Mr. SHAW:

That is all known by me. I am not asking that a medical man be permitted to enter Canada as a medical man and just simply be given authority to practise without meeting the requirements as determined through examination set by whatever body is responsible for doing that. But you have thrown up that barrier against the medical man as such coming in. He is not qualified as a. farmer. He cannot be regarded as admissible, as nearly as I can determine, under any other section of the Immigration Act. Therefore I feel that a special provision should be made.

Mr. GLEN:

You are speaking of countries other than the United Kingdom and the United States?

Mr. SHAW:

I mentioned earlier that British subjects and United States citizens do qualify. I have in mind, for example, a case which I brought to the attention of the department, and that was one reason why I mentioned this. This young doctor is Swiss; he is now director of the Jimma hospital in Ethiopia. He was in Canada about three or four years ago as a member of a medical mission. As a consequence of meeting a missionary in Africa, whom I know, this man wrote me. I was

told that he could not possibly enter this country. He is a graduate of about four universities. I would not ask that he be brought in, placed in a hospital and told to go to work, or permitted to establish himself in practice somewhere in the country without examination. But I think he should be permitted to enter, write his examinations and, if qualified, given a chance to establish himself here, provided that he is the type of person we should like to have in Canada, quite apart from his professional qualifications.

There is another question which has made me wonder; I have not very strong feelings in connection with it, but I am asking for information. We had a number of Poles brought to Canada. Please do not misunderstand me. Certainly I am not one of those who criticize any person because of his racial origin or religion. I never ask a man what his racial origin is, nor do I ask him what his religious faith is. I take him for what I find him to be, regardless of those other things. I am told that before those Poles came to Canada they were signed up as members of the British army for a period of two years. That came on pretty reliable authority. If that is true, my question is, why? I will just leave it at that point.

I have no great desire to take up much more of the time of the house, but I should like to refer to one more paragraph of the Prime Minister's observations yesterday. At page 2645 of Hansard he said:

The fear has been expressed that immigration would lead to a reduction in the standard of living. This need not be the case. If immigration is properly planned, the result will be the reverse. A larger population will help to develop our resources.

I agree with that.

By providing a larger number of consumers, in other words a larger domestic market, it will reduce the present dependence of Canada on the export of primary products. The essentia] thing is that immigrants be selected with care, and that their numbers be adjusted to the absorptive capacity of the country.

I wish to make just one observation in that connection. Of all that the Prime Minister said, I am less in agreement with that paragraph than any other. If the essence of that statement is correct, why did the United States, with its tremendous population in proportion to area, as compared with Canada, take such a terrific beating during the last depression? Moreover, if that is true, why did we curtail our immigration during the depression years? If that constituted even a partial solution, then I think we should have brought in immigrants in greater numbers, instead of making our policy much more restrictive.

Immigration Act

Mr. H. 0. WHITE (Middlesex East): I should like to take a few moments of the time of the house to refer to this matter of immigration. First, I wish to say I agree with the ideas and ideals expressed by the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. Fulton). I do not think I need go over those things he said, with which I am in accord, but for a moment I want to refer to the position of Canada and her need for immigrants. In the past it has been impressed upon many of us that we are a country of vast areas, with a sparse population; and I think it is obvious that we can bring people to this country and give them a higher standard of living than they would have anywhere else in the world, so that they will be quite prepared to pay higher prices for our products than if they remained in their native lands. Something else we can share with them is our national debt; we will gladly divide that up.

I rather resent some things about immigration, and one is the fact that some of those who come to this country bring with them political ideologies which are foreign to the North American continent. It seems to me that when they are so anxious to come here they should be prepared to accept our ideas and ideals in regard to government. I would be quite prepared to accept, as I believe we as Canadians would be prepared to accept, a quota system for those who wish to come to this country from Asia. As for the so-called Chinese Exclusion Act, I think we should bring that legislation up to date in such a way that we shall be treating these people in a humane and friendly manner, to right the wrong that has been done in the past. In the city of London we have a Chinese family by the name of Wong, to whom I should like to refer. In that family are eight children, of whom three are doctors; one is now at Osgoode Hall, a member of the legal profession, while the remaining four are in business in London. They are among the very finest of our citizens.

The hon. member for Kingston City (Mr. Kidd) mentioned the drift of our young people to the United States. That is to be regretted. It seems to me that we are losing the cream of our crop and bringing in the skim milk, and I doubt if we are to improve very much our position in this way. It is evident that something is wrong when these young people leave our country and go elsewhere. The hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. Irvine) mentioned that immigrants were brought in. That is not my understanding. They come to this country of their own free will; they are clamouring to come here. They are not brought

in; blit when they do come they should be quite prepared to accept our laws and regulations.

One hon. member said something about enemy aliens. In western Ontario we had a good number of prisoners of war working on farms, and I have had many individual farmers come to me wondering how they could have those men returned to them. Since losing the prisoners of war, some of these farmers have had Polish veterans working for them, and they are quite prepared to take back their prisoners of war and help them become established in this country. I have also met delegations of farmers who were quite prepared to take prisoners of war and so-called enemy aliens. I have neighbours who have been in this country for twenty-five years, originally coming from Hungary. They have relatives in Hungary who are now destitute and hungry, but they are classed as enemy aliens and cannot be admitted to this country. I think it is much easier to make democratic people out of them by bringing them to this country than by keeping them starving in Europe.

The Polish veterans have been mentioned, and I should like to state this fact. While I was home last week, I went to the Department of Labour in London, where I was told that, of the 122 Poles placed through the London labour office, fifty-one have left the farms on which they were originally placed, and that some of them have moved two and even three times. So that in this question of immigration we face quite a problem. Also only the other day I was told that one of these Polish soldiers had married, that he has a family and that he is applying for family allowance. I was wondering what the status of his wife and the child would be.

Mr. G. R. PEARKES (Nanaimo):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to preface my remarks with a short description of the activities of certain young Canadian-born Chinese who, in 1944, volunteered1 for service in the Pacific. The majority of these young men came from British Columbia, and I give this illustration, because I believe it is indicative of the spirit of the Canadian Chinese.

These boys-they were little more than youths-were trained in the most hazardous of all operations, that of acting as saboteurs behind the enemy lines. They were taken to a remote part of British Columbia, and there were taught how to use explosives, how to speak various dialects of the Chinese language, and were also given a smattering of Japanese. They received a most intensive six months special training.

Immigration Act

I was one of a few people who went to visit these young men while they were being trained.

I remember sitting around a camp fire one summer evening discussing with them the future of the operations they would be undertaking. One topic of conversation to which they invariably returned was that, while they were pleased to do this work and to take chances for Canada and for China, they did hope that when the war was over they would be recognized as full Canadian citizens, and given the franchise.

I am pleased to remind the house that the government of British Columbia has given the franchise not only to these young men but to all Canadian-born Chinese. These men went to the far east and carried out with distinction the tasks assigned to them. The majority of them have returned. I am pleased to say I have received communications from them reporting on how they dad their work, and how they are now reestablishing themselves in the life of the community.

Only last month I received a letter from one of these men who asked' if he might continue his service to Canada, and might be given an opportunity of joining one of the reserve army units, in order that he might pass on to other young Canadians-perhaps other young Canadians of Chinese extraction -some of the experiences he had had, and what he had learned while he was in Asia.

I am pleased to say I wrote the officer commanding the district, giving him the name of this young man, and that only today I received a letter in reply, saying that this young Canadian-born Chinese is to ibe given an opportunity of joining one of the reserve regiments.

I bring this matter to the attention of the house as an indication of the desire of these young men to become Canadian citizens. Anyone who has had any experience in connection with victory loan campaigns and Red Cross drives will know that the Chinese living in Canada have set an inspiring example for other sections of the community in their generosity in those drives, as well as in promoting their own drives to assist Canada.

I believe I am speaking for a large section of the population of British Columbia when I say we admire and respect the Chinese. We dislike seeing placed upon them any restrictions which might be considered inhumane or -which would not apply to other sections of the population. We bear in mind the fact that only a small proportion of the male Chinese living in British Columbia have their wives with them. It is unfortunate for them, and is a source of irritation; and perhaps there is a feeling almost of disgrace when it is remembered that for so long a time it has not been possible for these men, who have been in Canada for many years, to bring their wives to this country.

The majority of the male Chinese on Vancouver island are men who are now past middle age. They have performed humble work for many years, without having the comfort of their wives and families, except for short periods of time when they have gone back to China. Therefore I think I am correct in saying that the majority of people in British Columbia would like to see that handicap removed from these Chinese men, now that they are becoming citizens of Canada.

But we have to be practical in the matter, and we must realize how many Chinese males whose wives are living outside Canada there are in the country. The latest figures for British Columbia show that there are some 13,174, whereas in all of Canada there are some 23,556. If these Chinese male residents in Canada were allowed to bring in their wives and their dependent children under the age of eighteen, according to the present regulations only a small number-about 8,000 of them-who are Canadian citizens, would be permitted to bring in their families. But the remainder are eligible for Canadian citizenship, and I presume the vast majority of them will accept the opportunity of becoming Canadian citizens. Therefore we may see coming to Canada, if the doors are thrown wide open, not a few hundred Chinese ladies and their children, but several thousand of them, perhaps no less than 40,000, which, I believe, would not be an extreme figure at which to place it.

I suggest that it would be utterly impracticable for us in British Columbia to absorb anything like that number of Chinese females at the present time. The majority of the Chinese live in the cities. Only a comparatively few live in the country, although there are some market gardeners on the outskirts and a certain number of men work in the logging camps and sawmills. But, as I say, the majority of those who have families live in the cities, and Chinatown in Victoria and Chinatown in Vancouver are terribly overcrowded at the present time and could not absorb any additional population. Where are we to house this large number of Chinese women and children if they are permitted to come here? Every school on Vancouver island is overcrowded at the present time. Reference was made earlier in this debate to medical services. Very few of the Chinese in this country at the present time belong to the professional classes, and therefore the care of any large number of Chinese wives

Immigration Act

and children who might come to this country would be an added burden upon our already overtaxed medical and dental and teaching services.

I feel that we must ask the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) to give the people of British Columbia some assurance that there will not be a flood tide of these wives and children into the country. I was heartened by a sentence in his statement yesterday when he said that it is of the utmost importance to relate immigration to the absorptive capacity. I w'ould ask that that statement be applied to the Chinese families who may come in as soon as this act is repealed and to the additional number who would be allowed to come in as soon as Chinese residents take out their citizenship papers.

I should like the government to have a vivid picture of the Chinatowns in our coast cities and to realize that it will be a disgrace to this country if a large number of Chinese come here and are thrown into these already overcrowded slum conditions. I hope it will be possible to limit the entry of wives of Chinese who are here to those that can be absorbed readily. This may impose a little hardship on Chinese in this country who may have to wait a little while longer for their wives to come here, but I think it would be a wise and judicious policy to limit the families coming in to a trickle until such time as accommodation can be made available for them.

Mr. ALISTAIR STEWART (Winnipeg North):

Mr. Speaker, a few months ago the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) and I took part in a ceremony in Winnipeg at which we were presented with citizenship certificates. They were presented at the same time to representatives of other ethnic groups in Canada. On that occasion the minister made a speech which I applauded when he sat down-a speech upon which I now congratulate him. If my memory serves me aright, he said that he and we others who were with him had a great advantage over other Canadians in so far as we had chosen to come to this country, while those who were born in Canada were here entirely by accident. I know I chose deliberately to come to this country. It was a land of hope; it was in the western hemisphere, the hemisphere to which the peoples of the world are looking for leadership and guidance. Through the years that I have been here my pride in Canada has steadily grown and each time something has happened to hurt that pride I have felt practically a physical bruise.

[Mr. Pearkes.J

There is in this bill a principle at stake, a great principle of human justice. On other occasions I have charged the government with discrimination in connection with certain of its immigration regulations and orders but, after discussion and correspondence with the minister, I am now convinced that that discrimination no longer exists. I congratulate the minister and the government upon that state of affairs. But in this bill we have a certain type of discrimination. I should like to remind the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) of what he said yesterday, and I quote from page 2646 of Hansard:

This does not mean, however, that we should not seek to remove from our legislation discrimination which appears to be objectionable.

I feel that Chinese residents as such are discriminated against, and that is something which hurts the good name of Canada in the world at large. Yesterday my colleague and roommate, the hon. member for Kindersley (Mr. Jaenicke), came back from New York where, along with other members of parliament, he had attended the meetings of the united nations. He came back filled with jubilation at the knowledge that Canada's name stood high among the nations of the world. We do not want to do anything which will tarnish or sully that name; yet we risk that by placing Chinese residents on a different level from that of other residents in Canada.

I ask the government most earnestly to reconsider its position. After all. in effect what difference will it make if we give to Chinese residents the same rights given to other residents? We can assume, I think, that many of these Chinese residents will take out their citizenship papers when they find out they can bring their wives and children to this country. It is merely a matter of postponing, perhaps for a few months or a year or two, the time when their relatives would .come to this country. For the sake of a year or two I do not think it is worth risking having our representatives at the united nations held up to the scorn of other nations. We accepted certain obligations under the charter and we have to fulfil them. I ask the government to reconsider this matter and put Chinese residents of Canada on exactly the same basis as other residents.

I agree substantially with what the Prime Minister said yesterday and there is only one comment I wish to make, one which I made the other day. This concerns refugees in the displaced persons camps in Europe. Anyone in this house who has had anything at all to do with these people, anyone who has read the stories concerning them must realize how

Immigration Act

desperate is their position. Many of them have only hope left, and if they are not going to be given something to bolster up that hope I hesitate to think what may happen. To give them additional hope I repeat the suggestion I made. The teams which are going over to Europe to examine potential immigrants could examine these people and if they come within the rules or regulations they could be given a visa or a letter, some document which would let them know that eventually we would be prepared to take them into Canada. Obviously we cannot do so now, because we have been told repeatedly about the difficulties of transportation. but at least we can give them that hope which they need so desperately. If we do that we shall have gone far toward fulfilling our obligations to these dreadfully unfortunate people.

Mr. D. G. ROSS (St. Paul's):

Mr. Speaker, I realize the importance of the refugee problem and that it is a difficult one to handle. I have one suggestion to make with regard to the refugees, and that is that it might be well to bring in certain family groups of them who are known to have democratic tendencies. That would make it easier for them to work out their own destinies here.

I understand that about 100,000 applications have been made to Ontario House in London by British people for permission to come to Canada. I have a recollection that the Right Hon. Winston Churchill said not long ago that there were 6,000,000 people too many in Great Britain at the present time, and I have no doubt that the more people from Great Britain that we took into Canada, the more we should ease the hardships which they are experiencing today with respect to the shortage of food. It would mean just that many less to feed in Great Britain, and, further, they are the right kind of people we want in this country. We should give the people of Great Britain who bore the brunt of battle for so many years alone the preference in coming to this country. Very few people in Canada who have not been over to the old country realize the terrible hardships with which they have to put up today, and I can certainly say, from letters that I receive from Great Britain, that conditions there are pretty grim. For all these reasons I think we should do everything we can to give the British priority in coming to Canada.

I wanted to speak particularly on the question of Chinese immigration. I have in my riding a great number of Chinese. There are quite a few of them in the city of Toronto

and in the province of Ontario. I have known some of these Chinese intimately. I was connected with the Chinese war relief fund, and I know how much the average Chinaman in this country and especially in Toronto sacrificed in order to send relief to the people of his own country. We must not forget that China was at war for many years before world war II and that conditions in that country are still by no means settled, and we should give the Chinese every consideration. I never met a finer man in my life than Chong Ying of the city of Toronto. Some years before the war he wanted to bring his boy over here but it could not be done. That was a great disappointment to him. He is the head of the Chinese in the city of Toronto. Now he is an older man. There is another very fine Chinaman I know, Ernie Mark, and many others. Ernie worked hard and is still working hard collecting money in Canada to send relief to China. There are many others I know who are very fine people indeed, kindly, loyal to Canada and highly respected.

In my city many Chinese who have married do not live in Chinatown but have places of their own around the city. I think that is much better than living all together in a congested area. We should do everything we can to help out the Chinese who are here now.

A great deal has been said about the Chinese in Canada. According to the 1941 census, there were 34,627, of whom 30,713 were males and 3,914 were females. I suppose there are more now. But the point I wish to make is that eighty-two per cent of these Chinese in Canada are over forty years of age. While they might bring out their wives, I doubt that' they could bring out their families because their children would now be over twenty years of age. No Chinaman has been allowed to return from Canada to China since 1931, so that their children in China must now be over twenty years of age, and I do not think there is any danger of having a large influx of Chinese families. Again, sixty per cent of the Chinese in Canada are over fifty years of age. This makes it clear that there is not much danger of a large immigration of Chinese families to this country.

We asked the Chinese to come to Canada and welcomed them here, and so far as the Chinese in my own city are concerned, I know them to be very fine citizens. One of their difficulties is that they are forced, under present conditions, to live unnatural and abnormal lives, being practically forced to live a life of celibacy in congested areas. If they

Private Bills

had their wives with them they probably would not live in the centre of Toronto but would move out into house? of their own.

It is almost six o'clock and I should like to give just a few more figures before I sit down. In the metropolitan area of Toronto there are 2,559 Chinese, of whom 2,275 are males and 284 are females. I have not the number of Chinese born in Canada, but the figures I have just given include a great many children who were born in this country. I just wanted to take a few minutes, Mr. Speaker, to speak of the kindness and loyalty of the Chinese I have known and to put these figures on the record.

At six o'clock the house took recess.

After Recess

The house resumed at eight o'clock.

Mr. GREEN:

I have no intention of opposing this bill. The British Columbia Telephone Company are applying under the bill for permission to increase their capital from $11 million to $25 million. There is no doubt that they are faced with a great need for more expansion. I have clipped out of the paper received today from British Columbia a large advertisement by the company headed, "Report on the Telephone Situation." It goes on to apologize to the people who have applied for telephones but are unable to get them. It tells them why it is impossible to make these installations at the present time. There is no doubt that the company will have to put in a great many thousand new telephones and will require a great deal of money to do so.

However, I think there should be some assurance given to the committee, by the hon. member for New Westminster who is sponsoring the bill, to the effect that there is not to be an application for an increase in rates. That has always concerned me when bills of this type come before the house. In this case, where there is a big increase in capital, I think it is essential that some protection should be given to telephone users of British Columbia. I understand that the hon. member has been authorized to give assurance to

the effect that the company has no present intention of applying for an increase of rates and will not make any such application unless compelled to do so by extensive changes in conditions.

Mr. REID:

That is my definite understanding.

Mr. GREEN:

That assurance is clearly worded and contains a statement to the effect that an application will not be made unless the company is compelled to do so and then only by reason of extensive changes in conditions. If the hon. member for New Westminster is prepared to give that assurance on behalf of the British Columbia Telephone Company I for one shall have no objection to the bill passing.

Mr. REID:

I am authorized to do so, and it is my definite understanding.

Mr. IRVINE:

I just wish to bring to the attention of the committee a point which I raised in the standing committee when this bill was before it. The hon. member who is piloting this bill through the committee gave us a good outline of the project, and explained it very well. The point that I wish to bring to the attention of the committee and to the sponsor of the bill is the great need which is apparent in the rural sections of British Columbia for a further expansion of service. Of course the capital which has been provided by this legislation might well be used for that purpose or it might not; and it is in order that we may have some assurance that it will be used, in part at least, for extending the service in the rural districts, especially in the central and northern sections of the province, that I now rise.

The British Columbia Telephone Company is already well established in the better settled sections of the province, where, of course, a telephone system would pay better than it would in sparsely settled districts. It is so well established that in these points it virtually has a monopoly of the best section of the country; and unless it is an unusual type of corporation, it will not expend any more money than it can help in sections of the community which do not pay very well. That is only a natural thing for us to expect from a company which is, like all other companies, in the business for the profits that may be made as well as for services that may be rendered.

I should like to have some assurance that it will not continue to confine the expenditures of its newly authorized1 capital to communities which are already fairly well served,

Private Bills

but that it will extend its services to communities which have none. Of course I believe that a telephone system should be a public utility; that the provincial government should have taken over the whole service. But that is a matter for the provincial government and the people of British Columbia; we cannot deal with it here. We are asked to allow this company to carry on its business and extend its capital sufficiently to be able to do so; but the public should have some protection. The last section of the bill, for example, which gives the only protection that is given reads:

The company shall not have power to make any issue, sale or other disposition of its capital stock or any part thereof, without first obtaining the approval of the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada of the amount, terms or conditions of such issue, sale or other disposition of such capital stock.

There is some control over the issuance of its stock, but apparently there is no control of the company's action in regard to what particular project the stock will be issued about. Therefore it might very well neglect almost entirely the rural communities which need services so badly.

It goes without saying that, in certain sections of British Columbia, the population is sparsely settled, and that in such districts it would not be a very good paying proposition for a private company to build telephone lines. Nevertheless the service should be an over-all proposition, so that the company may make up in the well settled portions of the communities what it might lose in the more sparsely settled. There ought to be some measure of protection in the public interest in respect of the company's operations.

Mr. REID:

As pointed out by the hon. member, he did bring forward that very matter when the bill was before the committee. At that time I gave him, quite naturally, all the assurance that I could.

The application which is before us at the present time is due particularly to the great demand by commercial business and people in the lower mainland, but it is not complete with them unless telephones are taken out into the country and into the district which the hon. member represents. Unfortunately the head of the company fell sick and could not be here. But I have been given assurance that the very matter referred to is to receive the personal attention and keen interest of the head of the company in the light of the suggestion made by the hon. member, so that, if possible, service will be given.

Mr. CHURCH:

As a member of the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines I attended the hearing on this particular bill. I wish to raise some questions regarding the way in which these bills are considered.

This bill is not a private bill; it is a public bill which affects everybody in Canada. Do not forget this: we had a long fight with the Bell Telephone Company, a public utility, here in 1927.

In the first place, I take objection to the way in which we are considering these private bills. These should be reported by the committee reporters, so that the members of the House of Commons will have some evidence of what the bill is all about. We do not now know anything about it. We report divorce bills in both houses; I should probably say in this house and another house. I do not know whether I should call the other one a house or not, because they are away at times. What I want to point out to you, Mr. Chairman, is that this is no way for consideration to be given public bills like this one is.

British Columbia, which I last visited in 1927, has been a happy hunting-ground for many years not only for light, but for power, transportation, telephone and other companies.

I want to refer to this telephone company mentioned in the first clause of the bill, and I will show you who they are. They are an American trust; that is what they are. They found British Columbia a happy hunting-ground. In 1909 we in our city had a big fight and I myself had to take the case to the railway commission before the late Mr. Justice Mabee. There was a difference in the telephone rates in our city; part was the old city as far north as Bloor street and the new city practically north of Bloor street. In the new city the company were charging $132 for business telephones and $82 in Deer Park near Mount Pleasant cemetery. They would probably have put us all in there if they had kept on. After the city council decided not to take any action on the application, I myself applied to the railway commission on behalf of all the telephone users in the Toronto district. What was the result? After bearing evidence from electricians and other people for eight weeks, the chairman said he had learned more in the last ten or fifteen minutes when I pointed out. to him that the principle of the telephone was only that of pole and wire. I pointed out that it did not cost any more for water because you were farther away from the pumping station and that it did not cost any more for gas because you were farther away from the gas station, or for your electric light because you were farther away from the power house, and I asked why it should cost more for your telephone which is simply a. pole and ware principle. The chairman marked it down, and I want tossy that just now somebody has sent me a.

Private Bills

note asking me to make my remarks short. I will just continue my remarks as long as I like.

In 1909 the city of Toronto applied to Ottawa and came down to the railway committee. What we proposed was to place all these telephone and express companies under the control of the Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada under the Railway Act. We, the representatives of the municipalities, were simply howled down, such is the influence these companies had and such was the lobby they had here then at Ottawa, before a committee set up to consolidate the Railway Act. Now you are doing business in a different way. You are afraid to tell the public what is going on. In this case there is no written evidence of what happened before the railway committee of the House of Commons, or any report on it. They might as w^ell have met in private. There was not a single reporter there, as was the case with another bill the other day. But you have a report of divorce cases that do not affect the consumer. I could, if I liked, go back home and not bother my head about this; but I do it because I am here to protect the interests of the public. I did not come to Ottawa to advance my own interests. I came to Ottawa as a sacred trust. I came here to try to do something for the ordinary working people of the country and advance their best interests. I do not expect to get anything out of it under the party system, nor do I ask for anything.

I will tell you one thing on this particular question. I visited the province of British Columbia in 1927-and I will be through in seven or eight minutes now-and it was then the happy hunting-ground for company promoters like this one. It is the richest province in water powers, but the rates there were then prohibitive. I do not know how the small farmer got along then. He had not his light in his barn as we had then in Ontario. It is the richest province in water power, and in some places the water was not fit to drink then. I may say that in 1927 the rates for water were two or three times what our rates were, and not only those, but for light and power and the telephone rates; they may have marked them down now. They want us to increase their capital stock from $11 million to S25 million. I am not complaining about the rates. It is the people who pay the rates; I do not pay them. British Columbia is the richest province in water power I have ever seen, but they have been a long time in doing much about a hydro system for light and power, and the same is true with the telephone.

I come now to the principle of the bill. This company is part of an American trust, a subsidiary of one. I am reading now from "Moody's Manual of Investments." As to the history of this company, it used to be called the Anglo-Canadian Telephone Company. I may say that it would not be necessary for me to read all this if the committee's proceedings were recorded, but the committee do not know anything about it; I mean our present committee. You never had it reported. You do not know who they are. They can come here and apply for anything. We do not know anything about it. We just pass the bill. It is called as a private bill. How are we to know about it? How am I to go back and explain why I voted away public rights like this?

The history of this company is as follows:

Incorporated in Quebec December, 1934. As of APrd 16, 1935, acquired all the assets of the National Telephone and Telegraph Corporation which was incorporated in Delaware, December 7, 1926, as British Columbia Telephone and Telegraph Company.

It is a subsidiary of a large American trust.

Business: company has investment in companies which operate telephone exchanges in British Columbia and the Dominican republic.

Properties: a subsidiary, British Columbia Telephone Company, company operates without competition sixty-four telephone exchanges and 163,135 telephones, serving a population in excess of 500,000, including the metropolitan areas of Vancouver and Victoria. Other subsidiaries operate 5,320 telephones, serving various municipalities throughout British Columbia.

Then they go on to give the United States companies. Then they formed, by act of parliament, the British Columbia Telephone Company which is controlled by the Anglo-Canadian Telephone Company, a subsidiary of the American trust, associated telephone and telegraph system. The capital structure is set out here and also the history which is as follows:

Incorporated in Canada in 1916 as Western Canada Telephone Company; name changed to above-

British Columbia Telephone Company.

November, 1919. In 1923, acquired business and assets of British Columbia Telephone Company Limited incorporated in 1891 as Vernon and Nelson Telephone Company; name changed in 1903; acquired Provincial Company and Delta Telephone Company. In 1929, acquired Fort George and Alberta Telephone Company, East Kootenay Telephone Company and Chilliwack Telephone Company.

Then as to management, the directors were largely American, although there are some Canadians. Under "property" we find this:

Owns and operates over 97 per cent of all the telephones in British Columbia, including

Private Bills

the entire system of the metropolitan areas of the cities of Vancouver and Victoria, and owns all of its exchange buildings and sites in connection therewith. Also owns and operates an extensive long distance system, including four submarine cables from the mainland to Vancouver island connecting with the city of Victoria. Lines also connect with the western terminus of the Trans-Canada Telephone Sytsem. Company conducts its business under powers contained in its charter and without necessity of local or special franchises.

Now we come to the operating revenue which is given as follows:

1939 $5,794,023

1940 6.050,009

1941 6.547,552

1942 7.166.620

1943 7,755,871

1944 8.136.621

1945 8,723,801

You do not notice any net profit of $11 million. Here is what it is. For the last year of record the net profit is $1,324,979 and it came up from $1,297,384 in 1939. The figures for net profit as given here are:

1939 $1,297,384

1940 1,222,337

1941 1.361,350

1942 1,363.060

1943 1.273.038

1944 1,280,351

1945 1,324,979

Mind you, I am not objecting to the people of British Columbia doing as they please about this. It is none of my business, after all, but this company has been placed under federal control. While I appreciate what the hon. member for Vancouver Centre and others in his party, as well as some of my own party, have done in this connection, it is not for me to say what should be done under the bill. I have not time to go over the balance sheets, the liabilities and assets of this company. I do not want to talk out anybody's bill; I am not that kind of man, but I do object to the way this bill is drawn up. Now they want to obtain an increase in capital from $11,000,000 to $25,000,000. Somebody is going to cut up a pretty nice melon. I think hon. members would have to go away down to Mexico or some other place to get a melon as juicy as that. Not many years ago the Bell Telephone Company came along and cut up a melon amounting to $75,000,000, and the people of Ontario had to pay for most of it. At that time, if you had one share you got a nice split also of new shares, and no doubt the same procedure will be followed here later on. I do not know whether the hon. gentlemen to my left have any melons like that to cut up. There is very little money in the real melons they import in North Toronto, which sell at- forty or fifty cents each. This is the juiciest telephone melon I have ever seen. [DOT]

What does this company do? They apply to the senate and to our railway committee. No reporters are there, and very few members; the bill might just as well have been considered in private. We have an important meeting like that going on and hardly a line appears in the house for the public who will have to pay for it. I am not here to criticize the press at all; I have found that it does no good. Y'ou can never answer a newspaper, as they always have the last word. However I do complain about the way we are doing our business. Here the railway committee has given this company power to obtain another $14,000,000. When we get away up in amounts like that the figures become astronomical. I do not know that I can say much more about the bill, but I object to all these profits. We do not know anything much about, this bill or this company; yet we are asked to support it. Among the directors you will find some of the very same people who served an American trust so faithfully and well in these two subsidiary companies, American-owned. Many of the directors and shareholders of these companies live in the United States, in Delaware and almost every other state of the union. They include all kinds of people; I cannot find their names and addresses at the moment. They come over to Canada and find things very easy over here. They got away with a stock increase of $75 million in 1927 in the province of Ontario. Only one or two members would sit here for the whole evening, night after night, in an attempt to prevent the Bell Telephone Company from increasing its capital stock by of $75,000,000 in 1927 in the province of up the melon by a big split of shares. They got away with it then and they are going to get away with it now because of the way we do business. We have no records or reports before us. We do not keep records. We have records concerning divorce cases and everything else, but we cannot afford to spend the money to keep records in connection with a great public utility like this.

In Ontario, since we have taken light, heat and power away from the control of people like these and given it to the Hydro, the rates have been reduced three or four times, and the same thing could be done in regard to telephone rate service. This company got an extra million dollars in capital in 1941, only a few years ago, and they did not spend or use it all. They probably put it aside. We do not know whether they sold the shares; we could not get any information. Last year the operating revenue of this company was $9,628,000, while the net profit was $716,544, according to the report submitted to

Private Bills

the annual meeting last year. Mind you, they are probably giving good service at fair rates now; I believe that is particularly true in connection with long distance service; but the minute you give them $25,000,000, just see what will happen. They say there will be no increase in rates for a while, but wait and see. That was one of the reasons we had to make a change in connection with certain public utilities some years ago. We were asked to place the express companies and telephone companies under the control of the railway commission. At that time the chairman was Mr. Justice Mabee, a brilliant man who was appointed .by hon, gentlemen opposite. He brought down the rates in Toronto from $82 to $32, for a flat rate for Greater Toronto. Business telephones had been paying $132, and he cut that rate for a flat rate for the whole down to $52 and made them get along with the revenue they obtained. That applied all over that district, north, south, east and west. No wonder they applied for a big capital increase; next year they came here and wanted $75,000,000 in capital. So I say this is the juiciest melon I ever saw. Talk about the Montreal melon you used to be able to buy in the stores; it was never in it with what these people can do. All Ontario had to pay for that little deal, and then the stock was split splendidly. It is too bad hon. members did not have some of that stock; they would make more money than by sitting here talking of a bill about which we know nothing.

I do not think I need say anything more. We might just as well give them the title deed of the house, and I warn you, Mr. Chairman, to nail down the. parliament buildings before they get through. I saw the Beauharnois boys in the building today. Then the other night over in another branch, in a place down the hall, they were going to give a bill second reading before it was even printed. That was in the chamber of the saints everlasting rest in another part of this building.

Mr. HERRIDGE:

Coming from a district in the interior of British Columbia which has a considerable interest in this bill because it has a large number of telephone users, I [DOT]wish to say a few words. Before proceeding to do so, however, I must say that, after listening to the remarks of the hon. member for Broadview this evening, I can see that party changing its name in the near future from Progressive Conservative to Socialist Conservative.

The bill before us requests authority to increase the capital of this company to take care of necessary expansion. This company has almost a monopoly in British Columbia.

I do not object to that, because in the first place I believe that telephone service and public utilities generally can be carried on satisfactorily only on the basis of monopoly or near monopoly, if you want to have efficient administration, to keep down costs and to provide good service for the public. Let me say at once that I stand for the principle of public ownership, and wish this were a public monopoly instead of a private monopoly, but we have not reached that point yet, and we have to face the situation as it is.

This is virtually a private monopoly seeking an enlargement of its capital to serve the people of British Columbia. When it comes to the question of giving any monopoly rights and privileges we have to be very careful to protect the public, because in the case of a monopoly the customers have no choice. For many years I have been a customer of the British Columbia Telephone Company, together with a good many of my neighbours and constituents. I may say that in the past this company, like many other large corporations in Canada, has had what I consider very poor public relations. In the first place, it has covered the larger places and, in my opinion, has often ignored the smaller ones. The result has been that the smaller places have had to get along with much less service, and a less efficient service.

In addition to that, in my opinion, in past years its public relations were poor. But companies of this type, like many others in Canada, are now learning and making progress in that direction. They are realizing that the public of this country are not going to put up with that kind of treatment. I believe that during the last few years there has been a great improvement in the public service, and in the public relations of the company. I believe it must have some new officials, and some more progressive minded administrators.

In my district there has been a considerable expansion of service taking place, and some improvement in the service for the small communities. I understand that some of this money is required to improve the service in the rural areas. I have been careful in going into this matter and have listened to the presentation of the bill by the hon. member for New Westminster. Then, I have asked questions; and in view of my careful inquiry and my personal knowledge of the situation in the interior of British Columbia, coupled with the assurance given this evening by the hon. member for New Westminster to the hon. member for Vancouver South concerning rates, and knowing the need for an expansion

Private, Hillx

at this time of the telephone service in the interior of British Columbia, I shall have no hesitation in supporting the bill; because we are living under a capitalistic system and this capital is required to expand the telephone services so urgently needed by that section of the public I represent.

Mr. MacINNIS:

Mr. Chairman, it will be remembered that in 1941 or 1942 the British Columbia Telephone Company made application here for an increase in capital to the extent of $10 million. Because of the war, and the likelihood that an issue of that kind would interfere with the raising of money for the war, the increase granted was cut down to $1 million, which I believe the company has never used.

So that while I, too, favour public ownership of an institution of this kind, I am not opposing the bill, because there is no alternative in the province of British Columbia to the British Columbia Telephone Company. I am quite satisfied that it badly needs this new capital.

May I say, with all due regard for the sponsor of the bill, that I do not place much faith or reliance in the statement that no increase in rates will be applied for. My own opinion is that it is almost inevitable that, as the company expands its business with this new capital, and serves more customers, an increase in rates will be asked for. The only protection we have is that any increase in rates will have to be approved by the board of transport commissioners. So that I am supporting this, in so far as it needs my support, with my eyes open in that respect.

I do not think this committee paid sufficient attention to what was said by the hon. member for Broadview. The telephone business on the North American continent is a huge monopoly. As the hon. member for Broadview said, the British Columbia Telephone Company is controlled entirely by the Anglo-Canadian Telephone Company. And it, in turn, is controlled by the Associated Telephone and Telegraph Company of Wilmington, Delaware. In the last analysis, these are the people who will determine what will be done.

The Bell Telephone Company and the Associated Telephone and Telegraph Company of Wilmington, Delaware, control, between them, the whole of the telephone business on the North American continent. The Bell Telephone Company controls in the United States and1 in the provinces of Quebec and Ontario, while the Associated Telephone and Telegraph Company controls in British Columbia, South America and Philippine islands. This, then, is no small business, and we should keep these things clearly in mind

when we are dealing with this matter. However I am satisfied that the company needs the capital for which it is now asking; at least it needs some of it. Perhaps it will need it all in the next ten years.

I notice that the city council of Vancouver has examined the bill and, if it has not given its approval, at least it has offered no opposition. In regard to the matter of the application for increasing rates, it will be noticed that in the amending bill of 1941 section 6 (3) said:

No application for increase of the rates shall be based on any increase of the issued stock of the company as authorized by the amending act of 1941. but this provision shall not apply to or limit the power of the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada (or any successors to its powers), to fix just and reasonable rates upon application by the company for increased rates based on other grounds.

That section is deleted from the present bill.

The city of Vancouver, referring to that, said this:

We have also considered the company's application to repeal subsection (3) of section 6 added to the company's charter in 1941. Having regard to modern principles of rate making, we think the section is of little importance either to the city or to the company. As, however, it was apparently added to the act with the intention of serving as a measure of protection to the company's subscribers, we make no recommendation on the application with respect to it.

And further on they say:

Our recommendation is that the company be notified that the city has no objection to the amendment by which it seeks to increase its authorized capital from $11 million to $25 million, subject always to the approval of the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada to the issue, sale or other disposition of such stock or any part thereof.

And, for myself, I say, "To the approval of the board of transport commissioners in the matter of rates." As I have said, I am not opposing the bill. I shall vote for it.