Present:

Mr. N.A. Robertson, Secretary to the Cabinet (Chairman), Mr. A.D.P. Heeney, Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs, Dr. W.C. Clark, Deputy Minister of Finance, Mr. J.G. Taggart, Deputy Minister of Agriculture, Mr. D. Sim, Deputy Minister of National Revenue, Mr. Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada, Mr. W.F. Bull, Deputy Minister of Trade and Commerce, Mr. H.B. McKinnon, Chairman of the Tariff Board.

Mr. R.G. Robertson, Privy Council Office, (Secretary).

Also present:

The Deputy Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, (Col. Fortier), Mr. A.F.W. Plumptre, Department of External Affairs, Mr. G.B. Urquhart, Department of National Revenue, Mr. C.M. Isbister, Department of Trade and Commerce.

1. IMMIGRATION, FUNDS TRANSFERABLE FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM

1. The Deputy Minister of Citizenship and Immigration referred to the decision of the Committee at its meeting of October 20, 1950 that no approach should be made to the U.K. government for an increase in the amount of funds transferable by immigrants to Canada until consideration had been given to other aspects of assis­tance to immigration. Since that time, the government had announced a special arrangement for immigrants to come by T.C.A. and also an assisted passage scheme for certain categories of immigrants. The objective for 1951 was to bring the total of immigrants up to 150,000 and it was felt that an increase in the level of transferable funds from the United Kingdom might be helpful. Movement from the U.K. was up considerably. In 1950, only 13,000 had come from the United King­dom and nearly that many had arrived already in 1951. It seemed probable that about 35,000 might come during the year.

(Letter, Deputy Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to the Secretary to the Cabinet and enclosures - I.C.E.T.P. Document No. 88).?

2. The Chairman said that there did not appear now to be the same objections to a renewed approach to the United Kingdom as had been thought to apply in 1950. The representations could be made without prejudice to any other matter. The desirable approach might be to have the High Commissioner in London make rep­resentations to the Commonwealth Relations Office and at the same time to let them know that it would be satisfactory to discuss the matter at the next meeting of the U.K.-Canada Continuing Committee on Trade if the United Kingdom so desired.

3. Mr. Plumptre suggested that it would be best not to ask for any definite figure as the new limit for immigrant remittances.

4. The Committee, after discussion, agreed that External Affairs ask the High Commissioner in London to make representations to the Commonwealth Relations Office seeking an increase in the amount of funds allowed to be transferred by immigrants from the United Kingdom to Canada and, in so doing, to inform the C.R.O. that it would be satisfactory to have the matter placed on the agenda of the next meeting of the U.K.-Canada Continuing Committee if the United Kingdom so desired; no new limit of transferable funds to be suggested in the representations.

II. IMMIGRATION; EXTENSION OF ASSISTED AIR PASSAGE SCHEME TO B.O.A.C.

5. The Deputy Minister of Citizenship and Immigration said that the U.K. High Commissioner's Office in Ottawa had enquired whether the Canadian government would be prepared to extend to B.O.A.C. an arrangement similar to that applying to T.C.A. for the movement of immigrants by air. B.O.A.C. was known to have some unused capacity and transportation was one of the limitations on immigrant move­ment at present. It would, accordingly, be useful, if some immigrants could come by B.O.A.C. It had been explained in response to the enquiry that the arrangement for T.C.A. was largely a matter of accounting since the government was responsi­ble for any T.C.A. deficit. The arrangement applied only to unsold T.C.A. space and the amount contributed by the government for immigrant fares amounted to a deduction from the sum that would be payable to cover the T.C.A. deficit. There would be no such offset against any contribution toward passages by B.O.A.C. or other airlines. It was for consideration whether it might not be desirable to suggest to the U.K. government they inaugurate the arrangement for B.O.A.C. The position was parallel in that the U.K. government had to meet B.O.A.C. deficits. So long as only unsold space were used such an arrangement would appear to operate to the advantage of the United Kingdom since B.O.A.C. would receive at least £55 per immigrant for use of space that would otherwise be unoccupied.

(Letter, Deputy Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to the Secretary to the Cabinet with enclosure - I.C.E.T.P. Document No. 92).?

6. The Chairman said that he did not think the proposition was one that should be discussed formally with the U.K. government since it was a matter of internal financing. He had, however, raised it informally with the U.K. High Commissioner in Ottawa.

7. Mr. Plumptre suggested it might be appropriate to have the matter brought up informally at the London end.

8. The Committee, after discussion, agreed that the High Commissioner in London be informed of the representations made on behalf of B.O.A.C. for exten­sion to it of the assisted air passage scheme and of the informal discussion with the U.K. High Commissioner of the alternative proposal for inauguration of an assisted air passage plan by the U.K. government using unsold capacity on B.O.A.C.; the High Commissioner to be advised that, while it was felt that formal representations on the latter proposal would not be appropriate, there would be no objection to having it raised informally for consideration by the U.K. government.