Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):

Mr. Speaker, I desire to

announce the appointment of some additional parliamentary assistants, as follows:

Mr. Brooke Claxton (St. Lawrenee-St. George) to be parliamentary assistant to the President of the Privy Council.

Mr. Joseph Jean (Mercier) to be parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Justice.

Mr. Paul Martin (Essex East) to be parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Labour.

Mr. GRAYDON:

Is this the complete

roster of appointments, or are there more to be made?

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

That is seven

of the ten.

Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):

Before this motion carries, Mr. Speaker, I desire to make some observations with respect to the matter of radio broadcasting. You will recall that last session a committee on radio broadcasting was constituted and held several sessions, during which the whole matter of radio broadcasting in the several fields was reviewed. Many important matters were dealt with, one or two of which I should like to discuss.

First, however, may I point out that at the last session of parliament no opportunity was given to discuss the committee's report. When before the Easter recess the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) had something to say respecting the length of time which had been taken in setting up the committee on reconstruction and other committees of the house I took occasion to remind him, as I now remind hon. members, that one of the chief reasons why so much of the time of the house was so consumed was that at the end of the last session the opportunity to discuss matters dealt with by committees of the house was not present. The same applies to the committee on radio broadcasting, which completed its work near the end of the last session and through its chairman made its report to the house. No concurrence was moved, and no debate ensued. The only observations made- and Your Honour quite properly stipulated that they should be brief-were those I made, when I pointed out as a member of the committee that the report was not unanimous.

During the war years 1940 and 1941 voices were raised in the house supporting the constitution of a committee on radio broadcasting. A committee sat in 1938 and presented its report. Another sat in 1939, and it too made a report. In 1940 and 1941, for reasons best known to the government, parliament was refused the request made by some members that a committee be set up to investigate the policies, management and operation of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Numerous explanations were given as to why the government had refused the request. Finally however in 1942, following requests made from

Radio Broadcasting

time to time, the government agreed to the setting up of a committee on radio broadcasting. It was bad enough to permit the years 1940 and 1941 to pass without having a periodic investigation into the affairs of this publicly-owned and publicly-controlled corporation; but that was not the end of the difficulty. The session of 1942 began on January 22. On March 13, fifty days after the opening of the session, the committee on radio broadcasting was constituted. On May 6, after , another fifty-three days had passed, the first committee meeting was held. I do not wish to be unduly critical in matters of this kind, but I must point out that in that instance over a hundred days of the session had passed before anything was done in the committee on radio broadcasting, with the result that a considerably shorter period remained in which it might conclude its deliberations. Having regard to the time at its disposal, the committee sat as often as possible; but at the end of the session no opportunity was afforded to discuss the report presented.

May I now proceed to a discussion of one or two matters which then engaged the attention of the committee. One of the first which came to our notice was that of obtaining the necessary information upon which we might form our judgments as to the operation and management of the corporation. I have in mind particularly the minutes of the board of governors. Throughout the whole gamut of controversy respecting the affairs of the corporation, the government-perhaps I should say the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation- refused to permit production of the minutes of the board of governors for the assistance of members of the committee. That point was the subject of a division in the committee. The whole history of the operations of the corporation, so far as decisions and results of deliberations are concerned, found their way naturally to those minutes. The best the members of the committee were able to do was to have the minutes brought to the committee room. From time to time, after some argument, some parts of the minutes were read into the record by officers of the corporation, or by those giving evidence respecting their affairs.

I now renew the suggestion I then made, that while in the deliberations of a committee it may not always be advisable or necessary to give the public full access to all the minutes, there is little or no justification for depriving the people's representatives free access to minutes so that they may know what is taking place, how money is being spent, and how efficiently the corporation is operating.

My suggestion is that when the committee sits this year those who have something to do with the production of minutes ought to give careful consideration to such production, so that nothing may be left to chance, and everything will be in the open and available for scrutiny by those interested in the matter.

There were many interesting developments in the committee. One of the chief reasons for the public's persistent demand for investigation was that from time to time they had had cause for alarm arising from newspaper reports as to the correspondence in connection with the resignation of a member of the board of governors. In 1939, after considerable criticism had been voiced within the board of governors itself, the late Alan D. Plaunt, then a member of the board of governors, accepted the obligation of making a survey of the management and affairs of the corporation, of which he was one of the severest critics. Mr. Thompson was appointed to act with Mr. Plaunt, and the two of them brought in a report to the board of governors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as it was then constituted. The report, which was dated September 23, 1939, dealt with a multitude of matters and contained a large number of recommendations. It was then placed upon the doorstep of the board of governors to be dealt with as was contemplated and premeditated by the appointment of Mr. Plaunt and Mr. Thompson to do this work. I have no intention of doing anything more to-day than simply to refer to the report, because it is a lengthy document. The consideration of this report took up considerable time of the committee itself.

There was one thing which led to some public uneasiness with respect to the affairs of the broadcasting corporation. Action upon the report was successively deferred and delayed by the board of governors. This fact was clearly set out in the letter of resignation of Mr. Plaunt a year afterwards. The board of governors, or a committee thereof, met on October 16, a little less than a month after the report was submitted; on November 17 they met again; on January 20, 1940, they met again; on April 15, 1940, they met again; and they met again on July 6 and August 19, 1940. I think most hon. members will agree that there were plenty of opportunities for a comprehensive discussion of such an important matter as the report to which I have just referred.

On August 30, 1940, following the meeting of August 19, Alan B. Plaunt resigned. His letter of resignation to the minister in charge at that time contained details of many of the things which perhaps were at the root of the trouble

Radio Broadcasting

which had occurred. Here is the situation as one finds it outlined in Mr. Plaunt's letter of August 30, 1940. I do not intend to read the whole letter, but one pertinent part reads as follows:

I feel that as a public trustee I should not continue to accept responsibility for the internal organization and executive direction of the corporation when I have long ceased to have confidence in it.

The whole letter makes most interesting reading. The evidence shows that time after time Mr. Plaunt tried to have action taken with respect to the report he had made, but the board of governors successively deferred and delayed action. If I remember correctly, those are the words which he used quite often to describe the position in which he found himself. Is it any wonder that members of the House of Commons began to ask questions from time to time and that uneasiness was spreading throughout the country? But this uneasiness had not yet approached the point of a decision on the part of the government to investigate the affairs of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Although Mr. Plaunt's resignation was put in on August 30, 1940, we did not have an investigating committee set up by this house until May of 1942.

I do not intend this afternoon to deal with all the matters dealt with by the committee in its various sessions, but two or three interesting things occurred to which I should like to refer. Prior to the time the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation committee was set up, I said on many occasions, I think perhaps in this house as well, that if the affairs of the corporation were ever considered there would be some interesting revelations. It was difficult to listen to the evidence which came out at certain sittings of the committee without smiling, but one realized that the matter was really serious and deserved important consideration.

In April, 1941, after the Plaunt report, the structure of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was somewhat changed. The general manager, who was the big chief of the show, was gradually elbowed out. I think I described this move in the committee by saying that the general manager had been shifted from the ground floor up to the attic, and about all he was allowed to take with him was the nameplate on which were inscribed the words "General Manager". He still retained that office, but what actually happened-business men in the house and throughout the country will appreciate the faroical situation-was that after the change took place the general manager was actually the assistant general manager, and the assistant general mrnager was actually the manager.

In April, 1940, an order in council was passed by the government giving the executive direction and management and control of the corporation to an executive committee. We then had a general manager who was not a general manager, we had an assistant general *manager who was the general manager, and we had an order in council which placed everything in the hands of an executive committee. But the strangest part of it all was the fact that the executive committee never was set up. These are some of the things which I think justified a searching investigation into the whole matter. I find that the changes left the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in a wholly chaotic condition. If ever there was a committee which drew to the attention of this house and of parliament conditions which urgently needed rectification, it was the radio broadcasting committee of last year. True, I was not able to endorse some of the recommendations contained in the committee's report, but' certainly by its investigation the committee aroused the people of Canada and the government to a position which had for too long gone on unheeded, uninvestigated and unchecked. Not only did we have all this division of authority with respect to the general manager, with more chiefs, one might say, than were ever in any Indian tribe, and with a legal set-up of one kind and a factual set-up of another, but, as someone said in the committee, the trouble with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was that it had too many bosses. Yes. it had too many bosses, but also it did not actually have a boss, which was a very difficult thing to explain.

The set-up of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation with respect to the ministry was also a matter of some discussion in the committee. Two ministers of the crown had to do with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation- not merely one minister, but two-and with two ministers of the crown concerned in its affairs and with the situation with respect to the general manager such as I have described, it is not very much wonder, Mr. Speaker, that the people felt that an investigation of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was amply justified.

Mr. HOWE:

May I ask which two ministers were responsible for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation?

Mr. GRAYDON:

The two ministers responsible, as my hon. friend knows, were the Minister of National War Services and my hon. friend himsBlf.

Radio Broadcasting

Mr. HOWE:

But only one at a time. I was responsible for it for a time, and then it was transferred to the Minister of National War Services and my responsibility with respect to the corporation ended completely.

Mr. GRAYDON:

I do not want to question my hon. friend's word, but in the committee's investigation not only did the Minister of National War Services give evidence but my hon. friend as well.

Mr. HOWE:

I was a former minister in charge of the corporation and I was also a member of the committee. I presume that the less vocal members of the committee were entitled to speak occasionally, and I spoke as a member of the committee after sitting quiet for a long time.

Mr. GRAYDON:

I do not recall that the minister was very quiet, but I will take his word on that.

Mr. HOWE:

I spoke only once.

Mr. GRAYDON:

I think the minister had better check back on his position with respect to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, because actually he was partly responsible for the whole matter of licensing by the corporation. In that regard the corporation was actually under the minister. That statement was made many times in the committee, and criticism was offered with respect to two' ministers of the crown being responsible for the affairs of the corporation. I make that statement again now, and with respect to any changes that may have been made I say that this house and the people generally will welcome such a concentration of authority as will leave the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in a position at least where it knows to whom it is responsible, so that there will finally be some degree of certainty in its whole structure.

This brings me to another point. Speaking of the certainty of the structure of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, one finds this very interesting situation, which was the subject of some discussion in the early part of this session by myself and I think the Minister of National War Services, and perhaps also the Prime Minister. It is this, that although the newly-appointed general manager may have hit upon a new formula for describing it, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has not changed its structure legally or constitu-[DOT] tionally. I would that it had, because the corporation is not, as at present constituted, what is known as an independent public corporation. It cannot be regarded as such, even though the Minister of National WTar Services, when questions have been asked on the floor

of the house about the corporation, has said on occasion: I shall have to get the consent of this independent corporation before I can answer the question. But a former minister of the crown, giving evidence before the committee last year, made the statement that the corporation was in some respects an emanation of the crown. Evidence was also given in the committee that the properties of the corporation could not be taxed by local municipalities because it was an emanation of the crown, part and parcel of the government system and governmental structure.

When it is argued that it is an independent corporation like the Canadian

National Railways, why then are the

employees of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation not allowed to bargain collectively with their employer? I think I have given enough instances to show that in fairness to the continuation of the policy of public ownership in Canada with respect to one of our most important assets, parliament must see to it that the committee to be appointed this session deals with some of these problems that are still unsolved, and that is one of them. There is no reason why we should have an answer such as we received from the Prime Minister in the early part of this session when he agreed that there were some reasons for suggesting that this corporation was a half-government and half-independent public corporation. I referred to the corporation not long ago as a centaur-like corporation, and I repeat that statement. We have no right as a parliament to allow the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to be half a government enterprise and half an independent corporation. It must be either one or the other, and that is one of the things which I think must be dealt with fully by the special committee.

I do not want to discuss at any length the evidence which -was given before the committee last year. Whatever responsibility the committee may have placed on various people in its report, let me say that I do not think sufficient responsibility was placed upon two responsible parts of that corporation in the way it should have been placed. One was the government itself and the other the board of governors. Let me deal for a moment with the board of governors.

So far as the board of governors is concerned I think the report did not go far enough in its censure and in its recommendations. Many points were brought out in the evidence respecting the board of governors, and although the censure of the board of governors was there in the committee's report I felt that in view of the

Radio Broadcasting

condition of affairs which was within the knowledge of the board, and continued to be within the knowledge of the board all during the difficult period of the affairs of the corporation when they were changing managers and changing their structure, the only proper thing for the committee to have done was to ask for the resignation for the entire board of governors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. That would have given the whole structure an opportunity to be revivified, reconstructed and put upon a proper basis. Of course the board of governors had a heavy responsibility. But they had a responsibility which in my opinion they did not fully discharge, and they should have received a much greater censure and condemnation than that which the committee gave them. However, the government cannot be absolved from responsibility in this connection, because one of the difficulties which the board of governors faced was that it never had a full quota of members from the time Mr. Plaunt resigned, on August 30, 1940, until a few days before the committee was set up in 1942. For a year and a half there was at least one vacancy. Finally it was filled by the appointment of a man from Ottawa. But one of the reasons which the chairman of the board of governors gave for some of the difficulties facing the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation with respect to setting up an executive committee to manage its affairs as envisaged by the order in council of April, 1941, was that the government had not appointed anyone to the vacancy. It seems to me unjustifiable and inexcusable, if this corporation is as important as we think it is, that a year and a half should be allowed to go by without- filling one of the vacancies on the board. Mr. Morin, chairman of the board of governors, was asked by me the following questions and made the following answers, as appear on page 95 of the report of the special committee:

Q. The responsibility then apparently is shifted from your shoulders with respect to the executive committee and to the government? Is that the idea? Did they not appoint a successor to Mr. Plaunt?

A. It is not for me to blame the government. That is a fact everybody knows.

Q. In any event that is the reason, the failure to appoint another member to succeed Mr. Plaunt held up the appointment of the executive committee?

A. Yes.

I make passing reference to this because I think it is important that from now on appointments to the board of governors of the corporation shall not be delayed.

Then, of course, one* must also make reference to the report itself. In the report strong

emphasis was laid, as also was done by members of the committee, including a number of us who were in a minority, upon the fact that a majority of our listeners are drawn from two great sections, labour and agriculture. But when, last year, we came to examine the affaire of the board, and we looked around to find where the representative of labour was, we could not find him-; and when we looked around to discover who the representative of the farmers was, we could not find him either. The result was that the report of the radio broadcasting committee contained, rightly and properly, a recommendation that the viewpoints of labour and agriculture should be represented on the board of governors. Following the recommendation of that committee, which made its report in July, 1942, the government appointed not very long ago-I believe it was in March-a labour representative, Mr. H. B. Chase of Montreal, to the board of governors. With respect to the other appointment, which was that of a lady from British Columbia, I hesitate to criticize, because I believe that, as so many listeners belong to the fair sex, no objection should be made to the appointment of a lady to the board. I think it is an admirable step. Nevertheless agriculture still remains unrepresented. It is a crying shame that on that important board of governors there is no representative of the farming population, although by no group is more interest shown in the affairs of radio broadcasting. I say to the Prime Minister and the Minister of National War Services that some move should be made to have agriculture properly represented on the board of governors.

Mr. MacNICOL:

And a lady, too.

Mr. GRAYDON:

I am pleased to hear the hon. member for Davenport stick up for the ladies; they have no greater champion. It is a desirable thing to have both the womanhood and the agriculture of Canada represented. If the Prime Minister wants to add his word I will listen to him too.