Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Peel):

Either at this stage or in committee, whichever suits the minister, we should have some statement from him before the debate commences. Perhaps we could leave it in his hands as to when he would prefer to make that statement.

Postal Service

Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):

I should prefer to make it in committee. The statement is very short.

Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.

Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):

During the war some bonus was given to mail contractors by virtue of order in council P.C. 8490 dated October 31, 1941. A bonus of five per cent was given, as an increase, to cover the extra expenses occasioned by higher gasoline costs, and the like. This order in council was extended to March 24, 1942.

On the same day another bonus was given to mail contractors by virtue of orders in council 2311, 5833 and 4960. That was to recompense mail contractors who were operating under contracts which from their standpoint were not equitable in view of the changed conditions brought about by the war. It did work to the extent that $278,533 was given by way of bonus by virtue of the first order in council, namelv that of October 31, 1941.

In 1946 that amount had been reduced to $90,000 because when we gave the second bonus the first bonus was included, and there was left only a certain amount corresponding to an increase of $90,000 on the first lot of contracts which were increased by virtue of the first order in council.

These bonuses are about to expire on March 31, unless they are extended by virtue of any new law which might be passed. We think it would be unjust to limit these contracts to the price they carried at the time they were passed, and we wish to include the bonus in the extension of the contract after March 31.

A certain number of these contractors never asked for any increase, and have carried on in that way. Of course we are giving bonuses only to those who did ask-with the exception of the first, which was an increase of five per cent on all the contracts entered prior to April 29, 1941. We feel sure however that certain contractors should have asked for increases, or for supplementary payments, and we would like to be able to give them a supplement which would correspond reasonably with the amount that has been obtained by the others, and which we intend to continue to pay in the extension of the contract.

Mr. FRASER:

Would that be dated back? It would be retroactive?

Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):

No, it is not to be retroactive.

Mr. FRASER:

That would not be fair.

Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):

We cannot run after contractors who have not asked for a bonus and give them bonuses on the ground that they should have asked for them.

Between the period March 1, 1943 to December 31, 1946 bonuses were given on 4,034 contracts. The new contract rate per annum is $3,282,412, and the old contract rate per annum excluding bonus, was $2,411,992. The percentage increase is 36 T4. During the same period a number of contracts had expired, either through the death of a contractor or through abandonment of contracts. During the same period, against 4,034 in the first class, there were 4,164 contracts which were granted on tenders.

The tender rate per annum is a little over the tender rate for the contract with bonus; that is $3,333,455. But the percentage rate increase is 36-60. On mileage covered, the contracts which we gave through tenders gave a mileage much smaller than on the other plan -and of course at a higher price. The mileage on the tender contracts is $46.81 per mile while on the bonuses it is $40.84.

If we were abandoning all these contracts on bonus today, and were not incorporating the bonus, we would have altogether about 4,000 contracts we would have to ask for before March 31. It takes about sixty days to call for contracts by tenderers and to ascertain the lowest tenders. It must be admitted that very often today we have to refuse even the lowest tenders because they are too large. The tenderers do not know how their contract costs are going to run, where they will begin or where they will end, and they do not take any chances. Of course when we succeed in obtaining a contract at what we consider a reasonable amount we grant it.

By virtue of this measure I should like to be in a position to continue payment of bonuses in the contracts still in existence, and to give a corresponding amount, which we call a supplement, to those who have no bonuses, who have not already asked for it, but who are ready to continue their contracts if they are given the bonus the others have had up to this time, provided that the bonus applied for is justified.

Mr. CASE:

Does this mean that these contracts will not be put up for competition again?

Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):

It is the custom in the Post Office Department that if a contractor wants to keep his contract we give him a renewal. By that we save a considerable amount of money, because every time we enter into another contract the new contractor

Postal Service

has to obtain the necessary equipment, and in some fashion or other must pass the cost of it on to the Post Office Department. Our intention therefore is to continue the contracts of those who have contracts with bonuses and who want to renew those contracts with bonuses. It does not touch at all those who are not yet contracting with the department. They will have to tender, just like other people, and the lowest tenders will prevail.

This provision implies a certain discretion in the Postmaster General. We are therefore asking for the extension only to a time limit of sixty days after the beginning of the next session.

Mr. GRAYDON:

I am sure the committee will wish to support any measure designed to alleviate a condition in the public service Which has existed far too long. But like many government measures this is what would be called in rural circles a ramshackle approach to the problem. The treatment given to the rural mail couriers has been a sore spot in the public service. Many of us in the house, both on this side and on the other side, have argued in vain on behalf of these people-and I hope not much longer, in vain, because patience sometimes reaches the point of exhaustion, and so far as the rural mail carriers are concerned, patience was exhausted some considerable time ago.

Mr. GRANT:

1930.

Mr. GRAYDON:

That may be so; and I suppose we could go bacji even farther, because the last time he said something about this in the house the Postmaster General referred1 to 1867-I happen to have his remarks ini Hansard. The hon. member and the Postmaster General had better go back to the age to which they belong.

. Many of us have asked for a square deal for the rural mail carrier. Those of us who for many years had our mail delivered by the rural mail carrier realize that he is something more than a driver of a coach or a wagon or a buggy or a car, carrying the mail to the farmers of Canada. He is part and parcel of the community. He is an institution in rural Canada. In addition to carrying the mail he gives service which perhaps need not be mentioned here but Which has been a great boon to farmers.

The present tender system, leads to economy, but it is a dangerous kind of economy; it is a false economy. It leads to more than that; it leads to an unjust economy. Why do others in the public service have a different standard of employment from that applicable to those who deliver His Majesty's mail 83166-23

throughout rural Canada? Is there any other member of the public service of Canada who must submit a tender every time he gets a job? Why single out the men who serve the farmers? I am told that a recent survey made by the rural mail carriers association shows that ninety-nine per cent of the rural mail carriers are opposed: to the present contract system. That in itself ought to be an indication that something is radically wrong.

Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):

I should like

to-

Mr. GRAYDON:

I did not interrupt the minister. Last night he was very good at asking questions of the hon. member for Lake Centre, but he had better just stay where he is and he will have a chance after a while. I am going to deal with him a little more fully in a moment.

Those people believe that a basic mile rate ought to be instituted. Some of them have suggested a basic rate of $50 a mile, with special rates for the "out of the ordinary routes." I suggest to the minister that what is nothing less than farcical treatment of the rural mail carriers of Canada cannot be completely cured by a bill such as is proposed. You cannot cure this situation by applying a poultice when a surgical operation is necessary. The government ought to evolve a general policy with respect to rural mail carriers. It is not enough for the minister to come into the house with legislation of this kind, a half-baked piece of legislation, something that hardly touches the problem at all. We must have something better than that.

On August 6 last the minister was speaking in the house, as reported, on page 4390 of Hansard. He was referring to the fact that the Post Office Act permits the awarding of a contract for $200 or less without asking for tenders, and then he went on to say:

This provision goes back to 1867. If we had had time this session I would have brought in amendments to the Post Office Act to increase this amount from $200 to $500, because I admit that today $500 is worth no more than $200 was in 1867.

Is the minister still of the same frame of mind as he was on August 6? Are we to have a bona fide amendment to the Post Office Act to cover the rural mail carriers-yes, and the rural postmasters as well, who are also a forgotten class in Canada? Are we to have some general policy? Up to the .present time perhaps the government might have argued that they were so busy cleaning up the debris of war that they could not go into the problems of peace as they normally might wish to do. But surely it cannot be said that this is anything but a peace session.

Postal Service

We talk on a very high plane about doing things for people in other parts of the world, but we should not forget that there are some people on our own home front who deserve help. Having that in mind I want to make a constructive suggestion to the minister. Will he not this session appoint a special committee of this house for the purpose of hearing evidence and going into the whole question of the rural mail carriers and the rural postmasters, to the end that members of all parties working together may evolve something which will remove this sore spot from the public service of Canada and give these people that which they so justly deserve.

Mr. BRYCE:

Mr. Chairman, speaking on behalf of this group I wish to say that we welcome this resolution. As I understand it, what is being done today by order in council is to be done in the future by legislation. There will be quite a few matters we shall want to discuss when the bill is before us, but we will not waste the time of the committee at this stage.

Mr. LESAGE:

Mr. Chairman, I was surprised to hear the hon. member for Peel say what he did. After all, there are only two ways of dealing with this matter-by calling for tenders from the carriers, or by taking them into the civil service. Since the hon. member for Peel is a member of the Progressive Conservative party I was much surprised to hear him criticize a system which is based on free enterprise.

Local competition.

Mr. LESAGE:

Yes, local competition.

Mr. GRAYDON:

Is that the hon. member's conception of free enterprise?

Mr. LESAGE:

No, it is not.