Mr. Castleden:

Is that different from the others?

Mr. Fulton:

No, there is no difference be-twen the Hungarian refugees and any other immigrants.

Mr. Fisher:

On that point, does the minister not think it might be worth while publicizing the fact that there is no difference? Common opinion is prejudiced against the Hungarians because the popular belief is otherwise. There is one other point I should like to make. If the situation in Italy is such that because of the centralization in Rome we cannot have any more offices, surely that should not prevent the minister from obtaining more field officers to go out and check in the parishes where I understand the main backlog exists as far as applications are concerned. Most of the time in dealing with applications has to be spent in going out into the field and checking the parish records in the villages and towns where people live. Why could the minister not expand the field officer force even though he has to continue with the one office?

Mr. Fulton:

In connection with the Hungarian situation, it must be admitted that the majority of immigrants receiving assistance at the moment are Hungarians but when you consider the obstacles they had to overcome on arrival in Canada, the fact that they were not voluntary immigrants but refugees who came without preparation and without any form of capital, nothing more than the clothes they stood in and the $5 spending money they were given originally, and when you consider that the total movement has been over 36,000, I think a figure of 7,671, or roughly only one-fifth, is a very creditable record of performance in connection with these refugees.

Mr. Nicholson:

The minister said he would have some information under this item on the number of applications at the office in New Delhi, India.

Mr. Fulion:

I have to apologize to the hon. gentleman. The report is not available here. We will obtain it from the office and give the

4078 HOUSE OF

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration hon. gentleman the information either later tonight or another day if these estimates are still being considered.

Mr. Regier:

I believe this is the right item on which to ask the minister about the situation at Hong Kong. I understand there is a very heavy list of prospective immigrants who have applied. I have been advised of one case where the would-be immigrant was told to come back in approximately nine months' time. The list of applicants is so heavy and the number of officers is so limited that some Canadians are beginning to think it is a deliberate policy of the government to have only a limited number of officers there in order to slow down the flow of immigration through Hong Kong. As the minister knows, the situation over there is rather serious in that the city is plugged with some million and a half refugees. Some of these refugees are relatives of Canadian citizens. Some of our most reputable citizens have relatives among these refugees. What is the department doing to relieve the present situation?

Mr. Fulton:

The situation in Hong Kong is a baffling one and not one which I believe can be solved simply by an increase in staff. There are questions of identification, difficulties in getting information in regard to the background of these people, tracing their family relationships, medical examinations and so on. All these things are matters where the success of the operation is really dependent, I think, not so much upon the number of staff as upon the skill and knowledge of the staff regarding the conditions of the people with whom they are dealing. Last fall we sent an extra officer over there. We have increased the staff by one officer who can speak both English and Chinese. He is highly trained in Chinese. While I know the situation is not satisfactory, I can report to the hon. gentleman that in the month of December, 1957, we admitted from Hong Kong 206 Chinese compared with 77 in the month of December, 1956.

Mr. Fisher:

Can the minister not answer the question with regard to the expansion of field services in Italy on this particular vote? Is it not possible to increase those services?

Mr. Fulton:

I think the hon. gentleman will appreciate that in Italy, as in many other countries, we are dependent for the information we receive upon facilities made available from outside sources. Therefore, we are not entirely free agents in the matter. They have other duties to perform besides examining and reporting to us upon prospective immigrants to Canada. That is one of the

strictly limiting factors with regard to our ability to deal with the number of applications we have from Italy.

Mr. Winch:

What is the situation at the present time with regard to India? As the minister will remember, about a year ago the then minister promised that a new agreement would be negotiated with India with respect to the quota of immigrants allowed to enter Canada. Has that been done and, if so, has there been any increase in the field staff in India?

Mr. Fulton:

No, there is no increase in the field staff in India. The quota for India was set less than a year ago. It was set in May, 1957, when it was increased to 300. While I have had under consideration the question of some further negotiations, these are matters which you do not open too frequently as between governments. Furthermore, we had hoped to be able to deal with a considerable portion of the backlog as a result of the order in council of January 2, and until we see what effect that has in relieving pressure on the quota numbers we will not really be able to make an intelligent assessment of just what further quota number we should ask for.

Mr. Winch:

How do you decide what the quota is to be?

Mr. Fullon:

As a matter of fact, of course, it will depend in part on what the views of the other government are and also upon the pressure that is exerted in this country for the admission of people from the country from which they are being applied for.

Before I make any further decision I want to see whether, in fact, the amendment that was brought into force on January 2 will relieve the pressure and enable us to take care of the volume of applications we are receiving. If I find it does not, then I shall be prepared to have a further look at the situation.

Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):

wonder whether the minister, in relation to vote 71, would give us a little exercise in the relationship between estimates, supplementary estimates and governor general's warrants. In connection with this subject matter, I understand there is this vote of $2,483,000, provided by item 71 in the main estimates.

There is also in the supplementary estimates, item 684, which provides for $8 million. In addition thereto, there is the amount of $2,428,000 which was appropriated by means of governor general's warrants issued pursuant to order in council No. 19571134 dated August 19, 1957. I am not questioning the purpose of the money. I should like to know whether the $2,428,000 voted by order in council is included in that $10,483,000 set out in the estimates or whether it is in addition to the moneys that parliament is asked to vote?

Mr. Fulton:

The answer is no, the $2,428,000 is not included in the total to which the hon. gentleman has referred. It is included in the total of $54,055,059, which I gave earlier this afternoon as the total which would be covered by the amount in the main and supplementary estimates. In fact, I think I described it as the total estimated expenditure for 1957-58.

Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):

Did

that over-all figure that the minister gave include any statutory items of expenditure by this department?

Mr. Fulton:

Yes, the minister's salary; pensions and other benefits found on page 13 and Indian annuities also found on page 13. I believe these are the only statutory items in this department, unless there happen to be some from the national film board or the gallery or archives which report through this department, but which I do not believe have any statutory items.