Mr. SPEAKER:

The hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair) stated on the floor of the house on Monday last that the chief treasury officer who performs the duties of accountant of the house had refused to pay his travelling expenses by air and also those of the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Gibson). He said:

I request that Your Honour give the reason which you gave to the accountant of the House of Commons as to why the expense accounts for the hon. member for Comox-Alberni and myself were refused.

This was the first time I heard there was any trouble in connection with these expense accounts; but I took no exception to the hon. member speaking on this matter at the time because he started by saying he rose to a question of privilege. By the time he was through I saw that the main object of his statement was a complaint against a part of the house's administration which is under my control. I then said:

I call the attention of the hon. member to a very well known rule, that the Speaker should not be questioned from the floor of the house.

I nevertheless assured the hon. member that due consideration would be given his remarks.

It is a well known rule laid down in May's 14th edition, page 334, that:

Questions dealing with matters within the jurisdiction of the Speaker should be addressed to the Speaker by private notice.

Payment of members' travelling expenses has always been under the control of the commissioners of the internal economy of the house, who, for the present session, are the hon. ministers of Justice, External Affairs, Finance and Fisheries. Section 16 of the House of Commons Act provides that those hon. ministers shall act together with the Speaker, and section 18 of the act says:

All sums of money voted upon such estimates (the estimates of the house), or payable to members of the House of Commons under the Senate and House of Commons Act shall be subject to the order of the commissioners, or any three of them, of whom the Speaker shall be one.

The commissioners have often considered the members' travelling expenses but they have not yet discussed the advisability of applying section 43 (1) of the Senate and House of Commons Act to travel by air. A meeting of the commissioners was called two weeks ago and had to be postponed because ministers were too busy attending other official business. I will make it a point to submit to them the cases of the hon. members for Vancouver North and Comox-Alberni, which in my opinion deserve the most serious consideration.

Mr. GEORGE BLACK (Yukon):

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the statement Your Honour has just made I note that the hon. member for Vancouver North in making his statement said this:

The hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Black) informs me that he regularly travels by air and his accounts are approved.

I know the hon. member does not wish to misrepresent me, but he must have misunderstood me. I did not want him to understand that I regularly travel by air and that my accounts were paid. Occasionally when the adjournment of the house was so short that all of my time in going from my home and returning would be spent in travel, I have travelled by air and presented the accounts to the accountant of the house, with vouchers, and they have been paid. But that was not done on more than two or three occasions, and it is not the regular procedure.

Mr. JAMES SINCLAIR (Vancouver North):

I can certainly substantiate that. That was the effect of the communication I received from the hon. member for Yukon, which I think makes our case all the stronger in that there should be no differentiation between ridings. On this matter of privilege, as a member of parliament, I did consider that when the accounts of a member of parliament were submitted to a servant of parliament and were refused, it was quite proper to draw Your Honour's attention to that fact in the House of Commons. I can also say that as a member of parliament I think your statement is not very satisfactory.

Questions

Mr. McMASTER:

What was the amount of American dollars acquired by the foreign exchange control board in the period beginning January 1, 1947 and ending on the last day of November, 1947 from the following sources: (a) export of merchandise; (b) export of gold; (c) tourist and travelling expenditures by visitors to Canada; (d) interest and dividends; (e) freight and shipping; (f) the United Kingdom; (g) any other country;

(h) from other sources, specifying, if possible, the more important ones?

What were the sources of the sums acquired by the foreign exchange control board which increased their reserves from $461,000,000 on December 17, 1947, to $514,000,000 on January 31, 1948, divided under the following headings: (a) export of merchandise to United

States; (b) export of gold; (c) tourist and travelling expenditures by visitors to Canada; (d) interest and dividends; (e) freight and shipping; (f) the United Kingdom; (g) any other country; (h) gold acquired and held;

(i) from other sources, specifying if possible, the more important ones?

Mr. ABBOTT:

May I be permitted to answer these questions orally? I wish to point out that the information requested involves estimates of Canada's balance of payments which require a great deal of statistical work, and it is customary to make such estimates only on the basis of the calendar year. To attempt such estimates for broken periods, particularly for such a period as is referred to in the second question, would involve at least a very large amount of additional work, and the information could not be made available for a considerable period of time. A definitive estimate of Canada's balance of payments for the year 1947 will not be available until the report of the foreign exchange control board is published. 'However, I have requested that provisional or tentative estimates should be prepared, subject to correction later as all the details are available, and I trust- that it will meet the purpose which the hon. member has in mind if I table now a copy of these provisional estimates for the year 1917, which have been prepared at my request.

1. When will the Toronto district be given a steam suburban service by both railways with commutation tickets and new equipment?

2. Why are not steel cars available on the Canadian National Railways to replace the wooden type now in use to Oakville and Brampton?

3. Why has the transport board not acted under its powers under the Railway Act to give the Toronto district the same type of suburban service as for years has been available on Montreal island and district by both railway systems?

Mr. CHEVRIER:

The Canadian National Railways advise as follows:-

1. Commutation fares are available; (a) between Toronto and Oakville and intermediate points, (b) between Toronto and Weston and intermediate points, (c) between Toronto and Port Union and intermediate points, (d) between Toronto and Downsview and intermediate points.

With the number of first-class highways in the vicinity of Toronto paralleling railway tracks and the availability of other forms of transportation, additional steam railway services are not considered necessary to serve suburban communities.

2. Every effort is being made to distribute available passenger coaches of modern construction in the most effective way, and replacements of cars of the older type will be made as rapidly as circumstances permit.

3. The Board of Transport Commissioners advise as follows:

No application is before the. board for an order requiring a change in the type of suburban railway service in the Toronto district, and there is no material on the board's files which would justify the board in issuing-such an order.

Mr. HANSELL:

1- How much coal was used by the Canadian National Railways for each of the years 1945, and 1946 and what is the estimated value of this coal?

2. How much of this coal was imported from the United States during these years and what is the estimated value?

Mr. CHEVRIER:

The Canadian National Railways advise as follows:-

1. 1945-6,310,751 net tons-cost $38,432,474; 1946-6.082,395 net tons-cost $38,744,856.

2. 1945-4,336,688 net tons-cost $29,167,064; 1946-4,138,017 net tons-cost $29,751,724.

The above-mentioned costs include mine cost, foreign freight, duty and expense of handling through chutes and are exclusive of any charges for transportation over Canadian lines.

1. Did War Assets Corporation, during the period February 1, 1947 to January 31, 1948, dispose of a quantity of army sheepskin-lined coats (a) with parkas; (b) with collars?

Questions

2. If so, were tenders called?

3. What are the names of those from whom tenders were received, showing quantity and prices?

4. Were similar goods disposed of through the Montreal office?

5. If so, what price was received for similar lines?

1. (a) Yes. (b) Yes.

2. No.

3. Not applicable. See answer to question No. 2 above.

4. Yes.

5. Prices received for similar lines range from $1 per garment for badly worn coats up to $10 per garment for new coats.

1. How many applications have been made each year, by provinces, for the Veterans' Business and Professional {Loans Act?

2. How many of these applications have been granted, by provinces, to date?