Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):

Mr. Speaker, I promised the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) to make a statement concerning comments reported in the Toronto Telegram, and supposed to have been made by Mr. John Fisher. Those comments were contained in articles on April 18, 19 and 24. .

We have made investigations, and Mr. Fisher has furnished us with a statement which it is understood summarizes his remarks. It indicates that the immigration set-up as he observed it, first at Moncton and later at Montreal, is not geared to consider the tremendous human factor involved. He intimated' that there was some delay at Moncton while the medical officer was located; that physical conditions at Moncton were, to use his word, deplorable; that there was a further delay at Montreal, where they arrived after midnight, and that there was lack of personnel familiar with foreign languages to meet incoming immigrants. He ended up his statement with this remark:

May I report again that no immigrant was beaten, pushed or cowed, but that they were not given that extra welcome which should' go to any citizen coming to this land. The very human factors of excitement or emotion were apparently not considered.

The T.C.A. aircraft carrying Mr. Fisher, along with sixteen other returning residents, ten non-immigrants and fourteen immigrants, arrived at Moncton airfield at 8.40 p.m. on April 15. The fourteen immigrants consisted of nine British, three Germans, one Ukrainian, and one Lithuanian. Moncton is an emergency airfield that is used infrequently. There is only one immigration officer on duty, and he completed his immigration examination of the passengers in one hour and twenty-five minutes. This included the medical examination and the time taken to locate the doctor, who of course is not employed on a full-time basis. Hon. members will understand that this was a landing made at Moncton by an aircraft which was ordinarily intended to land in Newfoundland, but could not do so because of weather conditions.

As Mr. Fisher remarked, the building conditions at Moncton for the reception and examination of immigrants are not satisfactory. In this connection I should like to read from a letter which has come to us since from the resident manager of Allied Aviation Service Company at Moncton, in which he says:

I would like to say here that the Immigration officer in charge at Moncton has done all possible in his power to assist in every way the immigrants aboard these international aircraft, and all examinations are carried out in quick but quite efficient manner. It is true that the facilities here are not the best, but a new waiting room is at present being constructed, and when completed should be an asset to this station.

As a result of the report that the complaint was made with respect to the immigration officer at Moncton, Mr. Fisher wired the immigration inspector at the point in the following words:

Newspaper made bad mistake, because my blast at immigration red tape for immigrants concerned Montreal and not Moncton. Sorry your name erroneously involved. Your statement to paper perfectly correct. Regards.

John Fisher

There was no further examination of passengers on this plane by the immigration service at Dorval, because it had already taken place at Moncton.

With respect to the linguistic qualifications of immigration personnel at Montreal, in addition to English and French they are able to converse in Italian, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Estonian, German, Polish, Greek, Arabic, Chinese, Yiddish, Ukrainian, Spanish, and1 have a working knowledge of Russian and Dutch.

Concerning Mr. Fisher's complaint that the reception of these immigrants lacked warmth, there is no question about the desirability of extending a welcoming hand to new Canadians, and this is being done as far as possible by departmental personnel and voluntary agencies; the Department of Citizenship and Immigration is operating a very useful settlement service for immigrants -not available to immigrants in years gone by. There is, however, a limit to the extent to which provision can be made for services of this kind. This service is available at seaports where time between arrival of vessel and departure of train permits such reception. Hon. members will appreciate why similar arrangements are not feasible at airports.

Immigration

such as Dorval, or at border ports. The distance between Montreal and Dorval increases the difficulty to voluntary agencies in providing services at Dorval. Furthermore, air passengers are usually anxious to have their immigration and customs examinations completed rapidly so that they may proceed to their destination with as little delay as possible.

Respecting the handling of the particular flight on which Mr. Fisher was a passenger, in accordance with the policy of the department each immigrant was interviewed by an immigration officer to find out if he needed help, assistance or information. This took place while the baggage was being'unloaded from the aircraft, and the acting district superintendent of immigration at Montreal reports that the interviews were completed within five minutes.

Examination of prospective immigrants overseas and at Canadian ports of entry is necessary. The first is conducted to reduce the possibility of hardship on the immigrants themselves, which would result from rejection on arrival in Canada. The second is necessary because it is in Canada that landing or entry is granted.

Summed up: Mr. Fisher absolves the immigration officer in charge at Moncton, but says that facilities there are unsatisfactory. As I have said, better facilities are being constructed. Moncton is the point in Canada at which the only immigration examination of the passengers took place. At Dorval the examination of passengers related solely to customs-immigration officers participating only to the extent of offering advice and assistance. None of the customs or immigration officers at Dorval recalls any difficulty during the customs examinations and immigration interviews.

Like Mr. Fisher, I believe that we need more people in this country, and not only are we encouraging immigration but we are also helping and assisting the immigrants in becoming established.

We appreciate any criticism of this kind so that we may make our facilities better and larger.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

May I thank the minister for the very full report he has given. I join with him in expressing the hope that these officials will always be courteous and considerate, and will receive immigrants with that welcome which after all is of great importance to those coming to Canada for the first time.

Mr. Coldwell:

May I ask the minister a supplementary question? Has he at any time received complaints about Gander in this

connection? About three months ago a gentleman who was coming to Canada from London told me of the difficulty experienced by a lady entering the country in making herself understood because the immigration official had an inadequate knowledge of French. This gentleman, whom I know very well, said that he did the translating in order to help out the lady. Has the minister had any complaints of that description?

Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce):

We have had

some complaints with respect to the facilities at Gander, and there have been discussions with the Minister of Transport with respect to that. I am quite sure that improvements are being made. I have not had any complaint with respect to language difficulties, because we do our best to provide personnel that is trained as far as possible in the important languages with which we would ordinarily have to deal.

Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture):

Mr. Speaker, on previous occasions I have indicated that I would make a statement today with regard to policy respecting cheese and butter for the coming year, and I wish to make that statement now.

With respect to cheese, the Ontario Cheese Producers Association has organized the Ontario cheese producers marketing board, under provincial legislation, which is prepared to undertake the marketing of the production of Ontario. The cheese producers have represented that they should receive at least 30 cents a pound for cheese.

It has been decided that it would be advisable that the producers and the trade be encouraged to market their own cheese. The government has agreed to cover the risk of carrying and marketing cheese up to twenty-eight cents a pound by agreeing to have the agricultural prices support board arrange for the taking over of all first grade Canadian cheddar cheese at a price of twenty-eight cents per pound f.o.b. Montreal, plus storage charges from the date of storage to the date of delivery to the board. The board reserves the right to specify the time of delivery, which will be not later than January 1, 1952.

Then with regard to butter, the govern^ ment has been asked to establish an incentive price under butter for the dairy year 1951-52, beginning May 1, 1951.

The experience of the past two years has convinced us that it is better to maintain a

floor price rather than an incentive price. It would appear that the floor maintained through the year 1949-50 of 58 cents a pound basis No. 1 creamery solids, Montreal, would have proven a reasonable floor to have maintained over a period of years and that incentive to produce would be effective if the time were extended to two years.

It has, therefore, been decided to ask the agricultural prices support board to arrange that the dairy products board of the Department of Agriculture will be prepared throughout the dairy years 1951-52 and 1952-53 to purchase butter at 58 cents a pound basis No. 1 creamery solids Montreal.

The dairy products board will continue the policy throughout that period of distributing butter obtained during the high production summer months through the trade during the low production winter months at prices which are considered fair to the consumer.

The creamery butter carried in storage on April 1, 1946, was 5,400,000 pounds; April 1, 1947, it was 15,400,000 pounds; April 1, 1948, it was 8,400,000 pounds; April 1, 1949, it was 12,700,000 pounds; on April 1, 1950, it was 27,900,000 pounds; and on April 1, 1951, it was 9,900,000 pounds. The increases and decreases during this period were influenced by importation of butter and the manufacture and sale of margarine.

The government has asked the dairy products board to make a survey of the carryover as of December 1 in each year, and, if it is found that there is not sufficient butter to carry the consumers through to April 1 with a normal carry-over, that the board negotiate with those countries whose butter is admitted to Canada on arrangement at a preferred duty for any amount required to be distributed through the trade on the same price arrangement as Canadian butter.

It is expected that this policy will result in the farmer receiving a fair return throughout his high production summer season and that the consumer will be assured a fair price during the high cost winter season.

Mr. Charlton:

Does the minister mean

that in case of shortage the dairy products board will purchase butter from the countries in which it is available?

Mr. Gardiner:

That is the intention, yes.

Mr. H. R. Argue (Assiniboia):

I wonder if I might ask the Minister of Agriculture a question related to the announcement of the

Inquiries of the Ministry floor price for butter-which, I might say, I am sure will not meet with the approval of the dairy industry.

Mr. Speaker:

Order. The hon. member may ask a question.

Mr. Argue:

Can the Minister of Agriculture assure the dairy industry at this time that recent reports in the press to the effect that the tariff on margarine coming into Canada will be removed are incorrect?

Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture):

That is not a matter which comes directly under my department. The matter of granting permission for margarine to come into Canada under any duty rate, or in any manner whatsoever, really comes under customs, and I do not know what the intentions are with respect to amendments there. Amendments of the act that come under the Department of Agriculture have certain provisions which will affect the matter, but the real question is dealt with under customs.

Mr. Argue:

Then may I direct my question to the Minister of National Revenue, Mr. Speaker?