Mr. HOWE:

Yes, but I mentioned it as a business concern which was not under the supervision of the Civil Service Act. It is not under this bill, either.

Mr. BOUCHER:

The minister said a minute ago that written authority is required from himself for the payment of salaries of $4,000 or over. It seems to me there will be many employees in these crown companies who will not be highly trained. They would stand almost in a parallel situation with clerks and various other employees operating in the civil service under the Civil Service Act. In my

view, if in crown companies there are groups that correspond with groups of employees operating under the Civil Service Act, they should be governed by the same act and the same regulations.

Then, the minister requires that the management of a company shall receive from him written authority before they shall pay salaries in excess of $4,000. I fully appreciate the advisability of keeping some limit on salaries these crown companies can pay. Otherwise, they could be paying what is virtually government money in an exorbitant fashion, without detriment to themselves, but with detriment only to the people who pay the money.

I believe that in this measure there should be much more specific limitations respecting the power to employ and to pay employees in various grades, whether they be specialists, tradesmen, clerks or stenographers. While the minister says he has made a regulation under which his signature is required, I would point out that there is actually nothing in the law requiring that his regulations be obeyed, or to assure the people of Canada that there is equity in the arrangement.

Under what authority does the minister make those regulations, and how is such authority exercised? Will he also explain why people holding corresponding positions in the civil service, those who are not specialists or experts in any particular line, are not put in entirely the same category, and why they do not operate under the Civil Service Act which applies to civil servants?

Mr. HOWE:

The minister exercises the potent authority of the shareholders of the company. He can get rid of the management, if that management bungles the operation-and, I might say, he sometimes does. Also, the company is an agent of the crown, and the minister representing the crown in a particular case has the right to act.

It is all very well for my hon. friend to speculate how things could be done; but may I point out that these are business concerns. They have bargains with their employees. Usually they are unionized. I would say that 90 per cent of the employees of these companies are members of unions which have contracts with the companies. I do not know how my hon. friend can suggest any particular rule that would apply, other than the usual bargaining arrangement between employers and employees found in all business firms.

Mr. JACKMAN:

It seems to me almost incredible that the minister should say to the committee that, even leaving aside his own

Government Companies

department, the government ia not in big business. Any organization which employs tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of employees, must of necessity be in what is called big business.

The only difference I can see between some forms of government business-and we will exclude the Canadian National Railways, for special reasons-and private business is that private business is in active competition with its fellows; and most of that competition has to do with selling.

I have not heard from the minister that these government companies are to be in active competition with private industry, although he did mention one exception when my colleague the hon. member for Vancouver South brought up the point to-night. But, as I say, the only difference I can see is that they actively compete with someone in regard to selling. I do not see why the men and officers who staff these government-owned companies cannot come under the civil service. I believe the minister has a completely wrong conception about why the civil service was ever started. It certainly was not, as one must infer from his remarks, an organization started up for the sole purpose of creating a system which was not efficient.

Mr. HOWE:

Do not put words into my mouth.

Mr. JACKMAN:

That is the only inference which can be drawn.

Mr. HOWE:

My hon. friend is fond of doing that. I did not say the civil service was not efficient.

Mr. JACKMAN:

That is the only inference which can be drawn.

Mr. HOWE:

Never mind inference.

Mr. JACKMAN:

That is the inference I draw from your remarks. If you wish to correct it you may do so at another time. But do not interrupt when I am speaking.

The CHAIRMAN:

I must remind hon. members that when they are speaking they should address the chair.

Mr. JACKMAN:

Yes, Mr. Chairman. What I am saying is that the only inference I can draw, with my limited background, is that the minister does not believe that the Civil Service Act is an efficient form of organization, or that efficiency in a government department can be developed under it. Otherwise, why in connection with these companies which he intends to set up, or which are set up and are to be extended, does he not use the civil service form of administration.

Surely the Civil Service Act when it was brought down, wa,s a forward step in governmental administration, because it got rid of the curse of patronage which every government knows is sometimes a greater nuisance than it is worth. With a setup of this kind, in taking this retrogressive step, in connection with a series of companies the minister and those around him may appoint any number of people to jobs commanding high salaries. Under such circumstances you can only have a system of patronage which is undoubtedly bad and which flies in the face of the whole reasoning behind the Civil Service Act. This building up of a super civil service, for that is what it. means, will lead to a lack of harmony-I will not say a lack of best effort- and will cause discouragement to many who have served for a long time in the civil service.

For example, take the announcement in the press to-day that the president of the Central Mortgage and Housing corporation is to receive a salary of $18,000. The deputy minister of finance and other deputy ministers are doing not only an equal job but, in many cases, a much superior job; they require a background at least equal to the other gentleman, and in other cases they have had many more years of experience, but they are getting only approximately half that amount. How do you expect to get loyalty and the best endeavour from your senior men when you introduce new men and start them off at much higher salaries?

Another example is the unknown salary of the governor of the Bank of Canada. I presume that that salary is three times what the deputy minister of finance is getting from this government which states it is willing to pay equal wages for equal work. There is no excuse for paying these limited salaries in comparison with those being paid to the super civil servants you are setting up under these corporations.

I believe the minister misconceives the purpose of the Civil Service Act and by implication is condemning it as an efficient instrument to carry on the business of government. This committee would be well advised to consider putting the administration of these new companies under the Civil Service Act.

Mr. MacINNIS:

I think I should say something on the point just raised by the hon. member for Rosedale. Since coming to this house I have taken a special interest in civil service matters and have been on many of the special committees set up to consider the civil service. If I felt that the staffs of crown companies of this kind could be as efficiently

Combines Investigation

recruited under the civil service as they can be by the means to be used I would certainly press to have the civil service do the job, I believe the civil service is the best method of staffing our governmental institutions, but I feel the hon. member for Rosedale would not ask that the staff of the Canadian National Railways, from the men who tamp the ties to the engineers who drive the locomotives and the clerical staff that administers the office, be recruited under the civil service.

Mr. JACKMAN:

I excepted them.

Mr. MacINNIS:

My hon. friend says that he excepted them, but are not these corporations to some extent on all fours with the Canadian National Railways? It seems to me that the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply, who is piloting this bill, must accept the advice of my hon. friends to my right with a certain amount of suspicion. They are opposed to what he is doing, and anything they offer in regard to the measure would be something to make it less effective than it otherwise would be.

No.

Mr. MacINNIS:

Of course that is right. Any man with any logic would immediately come to that conclusion, and I try to approach matters in a logical way. If my hon. friends want to improve this measure and to make the crown companies set up under it a success they will have to stop opposing it and bring forward ideas and suggestions to make it better and not ideas and suggestions to hamper the operations.

Mr. SKEY:

I am sure the Minister of

Reconstruction and Supply appreciates the help he has had from the hon. member for Vancouver East, but I find it difficult to rationalize the ideas or tenets or theories of the hon. member as previously put forward in this house with the suggestion now made that there is an unequal basis for civil servants in the country.

However, I am concerned with another aspect of this bill. Yesterday afternoon I asked the minister about the security provisions that were being set up, and I am particularly concerned about the company set up with respect to atomic energy. Section 8 provides that, notwithstanding the Civil Service Act or any other statute or law, the officers or servants-a few moments ago the minister said that would mean the directors- are empowered to employ such officers or servants are deemed necessary to conduct the operations of the company.

May I remind the committee and the minister that at this time we are dealing with Canadian Arsenals Limited and Eldorado. If the power to employ such officers or servants as are deemed necessary is given to the directors, it is thereby taken away from this house, from the civil service commission, from the R.C.M.P. or from any other agency which might check on the security of those particular people. I should like to ask the minister whether the security provisions provided by this particular clause are sufficient to guarantee to the country, to the people who may deal with atomic energy and to the government that the employees who are employed can be completely trusted and will be those in whom they can have full confidence. When I asked this question yesterday the minister said that for years the R.C.MP. had been checking such employees as were employed in the national research council and other services of the government.

Section stands.

Progress reported.