Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Acting Prime Minister):

Mr. Speaker, I regret to have to announce to hon. members the passing of one of our members since the house adjourned on Tuesday last. Mr. Eugene Durocher, the member for St. James, died on Wednesday, May 10. after an illness lasting two weeks. Had he lived, Mr. Durocher would have been sixty-three years of age on August 27 next. It was such a brief time since Mr. Durocher was with us in this house, seemingly in good health, that his death comes with an unusually sudden shock to many hon. members who were unaware of his illness.

He was first elected to the House of Commons at a by-election in December, 1939. He was returned in the general elections of 1940, receiving what was I believe the largest majority won by any member of the house. Our

friend brought to the House of Commons a breadth of experience gained in a successful business career, both in his profession as a chartered accountant and later in the business of insurance. He had already served his fellow citizens in the post of alderman of the city of Montreal for two years preceding his entry to the house. Earlier than that, in 1939, he served as a member of the Montreal metropolitan commission. His activities in fraternal and community and philanthropic organizations were many and helpful and as a citizen he could be depended upon to give his assistance to any activity for the betterment of conditions of the less fortunate.

Mr. Durocher was not a frequent speaker, but when he did take part in debates he was listened to with attention, and always made a genuine contribution. In private discussion he was noted for being vigorous and outspoken and, at the same time, sane and clearheaded in his presentation of his views.

Mr. Durocher was faithful in his attendance in the house, and followed the proceedings carefully and keenly. He was extremely well informed, and he served with great acceptance and benefit on the radio committee. I think I can say that no member of the house possessed greater charm, was more amiable and at the same time better informed or better able to present the point of view which he had in mind than our friend who is gone. He possessed the quality of being agreeable and, at the same time, forceful and impressive. He was a living exponent of the bonne entente, not by obtrusive declarations but in the quiet neighbourly kindness and the sincerity and friendliness of his character.

Our friend was the possessor of that estimable quality, a fine sense of humour. Perhaps one of the most distinctive traits of his character was his zest for life and his enjoyment of the simple things and the little things which make up happiness of living. His early going out is I think all the more tragic because of his satisfaction in the associations with which God had blessed him.

I should like to add this personal word. It was my good fortune to meet and talk frequently with Mr. Durocher in connection with his interests in matters affecting his constituents, and I was impressed by his personality, his tolerance and his moderation. So that I myself, while expressing the deep regret of the house at his untimely ending, can say with sincerity that I feel that in his going out I have lost a valued personal friend.

The hon. member has left to mourn him a widow, three sons and a daughter. I know personally from his own talks with me that he

The late Eugene Durocher

took great joy in his family and he spoke of them frequently. One of his sons, Lieutenant Claude Durocher, is overseas with the Fusiliers de Mont Royale. I am sure it will be the wish of all hon. members of the house that you, Mr. Speaker, should convey to Madame Durocher and her daughter and her sons-I am sure we will join in remembering particularly the soldier son overseas-an expression of the very deep sympathy which we have for them in their great bereavement.

Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, as we pause on this occasion to mourn and to pay tribute to one of our members who has gone from us, we cannot help recalling that since we have been members of this house many of our membership have passed away in the midst of their parliamentary careers. All of us will recall these sad occasions; since I first came into the house in 1936 no less than thirty-four members of the House of Commons have passed away, twelve of them since the election of 1940.

I was privileged to know Mr. Eugene Durocher from a close acquaintance with him, meeting him both in the House of Commons and outside. What the Acting Prime Minister has said is only too true. Mr. Durocher was friendly, well-disposed, and a man of good character. I always enjoyed meeting him and passing the time of day with him. I shall miss him, as will members of the house generally. He took the place of a very important man in the public life of this country who sat in the house from 1920 until he died in 1939, the late Hon. Femand Rinfret, who I think the members would also like to recall at this time.

I want to associate myself with the words of the Acting Prime Minister, and to extend to the government our genuine sympathy in the loss of an honoured and most respected and esteemed colleague. At the same time I should like to join with the Acting Prime Minister in suggesting to you, Mr. Speaker, that a message from this house should go to the widow and family who have been bereaved. It is for this reason that I rise, to couple this party, the official opposition, with the words which have been so eloquently and so appropriately uttered by the acting leader of the government.

Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):

Mr. Speaker, we too would associate ourselves with the words of sympathy of the leader of the opposition for the members on the government side of the house, and would join with

the Acting Prime Minister in his expression of sympathy for the family in their susdden bereavement. Mr. Durocher was a member of the radio committee and I knew him there perhaps better than elsewhere. He was a courteous, kindly gentleman whom we all mourn. This sad occasion once again brings home to us in this house, shall I say, the wear of public life, as evidenced in the occasions on which from time to time we have to mourn the loss of one of our members. We join, Mr. Speaker, in the expressions of sympathy that have already been uttered.

Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):

Mr. Speaker, the members of our group desire to associate themselves with the eloquent and fitting words of the Acting Prime Minister and of the leader of the opposition in their expressions of appreciation of this man who has just left our midst. We desire, sir, that you convey to the bereaved ones our sympathy in this time of trial.

Mr. FRED ROSE (Cartier):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to associate myself with the words of the Acting Prime Minister in the passing of Mr. Durocher. He represented the constituency next to mine, and I found him very helpful to me coming here as a new member. A new member always appreciates a kindly word from those who have been in the house for some time. I had occasion to meet Mr. Durocher from time to time coming here on the train from Montreal, and I always found him kindly and helpful. He was a man who was able to forget the differences of party and to meet a member of another party on a friendly footing, as a human being, with kindness and consideration. I should like to add my personal word of sympathy to the bereaved widow and family.

Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):

Mr. Speaker, as the house is aware, the government expects Ic introduce as soon as practicable a bill which will embody the government's recommendations in regard to housing legislation. This will be a comprehensive measure covering all phases of the housing problem and while, of course, it cannot be fully operative until the end of the war or at least until the period of acute material and man-power shortages has ended, nevertheless it is expected that some activity will take place under it in the immediate future. It is

National Housing Act

obvious that, even if this bill could be introduced tomorrow, it would be several weeks before the measure would become law.

However, it has come to my attention that with the knowledge that there is in the offing housing legislation which may provide assistance for house-building on more liberal terms than are now provided for, there may be a tendency for builders and prospective home owners to defer proceeding with the construction of urgently needed new houses. It would be unfortunate if such an attitude should lead to a smaller volume of house-building at the present time than the maximum which would be possible with the supply of materials and labour available, limited as that supply is. Under the circumstances, the government has become convinced that the only way in which we can meet this problem is to announce publicly a few, at least, of the fundamental changes which will be incorporated in or result from the new legislation.

Part I of the present National Housing Act deals primarily with loans made to assist the construction of individual dwellings for prospective home owners. Certain general principles and conditions governing such loans are laid down in the act itself but the details are incorporated in our agreements with approved lending institutions. For instance, the act gives authority to the minister to approve the rate of interest to be charged to the borrower and also the period for which loans shall be made and the terms of repayment. Under that authority, it was originally provided in the agreements with the lending institutions that the rate of interest should not exceed 5 per cent and that the loans should normally run, in effect, for a term of twenty years. Actually the loans usually run in the first instance for ten years but are renewable for a second term of ten years, and the schedule of repayments provides for complete amortization of the loan over a period of twenty years. The time has now come, it is believed, for a reduction in interest rates, and we had intended that when the new legislation was passed the maximum rate to be charged to borrowers would be reduced to 4J per cent. In view of the tendency to wait and see what provisions the new legislation will contain, the announcement is made now. Furthermore, we are immediately advising the companies that in respect of all loans under part I of the present act made after today's date, that is to say, loans for which the mortgage contracts have not yet been signed, the interest rate charged to the borrower must not exceed 4i per cent. It should be noted that 4i per cent is the rate to be charged to the borrower; as the dominion advances 25 per cent of the amount of the

loan at its normal rate of 3 per cent, the effect is that the lending institutions receive 5 per cent on their 75 per cent share of the joint mortgage loan.

Another feature of the new legislation in which there will be some public interest is the length of the term for which a loan may be grunted. It is our intention to ask for authority to make loans up to a maximum of twenty-five or thirty years, but loans will be made for so long a period only in communities where we are satisfied that the community has adopted adequate zoning ordinances and where there is an adequate community or regional plan governing the future development of the area. If, therefore, municipal authorities wish their citizens to receive the benefit of such long-term loans, they should promptly take the steps necessary to provide for adequate community planning and for zoning ordinances which will protect the owners of homes from suffering serious depreciation in property values as a result of the development of nuisances or other adverse influences which tend to create blighted areas and destroy the values of residential properties in the particular area. If the municipalities are to give this protection, provincial 'governments should see that there is enabling authority on the statute books, where such enabling authority does not now exist, to allow municipalities to take the necessary steps to develop and enforce strict zoning ordinances and sound community plans. Officials of the National Housing Administration will be prepared to assist municipalities in their planning to the extent of explaining to municipal officials and the general public the principles of community planning, but the provincial governments are or should be in a better position to encourage and assist their municipalities in connection with specific planning projects.

While we are hopeful that the cooperation of all governments in such a programme, with the full support of an informed public opinion, will produce very great economic and social benefits in stimulating housing construction, lowering the over-all cost of housing to the public and improving the efficiency and the amenities of urban communities, nevertheless it is obvious that it will take a good deal of time, perhaps two or three years in some cases, before effective results can be accomplished in this field. I hope that no time will be lost by our municipal authorities in getting the programme under way. Nevertheless, no one who is in urgent need of a house should wait merely in anticipation of the new legislation, as the present provisions, allowing amortization over a maximum period of

National Housing Act

twenty years, will continue to apply in ordinary cases and at least for the duration of the war.

There is one other point which should be [DOT]made in respect of loans under part I of the act. Building costs have risen since the outbreak of war and I understand that there is a demand, in certain communities at least, for houses with more bedroom accommodation than it is now possible to build under our present restricted lending limits. At present we are working under a statutory authority, in the form of an item in the supplementary estimates, which limits the maximum size of National Housing Act loans to $3,200. On houses with a lending value of not over $3,200, a 90 per cent loan may be made, but the maximum percentage of loan on houses with a lending value of over $3,200 gradually declines, on the basis of a sliding scale, until at $4,000 only a loan not exceeding 80 per cent, or $3,200, can be made. There is, however, an unused balance of approximately $380,000 in the appropriation provided originally by the National Housing Act itself. The funds so appropriated could be used to finance the construction of houses with a lending value in excess of $4,000. We are therefore proposing to utilize these funds for the making of loans on houses having a lending value of up to $5,000, with a maximum loan of 80 per cent in the case of $4,000 to $5,000 houses. As the dominion finances only 25 per cent of the amount of a loan under part I of the National Housing Act, it will be noted that the funds we have available in this appropriatoin will make possible a total amount of loans of $1,520,000-that is, four times $380,000. If this amount should prove insufficient to carry until the new housing legislation is enacted, it could be supplemented temporarily by an allotment from the War Appropriation Act. It will be noted that we do not propose to raise the legal limit for 90 per cent loans. In view of the present level of building costs, I do not think we are justified in urging people with small incomes wrho can only afford to put up a few hundred dollars, to invest all their savings in a 10 per cent equity in a house costing, say $4,000 or $5,000, and assume the obligations involved in a 90 per cent mortgage on such a house.

I have been speaking thus far of changes that will be made in respect of loans under part I of the Act. The new act will contain three or four other parts, dealing with such matters as rental housing, housing . in rural areas, repair and modernization of urban homes, and certain other matters. It is not necessary to refer to all these parts at the present time, but I would like to state that part II of the new act will include pro-

[Mr. Ilsley.l .

visions making -it possible for the dominion to make 90 per cent first mortgage loans, carrying an interest rate of 3 per cent, on low rental housing projects along the lines of the large project of this type recently announced in the city of Montreal. What we wish to accomplish by this type of legislation is to encourage groups of public-spirited citizens in communities where there is an acute shortage of low-rental housing to raise at least 10 per cent of the funds required by organizing a limited dividend housing corporation, to study objectively -the housing conditions of the particular community and develop suitable plans and specifications for projects designed to meet the ascertained need, to supervise the construction of the project in order to assure sound coqstruction at the most economical cost, and to provide continuing and efficient management for the project throughout its life. I would like on this occasion to pay tribute to Mr. Spinney and his associates for the valuable public service which they have rendered in working out the Montreal project, and to express the hope that similar leadership may be found in a good many other communities.

An enterprise of this character is one primarily for public service rather than one for private profit. In the case of the Montreal project, for instance, the dividend has been limited to 3 -per cent, at the express wish of the sponsors themselves-I do not think we could have objected to a 4 per cent dividend. All the shareholders can expect to receive is this reasonable -but modest yield on -their investment, the return of their capital over a period of years, and the satisfaction of having made an important contribution to the solution of an important economic and social problem in their own community. After the dominion's loan and the shareholders' equity capital have been retired, title to the property will vest either in the dominion, or in the municipality if -the latter gives suitable assistance to make a low level of rents possible under present conditions. Since the Montreal project was announced, great interest has been expressed on the part of other communities and we hope that a number of similar projects will go forward. The dominion is ready to cooperate on a similar basis in any community where there is a real shortage of low rental housing accommodation-subject, of course, to the limited supply of building materials and of labour available for all types of housing construction at the present time.

It is hoped that these measures will promote house-building now to assist in relieving -the congestion in urban centres to the maximum extent consistent with -the war effort. It should-be emphasized that they are in addition

Business oj the Home

to the measures already1 in operation or announced. Thus, the government will continue to press forward with its house conversion plan which now extends to fifteen cities and towns throughout Canada, and, as the Acting Prime Minister indicated last week, Wartime Housing Limited is initiating a programme for the building of additional houses for the relief of dependents of members of the armed forces urgently in need of housing accommodation and for whom housing accommodation is not otherwise available.

In closing, I think I should say once again that I have not attempted to describe or outline all the provisions of the housing legislation which we shall be introducing; but I feel I should make this announcement now, so that there will be no holding back by persons who fear that if they went ahead immediately their position would be prejudiced by the provisions of the housing act.

Mr. GRAYDON:

In view of the need

which is well exemplified by what the minister has said, will there be any change, or the need of any change, so far as priorities are concerned, in materials, or in connection with the man-power situation, which of course is one of the things which has been holding back some of the development?

Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):

In answer to the question of

the leader of the opposition, the matter of priorities for small house building is being met in as effective a way as possible having regard to the requirements of war. There are certain higher priorities than house building, but house building is placed in a very high priority after immediate war requirements have been met. An attempt is being made to step up production of fittings such as bathtubs, furnaces, stoves and other fixtures for small houses, and we hope to keep up with building in that regard. So far we have been able to do so, and we hope that we can continue; but I [DOT] cannot promise my hon. friend that priorities for small house building will be on a level with the high priorities of war production.

Mr. GRAYDON:

What about the question of man-power? Has national selective service been working in cooperation with the two ministers in connection with the house building programme?

Mr. ILSLEY:

I am afraid I cannot answer that question. The appropriate minister, of course, is the Minister of Labour, but I think the answer would be probably the same as that given by the Minister of Munitions and Supply with respect to materials. There is a higher priority there as well, I think.

Mr. GRAYDON:

If the bottleneck is in

man-power or priorities or both, then of course the solution which the minister now provides will not necessarily be a solution of the problem.

Mr. ILSLEY:

We have to carry on the war.

Mr. J. S. ROY (Gaspe):

Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to move, seconded by the hon. member for Charlevoix-Saguenay (Mr. Dorion):

That private members' notices of motions be now taken up, in order that the one standing in my name for the suspension of the resolution passed by the house on February 11, giving priority to government measures, be now considered so as to facilitate the passing of Bill No. 110, "an act to amend certain instructions of the national selective service of the Department of Labour."

Mr. SPEAKER:

The hon. member gave me a copy of his motion before I came into the house. I have been considering it and I find that there is established in this house a precedent which would bar the discussion or consideration of such a motion. As will be seen at page 856 of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, third edition, a motion was ruled out of order because all motions referring to the business of the house should be introduced by the leader of the house. I quote:

Mr. Church, seconded by Mr. Garland (Carleton), moved: That on Friday, June 1, Bill No. 63, "An act to amend the Railway Act" (Investigation of subsidiary of telephone or telegraph companies) now under public bills and orders, be given precedence over all (a) private bills, (b) public bills and orders (1) during the hour devoted to private bills and (2) over all other business until disposed of on that evening.

Hon. Mr. Lapointe took objection to this motion on the ground that it ivas unfair to other measures which had precedence over this bill.

Mr. Speaker said: The motion is out of order. The other day I ruled that according to May and Bourinot any motion concerning the order of business of the house should be made by the Prime Minister or the leader of the house. . . . I have so decided and I now- so rule.

The hon. member has on the order paper a motion, No. 20, succeeding nineteen others that have been on the order paper for some considerable time. In the words of the Hon. Mr. Lapointe, it is unfair that precedence should be given to this motion over others that have been on the order paper for this length of time. In view of the authorities that have been cited, and following the established practice of

Business oj the House

this house and the decision given by Mr. Speaker Lemieux, I must rule the present motion out of order.

Mr. ROY:

May I be permitted to submit to Your Honour that although this procedure is not quite in the ordinary course, but-