February 9, 1955

CCF

Robert Ross (Roy) Knight

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

Mr. Knight:

The first extract is one taken from a speech of the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) on October 19, 1949, as found at page 946 of Hansard, in which he said:

X am sure all hon. members have welcomed this opportunity of focusing their attention upon this assertion, one which certainly appeals to each and every one of us, that there should be across Canada the greatest possible degree of equality of opportunity for the education of our young Canadians, the Canadians of the next generation.

Since I am making this plea, in the nature of things, Mr. Speaker, to a Liberal government, I should like to use as my next quotation one from a speech by a distinguished member of the Liberal party, no less a person than the premier of Manitoba, Hon. Douglas Campbell, when speaking at the federal-provincial conference in 1950. He said:

Education is a subject which is of fundamental national concern because it far transcends the interest of any local community that the utmost use should be made of all our human resources, and that no child should be penalized as to the education which is available to him merely because he happens to live in one part of Canada rather than another. We therefore strongly advocate that the federal government should accept responsibility for a substantial part of the cost of education.

If I may, in all humility, add my own words to those of greater men, may I say that the birthright of every child is a minimum standard of education, based not upon the wealth of the parent or the local school district or even of the province but upon the wealth and resources of the whole nation. I hope, sir, and I believe that we are entering upon an era of peace. Even if we are not to be engaged in active war, even if we may be able to make some rents in the "curtains" that divide the peoples of the world and permit again free intercommunication and perhaps some trade, we shall be involved in a struggle of ideas. In that struggle the quality and universality of education in our own country may be an important factor. Given that, and given time, I think the ideas of freedom and democracy will ultimately prevail.

Perhaps we should consider education for a moment from that point of view. Such an examination will not justify any smugness upon our part. In my opinion we are falling steadily behind some of the other countries in the commonwealth of nations. Comparatively speaking, we have created no great Canadian literature, nor indeed are we a nation of great readers. Smugness might incline us to think that perhaps those with whom we differ ideologically are illiterate.

I refer you now to a startling article by Mr. Burke Stannard in the Financial Post of December 18 in which he says:

In 1918 Russia had one university for every 11 millions of its population, Canada had one for every 315,000. Today-

Not very many years afterwards.

-Russia has one university student for every 150 population; Canada has one for every 250. We might well inquire as to just what is holding up Canadian progress.

He answers his own question by saying, and I quote in part:

Personally, I believe the financial barrier to be the one which keeps the enrolment low.

Then he says the significant fact is that government support is not rising as rapidly as university costs. Two educators were asked to make some comment on this particular article. One was Dr. R. C. Wallace, whose recent decease has been such a loss to education and indeed to this country generally. The opening words of his comment were, and I quote:

The situation calls for additional scholarship assistance as well as additional grants to the universities.

Dr. F. Cyril James, the principal of McGill University, while advocating the need for scholarships said it would be necessary for each scholarship to carry with it the payment to the university attended by the student of a supplementary grant. These men speak from the university viewpoint. Since in this resolution I am rather considering the quality of education for the great masses of the public, my first plea to the government would be for the provision of a more generous scale of scholarships from national funds. Personally, I would request that in the granting a greater emphasis should be laid on the humanities. I contend, with all due deference to the technical and scientific specialists, that such studies in the humanities are the basis and foundation of any liberal education.

I am going to make another suggestion in the interests of education. Perhaps it is less important and perhaps I should not spend the time on it, but it is this idea. I heard of an unfortunate case where some applicants for posts, perhaps administrative, in the civil service were turned down with a great deal of scorn by certain members of the employing agency-I do not know whether or not it was the civil service commission-and were told that was not the type of education needed for this job. I am going to suggest to the government that, in the employment of civil servants, and goodness knows there is no place in the country where we can better use well educated men, they keep a long list of young men trained in the humanities.

The names for such a list could be obtained through competitive examination or from the heads of universities. The government could enable these men to proceed further with their education through government scholarships so that they could qualify themselves for the particular jobs for which the government needed them.

From my early youth, I recall there were appointments to be made to the consular service in Britain. A competitive examination was set up open to all students within the British Empire of a certain age. The top half dozen candidates in this examination were selected for a two-year scholarship at Cambridge to continue their studies, largely in the languages but generally in the subjects which they would need. I would suggest to the government that would be a good method to adopt here and might give us some of the best brains in the country, whose training would have been in the humanities rather than in the sciences, and who might with further training fit into a niche suitable to themselves and with benefit to the country as a whole.

For a long time Britain has recognized the need of such scholarships. Mr. Kenneth Lindsay, who was parliamentary secretary to the board of education in Britain from 1937 to 1940, a man with a long career in both government and education, stated recently as reported in Saturday Night of January 22:

At the university level we have a system of grants so extensive that there is nothing like it anywhere else.

He was referring, of course, to Britain. He stated that 75 per cent of the university students there are receiving grants from the state. The basis of entrance is entirely on merit, a fact which keeps down wastage. We all know there is no point in training people if they have not the ability to absorb such training. I quote again from Mr. Lindsay:

About 60 per cent of all British universities' money comes from the state through the university grants committee which gives something like 20 million pounds per year, with no questions asked.

My next plea to the government in the interests of education is that it proceed forthwith to set up the Canada Council, as recommended by the Massey commission. Not long ago the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) spoke in this city to a group of educators interested in the humanities. I was fortunate enough to receive an invitation to attend the meetings. In a very fine speech during one of our evening sessions the Prime Minister, with his usual caution, the caution which one can understand since it is the

Education

corollary of responsibility, did not commit himself to the setting up of that council but he did by his speech inspire hope in the breasts of those who heard him that such action would be taken at this session. Certainly those who were interested were keenly disappointed to learn there was no mention of it in the speech from the throne.

I do not know whether or not the Minister of Finance (Mr. Harris) had anything to do with putting the brake on the wheels of progress in that particular case, but he can answer for himself or to his own conscience. Canada is slowly and gradually emerging, Mr. Speaker, from the feeling of inferiority which has always bedevilled us in literature and the other arts. Perhaps our pioneer preoccupation with primitive things, or perhaps our progress towards our own independence and our progress in material wealth, has been so swift that our appreciation of Canada's greatness and the capabilities of her people has not kept pace. We, ourselves, are at last discovering that there is as much drama in the lives of native Canadians as a basis for literature as there is in other people's lives.

Our artists are beginning at last to realize that there is as much beauty in a prairie sunset or in the Quebec woods as there is in a European scene which it was once conventional to portray upon a canvas. And I pay my tribute here to the great advance made by French-Canadian culture. Investments in the promotion of Canadian arts, such as I suggest, would add to the enjoyment, the education and the culture of all Canadian people.

And now I come to my third request-and it is really the meat of my resolution. I had thought once of spending my whole time upon it, because I am well aware that there are a good many new members who have come to the house since I last spoke on the subject and since the last debate upon it occurred. But I would tell them that it is all on Hansard-and that it has been there for the last six or eight years. While I have not time to go into it in too much detail today, I shall take whatever time Mr. Speaker will allow me.

My request is for more support from the consolidated revenue fund of this country to the provinces for the support of such programs in general education as the provinces themselves desire to maintain. There should be some degree of equality of opportunity in education for all Canadian children, irrespective of the province from which they come, and irrespective of the

Education

economic status of their parents-and the last is very important. We know that high school education, while free in the sense that people do not have to pay fees for it, is not in fact free. There are such things as clothes and books, and members of large families who must go out to support others who are younger than themselves, and who are growing up.

There are many children who, through circumstances over which they have no control, are underprivileged in the matter of education. In the financial educational structure of Canada we want stability. When economic disaster comes in the form of a failure in the wheat crop, or floods, or any other circumstances of that kind, we do not want education to be the first casualty, as it usually is. And that is certainly true in times of war.

And may I say to some of my friends who like to turn this into a political dispute, who sneer and ask questions about the C.C.F. government in Saskatchewan, and all that sort of thing, that sincerely, so far as I am concerned, there is no political element whatsoever in this resolution. I move it simply in what I believe to be the interests of Canadian children. And I have not in mind the children in my own province any more than I have in mind the children of New Brunswick, Quebec, Alberta, or whatever province one may choose.

In view of the history of this country one can understand the fears held by some that federal aid might somehow imply or involve federal control. Well, one can understand that view; and one can understand, too, how politicians could have some success in promoting that fear for their own purposes. But for such fear in my opinion there is not the slightest shred of justification. The technique of federal grants in aid, without federal control, has already been well established. Consider the Agricultural Instruction Act, the Technical Education Act, the Youth Training Act, the Vocational Training Coordination Act, all providing financial assistance for education, without any control. Is there anyone in this house bold enough to get up and say that any federal control has been exerted in any of these spheres?

And then there are national research scholarships, D.V.A. university grants, direct grants to universities, grants to the research council for university research, the training of cadets at colleges, the maintenance of the education board of the bureau of statistics. And, by the way, while we are talking about constitutional matters, how about federal aid in matters of provincial control for family

IMr. Knight.]

allowances, or the national health program? I am not objecting to it, and I do not think anybody else is.

Perhaps I should explain what I mean by equality of educational opportunity. I remember one hon. member in one of the debates who certainly did not understand it. I suppose it is easier to say what it is not than to say what it is. It is not in any degree equality of education. It is not uniformity or standardization of education-for the first is impossible, human nature being what it is, and the second vvould certainly be undesirable and, if possible, would imply a control to which I personally, and everyone I know, would be opposed.

The idea of equality of opportunity is simply an attempt to give every Canadian child as good a chance to obtain an education as any other Canadian child. In my opinion that is his birthright in a civilized and democratic country.

It is not equality but inequality which prevails now, and its cause is almost entirely financial. The financial problem manifests itself in many ways, among others a shortage of teachers-and we see this all around us *-inadequately trained teachers, which we see in evidence everywhere, the lowering of standards, the lack of buildings and equipment, overcrowded classrooms, lack of transportation in outlying districts, unequal distribution of wealth as between provinces and districts and, in some places, a complete lack of educational facilities.

I have tried to avoid using statistics in this speech, but I would recommend for the reading of members in the house two reports which are the result of intensive research into this whole matter, and where comparisons as between province and province may be found. I refer to one report compiled by the Canadian teachers federation in December 1953, entitled "Educational Finance in Canada", and a report prepared by Dr. LaZerte under the sponsorship of the Canadian school trustees association, a body which I may add is completely in favour of federal aid.

We have reached almost an impasse in education in Canada. Education has always been almost entirely a charge upon real property. Well, I submit that cow has been milked dry. The municipalities, in desperation for funds, turn to the provinces, some of which at least have increased their grants, and most of which have reached the end of their ability to pay more.

The basis of taxation for general education must be broadened. I have seldom heard of bachelors or childless couples complaining about assessments for purposes of education of the children of others. And I have a better opinion of my fellow Canadians than to think that the wealthier provinces would complain if some of the funds they contribute to the consolidated revenue fund were used for grants to ensure education for the underprivileged children in other and less fortunate provinces.

This is a matter of vital public concern. Hundreds of organizations throughout the country have endorsed federal aid. I have not time to list them, but I do have a list a foot high. The only difficulty opposed to it is a political one, and that is based upon an unreasoning fear that somehow federal aid would imply federal control, and might involve interference with provincial jurisdiction or minority rights, a supposition I emphatically deny. However, I have already dealt with that phase of the subject.

The press of the country is full of articles setting out the difficulties faced in the educational system. I have before me a dozen or more clippings taken from the press in the last week or two. I find in one, for instance, that we are unable to train a sufficient number of Canadian teachers. I find that Ontario and Saskatchewan-and there may be other provinces-have actually been importing teachers from Great Britain. There may be good features in that. I know I favour the idea of exchange of teachers as between provinces and countries, but here is a compulsory one. While it may have its good features, I suggest to you that it is a sad commentary on our own system of training our teachers. What a blow to our national pride! This great country is looked up to for its wealth, but we cannot train our own school teachers. We have not the money to do it, so we take the ad hoc business of going out and grabbing them here and there wherever we can.

Here are a few pertinent things I picked up in the press recently. From the Globe and Mail I picked out the following:

Secondary school enrolment will increase in Ontario by more than 100,000 pupils in the next ten years and the province will require 4,000 more teachers.

This is a statement by Dr. Sidney Smith, president of the University of Toronto, as quoted in the paper I have mentioned. Here is another one:

In 1952-53 Canada had many unqualified persons substituting as teachers. Of these, 5,100 had no professional training, 3,700 had partial training and other thousands had poor qualifications.

Education

Dr. LaZerte in The Listening Post, as a result of a study he made of the situation for a full year, said this:

In 1951-52 the amount per pupil spent on a British Columbia child was over three times as high as in Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island.

Well, sir, these little children are there. Is that justice? Surely it is for us to do something for them. The sum of $3 is spent in British Columbia on the education of a child, and the little child, because he has the fortune or misfortune-I leave it to the members from those provinces, I dare not express an opinion on it-to be born in Newfoundland or Prince Edward Island, has $1 spent on him.

I am asking you if that is justice. The child, of course, is not in a position to do anything about it, but I suggest to you, sir, that you and I ought to, and the government should, do something.

I picked another one from Le Nouvelliste of Three Rivers. The article pointed out the number of teachers working without teaching certificates or diplomas. It said:

Schools in rural areas have two choices, close down completely or employ untrained teachers.

We have substandard teachers in my own province and in Manitoba. As a matter of fact there are some in almost all the provinces. We ought to be ashamed. I saw another headline in a paper. Mr. Parker, a member of the Northwest Territories government, said that education is the territories' chief problem. It is one of Canada's chief problems. Education in Canada is big business and we should be concerned to see that we are getting value for our own money. I found statistics for 1953 which show that the percentage of teachers with university degrees is 24-6 in Ontario; 19-3 in Nova Scotia; 11-5 in New Brunswick; 5-1 in Prince Edward Island and 4-5 in Newfoundland. I am glad to be able to report that that is much better than it was at the last time a similar survey was made. We are making progress in that direction.

I have another heading which appeared in the Ottawa Citizen a few days ago as follows:

Soaring enrolment poses problem.

The article proceeds to discuss overcrowding in schools and shows it is a major problem in all provinces.

Then, Mr. J. Roger Pichette says that in his constituency of Restigouche county 1,600 school-age children "are not attending any school or at best attending one or two months a year". I do not know as to these facts. I am quoting them from what I consider to

Education

be reliable papers. This paper which states that to be a fact also makes the comment that the federal tax system's purpose is to make it financially possible for all the provinces, whatever their tax base, to perform their constitutional functions themselves and to provide a reasonable level of provincial services without an abnormal burden of taxation. I am suggesting that the burden of taxation on the municipalities and on many of the provinces of this country in respect of education is in fact abnormal.

A Canadian Press dispatch from the Vancouver Sun reports under this big headline: "Teachers blast Alberta scheme":

Dr. L. P. Patterson of Montreal speaking said it was a retrograde step of the worst kind.

I presume Dr. Patterson was a special speaker out there. When he said it was "a retrograde step" he was describing a plan to allow unmatriculated, grade 12 students, to go out and teach schools in the province of Alberta.

In picking out these press items, I have made no reflection upon any of the provinces, nor do 1 make any reflection on the school boards or on the teachers. They are caught up in the web of an impossible educational financial situation. The fact that there are 40 per cent of the teachers in one province with no professional qualifications or with less than the minimum requirements is no reflection on those people who day by day have to go into their school rooms and work in the face of those problems, sometimes for very small rewards, though I am pleased to note that that reward is now greater. But I say this: you can build a million dollar school with all the gimmicks-I hate that word, although I have used it-but if that school has not the prop of teachers of scholarship, ability, character and qualities of leadership, the whole edifice might as well educationally tumble down about your ears. Such people must be adequately trained and adequately paid, and their work must be adequately recognized. Sir, we do not submit the bodies of sick children to untrained or unskilled doctors. Is it not more important that we should make sure that we are not submitting their minds over a twelve-year period to unskilled, low-paid and inexperienced mentors?

The solution for this teacher problem, like others I have mentioned, is simply federal aid to education. True, education in its administration and curriculum is and must be, I insist, a provincial problem, but its results are national, especially in these days of easy communication, of quick transportation, of resettling as from one province to

another, of Saskatchewan people moving to the Pacific coast to live in British Columbia, of Quebec people moving into Ontario and occupying lands and working in Ontario where they come under a different provincial jurisdiction. The education given in one province permeates the nation. As an instance of that, I would ask you to remember the great debt that we have owed for the last 50 years to educators from the maritimes who have come out to the west and assisted us with our teaching problems there.

In conclusion, let me return to my original theme, the building of a great and an educated nation. Our young men and women, as they traverse the world, will not be regarded as the products educationally of any particular province, but as products of this great free land, which is Canada. Let us use every means in our power to see to it that it also becomes an enlightened land.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):

Mr. Speaker, I am rising to oppose this motion. Before I state the grounds for my opposition to it, I should like for a minute or two to indicate to you, sir, and to the house that in opposing the motion I am not and I do not want myself to be the cause of being represented as being opposed to many of the objectives outlined by the hon. member for Saskatoon.

I took a few notes while he was speaking. I doubt if there are any hon. members in this house who are so reactionary that they would quarrel with his view that it should be the desire of the Canadian nation to have as close an approach as we can get to equality of opportunity for the children of this country. If I were not restrained by the restraint shown by the hon. member, I would even go so far as to say that probably no government had done more toward achieving those objectives than the government which is now occupying the rather depleted treasury benches. I am going to state precisely why I have expressed that view.

In the days when I was making what I hope even the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) will admit was an honest living as a teacher-and may I say that I am not pretending for a minute that I am a teacher any more-

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
PC

James MacKerras Macdonnell

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Macdonnell:

What about an honest living?

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Pickersgill:

I hope it is honest. In those days, as the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre knows, as everyone knows who comes from Manitoba where he and I were brought up, indeed as anyone who comes from any one of the western provinces or

from any of the Atlantic provinces knows, in those years we really did have a financial crisis about education in this country. We had a financial crisis about everything else the municipal and provincial governments had to do with. By the end of that period it was so great that it had affected even the wealthiest of the provinces.

Nothing that has been done since confederation has done so much to bring about equality of opportunity, or the possibility of equality of opportunity, for the children of this country as the policy of redistributing a portion of the national revenues so that the provincial governments will be in position to carry out their constitutional functions for themselves. That policy was recommended by the Rowell-Sirois commission, which as everyone knows was appointed in the summer of 1937 and made its report early in the years of the war. Despite a good deal of opposition from some prominent members of certain parties on the other side of the house, that policy was translated into an offer by which every provincial government was free to accept a tax rental agreement which would put it in a position to carry out its educational functions, which in my view is the most important of all its functions, for itself.

If the amount which the provinces receive under the tax rental agreements is not sufficient to enable the provincial and local authorities between them to provide equality of opportunity in the field of education, then I say right away that could be remedied through a redistribution of the national revenues so that might be possible. My own view is that the present tax rental agreements do redistribute the revenues of this country in such a fashion that it is quite possible in every province, I do not say to provide the kind of education all of us would like to see but to provide a real approximation to equality in all the provinces, provided the people of a province want it enough to elect the kind of provincial government that will insist upon providing it.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
CCF

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

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

Mr. Knowles:

Tell us about Newfoundland.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Pickersgill:

I will tell you about Newfoundland. As a matter of fact that is why I intervened so early in this debate. I did want to say something about the particular relationship of Newfoundland to this motion.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
CCF

Major James William Coldwell

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

Mr. Coldwell:

Has the hon. gentleman not thought that the present suggestions regarding tax agreements might undermine them seriously and prevent a further possibility of the provinces carrying out their responsibilities in this regard?

Education

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Pickersgill:

I am pleased that the hon. gentleman has given me an excuse to say something which I rather hesitated to say. I was afraid that if I brought up that subject I would be accused by the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Knight), who clothed himself in a non-partisan cloak, of introducing a partisan note. I do not think that anything will be found anywhere in any utterance from this side of the house that suggests that. It seems to me that the assurance which the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) gave in the letter which he addressed to the provincial governments, an assurance which he has given repeatedly in public, is the most complete answer to that.

It does seem to me that those people who are taking exception to the efforts which we are making to see that undue burdens are not placed upon one group of Canadian taxpayers because they happen to live in a province whose government does not want to have a tax rental agreement; it does seem to me that the continued attacks which are made upon these efforts to provide a reasonable equality for these Canadian citizens, are not helping to ensure the stability of this system.

If I may continue with the thought that I had started with, I am not saying that this redistribution must be done by means of tax rental agreements. Perhaps I had better quote from the letter which the Prime Minister addressed to all the premiers except the premier of Quebec, and something similar to the paragraph I intend to read was in the letter to that premier. The passage I have in mind will be found on page 281 of Hansard of January 17, 1955, and reads:

We did indicate, however, that the federal government was not wedded to the principle of tax rental agreements to the exclusion of any better alternative arrangement if one could be found. At the same time, we made it clear that the present government had no intention of abandoning the objective of the tax rental agreements which is to make it financially possible for all the provinces, whatever their tax base, to perform their constitutional functions themselves and to provide a reasonable Canadian level of provincial services without an abnormal burden of taxation.

As the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) said, that is the foundation of the policy of the federal government. I am going to make the statement right now, Mr. Speaker, that so long as I am a member of the government that is going to continue to be the foundation of the policy of the government.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
CCF

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

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

Mr. Knowles:

You might find yourself incompetent one of these days.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Pickersgill:

Quite so. That is possible. We have a democratic system and some day. I suppose, the people of Canada will get tired of us.

Education

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Pickersgill:

But I do not think that day is dawning just yet.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Oh, oh.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
CCF

Major James William Coldwell

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

Mr. Coldwell:

In a couple of years.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
CCF

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

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

Mr. Knowles:

It is obvious you need to get back to education.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Pickersgill:

It perhaps would be

prudent for me to keep my hand in. Next to the tax rental agreements or the principle of the tax rental agreements to which I have just alluded, I do not think that any other measure that has ever been enacted by this parliament or by any provincial legislature has done more to bring about equality of opportunity for the children of this country than has the family allowance legislation which was introduced by my old chief, Mr. Mackenzie King. Of all his many achievements, it may be the one which will have been of the most enduring value.

There are many other ways in which the federal government can-as it has and as I hope it will continue to do-advance in a general sort of way the cause of education in this country. The hon. member for Saskatoon referred to several of these things. One could refer to a good many others such as the university grants, the scholarships provided by the research council, some of the appropriations provided by my hon. friend the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg), some by my hon. friend the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin) and a host of other particular things. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) does a good deal of this sort of thing. The Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Sinclair) does something.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
CCF

Major James William Coldwell

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

Mr. Coldwell:

What about defence?

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Pickersgill:

I suppose half the departments of government do something of that sort. But that is not what the hon. member for Saskatoon really means by this motion.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
CCF

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

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

Mr. Knowles:

Your own department does some of it too.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Pickersgill:

Nor is that what I mean when I oppose this motion. This is not strictly relevant, Mr. Speaker; in fact, I think it is strictly irrelevant, and if you call me to order I will not persist.

Topic:   EQUALIZING OF OPPORTUNITY
Subtopic:   ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES
Permalink

February 9, 1955