reap the bountiful harvest which has been ours this year. They have now returned to the city, and are again asking for benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act. One company, the Ford Motor Company, did take back some of those who had been dismissed. This was due to the fact that contracts were obtained, not only from the export markets but for the manufacture of jet aeroplane wings, and accounts for about 900. It has been offset by a lay-off in the Chrysler plant of a considerable number, due to economic conditions. One must understand the automobile business to some extent to realize that the industry cannot switch from one commodity or vehicle to another without a great deal of expense, also considerable thought and effort. It takes many months of planning to put into operation the machines which are going to make new vehicles. It cannot be done hurriedly. On the other hand it is not

The Address-Mr. D. F. Brown practicable to think that all this expense and planning can be undertaken if there are to be no sizeable orders in return.

In leaving the unemployed I would not have it thought that there are no women unemployed. As of a week ago we had about 1,347 unemployed women claiming unemployment insurance benefits. During the summer, when we saw the position into which we were getting, conferences were held with the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) and the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg), and industrial and union leaders, as a result of which a committee was set up which has continued to hold meetings in the city of Windsor. This committee has been headed by our distinguished deputy minister of labour, Mr. Arthur MacNamara, who has given unstintingly of his time and ability in assisting that part of the country. Meetings have been held with representatives of the larger automobile plants, representatives of the unions, provincial members, representatives of the Department of Defence Production and the Department of Trade and Commerce. Other departments have also been represented. I have taken part in these meetings, too, with the exception of the last one which was held after this session had commenced. We are grateful to Mr. MacNamara for having gone to Windsor at great inconvenience to himself, and assisting us in the way he has, even if it has only been for the purpose of ascertaining the true position and the dissemination of that information amongst the public.

I know that the Department of Defence Production has also given special attention to the Windsor area, and has invited tenders from industrial firms for a variety of articles. I was glad to see that yesterday the Minister of Defence Production (Mr. Howe) was in Windsor when the first war truck came off the Chrysler production line yesterday. If orders for more trucks followed it would help us to maintain our standard of living and our dignity, because, as I have said, we are not asking for any favours. We merely want opportunities.

It may not be generally known, but the Department of Defence Production has allotted contracts or tenders for the following list of items:

18 passenger busses (40-passenger size)

Spares for ambulances

Spares for General Motors vehicles

Drugs and chemicals

370 storage tanks

835 trailers

12.000 aprons for use in food handling 22,700 pillows

3,740 frying pans

3.000 hospital mattresses 23,015 bed mattresses 100 spray guns

80 pressure cups

2,400 ladles

65,000 uniform vests cotton

18 tractors

15 pumps

110 work benches I

Spare part stores Chrysler motors

Spare part stores General Motors vehicles

To many hon. members this may seem to be a sizeable amount of war orders, but having in mind the potential ability of that community to produce it means comparatively few working days. In fact it will not mean that any of those unemployed will be restored to the payroll. For one reason or another we are not in a position to compete with low cost areas where the standard of living is not the same as ours or where the standard of pay is not the same as ours. It would seem to me, Mr. Speaker, that if we are going to make the most, not only of the manpower ability but of the machinery and equipment we have for the production of war materials, then it will be necessary for the Department of Defence Production to divide the country into sections and invite tenders in particular areas, only, so that there will be no competition between one area and another. Otherwise, it would appear to me that there will be a great deal of machinery and equipment lying idle when it should be busy. There will be a great deal of "knowhow", ability, and capacity for planning throughout this country lying stagnant.

I am glad to note that the federal government is doing something for those who are now unemployed. May I say that it has been the experience of the Department of Labour that the people, the labourers or the artisans, who have once lived in that part of the country do not and will not move away. That situation, of course, is subject to some exceptions. There may be a few who will want to go away and who will go of their own volition, but generally it has been the experience that they will not move, by their own choice, to any other part of the country. I do not say that boastfully, but merely mention it as a fact that has been established by the department.

I am happy to see that the federal government has joined with the provincial government in inaugurating a vocational training class or classes for those who are unemployed. The federal government is now paying 75 per cent of the cost of those classes, which will be held largely in the W. D. Lowe Vocational School, probably one of the finest vocational schools of its type in the Dominion of Canada.

We all realize that throughout the length and breadth of this country there is a considerable shortage of skilled workmen not only for the factories but in the building

trades. It is therefore encouraging to see this joint action being taken. I am sure it will be welcomed by those citizens of the city of Windsor and its environs who at the present time happen to be unemployed.

There is a desire on the part of the department, I am sure, that advantage should be taken of the opportunity that is being given to these people. I should like to add my appeal to those workmen who are unemployed to accept this chance given to them by the federal and the provincial governments to improve themselves and to enlarge their abilities, so that when the opportunity is presented they will be able to accept positions of a higher grade than those they had before.

These classes are going to specialize. The first is a machine shop class. It is true that the automobile industry needs men trained in work other than that to which they have been accustomed. Many of them, of course, are specialists in one set of operations in the factory; but there are many other opportunities which may be available to them, and these classes are providing that opportunity. One other subject in which instruction is to be given is sheet metal work. As I pointed out, one factory has obtained a large contract for the assembly of wings for jet-propelled airplanes. This training will be invaluable to persons engaged in that work. The third class will be in draftsmanship, which is so highly important not only in the automobile industry but throughout all mechanized endeavour.

I have pointed out that it is exceedingly difficult to persuade persons who have lived in that part of the country to take positions in other parts of the country. We have had it pointed out that jobs are available in one part or another. If I may, I should like to add my appeal to that of the Department of Labour. I would suggest to these people that, as a temporary measure only, they take jobs in other parts of the country which are most convenient to them, as an emergency measure only and for the winter, so that at the end of the winter season they may return. We hope by that time conditions will have righted themselves in our community, and that they may be re-engaged in the activity to which they are most desirous to return and live in the places where their families are, and which may be most agreeable to them.

Windsor is not a city which does not attempt to help itself. There is at the present time an active committee composed of representatives of the unions and of the businessmen, who are constantly conferring with contractors in the Detroit area. In Detroit

The Address-Mr. D. F. Brown there are a great many concerns which have large war orders and which are anxious to subcontract a great deal of their work to smaller feeder plants. This committee is canvassing that situation to see whether there are not some subcontracts that could be filled by the plants in our area and the goods shipped back to the United States. I am sure that there will be no difficulty with regard to customs either in Canada or in the United States. I would urge the Department of Defence Production to send a man to that area, representing that department, for the purpose of co-operating with the local committee not only in making a canvass but actually to do the footwork in seeing that contracts are obtained that would keep our machines busy. That will not be a selfish purpose, because if our machines are busy they are helping not only the economy of Canada but also helping our sister country by producing war materials which are so greatly needed at this time. This committee has kept the Department of Defence Production fully informed as to the kind of work that can be done in the Windsor area; and I might say that there is little by way of machine production that cannot be undertaken in that area.

With seasonal unemployment as we have it, we naturally will look to public works. I think the backlog of public works has been kept and catalogued for that particular purpose. As I pointed out, we have those who are unemployed. There is one project I should like to mention to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) or to the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier). I think that, strictly speaking, these remarks should be directed to the Minister of Transport. I should like to mention the fact that we have a station operated by the Canadian National Railways. I am not aware when it was built, but it is quite antiquated; it is very dingy, and it is not at all suitable for a thriving and industrious city such as we have. Sometime ago I was assured by the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) that the first station that would be built by the Canadian National Railways would be at Windsor. The time has arrived when that promise should be acted upon. We have unemployed craftsmen in the building industry, and now is the time to take plans out of mothballs and put them into operation by building an adequate station to serve that community. I would respectfully request the Minister of Transport to take that up at the earliest opportunity. I would like to advance the suggestion also that the Department of Defence Production appoint someone not only to look after public works, but someone familiar with the Windsor situation to work

The Address-Mr. Dinsdale with the United States authorities to help the local committee get some work from the United States.

There are some other subjects I should like to bring up at this time, but I see that my time has almost expired; therefore I will have to refer to them on another occasion. One of the subjects has to do with the basic pension that is paid to those who have offered their very lives to our country. I have had several meetings with the zone representatives of the Canadian Legion, who have formed a small committee. I have worked with them. We have some concrete suggestions. We have some definite ideas, and I regret that I shall have to wait for some other occasion to bring the matter before this house. However, in closing, Mr. Speaker, may I assure this house that once more we in the city of Windsor are not complaining about the activities of the government. We are merely asking for an opportunity to help ourselves and if given that opportunity I am sure we shall not be found wanting.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PC

Walter Gilbert Dinsdale

Progressive Conservative

Mr. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon):

Mr. Speaker, it is nine years since I first had the opportunity of visiting the city of Ottawa. At that time it was in the capacity of a member, an A.C.2, to be exact, of His Majesty's air force. As I recall the experience of nine years ago when we first had the opportunity of visiting the houses of parliament and becoming familiar with the seat of government of this dominion of ours, I remember that my first impression was one of awe, because to a young man fresh from the prairies this beautiful building, the seat of government of our country, is an impressive sight. Since I have come back in a different capacity this fall hon. members can understand that my feeling of awe has been somewhat intensified. To have the task and the opportunity of addressing the House of Commons as a member of that group is something of course that we could never have anticipated in the wildest flights of fancy those nine years ago. I must say I do appreciate that privilege as a citizen of Canada.

It has been somewhat reassuring to me to discover as proceedings got under way that the mover (Mr. Cauchon) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne, as well as the seconder (Mr. Simmons), were making their first speeches. I think I am correct in that. Since I understood that they were making their first flights in this chamber it was rather reassuring to those of us who are new to the House of Commons to have to follow them in the debate on the speech from the throne.

As I begin I should like to say that we appreciate very much the kindness that has

been demonstrated to the new members by members of all parties. Every courtesy has been extended; advice has been tendered regardless of party, helping us to become oriented as quickly as possible into the mysteries and intricacies of parliamentary life.

During the past few days I have been intensely interested in following the speeches, because it becomes necessary for a new member to familiarize himself rapidly with the atmosphere of the chamber and of the proceedings of the House of Commons. I have listened to the speeches in an endeavour to get some clues as to the purpose of this traditional debate on the throne speech, and I have come to the conclusion that this debate offers four opportunities to the ordinary private member. First of all, it seems to me it gives the novice an opportunity to break the ice, to get his feet wet, as it were. Second, it seems to me it is an opportunity to extol the virtues as well as to express the particular needs of the home constituency, and later on in my remarks I may make some reference to that even at the risk of being regarded as somewhat parochial, as has already been mentioned here this afternoon. It seems obvious, too, that it is an opportunity to criticize the government constructively on the basis of its record of administration, or what we might call its sins of commission, and also on the basis of proposed business outlined in the speech from the throne, as well as on the basis of the things neglected and undone or what we might call the sins of omission. Such, it would appear, is the traditional function of members of His Majesty's loyal opposition. Finally, I have come to the conclusion that this debate provides the opportunity to create the atmosphere or establish the framework of reference for a particular session, of parliament. When we consider the magnitude of the issues being debated in this house the need for drawing the line somewhere becomes readily apparent.

When I rose to my feet I felt that nervous twinge that is peculiar to the beginner in any situation, but as I proceeded I found that the ice was broken and I began to feel more at ease. After all, I suppose one coming from the teaching profession should not feel too much out of place in the verbal barrage represented by this debate. Indeed I am reminded of the story of the learned professor who went with his class on a picnic. While the activities were under way one of the young ladies in the class got out beyond her depth, so that she was in danger of drowning. Instead of making a general call for help she called, "Help, Professor Snodgrass!" referring particularly to this old gentleman who, in

turn, dashed out and made the rescue. When he came back to where the young lady was reclining he became curious to know why she had called particularly for him. Upon being asked this question she replied, "Well, sir, I have sat in your class on many occasions and I have discovered no one who could go down deeper, stay down longer and come out drier than you." I feel if that is a requisite in making a speech in this debate, then perhaps I qualify.

It is scarcely necessary for me to labour the second point raised, that of extolling the virtues of one's constituency and expressing its particular needs. Brandon, Manitoba, has: been well represented in this chamber down through the years, from the time of Sir Clifford Sifton onward. And more recently I am sure all hon. members will agree when I say that the constituency of Brandon was most capably represented by the late Mr. J. E. Matthews. I have grown up in that constituency and, as a young man, in many respects came under the influence of Mr. Matthews. Undoubtedly some will conclude that in regard to political affiliation, his persuasion was not of the right kind in my case. But so far as good citizenship is concerned, and the demonstration of that quality of good citizenship, I owe a heavy personal debt to the example set by the late Mr. Matthews. I feel the honour conferred upon me in representing Brandon in the House of Commons is made more significant because of the fact that it is my opportunity to follow him.

If I were to refer to the requirements of my constituency I suppose I might re-echo many of the sentiments already expressed thus far in the debate. I can say heartily that I am in agreement with a system of old age pensions which, I understand, is the ostensible reason for the calling of this special session. The prevailing social realities, with an ageing population and the decreased support coming from the family as a result of basic changes in the family as a social institution, have made it almost inevitable that some legislation such as that about to be placed on the statute books this fall should be undertaken. In fact, such legislation is long past due. However, in- referring briefly to this topic I strongly urge the necessity for emphasizing the contributory principle, because I feel that in our society we are rapidly absorbing the idea of something for nothing. In Canada, where we depend upon responsibility and initiative for our continued progress, that is a highly dangerous spirit to establish.

The cost of living has been mentioned in debate. I can say that I am in agreement with what has been said by members of the 94699-10

The Address-Mr. Dinsdale official opposition. The cost of living arising from the inflationary trend stimulates almost the same attitude as one has toward sin- we're "agin" it. Everybody is "agin" it. Enough has been said about the economics of inflation. Time after time reference has been made establishing the point that the inflationary trend is most serious in Canada at the moment. Not only is it a general economic threat; it is also a situation wherein those who can least afford it suffer the most. There is thus established a feeling of insecurity and restlessness, because nothing destroys the confidence of the people more quickly than the dynamic and fluctuating financial situation produced by inflation. As has been said repeatedly, it can literally destroy a nation. I have been sent by my constituents to protest with all the vehemence I can muster this present dangerous inflationary trend in our economy.

Reference has been made to defence, and I feel I must deal with it in passing. In her international obligations, as well as from the necessity of protecting her own internal interests and affairs, Canada has been placed in a position where she has had to embark upon an extensive program of defence. The leader of the opposition (Mr. Drew) has outlined with eloquence a situation in which he has shown that, at the moment, Canada is totally unprepared to fulfil her obligations to the United Nations and to NATO.

This past summer I had the opportunity of witnessing at first hand some of the preparations for defence; or, one might say, judging from the sentiments expressed in this chamber, the lack of preparation taking place in the air force at the moment. I had the opportunity of participating in what is called the mobilization assignment training program, which was launched as recently as last August. Perhaps I should point out that prior to that experience I had always been interested in keeping in as close touch as possible with the air force, particularly in respect to some form of auxiliary training. At Brandon college, where it was my privilege to serve, year after year since the war we have asked for permission to form an auxiliary unit, only to be informed repeatedly that there were neither funds nor the facilities to do so. The Brandon flying club, too, has sought repeatedly for some form of participant training program only to be disappointed up to the moment. In the refresher training program in which I had the privilege of taking par-t I felt that here at last was something concrete. I found however that here, too, it was a scheme largely on paper, along with the Orenda engine and the increased number of squadrons. The idea is excellent, but it is still

The Address-Mr. Dinsdale only in the very early stages of development. I would hope to see it expand, because there are thousands of air force reserve personnel, aircrew in particular, who are only too anxious to take part in some form of parttime training which would keep them in a condition of preparedness and readiness.

In connection with the expansion of the air training facilities I am reminded that during world war II the constituency of Brandon was dotted with aerodromes, indeed so much so that it became popular in my constituency to refer to the late Mr. Matthews as "Airport Matthews". It is significant that up to the present time none of these stations have been reopened. I am informed by some of my constituents in Souris that strong representations have been made in regard to the facilities they have to offer, and I hope that in due course, as the training program is enlarged and developed, some consideration will be given to the facilities that exist in Brandon, not only as a matter of privilege but mainly because that locality offers the best flying weather and facilities available in any part of Canada.

Most speakers have referred to the difficulty faced by the veterans at the present time because of the increased cost of living, and reference has been made particularly to the attitude of the government with regard to the unemployability supplement. I should like to add my remarks to that discussion. There are several Legion branches in my constituency and, as is well known to all hon. members, they have been active in contacting their members in order to present their case. I think that case has been well established and I am ready to support any development which will bring about an equitable increase in pensions across the board rather than on the basis of the discriminatory means test that is being applied at the present time.

While federal aid for education has not been mentioned in the speech from the throne I want to say that I am heartily in favour of the gesture already made in this direction. Educational institutions across the country have responsibilities that cannot be met at the municipal or provincial level, and it is only reasonable to conclude that additional support will have to come from the federal government. That principle has been established and recognized. In our '[DOT]Hanging society our educational institutions are bearing the brunt of building the bulwarks of democracy. The institution of the family has lost some of its functions. It was expressed humorously to me just recently that we who are raising children

take them to the schools when they are just able to toddle, put them on the doorstep and say, "learn them good," and that is about the last we see of them until they are grown into responsible, mature citizens. The old era of the three R's has disappeared and we now have a much more extensive and expensive program than was thought necessary at the time of confederation in 1867. The move in the direction of federal aid for education is the only means whereby this important public service can be adequately financed.

There is a matter relating particularly to Brandon that I should like to deal with at this time. It is well known that the unity of Canada has been endangered by problems of geographic and economic regionalism. It seems to me that at this time there is an excellent opportunity to carry out decentralization of industry. Because of historic as well as geographic factors, in the past industry has been concentrated largely in two provinces. It has now been demonstrated as a sound sociological principle that decentralization is the ideal thing for a country as large as Canada. If we need any further convincing we have it in the present military threat of atomic warfare. In passing I might mention that there are certain implications arising out of this subject relating to the St. Lawrence seaway project, about which we shall have more to say later.

Just a word with regard to the matter of the allocation of war contracts. I have a clipping from the Brandon Sun which I think will be interesting to hon. members, setting forth what we have to offer in the way of industrial and manufacturing facilities. This clipping reads:

Indication that Brandon industries will have an opportunity to participate in Canada's defence production was given here Thursday by G. D. Mallory, director of the small industries division of the Department of Defence Production.

Mr. Mallory stopped over in Brandon at the invitation of the defence production pool which has been organized in Brandon by a number of local industries. After touring some of the plants participating in the pool, he was guest at a luncheon meeting where he discussed defence production problems.

The Brandon pool is the only one of its kind in western Canada and one of two in the dominion, Mr. Mallory said. He informed the group that Crawford Gordon, co-ordinator of the production branch of the Department of Defence Production, has expressed particular interest in the local organization and has asked his staff to do everything possible to get a contract for the pool.

Explaining the functions of the department, he said that because the present situation may continue for ten years, the government is trying to obtain as many sources of supply as possible so that normal production may suffer a minimum of dislocation.

That seems to indicate that the government is aware of the facilities available in

Brandon, and we trust that something further will develop in regard to the decentralization of industry as the demands of our defence economy increase.

This afternoon the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) and the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross) dealt with some problems to which I had intended to make reference and which are peculiar to the western farming areas. As they have already covered the points I had in mind I see no necessity to prolong my speech by repetition. For those who read Hansard or listen to the debates I just want to say that I support heartily what has been said this afternoon by both hon. members.

That is the second phase of the debate on the speech from the throne as I see it. Up to the present time I have not made any particular criticism, but I feel I would be remiss in my duty if I neglected to take advantage of this opportunity to do so. It seems to be the custom to blame the government for all the difficulties being faced by Canada at the present time, and I suppose that is only reasonable when you have a group responsible for carrying on the administration of the nation. I am going to limit my criticism to just one point, though many other points have been and could be raised.

As I see it, most of the difficulty results from government complacency. I think the presence of four new members on the opposition side of the house is ample and eloquent evidence of the reaction of the people in this regard. I would say it is a very definite indication of where the people of Canada generally place the responsibility and blame so far as the problems are concerned that we have been discussing during the course of the debate. Complacency of this nature is inevitable when you have a government that has been in office continuously for sixteen years. In the cloistered medieval atmosphere which is typical of this chamber it is easy to lose contact with -the people.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PC

Gordon Knapman Fraser

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Fraser:

They are antique.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CCF

Stanley Howard Knowles (Whip of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation)

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

Mr. Knowles:

They are all old enough for the Senate.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PC

Walter Gilbert Dinsdale

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Dinsdale:

More recently an overwhelming preponderance of government supporters in the house has tended to give the government the feeling that there is a divine right to rule, and also that the government members are a group of supermen who are the only people with the ability to run the affairs of this country. I can understand how that comes about. Applause has a rather heady influence, and as I remember from

The Address-Mr. Dinsdale my experience in old time revival meetings the more amens you get the longer you speak, and the more eloquent you become the further you go with your remarks. My impression, as I have tried to appraise the atmosphere of this chamber, is that such is the case here because there are plenty of amens from government backbenchers whenever the government states its case.

I do not know whether it is in order to make reference to the recent by-elections, but I should like to say that I found the same spirit of complacency and indifference in abundance at that time. For example, anyone who dared to oppose the government as a candidate in the field was almost laughed to scorn. Government supporters moved about extolling the virtues of the present administration and assuring the people that they never were more prosperous, happy and contented. We, on the other hand, pointed to the record of the administration with regard to inflation and the handling of the farmers' problems. We asked them to accept the government's challenge, namely, "who will stop us if we want to get away with it". The people responded in the manner that has already been indicated. I suggest -that is the severest censure that could possibly be made of the government. It comes right from the hearts of the people themselves and, let it be added, people of all political persuasions.

I have dealt extensively with local issues, and I know I shall be accused of parochialism, but I want to close by extending the scope of my re-marks briefly. At the present time we are facing the greatest crisis that this country and our western way of life have ever witnessed. I might express it in- these terms, that the honeymoon is over. It seems to me it is a matter of the survival of our way of life at the present time. The Prime Minister (Mr. St. Lauren-t) struck the note that I am trying to establish at -this stage of my discussion when he said in- the opening remarks of a speech delivered at the autumn convocation of the university of Toronto in 1950:

It is a melancholy reflection on the times in which we live in that we should feel obliged to be concerned over the preservation of civilization.

If I may make a personal reference from my own experience, I came into the world in the closing stages of world war I and was duly designated a war baby. You will remember that the spirit prevailing at that time, as expressed by President Wilson, was that the world had been made safe for democracy. We of the war baby generation moved along through the glorious twenties, when it was thought that the golden age was just aroui'd the corner, until we struck the

140 HOUSE OF

The Address-Mr. Poulin depression of 1929 when the war babies became the forgotten generation. Eventually we emerged out of the grim thirties and found ourselves the fighting generation. All these experiences have had their effect on myself and all others in the same age group. I think it is a melancholy reflection that we have to preoccupy ourselves with the thought that our western way of life is on the defensive at this time, just when we thought that we had reached the golden age. Our thinking is very heavily saturated with a doctrine that once prevailed in social scientific circles, the doctrine of social Darwinism or social evolution which was perhaps best expressed by Coue when he said: Every day in every way we are getting better and better.

We used to believe that was so. They used to teach us in school in the twenties that it was possible to build a perfect society; but we would have to have our heads very deeply in the sand to come to the conclusion today that just around the corner is peace, prosperity and happiness for everybody. To sum up the point, I should like to say that there must be no more soft living if we are to survive. I think it comes down to that basic issue. The pursuit of luxury must be abandoned. We have defence and economic commitments in many parts of the world that will demand the utmost sacrifice on the part of all Canadian citizens. Democratic citizenship demands the acceptance of obligations and responsibilities as well as liberties and privileges. Recently we have leaned too heavily upon the latter rather than upon the former. We have demanded our rights, privileges and liberties, and have forgotten that there are obligations and responsibilities involved in the maintenance of those privileges and freedoms.

Too frequently the suggestion we hear when faced with a problem is: what will the other fellow do about it, when the responsibility falls right on our own shoulders and the query should really be: what will I do about it? That of course leads to the basic problem, the spirit that motivates the democratic citizen; because after all, while we may provide for military strength, while we may provide for industrial strength, unless there is moral and spiritual fortitude to back up these materialistic things there is not much hope for the way of life we represent. We have received our heritage from the Hebrews, the Greeks and the Romans. That heritage has been transmitted to us through Christian civilization. I should like to submit that more than anything else at this time we need to cultivate the spirit within.

(Translation):

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
IND

Raoul Poulin

Independent

Mr. Raoul Poulin (Beauce):

Mr. Speaker, I had not intended to take part in this debate on the address. However, after hearing or reading most of the speeches delivered since the beginning of the session, I thought I might add my humble suggestions with respect to a particular point mentioned in the speech from the throne, and I refer to the high cost of living. Before going any further, may I say it is the only matter I shall deal with, and that very briefly.

It is with great pleasure and sincerity that I join all the previous speakers who have congratulated the mover of the address (Mr. Cauchon) and the seconder (Mr. Simmons) for the splendid way in which they have fulfilled the task assigned to them.

(Text):

May I congratulate also the hon. member Who has just taken his seat upon his excellent speech.

(Translation):

The hon. members, including the Right Hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) and the leaders of the opposition parties, who have expounded their views on the cost of living, seemed to be most sincere. If one considers the general tenor of the debate, the avoidance of -any overly narrow party spirit, it is not difficult to ascertain the seriousness' of the situation brought about by the rising cost of living.

However, for those who have gone further, for those who have had the sad privilege of actually coming into contact, if I may say so, with the very victims of this situation, it is not the word "seriousness" which strikes the mind and seizes the imagination, but the word "tragedy".

There is no use describing here the plight of the victims of this tragedy; that is a fact well known and admitted by all except the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor). The point is not whether the evil exists, but rather to wrack one's brain to find a solution.

The government claims to have done its best under the circumstances. In the speech from the throne, it expresses its intention to keep on doing its best, even if the attitude it has adopted has not produced any great results as yet.

The official opposition feel the government has done nothing, but they cautiously avoid indicating what it should do, what it might do to remedy the situation.

Another opposition group, the C.C.F. party, at least has had the merit of offering concrete proposals. They suggest price controls and even a return to subsidies, if necessary.

The answer was-and it seemed a not unreasonable one-that the mere administra-

[Mr. Dinsdale.l

The Address-Mr. Poulin

tion of these controls would cost the taxpayers between $100 and $200 million a year. I will add that these controls would be accompanied by a host of informers who would make the people dance and sing according to their whims and fancies.

Because of this helplessness we all feel, I was reminded of a humble suggestion I put forward in this house last April when I said that a practical, easy and quick way to cope with the high cost of living would be to double the amount of family allowances paid by the federal government.

Right away I can guess the objections that will be made. I will be told: What about those who don't get the allowances? I sympathize with those people, childless couples, unmarried veterans, old age pensioners and others. But let us not forget that if difficulties and hardships have doubled for those people, these same difficulties and hardships have been multiplied by 4, 6, 8, and even 10 in the case of large families where, quite often, only one person of moderate income has to provide for 6, 8, or 10 children. I know that our older citizens suffer because of the high cost of living. Let us take care, however, lest following excessive hardships among our children-hardships that prevent children from getting what is essential to their physical and intellectual development-there should grow up in this country a generation of young people prematurely old, whom the state would be compelled to help not at 70, nor at 65 nor at 60 years of age but rather at 50 or even 40, if not during their whole lifetime.

Some will object here again, that such a plan would be very expensive for the Canadian taxpayers. It is true. The government, however, has been getting enormous surpluses for some time. Well, if we stop to think that doubling the amount of the allowances would cost approximately $300 million per year and that on the other hand the unforeseen government surplus for a five-month period this year was over $500 million, we can see that the government would not have too much difficulty in finding the money required for this additional outlay.

This measure which I advocate would be temporary in character. It would remain in force only as long as inflation and high prices prevailed; as soon as they went down, with a consequent reduction in those government surpluses, this supplementary subsidy could be proportionately and gradually brought right back to its present level, as soon as the cost of living is back to normal.

It would be in fact a cost of living bonus paid to families, a measure which has been adopted in principle and in practice by various public and private institutions and which has the advantage of producing results where they are most needed and in proportion to the need.

Such a measure would present the added advantage that its application would not cost a cent more to the government since all the money paid would find its way directly and entirely into the pockets of those it is meant to help.

Finally, the measure would not restrict in any way the freedom of our institutions, which most of us respect so dearly since it was the theme of the speech from the throne.

Mr. Speaker, according to an old saying: "Society is no better than the families that make it up." I advocate this means of protecting the family because of my faith in the essential part played by the family as the parent cell of society.

The family is a sacred institution and no efforts should be spared to support and protect it if we want to uphold society. But who can deny that the family now finds itself in a position where it cannot properly play its part within society?

If the suggestion I have put forward in all humility and sincerity is considered impractical, I wish someone in this house will rise and show why it is considered so.

Until then, the majority of the Beauee county people will remain convinced that our government has failed to use all the means in its power in attempting to remedy, at least partly, a tragic evil that strikes at the families of this country.

(Text):

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CCF

Percy Ellis Wright

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

Mr. P. E. Wright (Melfort):

Mr. Speaker, in rising to take my place among those who have taken part in this debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne, I should like first to compliment the mover (Mr. Cauchon) and seconder (Mr. Simmons) of the address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session. I also take great pleasure in complimenting the two new members of this house who have spoken, one last night and the other just a few minutes ago. They did an excellent job; and I am sure their constituents will be proud of the men they have sent here to represent them in the House of

The Address-Mr. Wright Commons. I am sure we shall hear more from them not only in this session but in later ones.

There are two matters with which I should like to deal briefly before dealing with the speech itself. The first matter arose out of a statement made by the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) in reply to a statement made by the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge), that the policy of the C.C.F. in advocating a planned economy was that we should control things rather than people. The hon. member for Lake Centre, in his highly dramatic way, said when he rose to speak: What about Saskatchewan? What about Ivanchuk? And he patted his head. I have here the story of the Ivanchuk incident. He implied that the poor fisherman, Mr. Ivanchuk, had had his nets taken away by the government and that he had no means of livelihood for a month. Here are the facts of the case:

As to the return of Ivanchuk's equipment, C. L. McLean, the northern administrator, discussed this with Ivanchuk at South End. Most of Ivanchuk's nets were stored there, and Ivanchuk agreed that it was all right to deliver his nets within a week's time, as he was not going to fish in any case. The rest of his seized equipment was returned the next day. He was entirely in agreement with this, yet in his sworn statement he infers that we were holding his equipment until he signed a release.

With respect to his failure to deliver the fish to the board, I want to point out that in the province of Saskatchewan we have, as there is in other provinces of this dominion, a natural products marketing act. That act is practically the same as that in every other province. Under it, when any group of producers agree that a board shall be set up to market their product, when over 50 per cent of them agree-and in some provinces it is more than that-then all the producers must market that product through the board. You have it in Ontario among your tobacco growers and your vegetable growers. You have it in British Columbia among your apple growers and your dairy producers. We have an act passed by this dominion parliament, known as the wheat board act, under which every producer of wheat in designated areas in western Canada must deliver his wheat to the wheat board. No vote was taken on that measure, either; but I am sure that if a vote were taken it would carry by a large majority. To continue with the Ivanchuk case:

1. John Ivanchuk began fishing this year without a licence, and shipped 500 pounds of fish to Flin Flon. This was not seized, and we decided not to prosecute, because we thought there might be some doubt in Ivanchuk's mind as to where the fish were to be delivered.

2. Later, when Ivanchuk received his licence, he was told that he would have to ship to the fish

marketing service, because 95 per cent of the fishermen had voted for the service to handle their catch. This information was also written on the licence he received. If he had not agreed to this he could not have taken out a licence. He was warned subsequently, by field officer Albus, that in future all shipments must be made to the fish marketing service at Beaver Lake.

Despite this, 1,500 pounds of Ivanchuk's fish were shipped to Flin Flon, and on July 5, field officer Albus returned to Ivanchuk's camp, seized his equipment under the fishery regulations, and an investigation was started.

3. Charges were withdrawn against Ivanchuk for the following reason: He claimed that he told the pilot of Johanessen's Flying Service plane that the fish were to go to Beaver Lake. Charges could still have been placed against Ivanchuk because technically, it was his responsibility to see that the fish reached the proper destination. We decided to give him the benefit of the doubt and charges were withdrawn.

4. In regard to damages, if Ivanchuk instructed the pilot to take his fish to Beaver Lake, and they ended up at Flin Flon, Ivanchuk could quite properly take action against Johanessen's Flying Service for any damages incurred as a result of contravention of the fishery regulations.

5. In regard to the matter of compensation, Ivanchuk has been paid for all fish seized from him at the prevailing rate for fresh fish on Reindeer lake. He received exactly the same payment per pound as the other fishermen.

Those are the true facts with regard to this case. That was not the impression which the hon. member for Lake Centre left with the house when he was speaking, and I just thought that it should be corrected.

There is one other matter which I should like to deal with, and that is the censorship of the news coming out of Korea to Canada. I do not know whether it is the responsibility of this government or just to what extent this government has control over the censorship of that news. But I say a situation is being created in this country which is giving an opportunity to many people to undermine our institutions, through that censorship. Certain incidents took place in Korea, and we in this country knew nothing of them until the news leaked in through United States magazines and other sources. Then we had rumours flying all around this country as to the conduct of some of our troops over there. Later on charges were laid and a trial was held. What happened? It became front page news for a whole week in practically every daily paper in Canada, and we heard it over the radio day after day. All that created a wrong impression in this country. It laid the basis for a lot of rumours by people who would like to destroy some of our institutions. Surely we in this country are mature enough at this time to be told the truth about these things. The matter was played down too much in the first place; later it was played up too much. I think there should be some better method of censorship than the one we have. If you listen to the radio, in nearly every broadcast you hear

about dogfights between the United Nations planes and the communist planes. Almost invariably two or three communist planes are destroyed and several are damaged; our planes return without any losses. Yet last night over the radio we got a compilation of the losses suffered among our planes. I did not get the exact figures as they were given too quickly, but something over three hundred of our planes had been destroyed to date while just a little over two hundred of the communist planes had been destroyed. Surely the people of Canada are entitled to more authentic information than we are getting. They treat us as though we were a bunch of morons. We should have the truth. The truth never hurts. In commenting on this matter Maclean's magazine in the last issue said:

The damage done by the suppression of legitimate news isn't easy to repair.

They go on to state the incidents that were mentioned with regard to the neutral zone of Kaesong, and then they say:

Already-this is written in mid-September-there are rumours among the South Koreans of another rape incident and these rumours have drifted to Canada. The press carries no hint of it but the newspaper reader is entitled, if he chooses, to suspect that this doesn't necessarily mean the rumour is untrue. The only way to stop rumours is to give the public the facts as it is entitled to have-and that means all the facts short of those that will profit the enemy. And when there is room for doubt we think experience shows that the enemy can usually make better use of an unpleasant fact denied or suppressed than of an unpleasant fact quickly admitted and honestly atoned for.

That is the attitude we should take. Recently I heard rumours and statements that our troops coming back from Korea are sworn to secrecy. I do not know whether that is true or not. If it is not true the government should deny it; if it is true the government should give some explanation of it to our people, because I know that in the first war-and 1 am sure those who were engaged in the last war were not sworn to secrecy- on our return to either Canada or Great Britain we were not so sworn.

In dealing with the speech from the throne itself, I wish to say that our subamendment stresses two points. It gives a method whereby we in Canada can control inflation at this time, and expresses the reason for the need to control inflation. The reason is that there may be more equality of sacrifice in Canada in this rearmament program in which we are engaged at the present time. It seems to me that should be the basis of our legislation. The basis should be the maximum equality of sacrifice as between the different sections and groups in the country.

I want to say something with regard to inflation itself. To me inflation, if it is not

The Address-Mr. Wright runaway but moderate, is not necessarily an evil. It seems to me that the deflation we had in the thirties was a greater evil than even the inflation we have had to date. When a government fails to control inflation, when it fails to allow time for different sectors of the economy to adjust themselves to the inflationary trends, it becomes dangerous and entails a greater sacrifice on some sections of our economy than on others. That is what has happened. We have had runaway inflation and certain sections of our economy have benefited by it, at least temporarily. Other sections of our economy have had to make undue sacrifices. Among them have been our war veterans. On Monday I sent notice of a question to the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Lapointe) which I was going to ask him on the orders of the day. That question is as follows:

Will the minister give consideration to the setting up of a veterans affairs committee at this session to consider the necessity of amending the Pension Act and the War Veterans Allowance Act to bring payments under them in line with the present cost of living?

I had the courtesy to send notice of that question to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. I do not think he appreciated that courtesy. He made a statement to the house on the suggestion of a government member. I want to say that I have sent my last notice of a question that I intend to ask on the orders of the day to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. His reply to the question asked by the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruickshanki, as reported at page 21 of Hansard was in part:

I wish to say that the government has been considering all veterans legislation and the advisability of appointing a committee, and an announcement will be made at an early date concerning the same.

The government have had three and a half months in which to consider it; yet in the speech from the throne no mention is made of any intention on their part to deal with this matter. I hope that at an early date the Minister of Veterans Affairs will rise in his place and tell the house that it is the intention of the government to set up a veterans affairs committee; that it is the intention of the government to refer the Pension Act and the War Veterans Allowance Act to that body; that they will have a reference that will be wider than the reference they had last year, and that they will have authority to make the necessary investigation and freedom to make the necessary recommendations to the government that will bring these acts in line with the present cost of living in Canada.

If there is any group in Canada that is suffering today because of inflation it is those who are on pensions, on fixed incomes, those receiving government annuities, those who

The Address-Mr. Wright have bought government bonds and tried to provide for the future, and others who are on fixed incomes. If there is any group in this country to which consideration should be given at this time it is our veterans. We are engaged in a preparedness program in this and other democratic countries. If we fail to treat the people right who made great sacrifices previously, the boys and girls who enlisted and went out to protect our democracy, if we fail to take proper measures to take care of them, then we will not be strengthening democracy, we will not be strengthening our North Atlantic pact organization. The government must deal with this matter at this session, not at some future date.

I am sure every hon. member has received, as I have, many letters from branches of the Legion. Last year when we were discussing the unemployability supplements the hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Stewart) said he had received no letters from branches of the Legion in his constituency protesting that legislation. I do not doubt his word at all, but I am sure that by now he has received letters from branches of the veterans organization in his constituency, asking that something be done at this session with regard to these basic pensions and war veterans allowances. We will have failed in our duty at this session of parliament if we do not deal with this matter.

I should like to refer for a few moments to a statement made by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) when he spoke on Monday of this week. He is reported at page 38 of Hansard as having said this:

I know farmers in various parts of Canada and X know for a fact that at the present time they are getting a larger share of the national income than they ever got before. X am not saying that they should not. I am not saying that they are getting too much. I know that they work hard for what they get and I feel that the prices they are getting under present price levels are not too high and that it would not be fair to try to roll them back.

He states that farmers are getting the best returns they have ever got in their history. Well, I would not have been surprised if that statement had been made by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) who sometimes gets enthusiastic and overstates his case. I am surprised, however, that it was made by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), who is noted for his caution. It is not often he makes statements such as that, which cannot be supported by the facts. I consulted the Canada Year Book, and I find that in 1948 the net farm income in Canada was $1,600,336,000. The net national income in Canada that year was $12,474 million. In other words the farm population of Canada were getting approximately 12-7 per cent

of the national income, although today approximately 25 per cent of the population is engaged in agriculture. In 1949 net farm income stood at $1,537,387,000 and the net national income was $12,917 million. The percentage of national income going to the farmers in that year was 11-8, or a drop of [DOT]9 per cent from 1948. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) in his budget address last April stated the net farm income in Canada for 1950 was $1,424 million while the net national income was $14,308 million. This works out at approximately 10 per cent. In other words for the last three years we have had a gradual but continuous drop in the percentage of national income being got by the farmers of this country.

As a matter of fact there has been only one period in Canada's history, according to the records of the bureau of statistics, when farmers have received a proportionate share of the national income. That was in the period 1916-20, including the last years of the first war and the immediate post-war years. During that time approximately 30 per cent of the people in Canada were engaged in agriculture and they received 30 per cent of the national income. So the statement of the Prime Minister that the farmers at this time are receiving a greater proportion of the national income than they ever received in the past is not borne out by the facts. Farmers are more prosperous than they were during the thirties, certainly; they are more prosperous than they were during the first three years of the war. When in 1941 floor prices were set in Canada, we were getting in western Canada a fraction more than 78 cents a bushel for our wheat, delivered at Fort William. That was something less than 60 cents a bushel on the farm. Yet this is the period used to make the comparison when the statement is made that farm income has increased tremendously. Reference is made to a base period when the farmer was not receiving anything like his fair share of the national income, nor anything like a fair return for the effort he was putting into the production of food for this country and for export. One must conclude, therefore, that sometimes figures can be juggled and thus become misleading, when they are cited to give the position occupied by any particular group in our economy. We have witnessed an increase in the cost of living. The price index stands at 189-8 points, so far as the general index is concerned. But when we come to the cost of farm production we see that the index is slightly more than 217. In other words there has been a greater increase in the cost of farm production than in any other part of our economy.

In using the figures he did use when comparing living costs in Canada with those in the United States, I am afraid the Prime Minister created a wrong impression. He mentioned food alone, but did not make reference to other items which enter into the cost of living. He did not refer to clothing or housing. I hold in my hand a pamphlet called Industry. This is the issue for October, 1951, and it states that the dollar as of August 1, is worth only 40 cents, as compared with the pre-war species when used to purchase groceries. The article proceeds to point out that there are other items which cost more, when compared with their former cost. It states that the dollar, when used in building a home, buys only 34J cents worth of materials, when compared with what it bought in 1939. In respect of home furnishings the figure is about 50 cents on the dollar.

These are basic things all people must have. They must have homes; they must have food; they must have clothing. In buying any of these commodities the dollar today is worth less than the official index indicates. So the poor people, those in the lower income groups, find their dollar is not worth even 50 cents. Yet when the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) goes on the air he talks about saving, and the investment of our savings. Many of us were in the house in 1943 and 1944 when Mr. Ilsley, then minister of finance, appealed to us to go back to our constituents and try to encourage our people to make savings, and to buy war bonds. We took him at his word and did as he asked, with the result that some pretty effective campaigns were put on for the sale of war bonds. All the people co-operated. One of the things Mr. Ilsley told us we could tell the people was that if they would save their money now and invest it in war bonds, when the war was over and we got back to peacetime production their dollar would buy more and better goods. We took him at his word.

I am sorry to say that that has not been the experience. I do not know whether, had Mr. Ilsley remained as minister of finance, decontrol would have been carried out as quickly as it was. I doubt it; Mr. Ilsley was a most conscientious man and endeavoured at all times to carry out any promise he made to the people. That promise was made by the government, and it should have been fulfilled. After the war they should have maintained the necessary controls in order that the dollar which they had encouraged the people to invest in war bonds would continue to be worth a full dollar and not 50 cents as it is today. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) has asked the people today to increase their savings. What is done with savings?

The Address-Mr. Croll Most people put them in the bank. What happens to those savings when they are placed in the bank? The Bank Act permits the chartered banks to increase their lending capacity by several times the amount of those savings. Just today the Minister of Finance, in answer to a question by the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Stewart), stated that when the small loan companies had sold their debentures and thereby increased their capital by obtaining the savings of our people, they could turn around and lend them again to other people.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CCF

Stanley Howard Knowles (Whip of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation)

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

Mr. Knowles:

At 18 per cent.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CCF

Percy Ellis Wright

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

Mr. Wright:

Yes, at 18 per cent. These are the people who have been deprived of the privilege to buy under deferred payment plans that were previously in effect. Is that consistency? I do not think it is. I do not think our people at the present time are too far away from what happened after 1943 to make the investment which the government has asked them to make in government securities at this time or in the near future. Unless this or any other government is prepared to fulfil its promises to the people, they should not be the government any longer. That is the position we are in today in Canada. It is time this government recognized its responsibility and fulfilled its promises to the people of Canada.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

David Arnold Croll

Liberal

Mr. David A. Croll (Spadina):

Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege of being in the house when the new hon. member for Brandon (Mr. Dinsdale) made his maiden speech. I am sure I speak for all hon. members when I say that he acquitted himself most admirably. He is a modest and talented young man. I also had the privilege to be in the house yesterday when the new hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Churchill) made his maiden speech. He was fluent and spoke in measured terms on a subject close to his heart and about which he knew a good deal. I was struck with the emphasis which the hon. member for Brandon placed upon his youth. It occurred to me immediately that there was a distinction to be drawn between the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre and the hon. member for Brandon. The hon. member for Brandon is a war baby, very young indeed, and so he may some day live to graduate from the shades of the opposition.

I want also to associate myself with the hon. member for Essex West (Mr. Brown) who made a most fervent plea concerning a problem that is peculiarly and especially a Windsor problem. The house ought not to lose sight of the fact that during the war there was built up in Windsor a production

The Address-Mr. Croll team that made that city the arsenal of this country. It would be a sad state of affairs if that was dissipated or broken up in any way.

Last session I had the privilege of being a member of the veterans affairs committee. I have been on every veterans affairs committee since I came into the house. I had occasion to speak on the report brought in by that committee. The veterans organizations appearing before the committee early this year made out a factual, documented and airtight case for an over-all increase in the basic pension. There can be no denial of that. When I last discussed this problem in the house I expressed the view that when we returned to the fall session, which is the present session, the cost of living might be stabilized. We would then be able to deal with the problem of basic increases in a firm and rational manner. The cost of living has not been stabilized; it has continued its upward, relentless grind. If it is not possible for us to control inflation or its by-product high cost of living, we must in some way find some method to compensate its victims.

The veterans affairs committee made a unanimous recommendation that the Legion briefs be studied by the cabinet in the interval between sessions. It was also the view of the committee that an increase in the basic pension should be granted. The cabinet has had ample opportunity to reexamine and study the briefs presented by the veteran groups. I am informed that they have given them meticulous study and sympathetic consideration. I hold the view, which to my knowledge is shared by the vast majority if not all members on this side of the house, that increases can no longer be delayed. Last session we granted increases to judges and civil servants because it was felt that the cost of living made their salaries inadequate. That is equally true of the pensioner. If we judge the position of the veterans by the same standards that were then applied, their case cannot be contradicted. The facts are there for all to see.

The Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) stated yesterday in the house that in the last twenty-five years we have doubled the old age pension. We have not done that with the veterans pension, yet many of these veterans are in as helpless a position as are some of the old age pensioners. I find that this clamour for an increased veterans pension does not come from the veterans alone. I find that all Canadians wish them to receive benefits which are adequate in the light of present condi-

tions. That means only one thing as we understand it in this house. From time to time we do a great deal of talking about assisting people with fixed incomes who have not measurably benefited from the increased national product; here is an opportunity to help the most deserving of these people. Veterans claims made before the committee and to the cabinet are not a raid upon the treasury. The veterans of this country have never been guilty of such action. We are very fortunate indeed this year; we have a sizeable surplus, which it is indicated is to be used to reduce the public debt. Is our debt to the veterans not a public debt? Should it have less priority than the money debt? I believe our pledge to the veterans is a solemn undertaking written in duty and gallantry. It is the highest moral debt. Let us never forget that they gave the best years of their lives.

I do not think we can delay any longer that which is now long overdue. It has now become an urgent matter, and must be dealt with at this session. There is one course and one course only; that is to grant an over-all increase in the basic pension in the most realistic manner. Members of the opposition have assumed for some reason that the matter of the basic pension cannot or will not be dealt with because there was no direct reference to it in the speech from the throne. I do not subscribe to that view. In common With other members on this side of the house I have kept the veterans request for an increase in the basic pension before the government since the early part of last year. I am given to understand that it has been receiving constant and sympathetic consideration. I am confident-I was going to say "hopeful" but "hopeful" is not a strong enough word-that it will be dealt with at this session and in a manner acceptable to our veterans.

(Translation):

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Lacroix

Liberal

Mr. Wilfrid LaCroix (Quebec-Montmorency):

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has informed the hon. members of this house that he is prepared seriously to study and consider any suggestions calculated to stop inflation and to reduce the cost of living.

During the last war, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) had the cabinet impose an embargo on the export of meat to the United States so that Great Britain, by virtue of an agreement with our government, could purchase our beef and pork at a reasonable price.

Nobody complained at the time because the price of meat shipped from the west, the great producing centre of this commodity in

our country, reached eastern consumers at about the same price as was being paid by Great Britain.

Why not then adopt the same policy and allow the export of only a quota of our meat production?

The domestic market would thus be sure to get at least part of the production of this great provider of meat, our Canadian west.

The United States do control meat prices and all will agree that meat prices there are lower than in Canada. You will of course wonder why meat is cheaper in the United States even though it is purchased here at a high price? The reason is very simple. It is because those whose job it is to buy foodstuffs for United States troops in Korea find all the meat they can for this purpose here in Canada rather than in the United States, so as not to disturb the American domestic market, supplied by western United States. In this way, the United States price stabilizer is able to keep domestic meat prices at a reasonable level. The United States government would rather pay a subsidy, for that is what it really amounts to, on the purchase of meat for American troops.

How does this affect us? Horse-meat markets have been set up for some time in eastern Canada, especially in Quebec:, where

100,000 horses, or perhaps more, that the Americans refuse to buy will be marketed. What is not good enough for Americans will be dumped in the eastern provinces.

In brief, the population of eastern Canada, the largest in the country, is now in a situation where, as at the siege of Paris, it has to slaughter horses and use them as food.

Until recently, horses slaughtered in Quebec were used in the manufacture of glue; henceforth, people in the poor and medium classes who make up the majority of wage-earners in Quebec will have to eat horse meat because of the great care taken not to incur the disfavour of electors in western Canada, not by one group only but by all political parties represented in the house.

I beg the government to act without delay to put a stop to this situation whereby the people of western Canada force the inhabitants of the east to eat horse meat. In my opinion, such a step would foster unity in Canada, because it would show, in a practical way, that there exists, in critical times, national solidarity among the various sections of this country.

The Address-Mr. LaCroix

National unity should work both ways; since each year taxpayers in eastern Canada make sacrifices to help the western wheat growers, the latter should also make some concessions to their fellow-countrymen of the east. The greed and selfishness of certain western meat producers at the present time will bring about, sooner or later, reprisals from the east.

I am quite sceptical about the sincerity of the leader of the opposition (Mr. Drew) and of the leader of the C.C.F. (Mr. Coldwell), who protest against the high level of prices but never speak about this matter. They fear the political consequences of losing the support of western Canada.

I believe the Liberal party should take the bull by the horns and remedy the situation, in the interest of the people at large. This would contribute to curb inflation which is making ever greater strides as regards this essential food.

A Quebec woman told me recently that she bought beef only for her husband, who works hard, so that he may continue to earn his family's livelihood. She added that her ten children did not eat any. They were therefore pitifully undernourished, a deplorable condition for the physical development of our youth.

I congratulate the government on its announced intention of introducing a law to prohibit the fixing of retail prices by manufacturers. Such a measure should have been enacted long ago, its necessity having been established by the Stevens investigation.

It is a serious mistake to complain about prices paid to farmers. If we look at the difference between the price received by the farmer for his product and that charged by the great monopolies which handle and distribute these goods, we note with surprise thait these middlemen reap a greater profit than the producers themselves. In Quebec province the farmer has difficulty in making ends meet. There is nothing surprising in that, if we consider the price he has to pay for everything he needs and the shameful fashion in which he is exploited by the large trust which controls the handling and distribution of animal feeds in so far as the price of the ingredients of these feeds is concerned. This exploitation, by the way, has already been denounced in the McGregor report.

The government should without delay institute proceedings to destroy this formidable trust which exploits our eastern farmers.

148 HOUSE OF

The Address-Mr. LaCroix

In principle I oppose price control under normal circumstances, but who will be so bold as to claim that the period which we are now going through is not the same as wartime?

There are certain goods, essential to life, which should be controlled by means of a system of arbitration in price fixing, a system which I submitted to the attention of the house last year.

There is no comparison possible between Great Britain and Canada since the former country is obliged to import practically all her food. Great Britain is not an agricultural country, but one huge industrial plant.

Now, about the situation in the United States where they have price control. Here is a statement by Mr. Michael DiSalle, head of the office of price stabilization, as printed by the Gazette on September 8, 1951. I quote:

"The price increase between February 15, 1951, and June 15, 1951, has been eight-tenths of one per cent, that is less than two billion dollars. While we have managed to keep prices within those limits, the price index in Canada, which, unlike the United States has no price control whatever, rose 5-3 points during the same period. Had our prices risen at the same speed as those in Canada it would have cost the American consumer seven billion dollars, or $150 per family of three."

National defence takes up a large part of our production. That is a factor to be taken into account in formulating a policy calculated to maintain the purchasing power of the dollar. Otherwise we are heading for a disaster which will continue to devaluate our dollars still further. Our government loans will be affected thereby. This will constitute a flagrant injustice towards those who had invested their savings in government bonds and might seriously upset the financial stability of our banks and insurance companies which, as you know, have been the heaviest subscribers to these loans.

After the first world war, I found myself in Paris, where I remained about four years. I realized then the meaning of the word inflation.

The franc started out at 20 cents and fell to 5 cents. Government debentures naturally followed the downward movement. I have seen old people who, after having saved all their lives, after having bought an annuity or acquired a government pension and thinking they had thus achieved security, were obliged, though well on in age, to take jobs

[Mr. LaCroix.J

as taxi drivers, janitors, watchmen, etc., or else rely entirely on charity.

Most insurance companies no longer honoured their obligations and, for people on fixed incomes, stark distress became their lot. It is this very thing that explains why there are so many communists in France and in all the European countries. These people have nothing left and, what I consider to be even worse, they have lost all hope.

Only those who owned some real property or stocks of imperishable goods were able to save their capital. That is what causes, in our own country, the tremendous increase in inventories already pointed out, and justly so, by the hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott). As a matter of fact, several of our manufacturers now prefer stocking finished goods to selling them, in the hope of getting a better price. Here again the government should act promptly, in order to force the normal sale of finished products.

I often wonder if our financial contribution in Korea and that required by our adherence to the Atlantic pact will not inevitably foster a condition similar to Europe's, for we must not forget that here in Canada we are only a small population of 13,000,000 people. Such a population surely cannot bear the brunt of taxation beyond possible bounds. Nor must it be forgotten that when the government increases the burden of taxes it helps to increase the cost of living.

The recent applications of public utilities, such as the Bell Telephone, for an increase in rates because taxes had gone up, are concrete examples.

I doubt the sincerity of the members of the opposition when they roar against the high cost of living because instead of striking at the root of the evil and of making suggestions to destroy it, they keep on asking for an increased war preparedness effort. On the other hand, in so far as the domestic market is concerned, they dare not tackle the problem for fear of losing votes in western Canada. I prefer the position taken by the Prime Minister who states frankly that he recognizes the seriousness of the situation and invites this house to make suggestions that will be acted upon if they are practicable.

We can see the whole difference between Liberalism, which is open to all methods calculated to ensure the security of the mass of the people, and Toryism, whose sole Objec-

tive is always to protect the monopolies and financial dictatorship, the leitmotif of its very existence.

The leader of the Progressive Conservative party sometimes makes beautiful statements, but when he has to put his fair words into practice he always knows how to back out, but fails to hoodwink the public who, fortunately, can see through his game.

I am pleased with the amendment to the address in reply to the speech from the throne which has been moved by the leader of the opposition. Indeed, it embodies exactly what I have always suggested since the beginning of the present inflation period. Strong methods are no doubt required to check inflation, for the more we let prices reach astronomical levels the more terrible shall be the reaction when it occurs, and all the more disastrous the economic consequences.

Therefore, in closing, Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to urge the government to do everything possible to check the falling off in the purchasing power of the dollar. I ask this on behalf of all those who through their industry and thrift have laid away some savings, on behalf of the great mass of workers who have a fixed income, on behalf of all those who still believe in government bonds, on behalf of all the breadwinners who want to bring up their children decently so that they may become useful citizens of the Canadian community and lastly, on behalf of those who shall pass away, leaving to their widows and orphans only an insurance policy worth but half its face value.

(Text):

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

George Alexander Cruickshank

Liberal

Mr. G. A. Cruickshank (Fraser Valley):

Mr. Speaker, I hope I shall not delay you too long. I am sorry I was not able to follow the previous speaker, but unfortunately I am not conversant with the French language. I intended to follow the member for Spadina (Mr. Croll). This afternoon I had the privilege of entertaining the wife of the gentleman whom I defeated in the last election. The reason I mention this fact is that it is an example of democracy at its best. So long as we can keep that form of government in Canada, everything will be all right. The gentleman whom I defeated in the last election has been a personal friend of mine for many years, as has been his wife. I am very proud of that fact. Accompanying that very charm-

The Address-Mr. Cruickshank ing lady was a dear friend of my own provincial minister from the province of British Columbia. I mention this just to point out that I think we have so much to be proud of in this House of Commons.

You will notice, Mr. Speaker, I am not reading my speech, nor have I any notes. I admit that I could probably make a better speech if I had one of the members of the press gallery, a member of the staff or a member of the opposition write it for me. If at any time I do read a speech, I shall not put it down here but I shall hold it up for all to see, and I shall send a copy to Hansard before I read it. The reason I mention that is this. We are so proud, particularly in my own riding, of the form of government we have in our country. I had today the privilege of introducing that lady to my leader, our Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) and to the leader of the opposition (Mr. Drew).

I am particularly proud of being a Canadian. Since I have been a member of the House of Commons-and it has not been so very long-the most important piece of legislation, in my opinion, which has been brought down in this building was that whereby we were able to say "I am a Canadian". I am proud of being a Canadian. Sometimes I do not altogether agree with my own party on some of the legislation they bring down; and I certainly do not always agree with the legislation suggested by the opposition. One reason for that, sir, is that since 1940 I have had the privilege of rooming with a very distinguished man, but I could not stand it any longer and 1 now room alone. I have also had the privilege of sitting in this house with many leaders of the opposition, and they could not make up their minds. I have had to endeavour to make up my mind, on behalf of my own party, as to the ultimate destination of George Cruickshank. I realize that you, Mr. Speaker, as a result of your position, have responsibility for the transportation of articles within this great building. I can assure you, sir, that when my time comes to take the long but short walk down the corridor from room 565 I will take my own belongings to where I may be assigned in that other place.

I am not going to talk about the cost of living, although I realize how important it is to the people of Canada. I am not even going to stage a filibuster. I do not know whether private bills are going to be dealt with at this session; but if they are, I shall have something to say on that occasion. Again may I say that I am not reading my speech. I have not even a note. I have a tie brought back to me-by one who went

The Address-Mr. Cruickshank on one of those overseas expeditions-from The Hague, not from Geneva. It is a beautiful tie. In order that you may recognize it, Mr. Speaker, I will wear it tomorrow.

What I want to say is this, and I am speaking on behalf of everybody in my riding, particularly those in the Legion to which I happen to have the honour of belonging. I am proud of being a life

member. I am proud of what the Legion has done. I am proud of the fact that within my riding I have six of the finest branches of the Legion in the Dominion of Canada. Some half million dollars is invested there, and there are about 4,000 paid-up members. That is fairly good for a rural riding.

I want to reiterate what has been said by the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Croll). Since I first came here I have had the privilege of belonging to the veterans affairs committee. In so far as my ability permitted me to do so, I have had the privilege of making recommendations on behalf of the veterans and their dependents. In what I have to say I am not speaking only on behalf of the Legion within my riding; I honestly believe that I am speaking on behalf of every citizen within my riding, irrespective of his party, creed or colour. We believe that we have a duty we owe to those who enabled us to sit here today making suggestions and making criticisms with regard to the form of administration we should receive. I am not speaking for the government, naturally. Some day I hope to move down about three desks, at which time I will speak for them; but in the meantime I am not speaking for them. I honestly believe, however, the government realizes that the feeling throughout Canada-and certainly within my own riding-is that if we can have a surplus of $500 million in five months to be used, as intimated by the Minister of Finance, to pay off the national debt, the first obligation we owe and should pay is the one to those who gave so mpch on our behalf. I sincerely and honestly hope that the government will at this session-at this session, I repeat-take steps to bring about some form of increase in the basic rate of pension to those who gave so much on our behalf.

On motion of Mr. Adamson the debate was adjourned.

On motion of Mr. Fournier (Hull) the house adjourned at 6.50 p.m.

Thursday, Oclober 18, 1951

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink

October 17, 1951