1955-05-13

[Stage Direction]
Mr. Rene N. Jutras (Provencher) presented the first report of the standing committee on agriculture and colonization, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. T. G. W. Ashbourne (Grand Falls-White Bay-Labrador) presented the first report of the standing committee on marine and fisheries, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.

Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Finance):: Hon. members will recall that Mr. Speaker presented to the house two days ago a report of the civil service commission with respect to four members of the staff. I now beg leave to move that the report be adopted.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. R. Pearkes (Esquimalt-Saanich):: May
I direct a question to the Minister of National Defence, notice of which I have sent him. Has the minister's attention been called to an article in the Vancouver Sun, alleging that goods are being smuggled into Canada from the Far East through the army mails? Can the minister also say what exemptions from customs duties are granted to service personnel?


Hon. R. O. Campney (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to thank the hon. member for having given me notice of his question. The hon. member for
50433-236J
Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) also gave me notice of a similar question. I have seen a copy of the rather, to me at least, astonishing article to which the hon. member has referred.
In reply, I would like to say that it has been our policy to investigate immediately and thoroughly any report of alleged irregularities of whatever kind, and from whatever source, even though, as I indicated to the house in the answer which I made to a question on April 18, many of these reports are later found to be either without foundation or greatly exaggerated.
With regard to the specific matter to which my hon. friend has referred, I may say that the report of rumoured abuses in the army postal service in Vancouver came to my attention early this week. While I was not given any actual evidence of the truth of these rumours, I nevertheless immediately ordered an investigation, which is at present in progress. So far nothing has come to light to indicate that there is any truth in these rumours.
As hon. members well know, postal investigations are most effectively carried through when the parties involved are unaware of the inquiry, and I can only hope that the effectiveness of this particular inquiry will not be prejudiced by what appears to be a particularly highly coloured and as yet unsubstantiated newspaper story.
With regard to the hon. member's second question, I understand that if a soldier has served abroad less than a year he may bring back $100 worth of goods free of duty. If he has served for a year or longer there is no limit on the amount he can bring back, but it must have been purchased at least six months prior to his returning to Canada. This applies no matter where the service abroad has been, whether in the United States, the Far East or Germany. I think it is covered by items 703(b) and (c) of the tariff act.


Mr. D. S. Harkness (Calgary North):: May
I ask the minister a supplementary question. Has he any information as to the nature of the goods alleged to have been smuggled and do they include narcotics and things of that sort?


Ralph Osborne Campney: I have no detailed knowledge as to what goods are alleged to be involved.

Inquiries of the Ministry The article to which reference has been made contains the only reference to narcotics which I have seen.
ILater:]


Mr. F. G. J. Hahn (New Westminster):: should like to direct a question to the Acting Postmaster General, notice of which I have not sent him. In view of the reply made a few moments ago by the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Campney) with regard to tampering with the mails, is the Acting Postmaster General prepared to indicate that the Post Office Department will carry on an investigation?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Acting Postmaster General):: I think I will let my colleague carry on his investigation.



NATIONAL REVENUE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Finance in his capacity as house leader? Will the minister arrange for the estimates of the Department of National Revenue to be referred to the special committee on estimates or to be brought before the house at an early date so that the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann) may be able to make a full statement and answer any questions about a certain affair?


Walter Edward Harris: The business of the house will be organized in such a manner that I hope we will be able to get out of here before July 1.



SUGGESTED ACCEPTANCE OF OTHER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. A. Bryson (Humboldt-Melfort):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, and I am sorry I did not give him prior notice. In view of the serious drop in export sales of Canadian wheat, will the government consider accepting soft currencies in payment therefor from countries willing to buy Canadian wheat under that condition?


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, there is no drop from last year in the sales of Canadian wheat; as a matter of fact we are well ahead of last year. We believe that our policy of selling for dollars is the proper policy for Canada. I know of no reason why we should sacrifice
[Mr. Campney.)
wheat which is the property of the producers of western Canada for the sake of the odd few sales we might get if we accepted a different currency.



NOVA SCOTIA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. J. MacEachen (Inverness-Richmond):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys. In view of the closing of a coal mine in the town of Inverness, Cape Breton, in April, and the now imminent closure of 1-B colliery in Glace Bay, can the minister tell the house whether any steps are contemplated by the government to halt this deterioration in the coal industry of Cape Breton island?


Hon. George Prudham (Minisier of Mines and Technical Surveys):: Mr. Speaker, at the time of the dominion-provincial meeting Premier Hicks of Nova Scotia and other officials of his government met in my office on two different occasions to discuss the problems of the coal industry. At one of those meetings my colleagues, the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg) and the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters), were present. There were no conclusions reached at either of those meetings but the whole problem of the industry was discussed, more particularly the problem of 1-B colliery.
There was a subsequent meeting between officials of the dominion coal board and the Dominion Coal Company to review the market prospects for this year. Premier Hicks of Nova Scotia has called another meeting for May 20 in Halifax to which I have been invited, and I believe also that my colleagues the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Public Works have been asked to attend as well as the chairman of the dominion coal board and other officials. I do not know what the agenda of that meeting will be but I expect that the problems of the industry will be discussed.



AVAILABILITY OF REPORT OF DR. A. G. CHRISTIE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Clarence Gillis (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys if he will make available to members of the house the report of Dr. A. G. Christie to the dominion coal board which was made last September and released to the press in May.


George Prudham: I was not aware that the report had been released to the press. It was made available to the provincial governments

concerned and at their request we were withholding publication until they had had a chance to study it.


Clarence Gillis: Is it possible for a member of the house to get a copy if he requests it? It was given to the press.


George Prudham: I shall be pleased to give my hon. friend a copy.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Randolph Pearkes: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, notice of which I have sent him. Have regulations under section 4 of the War Veterans Allowance Act been issued recently whereby the payment of the allowance at 1/25 per day has been cancelled and payment for days not worked on an income basis substituted?


Hon. Hugues Lapointe (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I believe the hon. member is referring to one of the regulations passed in 1952 after the War Veterans Allowance Act was amended to bring in section 4. This regulation was based on the formula used by the unemployment insurance commission, but in the course of administration of cases coming under this regulation it was found that this formula could create overpayments under the War Veterans Allowance Act inasmuch as it could cause a veteran to be paid an allowance in excess of the permissible income in any month under section 4. When this was realized the formula was amended to meet the situation.


George Randolph Pearkes: When was the amendment made?


Hugues Lapointe: I believe it became effective April 4, 1955.



DEFENCE PRODUCTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John B. Hamilton (York West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Defence Production. Can the minister give the house any indication as to whether his department has any new plans for government orders for the A.V. Roe company which will help to maintain the employment level at that plant?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, I am unable to understand what my hon. friend
Supply-Northern Affairs means by further orders. My recollection is that we have orders with the A.V. Roe plant running into more than $300 million. Employment at the plant depends upon the management and the rapidity with which they are able to get into new production. There is no lack of orders at the A.V. Roe plant.


John Borden Hamilton: May I ask a
supplementary question. Does the minister have any knowledge of any step-up in production which will help to maintain employment?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is a very difficult question for me to answer. I think production at the A.V. Roe plant is handled efficiently by the management. This is a privately owned plant and I do not think I am in position to answer further.



PRAIRIE FARM REHABILITATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. S. Zaplitny (Dauphin):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Agriculture if he is in a position to state to what extent the prairie farm rehabilitation division is responsible for the maintenance and repairs to dikes along the Assiniboine river in Manitoba.


Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, the position has always been-ever since confederation, I think-that the federal government has been responsible through some department for the handling of streams which are navigable. The Assiniboine river has been classed as one of those streams. Until two or three years ago that was handled by the Department of Public Works. Two or three years ago it was transferred to P.F.R.A. under the Department of Agriculture. As I said the other day, the lands are largely privately owned. They are in municipalities, and our people co-operate with the local people in handling the situation which exists.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Applewhaite in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL RESOURCES 293. Departmental administration, $509,310.


The Deputy Chairman:: I might remind the committee that this heading is to be found on page 50 of the blue book, and the details begin on page 397.
3734	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs


Mr. Drew:: Mr. Chairman, the items that we are dealing with under this heading relate to the most challenging prospect that Canadians have before them today. While all of the area known as the north may not be under the administration of the minister of this department, we must always be conscious of the fact that well over two-thirds of the land mass of Canada is in an area that we may freely describe as "the north". The phrase "the north" is a variable term. For a long time North Bay has been regarded as the gateway to the north in Ontario; and yet North Bay is far south of Edmonton, is only about the same distance north as the city of Quebec, and by the standards of those who live in the prairie provinces could hardly be regarded as a northern city by any accurate description. While it may not be easy to define the actual area that we would describe as the north, I believe that we may generally regard it as the area above the substantially settled communities across Canada. The north stretches from Labrador across to the Yukon and embraces all that great territory up to the Arctic ocean.
There has been evidence that the minister has shown considerable interest in the activities of his department, but certainly I was not only disturbed, but amazed to hear the attitude of the minister summed up in the words that there must be jobs in the north before the people will go there. It is that statement, and the fact that the minister apparently continues to accept that as a definition of his opinion, that impel me to make these remarks which I now propose to make while we are in committee, in regard to the affairs of this department.
The north in Canada now represents the great challenging area of development. It seems to me that the approach to the development of the north must be the same kind of approach as that which inspired our forefathers to extend railway lines across Canada, and build canals at a time when there was apparently no shipping to justify that immense expenditure for those days. Think of the imagination and the faith in the future that was represented by those who constructed the Canadian Pacific Railway. Think of the courage and the willingness to pledge the credit of Canada for the future of Canada that was represented by the decision of the government of Sir John Macdonald in 1881 to make the necessary arrangements with the company which was to build that great line across this country. Just let us recall-and particularly let our youth today recall-the vision of the men and women of those days.
The western territories were largely populated by roaming Indian tribes and by great
[The Deputy Chairman.]

herds of buffalo. As the Canadian Pacific lines were driven west, the builders were confronted with attacks by Indian tribes, and they were also, I might say, confronted by very severe attacks from some of the people who did not like to see their land used for that purpose, people who expressed their feelings with some vigour. But this line was driven across Canada, not because there were jobs there but because it was felt that with the resources across that great territory this railway development would create the possibility of jobs. Then it was left up to the initiative, courage and vigour of men and women with adventurous spirit to go out and make the jobs in the area, that vast area where transportation had been made available in that way.
Let us come to a later period, the thirties, when the expansion of northwestern Canada was taking place. Surely one of the most romantic chapters of Canadian history is the opening of the mineral and fur-bearing areas of northwestern Canada by air transport. It happens that I had the privilege, first, of visiting many of those far northern areas as a youngster. But later, some 20 years ago, I flew through most of that great territory from the Atlantic to the Pacific in those single-engined machines which were at that time carrying the largest freight load carried by any country in the world-surely something of which Canadians have reason to be proud today. It stirs the blood when you look back at those bush pilots who were carrying in those comparatively light Fairchilds, Fokkers and Junkers this immense load, greater in total than the total air freight load of the United States or of any other country in the world. That opened up the mining areas of Slave lake and Great Bear lake. It opened up the territories along the Mackenzie river, over to the Yukon, across to Hudson bay, and on, eastward, right over through the whole of northern Quebec and Labrador. What a challenging picture to the youth of today! Those men did not have jobs waiting for them there; they made the jobs. They reached out to the new territories and they created the possibilities of jobs with the transportation they themselves were supplying. It seems to me that this is the spirit in which we must approach this immense opportunity, this almost unlimited opportunity, which has opened out before us across this whole northland of ours. We are not speaking about some vague and uncertain thing. Across that whole area are resources such as are hardly equalled either elsewhere in Canada or elsewhere in the world. Sometimes I find that people who actually were not born and brought up here seem to see some of these things more clearly than we ourselves do.

I recall that it is more than 25 years ago- yes, nearly 30 years ago-when in a speech in Toronto the Right Hon. L. M. S. Amery made a statement which at that time seemed to me to be almost beyond the realm of reality, namely that in the great Pre-Cambrian shield and the northland generally of Canada there was mineral wealth yet to be discovered beyond anything discovered in any other country in the world today.
The time came when I saw some of that reality. I remember flying into the uranium discovery at Great Bear lake in the early stages, just after it had been opened up. That discovery had much to do with the ending of the Japanese war and, perhaps some of us might say, with all the terrible consequences that have flowed from the discovery made possible by the use of Canadian uranium at that time. But also in that area, as is known by everyone who has been there, there are fantastic deposits of silver, copper and other metals waiting to be developed. Yes, and throughout the whole north, there is iron in quantities equalled nowhere else in the world today. There is oil as well and gas in that far northland, as distinguished from the gas and oil of the southern areas. There is coal and above all there is waterpower. Every one of the great sources of industrial energy is there in that vast northland starting with the huge falls on the Hamilton river on the east coast of Labrador, right across to the mighty waterways of the Yukon and of the Northwest Territories. The possibilities for development are simply staggering. One of the rather remarkable affinities of nature is the fact that almost invariably the minerals are found in proximity to waterpower which can be turned into electric energy. There is lead and there is zinc as well in those areas.
To show that this is by no manner of means some vague and uncertain thing, may I say that the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company have 1,200 claims in the Pine Point area and are actually going ahead with underground work as soon as it is practical. Throughout the whole of that broad northland the challenge is there to all Canadians and to the young people from other parts of the world as well as to the people not so young but who are young in spirit. I know my hon. friend will share that view because he is indeed young in spirit himself.
One could go on to deal with these great opportunities. I have not mentioned nickel or some of the other metals that are found in such great quantities there. On the Mackenzie river, near Fort Good Hope there is a vast power potential. On the south Nahanni river there is Virginia falls, a waterfall twice as large as Niagara. On the Lockhart river
Supply-Northern Affairs at the east end of Great Slave lake there are enormous power resources. At Dead Man's rapids on the Slave river near Fort Smith there is a drop of 110 feet in ten miles, with a huge power potential. Power is also being developed in great quantities at Yellowknife for the operation of the mines there.
This is not without its accompanying resources as well because there are agricultural resources in those areas. Actually, the Mackenzie river plain is an extension of the prairie land of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Also there is wood in marketable quantities throughout that area. Along the Slave river, the Mackenzie river and the Liard river areas there are wonderful possibilities for agriculture. Things grow there rapidly in the long days of sunlight. Those who have been through that area also recognize the fact that, apart from the magnificent growth of food and vegetables, nowhere else in Canada are there flowers of such great brilliance and increasing in brilliance right up to the Arctic, from Aklavik right across to Coppermine, which is to the northeast, and to Hudson bay.
All this calls for unlimited optimism. All this calls for basing our plans upon the practical foundation of demonstrated hope that these things can become a reality in the years ahead. If we had waited until we saw the jobs or, shall I say, if our forefathers had waited until the jobs were there, the prairies would not have developed nor would the areas farther north to which branch lines from the Canadian Pacific railway have been extended. In Ontario, if the Ontario Northland Railway in the earlier part of this century had not been built up to James bay through an area which was still wild and where there was no real development at all at that time, the rich part of northern Ontario perhaps would still be in a primitive state today. But transportation was provided which made it possible for men and women of spirit and initiative to go there and to make jobs.
It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that this is not something to be left to reckless or haphazard development. We all know that mineral resources are wasting resources. We know that if there is inferior or inadequate transportation, only the richest ores will be highgraded and that promising mines will be left in a condition that may hardly make it economic for years to come to resume development. It is therefore important that under a free economy-and certainly under no shackles of socialism-we provide sensible plans, recognizing these vast potentialities, which will integrate the development with

Supply-Northern Affairs the resources and will provide the transportation into the areas where, by one means or another, these vast power potentials are going to be developed.
Without embarking on any acrimonious reference to an earlier discussion about what was known as the public investment program may I suggest that, to the extent that the government still feels that the credit of Canada should be pledged to a national development program, there is no place where this can better be done than throughout that northland where millions of horsepower of electric energy are waiting to be harnessed for the advantage of new generations if we place the credit of Canada behind that development.
I have heard it said that we must not be reckless in expenditures. As a Conservative, I trust that we shall be conservative in our approach to the handling of our finances in this respect. But, Mr. Chairman, there is a difference between spending money on capital development and spending money, on which there is no return, on some passing phase of our activities. This is capital development of the most valuable kind from which the returns will be not tenfold but one hundredfold in the years ahead in the communities that will grow there in that great northern area. That is a place in which to try out plans for development.
Then, Mr. Chairman, there is another aspect to this matter that I think we have perhaps overlooked, namely national defence. We have two-thirds of the land mass of our country with a sparse and limited population. It is of vital importance to the defence of Canada that communities be established near these power resources under an integrated plan right through the whole of northern Canada. Let no young person shudder with the thought of cold and worry about the prospect of going into the northland. About ten days ago a number of members of the house visited the military establishment at Churchill. Every one of them came back enthusiastic about the conditions under which the people were living at Churchill. I am confident that the minister, in giving the population of the northern areas, has not included the military establishments.


Mr. Lesage:: Churchill is below the 60th parallel. It is in Manitoba.


George Alexander Drew: I realize that, and I indicated that I realized that. Quite apart from the arbitrary definition, I am talking about the great northland and not only the Northwest Territories.


Jean Lesage: I am not quarrelling with you about it.


George Alexander Drew: I realize that the area under the immediate administration of the department and the Northwest Territories council, whose jurisdiction has been greatly expanded within the period that the minister has been the head of the department, starts at the 60th parallel. In the same way that North Bay is not really north, as I pointed out, there is also a lot of land south of the 60th parallel that most of us would regard as very far north indeed, and most of us definitely regard Churchill, halfway up the coast of Hudson bay, as very far north by ordinary standards. That was what I meant when I said that the word "north" is a broad, embracing term which includes within it the defined areas beginning at the 60th parallel. What I really wanted to point out with regard to Churchill was that in an area that is cold by any standards and in fact, I understand, is inclined to be a little colder than even the Arctic coast, those who live there find it healthy and invigorating, and I have had reports from young men there who believe they are in the very best military establishment in the whole of Canada. It is always a good thing for people, wherever they are, to believe they are in the best military establishment.
I mention that because it is only indicative of what is happening. Right across the whole northern part of Canada, without going into details that should not be placed on the record, there are air bases and radar bases which today embrace a substantial population. There is already a population there living perhaps not with all the amenities of the deep south of Canada but nevertheless living a vigorous, healthy and, to them, an invigorating and rewarding life. I mention that because if military bases can be agreeable places to live in, then civilian bases organized on a similar plan, such as would surround great hydroelectric developments producing 500,000, 1 million horsepower, and so on, would be similarly attractive places for people to live. After all, there were many people who found the Yukon and Dawson City a very pleasant place in the early days and not entirely as primitive as described by Robert W. Service in his wonderful poems. There are many members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and of other Canadian services who have found service life pleasant throughout the northland. But it would be very wise for us to make sure that with the development of these natural resources we have communities spotted across the north, because the real threat to Canada might come from parachute troops dropped over that northern area. Airports

should be developed all across the area farther south of the northern air and radar bases where appropriate steps could be taken to deal with a situation of that kind.
This is a reality if the danger of war is a reality at all. If we are spending over $2 billion with the recognition of the real danger of the possibility of war, then we must recognize the existence of the possibility of war and we must remember that the closest nation to Canada with the exception of the United States is Russia. We must remember that Russia is separated from the North American continent only by the Bering strait, 55 miles wide, and that northeastern China along the Yalu river is not many hours flying time from northern Canada in modern transport machines. While all of us hope and pray that war may not come, we cannot disregard the promise made yesterday by Chou En-lai that in the event of war China would stand side by side with Russia. We therefore see on the other side of the Pacific over 700 million people from whom units can be drawn that might be moved by air into that area.
This is a part of the problem of national defence. I mention it because it was said: You are not going to spend money on a large scale in the north. Money spent there should be regarded first of all as long-term self-liquidating returnable capital and, second, it should be regarded in the light of its value to national defence. I do not intend to enlarge upon these remarks beyond repeating my conviction as one who has seen that area grow from the most primitive stage, when on the north coast there were only Eskimos, the R.C.M.P. and the wireless stations, to the point where it has become integrated fairly well into our society through air development.
Let us look ahead. I would not suggest railway facilities, but there are roads. There is also the fantastic development in air transport. Last September at Farnborough I saw one of the new Blackburn transports take on board and carry away a huge truck. I saw two complete 25-pounder units with ammunition wagons go into one of these Blackburn transports, and saw them flown away. I mention that because we have reached the point now where nearly anything that can be moved by rail can be moved by the huge air transports now being produced. This development has revolutionized the whole prospects of the north. We should have no limit to our optimism and our hopes for that area. I trust that the plans of the government will be consonant with the spirit of the people of Canada and that when we say "go north, young man,
Supply-Northern Affairs go north" we will not tell him there is going to be a comfortable job ready and waiting for him but that we will take steps that will assure that his vigour, initiative and courage can be rewarded by opportunity.


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank the Leader of the Opposition. He has made the kind of speech I should like to make and have made on occasion about the development of the north, a challenge and necessity in our day. The Leader of the Opposition has made a comparison that has been made in the past, and which I have used, between the west of 50 years and more ago and the north today. It is true that when the Canadian Pacific Railway was built through the west it meant for the people of that day the meeting of a great challenge. It was constructed at a time when there was a population of about 4 million in Canada and the national income was very low compared with what it is today. Our forefathers, even our fathers, certainly took risks at the time, met the challenge, and the west was opened because transportation was furnished.
I said yesterday that the key to the economic development and opening up of the north is cheaper transportation. That is what brought about the development of the west. But there is a difference between the opening up of the west and the opening up of the north in this sense, that our forefathers, our grandfathers, could go to the west with this new means of transportation, open up the country and settle on farms with no more than their bare hands. This is not the kind of development that we can expect north of the 60th parallel. It will be mainly mineral development. Mineral development requires capital investment in huge quantities. It requires also, and I repeat it, cheaper transportation.
As I said yesterday, we should first create an economic climate that will be attractive to capital. In order to help do that the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys is conducting intensive geological surveys. We are studying now the possibility of improving transportation facilities in the north and of making it cheaper. We believe that we have to provide cheaper transportation, as was done in the west, in order that the north may be developed and populated. The populating of the north is not a primary aim in itself; it is, in point of time, secondary. Really, it comes after the necessary provision for the development of the immense natural resources to which the Leader of the Opposition so eloquently referred.
Well, making provision for that development is what we are doing, and I pray to

Supply-Northern Affairs God that this generation will have the same spirit of adventure, the same pioneering spirit that our fathers and forefathers had. With that spirit we can develop these northern parts that have to be developed. The day is near when the resources of northern Canada will be badly needed in the world, especially the mineral resources. But so far as transportation is concerned, although I have great confidence in aviation I cannot foresee the day-although it may come sooner than I think-when the huge air transports to which the Leader of the Opposition was referring could be used economically for the transportation of mineral concentrates from the north to the smelters. Of course, one could say that we should build smelters up there; that we have the power. It is true that we have the power but these are very costly operations.
For instance, in the case of the Pine Point discoveries on the south shore of Great Slave lake, there lies there what we believe to be the greatest known ore body of lead and zinc. We hope that the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company will soon see fit to have definite plans for the development and exploitation of this vast ore body. We hope that it will be possible to work out with them some kind of arrangement under which transportation facilities will be available to take out the ore. I have said, both outside the house and in the committee, that we hope it will be possible in days not too far off to have what is still the cheapest kind of transportation for distances of 300 or 400 miles or more, and that is a railway line from Grimshaw to Pine Point. We have been discussing, and still are discussing, the economic implications of such a project.
We look at the north, as the hon. Leader of the Opposition has said, and I thank him for his intervention, as something that has to be developed, not in a haphazard way but with plans. The plans must be directed not so much towards putting people there for the sake of putting people there, but towards exploiting the resources. We should first have capital which will go there because the economic climate will have been created by cheaper transportation. Then, these natural resources will be developed and manpower will go there because the capital investment which is necessary will have been made. Then, the population will go there, and I am sure that the population will be happy because in Whitehorse, Yellowknife and even far north in Aklavik I have met and talked to people who were very happy with their lot in life. The north presents a great challenge to all Canadians, and I hope that all hon.

members in this house will help the government, will help me and the officials of my department, to meet that challenge in the national interests.
(Translation):


Mr. Dufresne:: Mr. Chairman, we have just heard two interesting speeches, to which I, for one, have listened most attentively. I wish to congratulate my leader, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew), as well as the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources (Mr. Lesage) on their eloquent pleas on behalf of northern Canada.
Mr. Chairman, the Quebec battlefields commission, about which I would like to offer a few remarks, comes under the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.
Last year, while we were discussing these estimates, the minister asked the house to increase from $100,000 to $125,000 the annual amount which the commission uses in its operations. The house unanimously agreed to this request from the minister.
This year, according to the estimates, the same amount seems to be required. A year ago I appealed to the minister to see to it, if it were at all possible, that this $25,000 increase be used to increase the salaries of the employees of this commission, who, as far as I can see, do not receive what they possibly could earn elsewhere, in trade or industry. The minister told me he would pay particular attention to this request. Now, I would not like to be accused of narrowmindedness, and I do wish to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, but following that, I received other requests. It was pointed out to me among other things that one employee in particular, who had been working for the commission for 16 years, was only being paid 99 cents an hour, whereas others doing the same work were earning considerably more. I took up the matter with the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. It was he who spoke for me, and indirectly, for the employee in question. I am happy to tell the house that in this one case which I took up with the minister, we received full and complete satisfaction. I do want to thank the minister for doing what he had resolved to do, and I hope that other such increases may be granted during the 1955-56 fiscal year.
I am sure the minister will agree with me when I say that certain employees, whether employed on a temporary basis, for the summer season only, or on a permanent basis, are not getting salaries consistent with the

work they perform. Here again I trust that the minister's sense of fair play will induce him to get for these employees the salary they deserve.
I understand, Mr. Chairman, that the Quebec national battlefields are to undergo a certain restoration again this year. These battlefields are an historical site unequalled,
I think, in North America, if not in the world. We have there a page of history which our people like to relive now and then and which other people want to see.
The Quebec national battlefields represent also a substantial source of revenue for our city. As a matter of fact, these battlefields alone constitute an industry, a tourist industry, if you like, but which is bringing us visitors from everywhere. In Quebec City, we often say, referring to tourist advertising, that they come to our city in order to see what is not to be seen anywhere else. This is very true. City people are not interested in visiting big cities. They are looking for something new, and that is what we have to offer; the Quebec national battlefields are most interesting for those who are visiting the city of Quebec.
All tourists from overseas land in Wolfe's cove-a magnificent harbour built by a Conservative government at the request of one of my distinguished predecessors, the Hon. Maurice Dupre-and head straight for the battlefields.
The hon. minister was so kind as to tell me the other day that repair work will be done on Gilmour Hill road, which leads to the battlefields, and has regrettably suffered during our hard winter.
I trust, Mr. Chairman, that the funds we are going to vote for this commission will be reasonably spent and, again, I hope that the hon. Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources will speak to the members of the commission on behalf of the workers who are paid low salaries and obtain for them decent wages, which will enable them to face their family obligations.
Mr. Chairman, a moment ago, the Leader of the Opposition, the head of the party to which I belong, made a most interesting statement about our northern regions and more particularly about the region where one of the most important of our military camps is established, i.e., Fort Churchill. I had the privilege recently of visiting that northern establishment as well as several settlements
Supply-Northern Affairs in Manitoba. I wish to take advantage of this opportunity to thank the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Campney) for the chance he gave many members of the house to visit that part of our Canadian north. I would be remiss if I did not also thank the member for Churchill (Mr. Weaver) who at all times did all he could to make that trip a memorable one.
Apart from the military, we met, in The Pas area, various people engaged in public life. The mayor of The Pas, the president of the board of trade, people belonging to various social organizations asked us to support their representative in the House of Commons in his requests to the government that the northern regions be given particular consideration since they hold untold riches which constitute a source of immense wealth for the entire country. We saw for ourselves the mineral resources of the area, which constitute a major asset in the development of the whole country.
I consider it a duty to acquaint the minister with the result of my observations. It would be wise to pave the way for future generations through the development of the untold riches Providence has given us.
Mr. Chairman, those were the remarks I wished to make and I hope the minister will consider them favourably. I am sure-and I stress this point-that he will champion the rights of the present employees of the national battlefields commission in order to obtain for them a noticeable increase in pay so as to enable them to face their family obligations and remain excellent and honest servants of the entire country.


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, I am very grateful to the hon. member for Quebec West (Mr. Dufresne) and he can be assured that I shall call the attention of the chairman and the other members of the national battlefields commission to his remarks pertaining to the wages paid to their employees.
I am glad that he had a wonderful trip to northern Manitoba, but I must point out to him that the development of mineral resources in northern Manitoba obviously comes under the jurisdiction of the provincial authorities of Manitoba. The Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources has no jurisdiction whatever in the matter, since its authority does not go beyond the natural resources of the Yukon and the Northwest Territories. Now, as I

Supply-Northern Affairs pointed out to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) a few moments ago-


Mr. Fulton:: What about British Columbia-


Jean Lesage: 
J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: 
Jean Lesage: We have a financial agreement with the province of Manitoba. Moreover, there are gold mines that are being subsidized under the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act, which is administered by the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys.
(Text) :


Mr. Herridge:: Mr. Chairman, the members of this group have always been particularly interested in the conservation and development of our natural resources and on that account we are very interested in the estimates of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. I have read with great care the minutes of the proceedings of the committee on estimates for the period when it was dealing with the minister's department, and I found there a lot of valuable information. I do not intend to take up the time of the committee in asking questions which were answered as a result of the discussions in the committee.
The visit which the minister made to British Columbia was greatly appreciated by the persons he met. It indicated an interest on the part of the minister and a desire to see things at first hand and discuss them with his officials on the spot. I think that is to be commended. I have been asked by a number of organizations in Kootenay West to extend an invitation to the minister to visit our district and endeavour to address at least a few meetings. There are many problems in my constituency about which the people are greatly interested. I hope he will find time during the coming recess of parliament to visit the constituency and see the many things we have to show and listen to what my constituents will have to tell him. I am sure that as a result of contact with my constituents he will have even a greater understanding of the problems they face and the difficulties they encounter.


In my opinion the minister through his department holds the key to the promotion and conservation and development of our natural resources. He is in a strategic position in my opinion to give a lead by this understanding of these problems and the necessity for the proper development of our resources, finally resulting in a national policy of soil, water and forest conservation.
The minister's activities to date have clearly indicated his interest in the conservation of our natural resources and their proper development, particularly the water resources of the Columbia. I have had a number of letters from constituents who had noted with interest the minister's attention to that problem which is so important to many people in Kootenay West.
Under this first item I want to make a few suggestions to the minister which I believe *come within the ambit of administration. I do not intend to speak at length. In my opinion a satisfactory development of a conservation policy in this country demands public understanding, public appreciation, public interest and public support. I think in this field of government activity knowledge on the part of the public is essential. It has come to my attention from time to time that many Canadians are unaware of the work being done by the various branches of the minister's department and the relationship of that work to the development of our natural resources and their conservation.
I suppose it would be correct to say that the national parks branch of the minister's department is the best known. A great number of Canadians know about our national parks, but even that best known branch is not known to many Canadians.
The engineering and water resources branch is doing a work of immense value but few Canadians realize the value of this work and the extent of the investigations being carried on on the Columbia and other river systems and in other places in Canada. Large-scale investigations have been going on in my constituency for some ten years but still there are many people who are uninformed as to this work and its value and place in the final development of the water resources of our area.
I have had this matter in mind for some time because I see the great need for doing something along the lines that I am about to suggest. In my opinion there is a necessity, particularly in the minister's department, for

greater public relations activity so that the public may be fully informed of the work of the department and its various branches. I suggest that this could be done by means of frequent press releases to the newspapers and national magazines and through other publicity media.
It could be done also by the minister and his senior officials making occasional addresses. I would not suggest that the Minister of Finance would get a hearty welcome if he were to go around addressing farmers on taxation, as that is not a popular subject. But this is one case where I think there is an opportunity for the minister to address public bodies, because the work of this department is quite popular and I am sure people would appreciate hearing from the minister and his officials.
The northern affairs branch has greatly increased its activities in recent years. I listened with interest to the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition. There is a growing interest in the development of the northern parts of Canada. I do not think it is quite fair to suggest that there has been little done in the development of the north. I have been perusing the estimates for the last five or six years and, if my calculations are correct, since the hon. member for the Yukon came to this house-I see him in his seat- expenditures in the Yukon have increased about fifteenfold.


Mr. Simmons:: I would remind the hon.
member that the member for the Yukon looks after his constituents and takes good care of them.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am pleased to hear the
hon. member take some credit for the great increase in expenditures in the Yukon. Other hon. members take great care of their constituents, but quite often not with such satisfactory financial results. But I do mention the fact that there has been a large increase in expenditures in the Yukon which I think indicates an increasing interest on the part of the government and the minister's department in the development of that and other northern areas.
Here again there is a great lack of understanding and knowledge with respect to northern affairs by the great majority of Canadians. I suggest that this is another opportunity for the public relations branch of the minister's department to do something to inform Canadians to a greater extent about this important part of his administration.
I have been a lumberjack for a good many years. I made my living from a combination of farming and logging. Therefore I am particularly interested in the work of the
Supply-Northern Affairs forestry branch of the minister's department. The behind-the-scenes work of the men in the forestry branch of the minister's department goes almost unrecognized by the majority of Canadians, and I have always rather resented that. It is recognized by those who are particularly concerned with what they are doing or particularly wish to follow it; that is, some of the people in the universities, some of those in the larger lumber companies, and a few other people who are particularly interested in the development of conservation policies and matters of that sort. But the work of that branch goes largely unrecognized by the majority of Canadians. The research work conducted by the forest products laboratories in Vancouver and Ottawa and the other activities of the branch are almost unknown to the Canadian people generally.
I suggest again, Mr. Chairman, that this excellent scientific work and investigation and its results should be publicized to a greater extent through the press, through national magazines and through any other media that the minister saw fit. I suggest that, if we are going to obtain an understanding of the development of our natural resources and an appreciation of what they mean to Canada at the present time and in the days to come, we have to disseminate more information. We have to get the cooperation of a much wider group of Canadians. I suggest that the minister would be well advised to keep agricultural organizations, labour organizations, women's institutes and women's national organizations informed, and also to keep all the universities informed and find some means of bringing this information to the attention of the schools across Canada. I have great faith in getting this sort of concrete, definite information regarding government policies and actions with respect to natural resources brought to the attention of the children. I believe that the question of the conservation and development of natural resources should be brought to their attention beginning just after the primary grades in the public schools of this country.
An informed public opinion will develop increasing support for larger expenditures on policies designed to conserve our natural resources. Therefore I suggest that the minister will be well advised to explore all suitable avenues through which he can properly inform the public of the important work of his department and what that work means to this country. There is no real protection for our natural resources except that protection which is based on the strength of an informed

Supply-Northern Affairs public opinion and an aroused public conscience. In that connection, I should like to bring to the minister's attention and to the attention of members of this house a most interesting article which I recently read in the May 14 issue of Saturday Night. This article was written by Mr. Roderick Haig-Brown, who has been a great advocate of conservation policies in British Columbia for many years. The minister may know this gentleman. He has been a great defender of our provincial parks, our forest resources and our natural resources against the continuing intrusion of industrialism into our province. This article is entitled "The Vanishing Park-lands and Public Conscience". I am going to read only the concluding paragraph of the article, because I thought he put in excellent language and in brief form a sentiment that should be supported by all members in this house. This is what Mr. Roderick Haig-Brown has to say in concluding this article:
But there is, ultimately, no real protection for parks except in the strength of public feeling. So long as the public turns and bows three times in the direction of the nearest stock exchange at every mention of "progress" or "industrial development", provincial legislatures can be depended upon to make mad decisions about parks,-
I should like to bring to the attention of the house, and I am very happy to say this, that the public of Kootenay West did not bow three times in front of the stock exchange at the mention of a prospective industrial development. Then he goes on to say:
-and even the federal government will bear watching. There will be hope of a comprehensive and secure parks system in Canada the first time a labour union votes to down tools because a project threatens a park, or the first time an aroused citizenry mans a picket line in defence of a park. Sooner or later both these things will happen. But in the meantime the parks are disappearing.
He is referring to our provincial parks in British Columbia. Those remarks can apply equally well to the conservation of our natural resources in general. Therefore, because of my belief that knowledge is essential for widespread public support in defence of our natural resources, I bring these suggestions to the minister and trust he will find some ways and means of informing to a much greater extent the public of this country and the school children of this country of the value of the work of his department as a part of a national conservation policy in Canada.


Mr. Macdonnell:: Mr. Chairman, if I had asked the minister whether he really wanted me to speak again, I doubt whether he would have said yes, but I will comfort him as far as I can by saying that I shall be very brief.
I should like to add a word to what my leader said about the development of nearly
[Mr. Herridge.l
80 years ago. I should like to say that I believe that development was easier then because life was different. People were much more self-reliant then than they are now; they had to look after themselves because they knew that nobody else would look after them. I think that the atmosphere was different then. I like often to recall-and my leader this afternoon has reminded us of it-the days of the building of the C.P.R., because it was, after all, a business epic; it was a business romance. I suggest that anyone who has not read it should look up a narrative poem by Professor Pratt, I believe, of Victoria University, called "Toward the Last Spike". There he will find courage of the highest type in two quarters. First of all among the builders of the road. I like to think of Sir William Van Horne, an office man who could walk across a chasm on a plank where the workmen would only go on their hands and knees. That is the kind of man he was. I like to think also of this house when, in answer to many doubting hearts, Sir Charles Tupper, who was being jeered at-those were the days when it was said the railroad would never pay for the axle grease-made the heroic answer, "I can bear the jeers of hon. gentlemen opposite; I await the plaudits of posterity". He awaited them and he got them.
I should like to make a slight reference to one aspect of this matter. I believe we have this on a better basis this afternoon than last night. I think that we are again realizing and believing that in this country there are plenty of men of courage and initiative, and it is in that respect that I wish to raise a question with the minister. I quite realize that the minister has other people to whom he has to pay some deference, such as a hardhearted Minister of Finance and so on. It is not a very usual role for me to be advocating the spending of money, but I would say that there is some danger, since the minister, not because of his own temperament, I am sure, but because of an atmosphere that has been created, is not doing exactly what he himself might like. I am going to read a paragraph in which I think the word "possible" or "possibility" is terribly overstressed. I am going to suggest to the minister that the men of those days, as my leader said earlier, did not wait for things to become possible; they made them possible. It is with that in mind that I am going to read to the minister a paragraph from page 443 of the proceedings of the special committee on estimates. I know he will heartily agree with what I am saying whether he feels that this is an opportune moment to admit it or not.


Jean Lesage: Is that page 543?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: No, page 443. I am not reading from the report; I am reading from the evidence:


Mr. Thatcher:: But you could have an over-all policy.


Hon.   Mr. Lesage@: We have an over-all policy. I believe I have mentioned it, but you have to be sure before you spend thousands and hundreds of thousands of dollars to build roads to one given spot that there is going to be some mining production there.
Nobody can complain about that. It is the whole atmosphere of the thing that rather gets me down. I read on:
. . . for instance, we are presently studying, we have surveyed last year at a cost of about $50,000 the possibility of building a road between Carmacks on the Yukon river and Ross River Crossing-
And so on. He continues:
We have surveyed the possibility of opening up a road there because there have been some surveys, geological surveys, and some prospecting that has shown that there are possibilities of development.
We are going to get from the owners of the companies who are prospecting there definite word about the possibilities of the area, and also from the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys in about a year or so. then we will come to a decision on the economic opportunity of building this road.
All I want to say, Mr. Chairman, is that the atmosphere of that is not right. That is not the atmosphere in which the Canadian Pacific Railway was built. That is not the atmosphere in which this country was developed. I will just say to the minister that if he could make a raid on some of the other departments, I could offer him some useful suggestions as to where he could make those raids. For instance, I would suggest that those large amounts which are spent in publicity could be much better spent in turning some of these possibilities into actualities. I told the minister that I would be brief, but I still feel that the atmosphere that was referred to in the speech of my leader in which he sought to recapture the atmosphere of the pioneer days of this country is what we need again. I do not doubt for a minute that the minister has it himself. I think all he has to do is to make it possible.


Frederick George Hahn: I do not desire to go any further into the problems of the north but rather to go back to the banana belt of Canada, namely the southern part of British Columbia. Yesterday I asked the minister about the possibility of making a national park in the Point Roberts area, in the location of the monument in that area, more particularly in view of the fact that the United States government is apparently going to put a national park on their side of the monument. I want to be very brief. I only want some assurance that he and the departmental representatives will examine into what the Americans are
Supply-Northern Affairs doing with respect to determining whether or not a park will be made; that is, that the possibilities of building a park will be looked into. We in that area feel that we should just like to have that assurance. Possibly the minister could give it at this time.


Jean Lesage: I will look into the matter with the greatest pleasure and I will write to the hon. member.


Frederick George Hahn: Thank you.


James Aubrey Simmons: While we are on this item, I should like to say that I was interested last evening in the remarks made by my friend the hon. member for York West who has visited both the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory. He said that before one can see the development of our northwest on the scale to which it is destined, it will be necessary for all to see those far-flung areas. I agree with him. He also said that only in that way can we realize the great potential that lies before us in this country's development. I most certainly agree with him that the true development of the north can take place only with a sincere and real attempt to provide adequate transportation and communications for those areas and that it is not possible to provide expanding transportation services on the basis of a policy which provides some type of monopoly. The government should most certainly follow, as quickly as possible, a policy of free enterprise in connection with our northern transportation problems.
A good illustration of this is the intolerable position in which the Northern Transportation Company, a crown corporation, is placing private water carrier companies who are their competitors along the Mackenzie river. The Northern Transportation Company have now reduced their rates into the Northwest Territories, something which should have been done many years ago. The reason given for this reduction, I understand, was the increased tonnage of freight and the increased efficiency of handling. On breaking down these rate reductions, I find that the only points that have been reduced are those at which the Northern Transportation Company is in competition-


Jean Lesage: May I be pardoned for interrupting but I must point out that the Northern Transportation Company is a crown corporation which reports to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. It seems to me that I should not be starting at this point on a detailed examination of the rates from one point to another or any such thing. I have no jurisdiction over the Northern Transportation Company.

Supply-Northern Affairs


James Aubrey Simmons: This is something that has a great deal to do with the cost of living in the territories, Mr. Minister, and I am only going to take a minute or two on it. As I said, on breaking down these rate reductions-


Jean Lesage: They do not operate in the Yukon.


James Aubrey Simmons: They operate on the Mackenzie river. I find that the only points at which they have reduced the rates are those at which the Northern Transportation Company is in competition with the Yellowknife Transportation Company and the Hudson's Bay Company. At no other points are the rates reduced.


Jean Lesage: Oh, no. I just must come in again because this is not correct, Mr. Chairman.


James Aubrey Simmons: I find that the rate reduction as put in effect starts at Fort Providence and goes down the Mackenzie river-


Jean Lesage: Starts where?


James Aubrey Simmons: Starts at Fort Providence.


Jean Lesage: No. It does not start there. It applies to lake Athabasca.


James Aubrey Simmons: That is where it starts, according to the figures I have here. The reductions in rates that have been put into effect by the Northern Transportation Company are not for the benefit of the general public of the Northwest Territories but purely for the purpose of trying to cripple competitive carriers.


Jean Lesage: I just cannot allow that statement to go unchallenged. Of course the reductions that have been agreed to by the Northern Transportation Company lately are for the advantage of the people of the Northwest Territories. They were granted after we had asked the Northern Transportation Company and also their competitors to see whether they could not reduce their rates. The reductions by Northern Transportation Company have been granted on a much larger scale than that mentioned by the hon. member.


James Aubrey Simmons: I do not think it is much larger, Mr. Chairman. I have the reductions in rates right here. If any hon. member would like to see them, he is certainly at liberty to do so.


Jean Lesage: I am sure that the hon. member will see from his list-if the list is correct- that these reductions apply to lake Athabasca.


James Aubrey Simmons: They apply from Waterways to Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Fort Wrigley, Fort Norman, Norman Wells, Fort

Good Hope, Arctic Red River, Fort McPherson, Aklavik, Reindeer station, Tuktoyaktuk, Yellowknife, Bushell and Gunnar Dock.


Jean Lesage: Where is Bushell? Where is Gunnar Dock? They are on lake Athabasca.


James Aubrey Simmons: They are on lake Athabasca.


Jean Lesage: Yes.


James Aubrey Simmons: The last two are on lake Athabasca.


Jean Lesage: Yellowknife Transportation
Company is not a competitor of Northern Transportation Company on lake Athabasca; not that I know of.


James Aubrey Simmons: No; but they are at other points.


Jean Lesage: Oh, yes.


Mr. Hardie:: As a member of the estimates committee I had the opportunity, as did other members, to discuss the estimates of this department in detail and anything that I have to say would be repeating what I have said on other occasions and what others have said on other occasions. As I have said before, I feel that the development of the north is primarily dependent on transportation, whether it be by water, land or air. I think the minister told the committee that the department had studied the problem of transportation particularly with regard to the construction of a railroad from Grim-shaw, Alberta, to Pine Point. But as I understood him today, the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company, which controls the large lead-zinc deposit at Pine Point, has not submitted definite plans with respect to how or when they intend to develop this property. Is that not true?


Jean Lesage: Is that a question?


Mervyn Arthur Hardie: Yes.


Jean Lesage: Yes, that is true. I have not had any communication lately from the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company about their plans for the development of the ore body at Pine Point.


Mervyn Arthur Hardie: I am confident when the company does announce its intention of going ahead with the development at Pine Point the government will have the unanimous support of members on both sides of the house when it asks for an expenditure to build a railroad from Grimshaw to Pine Point. Anything I could say now about the vast potential of the north I have already said time and again. However, I should like to concur in the tribute paid yesterday by the hon. member for Calgary North to the officials of the northern affairs branch who appeared before the committee. I should also like

to add an additional tribute to all members of the estimates committee because in my opinion, and I think the hon. member for the Yukon will agree with me, it is very gratifying to know that members of all parties in the house are becoming conscious of the great potential of the north and favour greater government expenditures for the development of that area. It must also be gratifying to the minister to know that he has the support of all sections of the house. I feel he will now receive a very sympathetic hearing from his colleagues on the treasury benches when, I hope, he presents to them greatly increased expenditures for the years to come.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Just before the first item carries, may I say that there has been quite a bit of talk about transportation in the north and therefore I think this is perhaps the best time for me to ask the minister one or two questions. I noted he said yesterday that water rates and air rates to the north had been reduced by 20 per cent in both cases, I understand.


Jean Lesage: It varies.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I thought the minister said 20 per cent, but I now understand it varies.


Jean Lesage: It is roughly 20 per cent.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I wonder whether the minister can tell us what the water and air rates are per pound at the present time to a few points in the north. Let us take Fort Smith, Hay River, Yellowknife, Fort Norman and Aklavik.


Jean Lesage: Would the hon. member mind if I tried to obtain that information for eight o'clock tonight? Even if we have passed to another item, I can table the figures.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Perhaps the minister will have that by the time we reach the northern administration and lands branch.


Jean Lesage: Maybe I will have it. In any event, my officials are in the gallery listening to us and I ask them through you, Mr. Chairman, to get that information.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National parks branch-
295. Branch administration, $86,425.
Mr. Bryce:: Mr. Chairman, having listened to statements as to the amount of money being spent in the north, may I say that the minister should be congratulated on getting that amount of money from the treasury board, but I am envious because there are so many places in my constituency still undeveloped where that money could be spent which the minister passes by on his
Supply-Northern Affairs way north. However, I do not begrudge the money spent on this development. I feel quite sure that when we are able to transport power longer distances and at greater voltages the northern part of my constituency will come into its own because we have there the Nelson river, Grand rapids and other places that are future power sites. I have no intention of making a speech but I want to ask the minister a few questions.
One matter about which I am approached both at home and by letter concerns what is going to happen to Lower Fort Garry. Is the federal department going to hand it over to the provincial government to run or is it going to remain on the same basis? Lower Fort Garry is associated with the Selkirk settlers and the people who made the Red river valley famous. I do not need to recall the history of those hardy pioneers. Some of their descendants are still there and they are anxious to know what is going to happen to Lower Fort Garry. I understand it is now rented to a company.


Jean Lesage: A club.


William Scottie Bryce: A golf club. That is all right if that is what the department wants to do, but I understand it has only been rented for a year at a time. Personally I would not like to rent a house or a farm a year at a time because people do not take any interest in properties if they only have the use of them for a year. If it is going to be handed over to the provincial government so that it can become a place where the people of Winnipeg can go on a Saturday afternoon that will be ideal. There could be a nice tearoom there and I am sure there would be many visitors. But if the department decides against that and is going to rent it to a country club or golf club, then I think the department should at least give them a three-year lease so that the place will not deteriorate. This landmark is very important to the people of Selkirk, the descendants of the pioneers in the Red river valley. I should like the minister to tell me something about that. I may be out of place in drawing to the minister's attention the fact that there is still a lot of federal and provincial crown land north of the interlake country that would be suitable for a park and would not require the expenditure of very much money. The land belongs to the provincial and dominion governments now and could be set aside for future development. Everybody agrees that Canada is growing by leaps and bounds, and while we have Riding Mountain park we should be making provision for another park in the interlake country or north of the interlake country.

Supply-Northern Affairs


Jean Lesage: I am very pleased to answer the queries of the hon. member for Selkirk. Lower Fort Garry has been rented for a number of years to the Motor Country Club of Winnipeg. When I went to Winnipeg last year on my trip west and north with my deputy minister we stopped at Lower Fort Garry and had conversations with the executive officers of the Motor Country Club. We also discussed the matter with the provincial member of the historic sites and monuments board. After we came back to Ottawa we had correspondence with ministers of the provincial government. After consulting all these people we came to the conclusion, which was in accord with their advice, that we should continue to rent the premises to the Motor Country Club but that the lease should include a condition which did not exist previously to the effect that the public should be admitted to the grounds and to the buildings. This has been agreed to now, and this morning I signed a submission to council to be authorized to sign a five-year lease with the Motor Country Club. This lease will contain conditions which will facilitate the general public in visiting the fort, the surrounding grounds and buildings including the main building on request.
Moreover, this year the department is going to spend $12,639 to make alterations to what is called the fur storage building on the fort premises. I believe I can assure the hon. member, through you, Mr. Chairman, that everything is being done to keep that fort in the best possible condition. One of the conditions of the lease is that the Motor Country Club shall maintain the main building and grounds. They are in a beautiful state from what I could see last year. It seems to me that this great historic place will be preserved to be seen by the general public of Manitoba and all visitors to that wonderful province.


William Scottie Bryce: I want to thank the minister for his reply. Needless to say he understands my main concern that the common people of Manitoba will have every opportunity to visit that historic spot.


Jean Lesage: That is the condition that we have attached to the new lease. We consented to the lease under that specific condition, that the people could go into that fort every day of the week.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: The hon. member for Bow River.


Mr. Mclvor:: I was going to ask a question on this.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: The hon. member for Bow River.


Mr. Johnston (Bow River):: I am not going to take too much time on this occasion. One of my main concerns so far as national parks are concerned has to do with Banff national park and the inauguration of the dollar-a-day hospitalization plan. This subject has been debated at some length, and I believe the minister is now familiar with all the aspects of it. I am sure he is going to give the matter every consideration. He is in touch now with the provincial authorities and the people of Banff. I feel quite sure that before very long we are going to have the dollar-a-day hospitalization plan out there, so I am not going to dwell on that.
There are one or two other points, possibly minor, yet they do have some concern for the people of Banff, to which I want to refer. Banff, as you know, Mr. Chairman, and I think the minister will agree without any question whatever, is the outstanding summer tourist resort in Canada.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Charles Edward Johnston: There is no question about it. There are more visitors to Banff national park from all parts of this country and the United States than any other tourist attraction in Canada. Certainly, Banff does not take second place in its magnificence to any spot in Canada or the United States. I have visited nearly all the national parks in the United States, and I say that without fear of contradiction.
This brings me to my point, Mr. Chairman. The other day I saw an article in the newspaper, and I want to read it to you. It pertains to our Royal Canadian Mounted Police. I know the minister will say immediately that that is not his department, but it is so far as it affects Banff, and that is what I am concerned about. Let me read it to you, Mr. Chairman. This article appeared in the Ottawa Journal of May 6, 1955:	The heading is, "Only in Ottawa may you see R.C.M.P. in scarlet". It reads:
A press release by the city tourist and information bureau pointing out that Canada's "Mounties" are to be seen regularly in their scarlet dress uniforms only in Ottawa has been reprinted by dozens of American newspapers, Gerald Geldert, bureau director, reported today.
He felt this would bring U.S. tourists to Ottawa. In other Canadian cities the R.C.M.P. wears dress uniform only on special occasions.
May I repeat one sentence to you?
He felt this would bring U.S. tourists to Ottawa.
This morning I took the trouble of communicating with the commissioner of the R.C.M.P. to find out whether or not that statement was true. I was well aware that it was not before I communicated with him, but I am informed by his officials that it

is not true. I wanted to make sure. I am informed by the officials concerned that you will find the R.C.M.P. in their red serge uniforms just as often in Banff as you do in Ottawa. When we have the tourist bureau in this city trying to create discrimination of that sort against some of our outstanding tourist resorts, I think the city of Ottawa should be a little more careful that they are correct in the information they give.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I want to turn to one or two other important facts concerning Banff. In Banff there has been some question as to whether or not the new post office building, which is being erected, should provide office space for the Banff advisory council. As the minister knows so well, this advisory council is the elected body in Banff which acts as a sort of liaison officer between the people, the superintendent of parks and the department here in Ottawa. The council has no office space, and they have no money. It would seem to me that perhaps the minister could intercede with the Minister of Public Works to see if it is not possible to have the Banff advisory council accommodated in one small room. On one occasion I saw the Minister of Public Works, but I did not have very great success, so I hope the minister has more success.
I want to go on to another point which is causing some concern in Banff, and that is the change in rates which is being applied to licence fees. I have indicated to the minister that generally speaking, where increases have been carried out this year, there is not too much room for complaint. There are some points, however, to which the minister's attention should be drawn. I have not bothered referring these to him, but I want to draw one or two instances to his attention. First of all, I think it is unreasonable to suppose or expect that we should be able or even try to increase the licence fees in any national park in Canada, and particularly in Banff, with the thought in mind that the citizens of those areas should be expected to assist materially in the upkeep of the park. Now, that would be ridiculous in the extreme because there are only about 2,500 or 3,000 citizens living in Banff. While they contribute to the upkeep, they contribute also to the accommodation and well-being of the tourists who go there. They could not be expected to contribute to any great extent to the upkeep of the parks generally.
Having that in mind, Mr. Chairman, the advisory council has drawn to my attention one or two instances where the increase in the licence fees seems to be out of line with
Supply-Northern Affairs the ordinary increases in other parts of the province. I want to refer to one particular instance:
Rooms. Rental of two rooms or less in private house, with or without meals, each room $2.
In this instance there has been an increase of 100 per cent. Previously we were charging $1 for the season or for the year. This year it has been increased to $2. I am conscious of the fact that it is an increase of $1. That may not sound so much as a 100 per cent increase, but the fact is, Mr. Chairman, the people who are renting rooms in their homes are rendering a service to the tourists who come there.


Jean Lesage: It is only $2 a year.


Charles Edward Johnston: Yes, that is right.


Jean Lesage: Well-


Charles Edward Johnston: When you put it that way-and I put it that way before the minister did-it does not sound like a tremendous increase, but it is in fact an increase of 100 per cent. That sounds better from my point of view.


Jean Lesage: Yes. If you were speaking of a reduction in federal taxes, you would talk in a different way.


Charles Edward Johnston: The people who rent those rooms are doing it as a service to tourists who come to Banff. Last year I pointed out that many hundreds of people who come to Banff as tourists have to sleep in the station or in places other than cabins, motels and rooms. In order to visit there at all they must sleep in those places or they cannot come. The people of Banff have gone out of their way to make their homes available. I do not think we should penalize them by doubling the licence fee. It may be only $1, but some people are very sensitive in that regard. I have had people write to me since the increase was made, and they have told me they are not going to rent their rooms if they have to pay an increased licence fee. Of course they could do it, nevertheless it is an inconvenience to have strangers in your home. The minister himself says it is only $1. He would be well advised to cut it out and leave it at the original fee of $1.
The other matter I wish to deal with has to do with rooming houses. I read from the item:
Containing more than 2 rooms for rent but no meals served, each room, $2.
It used to be $1; it has been raised to $2. The advisory board which represents the people of Banff think it should be left at $1

Supply-Northern Affairs for the very reason I have already pointed out. The people who rent rooms in their private residences do so in a spirit of cooperation. It is true they get paid for it. I am not minimizing that for a moment, but it is an inconvenience. I know of people in Banff who have their families sleeping in the kitchens and the dining rooms in order to make their bedrooms available to tourists. If that were not done those tourists would have no place to sleep. They would have to sleep in the railway station or in the bus station or some place else. The people are willing and anxious to make their homes available.


Mr. Ferguson:: He has me in tears over that $2 a year. He will have to stop.


Charles Edward Johnston: If the hon.
member who just interjected that remark went to Banff expecting to have a pleasant holiday and do some fishing, and found himself sleeping on a chair in the station it would bring him to tears.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: I would not go if I had to sleep in the station. I am not going to go without three meals a day, nor am I going to sleep in a station.


Charles Edward Johnston: That is what I am trying to point out. If the tourists of Canada and the United States know that when they come to Banff they will have to sleep in the railway station, they will not come. Therefore the people of Banff, out of the generosity of their hearts, have made their rooms available. And because they have done so the government doubles the fee.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Yes, $2 a year.


Mr.   Johnslon@Bow River: That is not very good recognition of the service rendered. That is one of the things I am concerned about.
There is another aspect that I wish to bring to the minister's attention. I refer to motels. I am not thinking of the increase in rates, though there has been an increase in motel rates. I know quite well that most motels in Canada, and particularly in Banff, are making pretty good money. Therefore I am not so concerned about those who have raised their rates by $1, $2, $3, or $4. What I want to bring to the minister's attention is this. It is a matter of principle.
There are people in Banff and in other national parks of Canada who wish to start motels, and applications have been made to the department for permits. The policy of the government has been along this line. Unless a motel can be constructed that will be an asset to the national park, a permit should not be granted. I would go so far as to agree with that. We should not have

a motel constructed in any national park that will be a disgrace to that park. However, it should not be necessary for the prospective owner of a motel in Banff, or in any other national park, to put up $100,000, $150,000 or $200,000 before a permit is granted.
I say to the minister that some of the best motels we have in Banff, such as Brewster's and Becker's-and there are others-started out with one or two camps. They never had $150,000 or $100,000 when they started. They have built up the business. Some of these motels now are just as modern as any to be found anywhere in the country, and they are an asset to the town of Banff and to the national park. But the point is that they started at the bottom and built worth-while additions to their motels.
It seems to me that is the only fair and proper way to operate. We should not establish the principle that we are not going to grant permits for the construction of motels in the national parks unless people can put up $100,000, $150,000 or $200,000. If we grant permits it would be perfectly in order to say, "We are not going to allow you to build any shack in Banff national park. If you want to put up a small unit to accommodate two persons or four persons, that will be all right. You put it up, and you comply with the regulations, and it has to be an asset to the national park." That would be proper, and I would back it 100 per cent. It might take only $15,000 the first year, and the next year they might be able to add to it. In a matter of four or five years they could have a motel that would be capable of accommodating 40 to 50 persons. It would be a real asset to the park, and the people would make some money out of it.
That would be the principle to establish to assist in that type of construction. In Banff, and I suppose in most of the other national parks, we need more motel accommodation; we need more cabin accommodation to take care of the ever-increasing numbers who come as tourists to visit those outstanding spots. I hope the minister will give this consideration.
I could discuss other things, but as I told the committee on another occasion I do not intend to carry on the debate at any great length. I thought I should bring these particular things to the minister's attention, because they have been brought to mine by the advisory council in Banff. Since the minister has been so considerate in other matters, I hope he will go a little further and cut down some of these licence fees that have been at $1; and when he comes to Banff

again and visits some of these outlying places, he may be able to get some good fish.


Mr. Byrne:: 
Mr. Ellis:: Mr. Chairman, I have just one or two observations to make in connection with the accommodation at Prince Albert national park. My understanding of the purpose of our national park system is that facilities are made available to Canadians as a whole. I submit that everything should be done to make it possible for Canadians, irrespective of income to visit our parks.
Complaints have been brought to my attention in connection with the accommodation at Prince Albert national park. I understand that shack tents in the park are not to be made available to other than the owners. The situation is that many wage earners can get only two or three weeks' holidays in the summer, and they find themselves in the position when they open a shack tent that they are not permitted to make it available to relatives or friends. Will the minister advise me if that statement is correct.


Jean Lesage: No. May I say right now that they can make it available to their friends at any time provided it is free, but what they cannot do is to rent a shack tent to different people every week or two weeks.


Alfred Claude Ellis: I understand that is the regulation. I realize also that there was a time when a number of shack tents were owned by one individual, but that situation has not existed for some time. One of my constituents informs me that after his shack tent was opened up he made it available to one of his neighbours, and he then received a letter from the superintendent of the park suggesting that he was renting it. I submit that any person owning a shack tent in the park should be permitted to make it available to friends without any suggestion of renting it. There have been complaints brought to my attention of persons owning shack tents in the park and making them available to friends being told that they were renting them.


Jean Lesage: Being asked if they were renting them.


Alfred Claude Ellis: The suggestion was made that they were renting them when in fact they

Supply-Northern Affairs were simply lending or making the shack appeal, that Canadians may start living in tent available to friends.	shacks. What a ridiculous appeal.


Jean Lesage: How much?


Alfred Claude Ellis: I should like to have the assurance of the minister that the owners of shack tents in Prince Albert national park will be able to make those available to their relatives or friends without the inference being made that they are renting them. It is not a question of running a business, or putting ads in the paper that shack tents are available for rent.
I repeat that many of these people are wage earners who get only two or three weeks' holiday. It costs a good deal to set up a shack tent at the start of the season, and I see no reason why it should have to remain idle for most of the season. I cannot understand why these people should not be permitted to rent them. However, the instance I am citing is that of a person who was not renting it, but the claim was made that he was doing so simply because other people were living in it.
I suggest to the minister that when a person wants to make an arrangement on his own responsibility with another party and make his shack tent available, he should be permitted to do so. It is an expensive proposition for a wage earner on a low income to maintain facilities of that kind in the park, and anything that can lighten that load should be done.
The facilities of the national parks should be made available to persons on low incomes. There are many people who are not in a position to go into the parks and pay the rates asked for accommodation. I ask the minister to consider making it possible for the owner of a shack tent to make a private arrangement with regard to the use of that tent in the national park. After all, he would not be indulging in the real estate business or anything like that.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Surely to goodness Canada has not reached the stage that the people have to live in shacks. I have not been in that park, but have we sunk so low that we have to designate buildings for people to live in, irrespective of their financial standing, as shack tents. There is a plea that they should be rented for nothing, because someone wants to go into a venture building shacks. Let us get away from that. Stop building shacks in Canada. Let us get down to earth. If we cannot do better than that there is something wrong. We have listened to an appeal for 30 minutes- at a cost to the country of about $1,500 an hour-that people may continue to live in shacks. How nonsensical to make such an


Mr. Sluder:: That is socialism.


An hon. Member:: Don't be asinine.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: If that is asinine, I would sooner be asinine than make your appeal.


Mr. Barneii:: Recent remarks by the hon. member for Bow River have prompted me to participate briefly in this debate. As you will recall, the hon. member was at some pains to set the record straight. I thought perhaps I might follow his good example for a few moments. The hon. member went into considerable detail as to the glories of Banff national park. While I would not argue with him seriously in regard to his claim that it is an outstanding tourist attraction, nevertheless I would remind him that there is a park somewhat to the north of that, known as Jasper national park, which has within its borders, or close to them, the highest peak in the Canadian Rockies. I am referring to mount Robson. Considerable publicity comes to the Jasper park region because of the fact that we have there, as I say, the highest peak in the Canadian Rockies.
Coming to this matter of putting the record straight, Mr. Chairman, I felt that I should like to remind hon. members who come from these flat lands of the east that after all they should not allow the Canadian Rockies to so overawe them that they overlook the fact that in reality the Canadian Rockies are merely the foothills of our mighty Coast range of mountains in British Columbia. Some indication that this is the prevailing attitude in the east is found in an article that I recall noticing about a year ago in the Toronto Star Weekly, which went to considerable pains to describe mount Robson, referring to it as the highest mountain in Canada.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I do not know whether you observed that article, but I am quite sure you will agree with me that that was not a correct statement of fact, and that it is something which perhaps could be put straight in the minds of those who dwell in the more easterly parts of Canada.
As you are undoubtedly well aware, within the present boundaries of the constituency of Comox-Alberni, in a part of our country which, I believe, at one time was within the constituency which you represent, Mr. Chairman, does lie the highest mountain in Canada, namely mighty mount Waddington, at the head of Knight inlet in the Klinaklini river area, the only mountain as far as I know which rises above 13,000 feet.

I felt that I should like to put the record straight, and in view of the discussion that has taken place about the biggest and best national parks in Canada, draw to the attention of the minister that when he is looking around for bigger and better national parks in Canada, there in the western part of British Columbia does in fact lie Canada's mightiest mountain, rising to something over 13,200 feet.


Mr. Quelch:: Mr. Chairman, whilst some hon. members may have been a little jealous about the attractions of Banff as a national park, there is really no doubt in anybody's mind that Banff is the greatest tourist attraction in Canada today. However, many of the people who come to Banff are very much disappointed at the very poor fishing they find. They read the "Anglers' Guide" and are told that some of the lakes and streams are teeming with fish. Then after having fished there for a week and having caught one fish, or none at all, they begin to wonder where these teeming lakes are.
I was very much interested in an article that appeared in the "Voice of Motordom" the official organ of the A.M.A., by Fred Turnbull, president of the Edmonton trout fishing club. I should like to quote briefly from that article. He was first of all referring to the great improvement in fishing in the province of Alberta as a result of the recent conservation program. Then he had this to say:
What has been the effect of this great local improvement on the tourist influx to our national parks? We all like to go to the mountains to fish and at the same time enjoy the wonderful scenery, but place before the fisherman two choices, one, to visit the national park and to enjoy the scenery but along with that obtain only mediocre fishing, and on the other hand drive out 30 miles or so from the city after lunch and return home with an excellent catch of trout up to four pounds in weight. It is left to the reader to say which choice the fisherman will take.
There is no doubt that those responsible for the very mediocre fishing in our national parks are beginning to realize that the tourist expects something more than pictures of used fish displayed in travel and sporting magazines with the caption "Come to Canada and get the big ones". What does the average tourist fisherman expect? It is generally conceded that the average fisherman is satisfied with a reasonable catch of say four or five trout about a half a pound to two pounds each with the occasional big one as an added incentive. He wants these fish in lakes and streams fairly close to the highway, not so far away that he has to hire an expensive outfit to reach them.
I have heard many reasons for the poor fishing in the national parks in the Rockies.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Before the hon. member develops his argument, now that he has read his extract I must draw the attention of the committee to the fact that it is
Private Bills-Divorce five o'clock, and we must proceed to the consideration of public and private bills.
At five o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair.



PRIVATE BILLS

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Applewhaite):: There being several divorce bills on the order paper, is it agreed that they all be taken in the one motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



SECOND READINGS-SENATE BILLS

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 353, for the relief of Franga Beryl Harker Stinson.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 354, for the relief of Enid Gertrude Brooks Bray.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 355, for the relief of Shirley Pollack Nadler.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 356, for the relief of Isidore Hoffman.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 357, for the relief of Ethel Dwor-kin Abrams.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 358, for the relief of Michael Moses Scullion.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 359, for the relief of Clifford Joseph Linehan.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 360, for the relief of Irene Furlong Walters.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 361, for the relief of Joyce Davies Javallas.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 362, for the relief of Freida Schec-ter Lupovitch.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 363, for the relief of Gertie Try-ansky Katz.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 364, for the relief of Olive Gertrude Meredith Bateman.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 365, for the relief of David Sandler.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 366, for the relief of Marcel Des-lauriers.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 367, for the relief of Delmar Ross Andreis.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 368, for the relief of Elizabeth Blanche Nelson Mallozzi.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 369, for the relief of Glennice Maude Hunter Garayt.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 370, for the relief of Irene Jessie Hillson Towes.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 371, for the relief of Vivian Ruth Law Alarie.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 372, for the relief of Joseph Antonio Campeol.-Mr. Hunter.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, May 10, consideration of the motion of Mr. Argue
[Stage Direction]
Canada Grain Act
for the second reading of Bill No. 22, to amend the Canada Grain Act.
Hugh Alexander Bryson: Mr. Speaker, I should like to speak a few moments in support of Bill No. 22, which was introduced by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) and on which debate was continued last Tuesday. I should like to make one or two rather critical remarks about the speech delivered by the hon. member for Provencher (Mr. Jutras) on Tuesday, May 3, when he spoke on this bill. It seemed to me that the hon. member indulged in about 40 minutes of mental gymnastics in an effort to defend and justify the government's position in opposing the recommendations contained in this bill. Following that speech, another 20 minutes spent by the hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek (Mr. Studer)-


Irvin William Studer: Twelve minutes.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: It sounded like 20 minutes. As I say, another 20 minutes were spent by him in another kind of gymnastics.
The hon. member for Provencher suggested that the government is not ignoring the wishes of the western farm organizations in not implementing the principle laid down in this bill, namely that every farmer should have the right to deliver his grain to the elevator of his choice. I should like to recall that the hon. member was chairman of the standing committee on agriculture last year when this question was dealt with at great length. Certainly he can hear as well as anyone else, and certainly he heard that the Saskatchewan pool spoke favourably of this proposition. Likewise support was given to it by the interprovincial farm union council.
Since then, as was indicated on Tuesday last by the hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch), the three western pools have shown support for the bill, as well as the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. Certainly the Saskatchewan wheat pool have only recently indicated that, because of the unfairness of box car allocations, they lost what they consider to be $750,000, because they feel the government has ignored their wishes as well as those of other farm organizations in this respect.
I do not intend to deal with the car order book. That matter was dealt with thoroughly by both the hon. member for Assiniboia and the hon. member for Provencher. The hon. member for Provencher feels that the car order book will not work either in times of congestion or in times of non-congestion.


Mr. Juiras:: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. Ever since the hon. member started to speak he has been attributing to
[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Applewhaite).]
me words which I did not use and drawing inferences that could not be drawn from the context of my speech. I suggest that the hon. member make his own speech.


Irvin William Studer: May I ask the hon. member a question? May I ask what authority his party has, or what authority he has, to bring this bill before the House of Commons when no farm organization asked them to do so? Perhaps his political organization did, but certainly no farm organization.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Mr. Speaker, I should just like to tell the hon. member that we are not obliged to have authority from anybody to bring anything before this House of Commons. We accept responsibility for what we do in this house. Let us not hear any more of this nonsense.
In answer to the hon. member for Provencher may I say this. In Hansard it is recorded what was said. I read Hansard, and possibly my interpretation is not what he meant. This is the way I read it. At page 3414 we find these words:
I did say that I doubted very much whether you could make the car order book function in a condition of congestion such as we have at the moment.
That is one thing. He does not believe the car order book would work in times of congestion. Then further down on the page we find this:
. . . but personally I think the time has probably come when it should be suspended, because it cannot be made to work efficiently and equitably in a condition of acute shortage such as we have at the moment.
That is my interpretation of it. If that is not what he meant, he is at liberty to make his own statement.


René Jutras: The hon. member said I made the statement that I believed the car order book could not function even in a period of non-congestion. I never said that, and that is certainly not what I said in the last statement quoted.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: That is a technical point. However, that is the way I read it. Anyway, I do not think it is worth while to argue about whether the car order book is or is not going to do a job. As a matter of fact the car order book can be suspended-as it has been suspended-at the pleasure of the transport controller.
I know the excuse that was made. The excuse was that the car order book had to be suspended in order that the wheat board could fill certain commitments for grain according to grade. But I should like to remind the house that there are over 5,350 grain elevators in the three western provinces.

When the car order book was suspended for the reasons I have outlined, only 200 points were using the car order book, as nearly as I can ascertain. I could not find out in the committee last year, but from the best estimates I can get only 200 of those points were using the car order book. Under those conditions I contend that it is an extremely flimsy argument to say you have to suspend the car order book because, out of over 5,350 elevators, 200 were using the car order book.
The argument that if you sign in your permit book that you are going to deliver your grain to any one elevator, that fact binds you unconditionally and irrevocably to making delivery to that elevator, is nothing but sheer nonsense.


Irvin William Studer: Then why sign?


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Let those people haul where they want to haul their grain. If you have any quarrel with an elevator man you are free to go elsewhere, as you are now, and take your chances.


Irvin William Studer: Then why sign?


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Let us not penalize the people who want the right to haul where they wish. I say that argument does not hold water. I think possibly there are a great many people who question the proposition of being able to haul their grain here or there, where there is a difference. The other day in this house an hon. member said he would not want to bind himself unconditionally to any one line elevator company at the present time.
I just cannot see any point in that argument. As far as I am concerned every line elevator in western Canada is exactly the same. You will get just as good a deal from the line elevator companies, as far as grade, dockage and weight are concerned, as you will from the pool elevators. They are good. They have to be good because of the fact that the pool elevators are handling a great quantity of the farmers' grain. That has not always been the history of the line elevator companies, and therein lies the crux of the whole situation.
Too many of us remember what happened before the pool elevator system started to handle a great deal of the farmers' grain. You would go to the line elevator, and you had to take No. 4 grade for No. 2 wheat. It was a case of take it or leave it. You were overdocked, underweighed and undergraded. These were the conditions that made the farmers decide to shift for themselves and form the pool elevator system, in order to get away from the discrimination that- was being practised.
I say that is the crux of the whole situation. With the formation of the pool elevator 50433-237
Canada Grain Act
system of grain handling those practices came to an end. You will get just as good a deal now from the line elevator companies as you will from the pools. You will continue to get that kind of deal just as long as the pool elevators are in business. But just as soon, as the pools go out of business you are going to get the same kind of deal you got before they came into existence.
The line companies are trying to woo customers from the pools by promises of a better deal. Their efforts in this direction are being aided by the government, when pool members are not afforded the opportunity of delivering grain to their own elevators, which they themselves built in order that they might participate in the savings made through handling their own grain, amounting to millions of dollars annually. That is what we object to. It is often said that one picture is worth a thousand words. Sometimes a story is equally useful for the purpose of emphasizing a point. I am not going to say any more on the subject, but I should like to tell a little story to emphasize the point I am trying to make.
The present efforts of the line companies, abetted by the government, to restore their monopoly position so far as the grain trade is concerned, are reminiscent of a story I heard many years ago about an old farmer who had nieces and nephews. They placed a herd of cattle in the old farmer's care in trust, and he was to look after the cattle for them. Bands of marauding wolves throughout the countryside were taking a heavy toll of the herd so the old farmer, true to his trust, built a stout corral and hired range riders who guarded the herd by day. Oh, once in a while a wily wolf crashed the corral at night and grabbed a calf, but the system worked pretty well. All the wolves could do was stay out in the hills, hold indignation meetings and wonder what they could do about it.


Irvin William Studer: They must have been socialists.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: The nieces and nephews, like a great many people, fell prey to propaganda. As a result they went to the old farmer and said they thought they should be getting a greater return from the herd. Under pressure the old farmer hired another manager, with specific instructions to cut down on the costs. The operation had to be made more efficient. The new manager thought about the matter for a long time and came up with an idea. He reasoned that wolves, because of their long experience and wide knowledge, knew more about cattle than anybody else. So he summoned the wolves to a big conference, and they really co-operated. Hearings were held

Canada Grain Act
and committees appointed, all at the expense of the old farmer, of course.
Finally all the wolves were unanimous in their opinion. They said tear down the corral, it is unproductive; fire all the range riders, they are nothing but arbitrary bureaucrats. When all the reports had been made the old farmer questioned the new manager as to whether or not this was the right thing to do. The manager said it must be right, because the committees he had set up knew more about cattle than anybody else.
It is the same with those who speak against the measure before us today. Why should they not accede to the wishes and advice of the line elevator companies? After all, they have had 50 years' experience, and they certainly know more about the grain business than the farmers themselves.
Regardless of the outcome of the vote, which may be taken today, we are going to continue to fight for this fundamental principle, so that the farmers may be able to deliver their grain to elevators of their own choosing.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, this bill represents the third attempt by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) to have legislation of this type enacted. As Bill No. 186 it was introduced into the previous parliament on February 23, 1953. Subsequently as Bill No. 3 it was introduced on November 16, 1953, at the first session of this parliament. It was defeated on January 15, 1954, by 111 votes to 29.
The hon. member persists in spite of the adverse opinion which this house has already recorded on his proposal. He persists in spite of the fact that his plan is completely unworkable, as he could have ascertained by application to any company operating elevators in western Canada. He persists in spite of the fact that during sessions of the agriculture committee last May there was extensive discussion about car allocation, during which the hon. member and his colleagues were unable to elicit one word of approval from witnesses who apeared before that body.
The house will wish not to be wearied by unnecessary repetition of what was said in the debate last year. For example, at page 937 of Hansard for December 15, 1953, an extensive statement was placed on record in connection with the car order book and its history. That need not be repeated. But it must be repeated that the car order book already provides all that is necessary to enable a grain producer to have placed at the elevator of his choice a car for the loading of his own grain.
tMr. Bryson.]
The car order book provisions are an invaluable safeguard of a farmer's rights, whether he chooses to order cars, as he sometimes does, or refrains from doing so. The latter is the case at most times, in most places with most farmers. The effect of this bill would be to force the car order book into constant use at those points where farmers now elect not to use it. It would provide a certain arbitrary distribution of box cars at such a point, a distribution which, presumably advantageous to one elevator or another, might be objectionable to some other elevator or to some producer. The operation of such a scheme would at once be brought to naught by the first person, whether elevator agent or farmer, who chose to put his name on the car order book. That is one reason why the scheme is unworkable.
Observe next that the proposed legislation would be completely unenforceable. It seeks to place a duty upon the railway agent, at any given moment, to act in a prescribed way. But who would ascertain his duty at such a moment? Who could say whether or not he had acted correctly? Who could say that he was not planning to remedy any apparent defect in his procedure at some date, sooner or later, in the future? Or think of the task of the railway agent at one of the larger shipping points where there may be from 300 to 1,300 permit books, covering perhaps 100,000 seeded acres or more, and where there are perhaps seven or eight elevators. At Dawson Creek over 1,300 permit books are issued annually, with an acreage of 260,000. He would have a highly involved arithmetical calculation to make before he could arrive at a basis for car distribution. There would be room for a multiplicity of errors, with perhaps no answer possible that would be both acceptable and practicable. And to add to his confusion would be the knowledge that error would put him in peril of the penalties prescribed for violations of the Canada Grain Act.
The bill provides for a sort of election, with votes weighted according to acreage. Such a scheme is loaded with difficulties. An acre which has been intended to produce fodder in the shape of green feed will have equal voting rights with one which has actually produced 30 bushels of wheat. An acre on which the crop has been destroyed by hail, by rust or by frost will have equal rights with a nearby acre which has had a good crop. An acre producing five bushels of flax will have equal rights with an acre which has produced 100 bushels of oats.
Observe next that the farmer who is willing to take the trouble can vote twice, to the

disadvantage of his neighbour who does not want to be put to this trouble. He can first vote his full acreage in favour of one elevator. Then, having done so, he can put his name on the car order book for successive cars to accommodate all the marketable grain he has produced, for shipment from that elevator. Or, having voted his acreage in favour of one elevator, he may actually deliver to another.
The hon. member last year seemed willing to admit that there were in his bill certain weaknesses, as had been pointed out. He went on to say on January 15, 1954, Hansard, at page 1169:
I submit that is no reason for defeating this bill. Rather the subject matter of the bill should be referred to the agriculture committee of this house for discussion and consideration.
But the difficulties and defects to be found in the bill are not simple matters of wording or of drafting which can be ironed out by revision. Instead, defects are inherent in the very concept of the scheme. Moreover, the bill cannot be referred to the committee without prior endorsation of the principle which it involves. On principle, quite apart from defects in detail, it is unsound and should be defeated.
Several points of principle may be noted as follows:
1.	The bill would attempt to freeze, as of October 1, the percentage of shipments to be made by different elevators during the following year, and consequently the percentage of grain that each elevator at a given shipping point might expect to receive. That is to destroy competition in service. Nothing could be more contrary to the spirit of the Canada Grain Act, which endeavours to promote competition. Nothing could be more contrary to the basic philosophy which has animated parliament in the past and the major parties represented herein. At least it is contrary to the philosophy of the Liberal party. It may be that the C.C.F. party has adopted a philosophy to the effect that competition is undesirable and should be restrained.
2.	The proposal would discourage and even prevent elevator construction. There would be no incentive to build additional space if car allocation is frozen according to a predetermined cycle. This is in contrast with the present policy of the government, which is to encourage elevator construction by allowing accelerated write-off of capital costs.
3.	The proposal is in direct conflict with the Canadian Wheat Board Act, section 20(k), which gives the Canadian wheat board jurisdiction over allocation of box cars which
50433-237$
Canada Grain Act
are not placed pursuant to a car order book. Surely parliament cannot be expected to deprive the Canadian wheat board of powers which have previously been considered necessary for the purposes of that body.
4.	The proposal would hamper railway operation by introducing inefficiencies. It would frequently force cars to be placed at elevators in no position to make immediate use of them. The elevator may not contain grain of the type currently authorized for shipment by the Canadian wheat board. Or shipments from that particular elevator may be precluded because the operating company has elsewhere exhausted its current quota of authorized shipments.
5.	This and similar proposals have been based upon two misconceptions. One is to the effect that under present conditions each elevator in western Canada is afforded the same opportunity as its competitors to ship grain, because of an equal division of box cars, depending upon the will of the railway company. This idea is completely wrong. Take at random 50 points in Saskatchewan with two or more elevators, and you will probably find 50 elevators which have handled and shipped more grain than their competitors. Naturally so, for those with greater patronage or larger facilities are likely to have more grain of the types which the Canadian wheat board authorizes for shipment. Or again you may find that an elevator company has deliberately chosen to ship less of its authorized quota from one point in order, for some reason or other, to be able to ship more of its authorized quota from some other point.
6.	The other misconception is that there is a scarcity of box cars for grain shipment. On the contrary, the railways could supply many more cars to be loaded if there were any place to unload them. It is not the supply of box cars to country elevators which needs regulation. It is the unloading of grain into terminal elevators, something the Canadian wheat board is now regulating according to its best judgment. It strives to make the best possible use of terminal space; to keep flowing the kinds and grades of grain in current demand; to keep the pipe lines of supply from being clogged by grain of grades currently unsaleable. To do its work properly it must have freedom of action; it must not be hampered by any such rigid scheme of car allocation as this bill proposes.
7.	The Canadian wheat board, in authorizing shipments from the country, does so very largely on the basis of giving a quota to each elevator company. Each such company is then left as free as prevailing conditions permit to choose the point of origin of its

Canada Grain Act
shipments, with due regard to types of grain required and to areas most in need of relief. When the whole elevator system is congested with more grain than can be promptly disposed of, no system of controlling shipments can give perfect satisfaction at all times, to everyone and in every place. But certainly the flexible system now operated by the Canadian wheat board holds greater possibilities of fairness, of satisfaction and of efficiency than any scheme that has been proposed for interfering with the handling machinery along the lines of this bill.
8.	If this bill had any desirable features it would become necessary to consider another problem, whether or not it would be constitutional and within the competence of parliament. The government has been advised to the contrary, not indeed with respect to this particular bill but with respect to other proposals for allocation of box cars which would govern competition between elevator companies. But there is no need for legal argument in this connection, or of any reference to the supreme court, since the bill is undesirable of itself, quite apart from any question of constitutional validity.
This question has been discussed with the grain companies, and particularly with the farmer-owned companies. There is, in fact, a very sharp division among farmer-owned grain companies as to whether or not any plan of the kind suggested by the bill is desirable. I may say there has been no division of opinion about the merits of this bill, because it is the unanimous view of all grain companies, including all farmer-owned grain companies, that this bill is unworkable. However, the idea of farmers' preference has been to the fore recently, and a number of discussions have been held by myself and my officials with grain companies, particularly with farmer-owned grain companies.
The farmer-owned grain companies have themselves not been able to produce a bill which they would be prepared to support. I have never received a draft of such a bill, and my officers have been told by the solicitor of one of the companies that he had been unable to draft such a bill.
The whole idea of fixing a method of distribution of box cars for all time is completely mistaken, because conditions change from time to time. It was only two years ago that the transport controller received a letter signed jointly by the Alberta wheat pool, Mr. A. T. Baker, manager; North-West Line Elevators' Association, Alberta division, Mr. E. I. Ward, [DOT]chairman; and the United Grain Growers Liimited, Mr. W. J. Garland, superintendent of

elevators, which in effect asked that the principle of one car per elevator be reinstated. Perhaps I should read the letter; it might be interesting.


Mr. Argue:: Is that their policy today?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Well, I do know their policy of today, but what is going to be their policy two years from now? This letter is less than two years old.


Hazen Robert Argue: Read recent correspondence.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have read recent correspondence, and I recognize an organized drive just as well as you do or anyone else does. We have had more of that from the province of Saskatchewan and no letters from anywhere else. If you think or anyone else thinks these letters are spontaneously written, perhaps you should give it another thought.


Hazen Robert Argue: May I ask the minister a question? Does the Alberta wheat pool not support the Saskatchewan wheat pool in the ideas that have been presented about box car allocation?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We know that ideas have been presented jointly, but as I say no wheat pool has submitted a bill for the consideration of the government which meets the approval of any one of the three wheat pools. I have not received such a bill up to this time.


Hazen Robert Argue: Would the minister consider it if he received it?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Well, that is not your privilege to ask. We have your bill before us. You have wasted a great deal of the time of parliament over it. If you would desist from your efforts in that direction there might be some possibility of drafting an amendment to the grain act that would satisfy at least some of the farmers, but with your bill before us there can be no such possibility. I rather think you have been told that by responsible leaders of farm organizations.


Hazen Robert Argue: No, that statement is not correct.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Either that statement is correct or-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Applewhaite):: Order. Perhaps the time has come when I should remind hon. members that during a debate remarks should be made to and through the Chair.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The key paragraph in this letter is:
Whereas the operation of car order books is not feasible under existing conditions and in any case is likely to favour the larger producer to the disadvantage of the small producer, it has been mutually agreed by all Alberta operators that,

during the 1953-54 crop year, temporary inequalities of distribution resulting from preferenced shipments shall be evened up at the earliest opportunity.
That was the situation that seemed desirable in Alberta for the crop of 1953-54, by unanimous consent of all the grain companies operating in that province. It may very well be the situation that the grain companies in that province would prefer in 1957-58.
The acute congestion seems to be passing; at least there is less congestion now than there has been for some years. Why, during a period of temporary congestion, attempt to freeze a system that may be wholly inapplicable for a period when no such congestion exists? That, I think, will appeal to every hon. member as not desirable, in the long-run interests of the producer in western Canada.
I do not think I need say more. I am perfectly sure that this bill, if enacted, would disorganize grain handling in western Canada to an extent that would tend to frustrate the efforts of all those who are attempting to do an efficient job of marketing the western producers grain.
We must have flexibility in the operation of country elevators and in the handling of stocks of grain contained in those elevators. It is true that when great quantities of grain were being handled the percentage of the Saskatchewan pool dropped several points from the percentage handled before congestion occurred. An effort is being made to reverse that trend, and I think the results of the current year will indicate that considerable progress has been made in that direction.
On the other hand, the percentage handled by the pool in Manitoba has not changed materially during the period of congestion. That is more or less true in Alberta, though I believe there has been some dropping off there.
Grain marketing in western Canada has been carried on under great difficulties. We have tried to handle five normal crops in a period of three years. The fact that there has not been greater dislocation is, I think, a credit to everyone concerned with the marketing of the western crop. I assure you that the efforts of all concerned are to give the greatest equality of marketing opportunity possible to producers in all parts of western Canada. I suggest that until some more perfect system is evolved than that provided for in this bill, parliament will be well advised to take no action in the matter.


Mr. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: The
Minister of Trade and Commerce has indicated that the bill we have before us is
Canada Grain Act
tending to become a hardy perennial. I well remember the discussions on previous occasions when we had the bill before us, and I must say that only gradually has the significance of the problem impressed itself upon me.
The bill attempts to deal with the problem of grain distribution that has resulted from the congestion of the past three years. That problem has been concentrated largely in the province of Saskatchewan, with the result that Manitoba farmers have not been too concerned with the difficulties. For example, when we were discussing this matter of box car allocation in the agriculture committee last year I recall that the Manitoba representative of the pool elevator system disagreed with the representatives from Saskatchewan and Alberta. The position he took at that time arose from the fact that in Manitoba we were not faced to nearly the same extent with this problem of congestion. Since the meeting of the agriculture committee there has been a slight change in the attitude of the Manitoba farmers, particularly those doing business with the pool elevator system.
Just a few weeks ago I received a pamphlet dealing with this problem of box car allocation which puts forward in strong terms the necessity for a more equitable distribution. I note that this is endorsed by the three systems, the Manitoba pool elevators, the Saskatchewan wheat pool and the Alberta wheat pool which suggests to me that there is a change in thinking on this important subject.
For the first time I have been receiving letters on this matter. There was no ripple of concern at all in my constituency in the southwestern corner of Manitoba until the present year. I am interested to note that the aspect of the difficulty which is being protested against more than any other is in relation to those instances where you have the one for one distribution of box cars, that is, the formula where you have box cars spotted on the basis of one per elevator regardless of the normal pattern of grain business at any particular' elevator point.
During the Easter recess I took the trouble to do some personal investigating in connection with this matter. Certain letters had come to me, and I went out to interview the farmers who had submitted those letters.
I found that they had not any clear-cut thinking on a possible solution, but they certainly were unhappy because they could not do business with the elevator of their own choice. I discussed the bill which we have before us, but they were not personally acquainted with its provisions. If they were

Canada Grain Act
familiar with its contents these would be more or less incomprehensible to them, as are the contents of most bills that come before this house, which are drawn up in legal terminology. The result is that they generally remain an obscure issue with the layman.
I can say frankly that there does not seem to be any general support for the solution of the box car allocation problem presented in Bill No. 22. The reason I rose to take part in this discussion was to indicate dissatisfaction over the present state of affairs. I am inclined to agree with the Minister of Trade and Commerce that there is no simple solution to the problem, nor will there be so long as the present congestion continues. We discussed this matter last year in the agriculture committee and there is to be another meeting of this committee within the next few days. I recommend strongly that we be given an opportunity to discuss this matter thoroughly in the committee.
The pool organizations have worked out an outline of a possible solution to the problem, and have placed this in the hands of certain hon. members. I received this outline with a covering letter from the Saskatchewan wheat pool over the signature of Mr. Robertson, the secretary. In this letter he stated:
The three pool organizations have been working together on this matter for some time. An interprovincial committee, composed of the vice presidents of the three pool organizations, has on various occasions been in touch with a member of the government in an effort to secure adequate amending legislation to meet the situation.
Mr. Robertson goes on to state that the representative of the interprovincial pool committee from the Manitoba pool is Mr. George McConnell, vice president of that organization. They have made some suggestions as to possible solutions of this box car allocation problem which are much more comprehensive than the provisions of the bill before us. I would like to indicate what those suggestions are.
In order to establish a workable basis for individual farmers, to deliver grain to elevators of their own choice, certain amendments would be required to the Canadian Wheat Board Act, and also to the Canada Grain Act. It is suggested, first, that a provision be inserted in the wheat board act whereby the wheat board would furnish yearly to the board of grain commissioners a list of growers who had delivered grain the previous year, together with their address and seeded acreage.
Second, that a provision be inserted in the Canada Grain Act to authorize the board of grain commissioners to send yearly to every such grower a form to be completed and

returned stating his delivery preference; with this information the board of grain commissioners to determine a cycle of car distribution for each point, and to inform the appropriate elevator companies and the railways of such cycle.
Third, cars ordered within the period by the wheat board to be treated as part of the cycle.
Fourth, cars spotted but not loaded by the elevator company to be treated as part of its cycle.
Fifth, all grain in store in country elevators at the time the cycle comes into operation to come under its jurisdiction.
Sixth, the board of grain commissioners should also be authorized to make whatever regulations are required to enable any cycle to operate successfully.
That is a much more comprehensive treatment of the matter than we have in the bill before us. Certain local elevator operators have indicated to me that the ideal solution would be to have the local railway agent allocate cars according to his understanding of the local delivery situation. But it has also been indicated to me that the local railway agents are unwilling to take such responsibility, and I have a reply from the local agent at Fairfax, Manitoba, substantiating this. It was indicated to me that the agent answered that he could do nothing about it at all and quoted the grain act, the transport controller, the car order book regulations, etc. This letter from the secretary of the Fairfax co-operative elevator goes on to state:
If he is correct, which we doubt, then why are laws not altered or clarified to bring this business up to date with the situations of today.
The local railway agent did not want to assume this responsibility because of the difficulties he would encounter in relation to the transport controller, the Canada Grain Act, etc.
Now, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I cannot agree that this bill would solve the problem, because it introduces further rigidity into a system that is already too rigid under circumstances of congestion. The sponsor of the bill made a moving plea in his initial statement for greater flexibility in handling the movement of grain. He made a stirring plea that the processes of free competition and free enterprise might be allowed to operate among our farming community. That immediately put me on my guard, coming from that particular source; and I am afraid that if he is sincere in his advocacy of that particular viewpoint, I must conclude that this bill would not solve the problem.

I would repeat in closing that there is a growing demand from the farming community that something be done so the individual farmer is placed in a position where he may deliver his grain to the elevator of his choice. That demand will continue so long as the prevailing congestion is with us, and I would very strongly recommend that we take an opportunity to discuss this matter again in the agriculture committee. The pamphlet that has been sponsored by the pool elevator associations of the three prairie provinces would indicate that there is a change in the thinking of the Manitoba pool organization on this matter. I would certainly appreciate having the opportunity to consider this matter in broad perspective, and not confined as it is here to the relatively restricted terms of this Bill No. 22.


Hazen Robert Argue: I wonder if the hon. member would permit a question?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes.


Hazen Robert Argue: I wonder if the hon. member would be prepared to say whether or not he would support a bill along the lines suggested by the wheat pool organizations.


Edmund Davie Fulton: You draw up the bill and let us see it first.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: In reply to that question, I would have to see the bill before I would commit myself. Certainly the suggestions they have outlined would constitute a much more comprehensive approach to the problem than the bill at present before us.


Hazen Robert Argue: Do you support the demands of the wheat pool organization at this moment?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes, I would support the demand for a fair distribution of box cars, and I would certainly agree that the one for one formula is not adequate to deal with the situation.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: The principle of this bill is set out very clearly in the explanatory notes. I think it would be well to have it on the record again because of some of the things that have been said this afternoon and on the last occasion it was before the house. In the explanatory notes the principle is set out in these words:
The purpose of this act is to remove discrimination in the allocation of box cars by providing in a new section of the car order book a rule for the fair allocation of box cars among elevator companies at a marketing point where the car order book, as presently constituted, is not in effect. By allocating their seeded acreage among the elevator companies at a marketing point, producers themselves will determine the distribution of box cars at that point.
Canada Grain Act
I fail to see how anyone representing agriculture in this house could deny the value of that principle. Certainly, if the producers themselves wish to express a preference as to the elevator company with whom they want to do business, then they should be allowed to do so. The Minister of Trade and Commerce has opposed the bill, and strangely enough the basis of his opposition to the bill seemed to be that the philosophy behind it and behind the arguments used by members of this group has run counter to the philosophy of the Liberal party, which he states is competition. I am sure that statement will be examined with great interest by co-operators right across Canada, because now the minister has placed the Liberal party squarely on the side of competition and of course, by doing so, squarely against co-operation.


An hon. Member:: That is nonsense.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: You cannot have it both ways, my friend. Mr. Speaker, I say that is a strange basis on which to oppose this legislation, because I have so often heard members of the Liberal party, from the prairies at least, attempt to take a great deal of credit for the setting up of the Canadian wheat board. What was the reason for the setting up of the Canadian wheat board in the first instance? It was exactly the same reasoning as was behind the setting up of the wheat pools and the co-operative handling of grain. It was a method of doing the marketing for the farmer in a co-operative manner rather than in a competitive manner.
Certainly if this philosophy expressed by the Minister of Trade and Commerce today on behalf of the Liberal party were followed to its logical conclusion it would mean the end of the wheat board entirely and a return to the old competitive system of the Winnipeg grain exchange. There is no other conclusion to which one may come. I would be very much surprised if the minister could persuade the grain producers of western Canada that it is a good thing for them to go back to a competitive position in the marketing of their grain.
Let us take, for example, a thousand farmers in a community. I am sure if the minister told them the best way they could market their grain was for each farmer to be always in competition with the 999 other farmers, we would hear some very interesting comments from the grain producers. We cannot get away from it. The line is very clearly drawn now. This group is trying to bring justice to the grain producers. We are squarely behind the co-operative principle, and we have no hesitation in saying

Supply-Northern Affairs so. I support the co-operative philosophy right down the line. The minister takes his party down the line of competition. Of course it will be up to the people to choose.
Mr. Speaker, I see it is six o'clock. May I move the adjournment of the debate?
On motion of Mr. Zaplitny the debate was adjourned.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Applewhaite):: At
eight o'clock the house will resume consideration of the business which was interrupted at five o'clock.
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Applewhaite in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
National parks branch-
295. Branch administration, $86,425.
Victor Quelch: Mr. Chairman, just before five o'clock I had been quoting from an article by Mr. Turnbull, president of the Edmonton trout fishing club, and printed in "The Voice of Motordom", regarding what he considered the poor fishing facilities in the national parks of Banff and Jasper.
I have heard many reasons advanced why the fishing in those parks is of a somewhat poor character. I have been told by officials in the parks that it is largely owing to the fact that the water is too cold and greatly retards the growth of the fish. I have also been told that there is too much silt and that the silt affects the spawning. I have also been told that there is a lack of feed in many of the lakes. On the other hand many men who have had a great deal of experience in this matter in other national parks in other parts of the country feel that with a good program, with sufficient backing, it would be possible to greatly improve the situation.
In that same article Mr. Turnbull makes this comment:
If your provincial government can do this wonderful work of restocking with such success, others can do the same. General conditions are the same, invested facilities in the park such as hatcheries, etc., are possibly better; the only thing that seems to be wrong is lack of management and experience.
Then he goes on to give the names of a number of men living in Jasper who he feels could give the government valuable assistance in helping to improve the situation. But personally I do not doubt for one minute that

the department has men who are just as good and who know just as much about the question of improving fishing conditions as anyone else. Provided they were given sufficient backing, they could no doubt take care of the situation.
It is interesting to note the program that has been carried on of recent years in Alberta. There was a time when it was practically impossible to get trout fishing on the prairies, but today we find that there is great trout fishing in many parts of Alberta as a result of the new program, and that is so in spots similar in character to the park because they are in the mountains alongside the park.
I just want to read one or two quotations from "Within Our Borders" dealing with this question. The heading is "Large Trout Await Anglers in Small Alberta Lakes" and the article goes on to say:
Small lakes In Alberta are providing an overabundance of trout fishing to such a point that the fisheries branch of the lands and forests department has had to appeal to anglers to fish the small lakes heavily.
I hope the day will come when the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources will also have to give that advice to people in the national parks. The article continues:
Alberta fishery officers, looking for new places to plant trout where they would provide more and better fishing for the average fisherman, tried stocking prairie potholes which had no fish at all.
I would suggest to the minister that he might suggest to the provincial government of Alberta that if they have any surplus fish they might put them in some of the lakes in the national parks. The article continues:
Because the lakes offer no facilities for spawning, regular restocking is necessary but before new fish can be planted, they must be fished out. The reason for this is that after the third summer the original fish stocked have grown so large that they dominate the lakes and their food supply, leaving no room for young fish.
Alberta fishery officials have found that lakes with surface areas of between 80 and 200 acres are ideal for rainbow stocking. They can be stocked economically and are small enough to be fished out in time to allow a second planting of trout.
If subsequent fish planted in the lakes are to survive, the previous fish must be all caught by the fourth summer from the time of stocking. If some of the originals remain, they have to be removed before new stock can be introduced to the lakes.
It is extremely interesting to note what has been done in that regard, and as a result we have this peculiar situation. We find that a number of the people living in Banff, which is looked upon by many people as a fisherman's paradise, when they want to go fishing go outside the park, either into Alberta or

British Columbia, in order to get fishing. I think it should be possible to improve the fishing in a number of the lakes by a greater program of restocking.
It is interesting to note that a few years ago certain parties in Banff asked permission to start a trout farm in the park. The former minister was greatly interested in that offer and he said he knew of a similar program in Nova Scotia which had been quite a success. At that time he seemed quite keen on the idea of allowing a trout farm to be instituted in Banff. But unfortunately his officials apparently had an entirely different view. They frowned upon the suggestion and drew up a number of requirements that had to be met before permission would be granted. All those requirements were fulfilled, yet in spite of that fact the plan was stalled and I suppose today the whole thing has been given up. I have not heard any more about it lately.
I quite agree that the type of fishing that would be provided by a trout farm would not be in the same class as that provided in the natural form. I think we would all much prefer to do our fishing in a natural stream or a natural lake rather than go to a trout farm for our fishing. On the other hand many families who go into Banff park are not in a position to wander up the streams for many miles. They have their children with them. To them it would be a great thing if they could go to a trout farm, fish and catch a few trout.
As I say, I do not think anything can compare with the joy of going up into the mountains, amongst the fine scenery, in the fine mountain air, to do some fishing. There is only one thing lacking in so far as Banff is concerned, namely fish. And after all, if you are going fishing you need some fish.
I am not suggesting there are no fish in Banff. We all know there are many places in Banff where there is very good fishing; but those points are a number of miles from the highway and, as I say, it is not possible for many people to enjoy that type of fishing. It generally requires equipment which is beyond the means of certain people, or maybe they have not the time to wander 15 miles or so off the beaten track. I therefore hope the minister will give careful consideration to a program of improving the fishing in the natural lakes.
I have met a number of Americans in Banff who have just been boiling mad. They received certain circulars about our wonderful fishing, and how our streams are teeming with fish. I met an American in the store one day. I was in there buying black gnats.
Supply-Northern Affairs He said, "There is no use buying those. I have over $1,000 worth of fishing gear, and I have not caught a fish yet."


Mr. Marlin:: You do not think he is alone, do you?


Victor Quelch: No, he is not alone by any means. There are many of them. Again I will frankly admit that there are spots in Banff where there is good fishing, provided you have the time and the inclination to walk far enough to reach them. But in the lakes that are easily accessible the fishing, generally speaking, is very poor.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Probably you would do better with a bent pin on the end of a string.


Victor Quelch: That is true in a way. I have seen little boys, fishing in the Bow river with a worm and small hook, pull out fish; but they are generally small fish. A grown-up would probably throw the fish back because it would be below legal size. But being little boys they pop them in their pockets and go off home with them.
I have fished with practically everything you can think of, including dry flies, wet flies, nymphs, spinners, gentles, and anything else you like. I have even resorted to worms when I have been desperate; but even so, I found it rather hard to catch fish. I think I am what you might call an average fisherman. I do not claim to be a good one. I have caught plenty of trout in Banff, but the hours I spent in doing so were quite numerous. I have averaged about three hours for every fish I caught. I kept track of them, because in Banff they are very keen about having you fill in creel cards.
When you go fishing they tell you to fill in a creel card. First of all, I found that if I went to the repository for a creel card, as a rule there would be no cards there. Then by the time I got home I would forget to note down all the information. I notice in the creel card reports the time spent catching fish is tabulated, and the average would appear to be three-quarters of an hour or one hour per fish depending on the location. That information is not very accurate because people who go there and fish for hours and do not catch any fish do not bother as a rule to fill out a card. Consequently the reports do not give a very accurate picture of the situation.
There is one other suggestion I should like to make to the minister. The department should bring the "Anglers' Guide" up to date. I notice in that guide there is quite a bit of information that is very much out of date. For instance, they talk about crossing Massive bridge. Massive bridge went out several

Supply-Northern Affairs years ago. There is no bridge there; yet the most recent issue still tells you to cross Massive bridge. There is no bridge to cross unless you can jump across a space of about 30 feet where two spans are missing.
That is all I have to say. I hope the minister will give the matter careful consideration. I know it is not the first time he has been approached about it.


Mr. Brooks:: Mr. Chairman, I listened to the hon. member for Acadia, and all I can say is that the people in his part of the country had better come to New Brunswick national park, where they will really get some fishing. They will not have to fish for a week without any success, because we have some very good trout in our national park, both in the lake and in the different streams.
I do not intend to discuss that phase of our national park tonight. Ours is one of the newest national parks in Canada, if not the newest, and we are very proud of it. It was a very large undertaking and has been most successful. There were many roads and camps to be built. So far as recreation is concerned, there is a fine golf course and there are large picnic grounds. Every year the number of people visiting Fundy national park in New Brunswick is increasing.
We in New Brunswick feel that the man who was largely responsible for the excellent job that has been done there was the superintendent, Mr. Saunders, who was appointed a few years ago on the recommendation of Mr. McNair, I believe, who was then premier of New Brunswick. At the present time the people of New Brunswick, particularly those who are interested in the national park-and we all are-are quite concerned because they understand the superintendent is either to be retired or transferred to some other national park. I should like to ask the minister tonight what is the policy of the department with reference to the transferring of superintendents from one national park to another, why they feel it is necessary to make these transfers, and also what the policy is with reference to the retirement of superintendents of national parks.
I understand our superintendent was advised nearly a year ago that he was going to be transferred to a national park in Manitoba. He is a man about 59 years of age, and has given splendid service in the province of New Brunswick. He understands our situation there as no other man does, and there must be enormous expense involved in transferring a man with all his household effects from New Brunswick to Manitoba and transferring the Manitoba superintendent to the national park in New Brunswick. It seems to

me a poor policy, and one which does not mean any betterment as far as the superintendents are concerned.
I hope the minister will be able to explain this matter satisfactorily because, as I say, the people of New Brunswick are quite concerned. Up until a little over a year ago there was no suggestion whatever of transferring the superintendent of the national park in New Brunswick to any other place, nor any suggestion of his retirement. Mr. Saunders has taken a very active part in the public life of his community. He has been active on practically all committees having anything to do with the betterment of the community, and a little over a year ago he was asked if he would run for the position of councillor in the parish of Alma in the county of Albert, where the park is located.
It may have been and probably was indiscreet on the part of the superintendent to take part in any kind of election, even a council election which is not supposed to be political in any sense of the word. Mr. Saunders allowed himself to be persuaded to run for councillor. He ran against a man who had been in office for a number of years and gave him a trimming. Shortly after Mr. Saunders was notified that he would be transferred to another park. The man he defeated in the election was chairman of the government organization in that particular part of Albert county, and is also a great friend of the former member for Saint John-Albert. The minister shakes his head. I am simply stating what the people in that section of the county and in New Brunswick generally feel. It is their opinion that this man was told he would be transferred to another national park simply because he ran for a council seat in this particular parish.
I hope the minister has a satisfactory explanation tonight, because we are concerned. Here we have had an excellent superintendent for our national park, a man who has given us one of the finest national parks in Canada, and at the age of 59 he is notified that he is to be transferred to Manitoba, that he and his family must take up their roots and go to another part of Canada. He has refused to be transferred to Manitoba, and now he is being retired at the age of 59. I understand his pension is going to be much less than it would be if he had been able to serve his full time.
I have met Mr. Saunders once, but he has never communicated with me in any way. I am simply giving expression tonight to the opinion of many people in my own town of Sussex, which is near the national park, people in the county of Albert and throughout New Brunswick who feel that a great

injustice has been done to a very fine public servant, a man who has given to this national park the very best he had to give. I hope the minister will be able to give a satisfactory explanation and will be able to say to me tonight that no injustice will be done to this man who, I believe, is being asked to retire before he has earned and can be paid the full amount of his retirement allowance.


Jean Lesage: I have never asked Mr. Saunders to retire and I am sure nobody in my department has ever done so. He is retiring by his own choice, of his own will.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Is it not because he does not wish to be transferred?


Jean Lesage: Oh, yes; but it is the policy of the department to move superintendents around in Canada.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: At the age of 59?


Jean Lesage: It is the policy at any age. I will read what I said in the committee with respect to the moving around of departmental personnel, in answer to a question by the hon. member for Calgary North; and may I point out that at the time Mr. Saunders was not being considered. First of all we were discussing wardens, then the hon. member for Calgary North asked me about park superintendents. Here is my answer.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Just a minute. Is it not a fact he has only about six months to serve before he will receive the full amount of his pension?


Jean Lesage: He is not retiring before 60. He is retiring at 60, but he takes his six months' leave before he reaches the age of 60. He will have his pension.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: What is the normal age of retirement?


Jean Lesage: At the age of 60 a civil servant might wish, of his own volition, to retire. That is what he has done.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I want to state this, Mr. Chairman. He was asked to move to Manitoba, and I think the minister will agree with that.


Jean Lesage: Yes, he was asked to move.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Because he did not wish to do so-and I do not think it was fair to ask a man of that age to do so-now he has to retire from the national park in New Brunswick. He did not wish to move his family to Manitoba.


Jean Lesage: May I give my explanation, Mr. Chairman? I believe I have let the hon. member for Royal make his statement without interruption. May I say again that this
50433-238$
Supply-Northern Affairs department is not retiring Mr. Saunders. Mr. Saunders chose to offer his resignation when he was told that he would be transferred. Rather than be transferred he answered that he wished to retire at the age of 60, and his resignation was accepted. He will get his civil service pension.
May I quote the policy of the department as set out in the committee proceedings, and as I explained it when there was no question about Mr. Saunders. I am reading from page 638 of the estimates committee report:
I believe it is a good thing to move superintendents around every five years or so for the following reasons: First, the superintendents will have gathered experience and they will go to a park with new ideas for that park. Secondly, psychologically when a man comes into a new post he will be wanting to make a good job of it. But after five, six, seven or eight years he might settle down and we are afraid he will lack imagination . . .


Douglas Scott Harkness: When you stay five years-


Hon.   Mr. Lesage@: Five years or more.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I would be inclined to agree because I would not look on five years as being a frequent move.
When Mr. Saunders was told that he would be transferred in accordance with the policy of the department-it had been the policy before I became minister-he decided to retire. My predecessor in office, who is behind me now, is telling me that was his policy.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: How many have been transferred, may I ask?


Jean Lesage: Since 1953 there have been' five transferred, out of a total of 16 park superintendents.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: What were their ages?


Jean Lesage: Age has nothing to do with it. We transfer them every five or six years. A man of 59 still has six years left, and the intention was to move superintendent Bryant from Kootenay park to Fundy and to move superintendent Saunders to Kootenay park.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: What was the date of that?


Jean Lesage: The decision was in March, 1954. My predecessor just tells me-I came into the department in the fall of 1953- that there had been a question about moving Mr. Saunders before I came into the department, so it was not new. That was in accordance with departmental policy. No wrong has been done to Mr. Saunders. On the contrary, rather than be transferred he decided on his own to offer his resignation and take his pension. There is no injustice to Mr. Saunders.


Mr. Blackmore:: I have no desire to detain the committee for very long. I wish to tell the minister that the Lethbridge federal riding thinks he is doing an exceedingly good

Supply-Northern Affairs job. They greatly appreciated having him come out and visit them last year. They were delighted with the impression he made, and with the fact that he seemed to have learned everything there was to be known about Waterton Lakes park in the short time he was there. He seemed to fit right into the scheme of things. We bid him welcome any time he chooses to visit us.
We believe also that the progress that has been made during the last two or three years in connection with the park is satisfactory. I should like to take this opportunity of thanking the present Minister of Public Works, who was the predecessor of the present minister of northern affairs, for appointing to Waterton Lakes park as superintendent Mr. J. H. Atkinson. I think Mr. Atkinson's coming was the greatest blessing that ever happened to the park. I would be pleased to have the present minister forget to transfer Mr. Atkinson when his five or so years are up. Just let him stay on there, because he seems to fit into that park almost as well as the Waterton lakes do.
We feel that the amount of money that has been expended on the park this year is quite satisfactory. Indeed, we can understand that in a year in which the government has felt it necessary to save a little bit more money than they have in times past, they appropriated as much as seemed fitting under the circumstances.
We would like, however, to have more money next year, and for this reason. We feel that one of the essentials in making Waterton Lakes park the dream park which we all, including the minister, wish it to be, would be a fine swimming pool in the park. This should not be a swimming pool alone, but a building in which people could take refuge in case of stormy, windy, cold or wet weather which sometimes comes to that part for two or three days. We believe that a fine building, erected as an attraction both winter and summer to house a swimming pool, would be so great an asset to that park that the necessary money, probably $300,000 or $400,000, would be money exceedingly well spent. We would ask the minister to do all he possibly can to impress the treasury board with the idea that they should extend themselves a little for a year or two while they build that swimming pool.
I think nothing more needs to be said, except to report to the minister that, so far as 1 know, everything in Waterton Lakes park is going along as well as could be expected. We are just waiting for the days to come and go while we grow in Waterton Lakes park. While I do not propose to contest
[Mr. Blackmore.i
what the hon. member for Bow River and several others have said about their respective parks being the very best, I would probably question the standard by which they judge parks.
In closing I would point out that Waterton Lakes park is of exceptional importance because it is the front window of Canada in that particular area. It is right down against Glacier national park, being located at the extreme southwest corner of Alberta. It is the park to which United States tourists come to get an impression of Canada, which impression will cause them either to go far into the interior, away into the northland, or turn around and go back. We all want them to go far into the interior, away into the northland. We say, therefore, let us pay particular attention to making Waterton Lakes the very finest park in Canada, whether or not it is so now.


Mr. Regier:: I should like to once again raise a matter I mentioned in this house a year ago. I noticed that after the last session the minister spent some time in making a number of visits to some of our national parks. I should like to recommend that the next time he comes to British Columbia he pay a call on the minister of fisheries there and ask that minister to take him on a tour of a provincial park. He will probably have to go by saddle horse. I am referring, of course, to Garibaldi provincial park, which I feel is a park that, once developed, would be Canada's leading national park.
Last year I asked the minister about this, and he expressed the interest of his department in taking over from the provincial government the responsibility for the development of Garibaldi park. The minister stated some conditions that would have to be met before his department could consider taking it over. One condition was that a first-class highway be constructed to the entrance of the park. We have a first-class highway, the Lougheed highway, that runs to within two or three miles of the southern entrance to Garibaldi. I think the minister had in mind at that time a first-class highway that would give access to the northern entrance. I understand that the government of British Columbia is now proceeding with the Howe Sound highway, and this highway, when completed, will give access to the northern entrance of the park. Therefore that condition is being met.
The other condition mentioned was that the provincial government be prepared to hand over all interest in the park, and this would include all interest in the mineral

resources. 1 understand that former governments of British Columbia-not the present government-when considering this matter always hesitated to hand over the mineral rights to the federal government. There was the feeling that possibly they were handing over to a higher level of government untold millions of dollars by way of future mineral royalties.
As one of the daily newspapers pointed out only some six months ago, this would be a very shortsighted policy for the government of British Columbia to adopt. While 50 years from now they might obtain $10 million, $15 million, or even $20 million in royalties from minerals that might be found at that time, in the meantime the provincial coffers were annually losing untold millions of dollars from tourists who would visit this park if the development were begun now. I hope that attitude of former governments of British Columbia is not being adopted by the government we now have in British Columbia. I hope the minister will be able to report some progress in the negotiations, or at least be able to report that over the past year he has commenced negotiations.
I would not like him to think he has to leave the initiation of such negotiations to the provincial government. The development of Garibaldi park is beyond the resources of the government of British Columbia. We cannot begin to develop Garibaldi park for less than $30 million, and the government of British Columbia simply is not in a position to begin spending that kind of money on one item. It would be in the national interest to develop this park. I say this, and I have endorsation of it in statements made on other occasions in other places by the Minister of Fisheries. Garibaldi park has the potential to become one of the most famous parks not only of Canada but of the whole world. I believe the Minister of Fisheries is responsible for saying that while he had looked at practically all of the world's famous ski resorts, not one of them, even those in the Alps mountains, would be able to hold up against this park in British Columbia if it were developed.
One of the first things necessary for that development, of course, would be a highway from the southern end right through the park to the northern end, and that is where many millions of dollars enter the picture. It is possible that a bridge would also have to be constructed across the Fraser river at Haney to handle the tourist traffic we would be sure to have from the south.
I would also very much like to see Garibaldi park developed as a national park soon.
Supply-Northern Affairs I am not opposed to, and I endorse, the development of the national parks we now have in Canada, and I would like to see even more developed, but in the lower mainland most of our people live within a hundred miles of the city of Vancouver. Out of a population of 1,250,000 people in the province, some 750,000 live within a hundred miles of Vancouver. These people have only limited park facilities available to them. On Sunday about the only place they can go is to Stanley park; and if you visit Stanley park on a Sunday afternoon you find the place is literally crowded with people. It has reached the stage that if you want to relax in Stanley park you have to go there on a Monday or a Tuesday, when most people are at work. It is urgent that we have park facilities available offering fairly easy access to the 750,00Q people.
It is all very well to say that British Columbia has national parks. The national parks in British Columbia are hundreds of miles removed from where most of the people live. In our lower mainland area we have tens of thousands of people who have no means of transportation available. These people receive absolutely no advantage from the development of our national parks that are away off in the Rocky mountains. It is on behalf of those people in the lower mainland who need the park, who have not the wherewithal to spend several weeks hundreds of miles away from home, who would be glad to make use of public transportation facilities at a cost of 75 cents or a dollar, that I speak. It could become one of the most wonderful playgrounds of the Dominion of Canada.
On behalf of these three-quarters of a million taxpayers of Canada, I urge that further negotiations should take place. If the negotiations have not yet begun I hope they definitely will begin, and that this government will not wait for the government of British Columbia to take the initiative in this matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
300. Grant in aid of the development of the international peace garden in Manitoba, $10,000.
Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I hear groans coming from the backbenchers, but I assure the groaners that I shall not carry on at any great length with this subject. I mentioned this topic during the discussion in the committee on estimates. The only reason I raise it now is that I know the minister would be disappointed if I did not make some reference to it, and I know that at least the chairman also would be disappointed, because he is one of those fortunate men who had the opportunity during the past summer to visit

Supply-Northern Affairs the international peace garden on the Manitoba-North Dakota boundary.
I want to express appreciation to the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources for continuing this $10,000 grant in aid of the development of the international peace garden, which began as a voluntary effort on the part of the peoples of Canada and the United States to symbolize the universal desire for peace. The cairn marking the spot, which was dedicated in 1932, is inscribed as follows:
To God in His Glory
We two nations dedicate this garden and pledge ourselves that as long as men shall live, we will not take up arms against one another.
I should point out that the garden which began as a symbol of the universal desire for peace has now developed into one of the outstanding tourist attractions in the midcontinental area of North America. I have often heard travellers in Canada say they like to visit the scenic spots in the Rocky mountain district or that they enjoy travelling in Ontario, Quebec and the maritimes, but they indicate they are not too inspired with our flat, level prairies in the centre part of the country.
Here is a development which has offset that vacuum in tourist attractions which has existed in the centre of our country. Not only from the standpoint of its own scenic beauty but also from the standpoint of its symbolic appeal is it drawing increasingly large numbers of tourists. Although this is not a part of our system of national parks it certainly can be regarded as an extension.
I would venture to say that the fact Riding Mountain national park attracted 500,000 visitors last year was due in large part to the visitors who were interested in the international peace garden and then continued on some hundred miles further north to the Riding Mountain national park.
In reality the international peace garden is an international park and today it is creating world-wide interest. It is because of this growing interest that I venture to say a few words tonight so the matter may be kept before hon. members of this house and the people of Canada as a whole.
As I have indicated, this is a co-operative effort by the peoples of Canada and the United States. I should like to compare the support we are giving this garden to that given by the United States. Their grant amounts to $100,000 for a period of three years, which means that they are providing $33,000 per annum as against our $10,000. As indicative of the significance of this international peace garden I might say that the
[Mr. Dinsdale.l
state of North Dakota is adding to its automobile licence plates the phrase "the peace garden state". That form of publicity will go a long way in popularizing the development among the peoples of North Dakota and the United States as a whole.
One further comment on this item. I notice that the grant for the national battlefields commission is being increased from $100,000 to $125,000 and also that the grant to provide for special work at national battlefields park, Quebec, is being increased from $6,000 to $8,000. Just in case they have forgotten, I should like to remind hon. members of the committee that up until three years ago the annual grant to the international peace garden was $15,000. Then it disappeared for a year and was restored at the reduced rate of $10,000 per annum. As an investment in the cause of peace I believe this development is unparalleled. Moreover, I should like to emphasize that every dollar expended in the development of the garden will be returned in manifold ways because of its powerful attraction as a tourist centre.
It is my belief that in the not too far distant future we shall see the United States establishing a suitable building as a museum on their side of the garden area. The question of making the international peace garden a national arboretum is under consideration, and inevitably Canada will be forced to think along the same lines if this development continues to capture the imagination of people on both sides of the border as well as people throughout the world.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: Mr. Chairman, I want to back up what the hon. member for Brandon-Souris has said. I lived in Souris for six years, and those with whom I was associated were intensely interested in this park. The latest report I have had is that the superintendent of the park treats the tourists so well that they want to come back again.


Mr.   Pomraer@: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words in support of what the hon. member for Brandon-Souris has said. This is one time when I can support a proposal of my hon. friend, and I do it with a great deal of pleasure. The hon. member has covered the history and background of this worthy project, and I would like to ask the minister to consider increasing the grant. As has been pointed out, the United States grant is $100,000 for three years, whereas ours is $10,000 a year. I believe the grant should be doubled, not only from the tourist attraction standpoint but because of the great work that has been done in this international peace garden.

I am not going to repeat what the hon. member for Brandon-Souris has said, but I should like to quote the last paragraph of this pamphlet giving the history and progress of the international peace garden, this being the revised edition for 1953. It reads:
Perhaps the most encouraging aspect of the year has been the realization of internationalism in the garden. Not only has there been over three times the number of visitors of the previous year, but they have come from 48 states and 10 provinces on this continent, and nine countries of the world beyond. In June, there was a pilgrimage of the National Council of Women of Canada, during their convention, to the garden; and in the fall, the Associated Countrywomen of the World sent delegates from many countries to the garden. An international relations conference of students from the Minot state college of North Dakota and the students of Brandon college, Brandon, Manitoba, added further significance to the garden; while the annual meeting of the garden itself in early September forms the focal point of the year's work. Through the international addresses of prominent people of both countries at this time the citizens get the "timeless vision that peace is something to cherish, that it is something one has to work for, and that here people are working to erect not statues and memorials to commemorate victory in war or valor in combat, but instead a lovely garden to honor and laud peace itself."
For that reason alone, if for no other, we should make a little greater contribution than in the past.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, just to make it unanimous may I join with my friends from the province of Manitoba in supporting the expressions of appreciation and the appeals they have made. I am very glad this grant was restored a year or two ago. In my view those who preceded me are perfectly right in their suggestion that we might well increase the amount of the grant to the international peace garden.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
303. Canadian wildlife service-wildlife resources conservation and development, including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, $455,703.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I should like to make a few observations on this item. Before going on to the particular matter which I rose to mention, I wish to say that I listened with great interest to the hon. member for Acadia, and after listening to him I can fully appreciate now why he is called the Izaak Walton of the Social Credit party. I suggest to the member that it would be much less expensive to visit Kootenay West if he wants to catch some fish, rather than to spend all that money in the area the hon. member mentioned.
However, the hon. member for The Battle-fords was called away unexpectedly this afternoon and he asked me to bring to the minister's attention something of particular interest to some of his constituents as well
Supply-Northern Affairs as persons in other parts of Canada. He has received representations from various people protesting the use of steel traps in the Northwest Territories. The argument in favour of these representations by these people is that, while we live in a Christian civilization, we still promote primitive and cruel methods of trapping, particularly the use of steel traps in the Northwest Territories.
I am informed that, owing to the length of the trap lines, the traps are frequently not emptied for a month at a time. Naturally this causes days of suffering and a great deal of misery to the fur-bearing animals. They slowly die from their injuries or from starvation in the cold. The hon. member has asked me to bring to the minister's attention the fact that the law in the United States at the present time requires that every trap in a registered trap line must be visited at least once every 24 hours.
Anyone who understands anything about trapping-and I had a 15-mile trap line myself at one time-will realize that that is impossible. I am informed that in Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Germany steel traps for the trapping of fur-bearing animals are completely prohibited by law. They have replaced the system of steel traps. A more humane form of trap has been found quite satisfactory by the trappers in those countries.
The hon. member for The Battlefords brought to my attention, before he left this afternoon, that last year the Prime Minister of Canada sent a special message of best wishes to the Ottawa organization of the "Be Kind to Animals" week, and expressed his interest in the efforts of the organization to promote the humane treatment of animals. That is a clear indication that the Prime Minister of this country is very much interested in that question. I think you can relate the catching of fur-bearing animals with steel traps to that sort of approach to the question of the humane treatment of animals.
I realize all the difficulties connected with this problem. As I said before, I have done some trapping myself, and it is not so easy to find a replacement as one might imagine if one has had no experience in that line. But those making representations to the hon. member for The Battlefords suggest that the department would be well advised to investigate the methods used in other countries, particularly the countries I have mentioned, where they have completely abolished the use of steel traps for the catching of fur-bearing animals and now have a humane form of trap. The department could investigate the possibilities of replacing steel traps in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon and, as

Supply-Northern Affairs they were gradually replaced, assisting the trappers to purchase the new form of humane trap by means of a subsidy after the fashion of the subsidy given to Quebec farmers to purchase aluminum pails for the gathering of sap.
I bring these matters to the attention of the minister at the request of the hon. member for The Battlefords. I suggest that the minister go into the whole question and have it investigated, and possibly set a target date for the elimination of the use of steel traps for the catching of fur-bearing animals, because of the cruelty involved therein.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering and water resources branch-
305. Branch administration, $54,283.
Douglas Scott Harkness: I believe this is the point at which the hon. member for St. Paul's was told previously by the minister that he should bring up the matter about which he had begun to speak in connection with flood warnings. As he was unable to be here tonight he asked me to raise this matter.
The hon. member for St. Paul's is of the opinion that the great loss of life which occurred owing to "Hurricane Hazel" in and around the vicinity of Toronto could very well have been prevented if the people in those low-lying valleys had had a few hours' warning of what the height of water was likely to be as a result of the very heavy rains which had occurred. He was also of the opinion that this rainfall was known to the meteorological officers, and that warning could have been given. He asked me to take up the question with the minister as to whether any arrangements exist or have been put into effect since that time to give people warning of what height of flood water may be expected following a heavy storm.
We all know, of course, that once the water has fallen it takes a considerable length of time for the run-off to go down and reach an area such as that around Toronto where all this flooding took place. That provides sufficient time, as long as warning is given, for the people to evacuate any low-lying areas; or, if they are not willing to evacuate them, it gives sufficient time for the police to forcibly take them out of those areas, thus avoiding tragedies such as those which took place in the Toronto area.


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, the responsibilities and duties of the water resources division were explained at length in the committee, but I do not recall that that question of flood warning was raised there.


Douglas Scott Harkness: No.


Jean Lesage: What was mentioned in the committee was that this department, through its water resources division, was co-operating with the provinces in collecting the readings and gauging the levels of the streams all the year round. We communicate to the provincial authorities the readings of the levels of the rivers at regular intervals and, when the water rises, communications are more frequent. As a matter of fact this is done regularly for the Columbia river, the Bow river, the Fraser river, the Assiniboine river and the Red river, among others, but in the case of the Humber river I would have to look into it to ascertain if we have gauging stations on that river. We have some gauging stations on the Humber, but there have never been any flood warning arrangements there.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Might I ask the minister this question. In all those areas where they have these gauging stations and where there are low-lying river bottoms where possibly serious damage, serious loss of life and so forth could take place in the event of a flood, cannot a warning system be instituted in order to prevent this sort of thing in the future? I refer not just to Toronto but any place else in the country.


Jean Lesage: I was just discussing that matter with my officials. We will look into the matter and will co-operate fully with the provinces so they may be advised constantly of the water levels, especially when they rise suddenly.


Mr. Trainor:: I should like to call the attention of the minister to the serious condition that exists in Saskatchewan and Manitoba as a result of the flooding of the Assiniboine river. The drainage basin of that river covers a large area, namely some 60,000 square miles. Owing to the fact that the river runs through a country with alluvial soil, it is subject to silting. As a consequence the river bottom has been rising and the river has been subjected to flooding almost yearly, of late years, with a great deal of damage to farm lands-


Jean Lesage: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, may I say that the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources has no responsibility at all for flood damage. As I explained in the committee, the only responsibilities of the water resources branch, as far as rivers across the country are concerned and the levels of the rivers, are to study those levels by engineering surveys for development of the rivers and also, in cooperation with the provinces, to establish some gauging stations and to read the levels. The responsibility for flood prevention and

flood damage does not come under this department at all. There is no item which covers that matter.


Owen C. Trainor: Mr. Chairman, I am not suggesting that the department assume any responsibility for flood damage. However, I am assuming that the department have a certain responsibility for flood control. The minister himself has indicated that they have some responsibility for surveys in co-operation with the provinces. I suggest that in these estimates there is an item indicating an expenditure for damage on the Conestogo river. How would the minister classify that expenditure?


Jean Lesage: This was for water conservation, under a special agreement that was made with the government of Ontario under which we provided 37J per cent of the cost. There is a special item for that expenditure in the estimates. This was not especially for flood control but for water conservation.


Owen C. Trainor: The item referred to by the minister is item 310. I shall read it for his benefit:
To provide for a contribution to the cost of constructing a dam on the Conestogo river near Glen Allan, Ontario, for the purposes of flood control and water conservation, in accordance with the terms of an agreement entered into between Canada and the province of Ontario.


Jean Lesage: Yes, but flood control is still a provincial responsibility. Unless we have a request from a provincial government for participation under the Canada Water Conservation Assistance Act there is no responsibility on the part of this department for flood control. The present situation on the Assini-boine river has nothing to do with this department, or I should say this department has nothing to do with the present situation on the Assiniboine river. That is better.


Owen C. Trainor: I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, there is a possibility that the provincial government might seek the assistance of the minister's department in the same way the government of Ontario sought it in connection with the Conestogo river.


Jean Lesage: All right. When we have it we will consider it.


Owen C. Trainor: Perhaps it would not be amiss if one might briefly state what P.F.R.A. have recommended.


Jean Lesage: That is the Department of Agriculture, Mr. Chairman.


Owen C. Trainor: One does not know whether the Department of Agriculture will do anything. They have made engineering surveys and a recommendation. But the Department
Supply-Northern Affairs of Agriculture are not doing anything. As a consequence, year by year the farmers in the Assiniboine river area are obliged to suffer this flood damage. This is costing them millions of dollars year by year.
I could, of course, take this matter up under the estimates of the Department of Agriculture, but I suggest that possibly the minister's department might collaborate with the Department of Agriculture or with the provincial government in some way, as was done in Ontario, so this condition could be ameliorated. However, if the minister does not want to hear such a recommendation I do not suppose I have any alternative but to desist.


Mr. Patterson:: Mr. Chairman, there is one matter I should like to bring to the attention of the government at this time. I have reason to assume that it fits into this particular part of the debate. However, if I am out of order I am sure I shall soon be reminded about it.
The matter has to do with a situation existing on the Vedder river in British Columbia. In this connection I had submitted to me a brief containing letters starting at May 15, 1952 and bringing the matter right up to a very recent date. These communications are between Mr. Mulford, the clerk of the corporation of the township of Chilliwack and Mr. Cruickshank, a former member of parliament, and also between other officials of different departments.
Just to bring the matter to the attention of the committee I should like to read a brief section from a letter written by Mr. Mulford, the clerk of the corporation of the township of Chilliwack, to Mr. Cruickshank, dated May 15, 1952. It is as follows:
I understand you are aware of the proposed scheme to define and construct a permanent channel for the Vedder river, between the Vedder canal and the Vedder crossing bridge. The interested parties to this scheme at the present time are the provincial government, district of Sumas and the township of Chilliwack.
In the past, the river between these points has been allowed to wander, eating away at the banks and causing periodic flooding. Also there is always the danger of the river jumping its banks and flooding that area between Sardis and the canal in the township, thereby severing the trans-Canada highway, or moving through Yarrow and thereby flooding Sumas municipality.
That is just part of that letter. As I have intimated, I have other communications under various dates with reference to this matter. On August 2 there is a letter signed by Mr. Cruickshank and directed to Mr. Mulford. It reads as follows:
Re: Vedder river project.
The latest that I have from the Minister of Public Works re the above is as follows:-

Supply-Northern Affairs
This correspondence has been carried on with various departments.
-"In view of the interest as represented by other dominion government departments, I am not in a position to make any statement at present but am referring this matter to the other departments concerned to learn if they have any responsibility in contributing to the cost of the project if the latter can be shown to be the responsibility of this federal government."
On October 29, 1952, there was a letter from K. W. Morton, district engineer of the Department of Public Works, to Mr. E. S. Jones, deputy minister of the department of public works of the province of British Columbia. This letter sets out the attitude of the various departments of the government of Canada with respect to this project. I am not going to take time to read it all, but with respect to the military establishment, the Royal Canadian School of Military Engineering at Chilliwack, it states:
This area also was not affected by the 1948 flood. Indeed during the period of this flood the Vedder river did not rise beyond the existing dike at this spot and the camp was at no time threatened.
It also refers to a letter from the Minister of National Health and Welfare in which it was stated that without having information from officers on the spot it was difficult to make a comment, but if his memory served him well the hospital-referring to the Coqualeetza Indian hospital-was not involved in the severe flood of recent years.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order. I am going to ask the hon. member's co-operation. The Chair in these cases finds itself in a rather difficult position, because sometimes we do not have detailed knowledge of what are the duties and responsibilities of the departments. I would draw to the attention of the hon. member for Fraser Valley that it is the estimates of the engineering and water resources branch of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources that we are considering at the moment, and that the responsibility, if any, of the federal government for river bank protection and flood control as such does not, I believe, come under this department. Engineering studies for the purpose of making provision against such calamities do.
Not more than a few moments ago the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre agreed with the minister that the matter of flood control on certain Manitoba rivers and the liability, if any, of the federal government in connection with floods should not be discussed under this department. I realize the hon. member for Fraser Valley will most likely point out to me that three or four items further on there is a specific item dealing with surveys and investigations in

the Fraser river basin, and I think the river he is now discussing comes within the Fraser river basin.
However, I take it the committee will not mind if I put the matter this way. There are a great many rivers in Canada which may flood, and I do not believe it is within the duties of the committee to discuss flood damage, and certainly not flood consequences, on these items. I am not ruling the hon. member out of order. I am asking him to bear in mind the remarks I have made, and I would ask that if he and other members who have rivers within their jurisdictions consider it necessary to bring to the attention of the minister of the department the necessity for surveys or investigations in connection with possible flood control, they do so as briefly as possible.
The consequent results to the trans-Canada highway or any other installation do not, I think, come within the ambit of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. The Department of Public Works might be given the duty of building protective works, but certainly it is not the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources which can accept liability for the federal authority, as has been done in previous cases in the Fraser valley and other places, as the result of calamity. I think hon. members will realize the difficulty in which both the minister and myself find ourselves, and will co-operate.


An hon. Member:: He will be as brief as possible.


Alexander Bell Patterson: The reason I raise this matter under these estimates is that there has been correspondence with the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources in this connection, and personal representations have also been made to him. However, if that is the ruling of the Chair I shall abide by it.
Perhaps I might conclude the matter very briefly. As I have intimated, I have had these different communications with reference to the various installations in that area. The matter has been brought to the attention of the department on a number of occasions, but apparently up to the present time the minister has not seen his way clear to accept any responsibility in connection with the situation on the Vedder river. We have presented different plans, and I am going to request the minister to reconsider the submissions that have been made asking for assistance with respect to this project. It is of considerable magnitude, and certainly the municipalities are not able to handle it. A great deal of inconvenience and damage can

result to the surrounding areas, and on behalf of the people there I ask the minister to consider the whole situation again.


Jean Lesage: I shall with pleasure, and I will certainly write the hon. member to let him know of my decision after reconsideration.


Mr. Monteith:: Could the minister tell me what stage has been reached in the consideration of the brief presented by the upper Thames valley conservation authority?


Jean Lesage: The government is considering the matter.


Jay Waldo Monteith: That was the reply the minister gave me in the committee. I presume some further consideration has been given since that time, has it?


Jean Lesage: Further consideration has been given in the department. I just said that the government was considering the matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
308. To provide for studies and surveys of the Columbia river watershed in Canada, $641,360.
Frederick George Hahn: I do not think this expenditure is completely justifiable. My reason for saying so is the evidence that was submitted to the estimates committee on March 24. I should like to read certain extracts from that evidence to substantiate my statement, and also a newspaper report of a statement attributed to a member of the international joint commission on fisheries. At page 493 there is the following:


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I see, and the item abovetopographical services-shows a substantial increase. Would that be for the same reason?


Hon.   Mr. Lesage@: I mentioned that there was an increase of $250,000 in respect of the study of the feasibility of the diversion-$100,000 for topographical services, $50,000 in drilling investigation, and $100,000 for other professional and special services. We are pretty sure we shall have to go outside our department to have a good part of this work done under contract, for the reason which I have explained, namely, the lack of technical staff.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Will this increase be likely to do this work?


Hon.   Mr. Lesage@: We believe it is a beginning. We do not know exactly when it will be possible to give the answer.


Douglas Scott Harkness: It is likely to continue for more than one year?


Alexander Bell Patterson: I think with regard to the diversion study, this year's investigation could show that it was not feasible. In other words we could get information in the first year, in a negative way, to see that there would be no point in going any further.
I am not going to misconstrue that into saying the department thinks at the outset that the project is not feasible.
But if the information which we obtained this year were promising, and particularly if it were a border-line case, we would have to conduct further
Supply-Northern Affairs
studies before we could actually determine whether this project was feasible or not, and then it would be quite likely we should need to continue for another year, or maybe for two years.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Is the reason you wish to divert this river-i-


Hon.   Mr. Lesage@: We do not at this time "want" to divert this river. It is not our responsibility for the present to do more than find out whether it would be economically feasible.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Do you want to divert it so you can use water which the Americans would otherwise use?


Hon.   Mr. Lesage@: In order to regulate the flow of the Fraser river and have some power sites on the Fraser river which are impossible now.
That is the important part of the question so far as I am concerned. The suggestion is that we might have power sites on the Fraser river. Lest there be any mistake as to interpretation, later the hon. member for Calgary North asked this question:


Douglas Scott Harkness: And your dam sites would be on the Fraser?


Hon.   Mr. Lesage@: The possibility would be that there would be a series of sites on the river.
On Saturday, April 23, the Vancouver Herald had this to say about power sites, and I quote the heading, "Reid Warns Dams Will Kill Salmon Industry; Fish Must Be Protected Against Obstacle Course." The article reads:
Individual dams or series of dams in the Fraser river would kill the multi-million-dollar sockeye salmon fishery, as long as no method of protecting the fish is found. Senator Tom Reid told the Herald Friday.


Jean Lesage: Could I ask the hon. member to say who signed this article, and to describe what his knowledge is as to the effect of possible dams on the Fraser river on the salmon fisheries? I should like to know what importance we have to attach to the article from which the hon. member is reading.


Frederick George Hahn: If you will just let me continue to read it, you will discover.


Jean Lesage: I have a right to know who signed that article-


Frederick George Hahn: Senator Reid.


Jean Lesage: -and what his qualifications are.


Frederick George Hahn: Senator Tom Reid.
The senator was commenting on a recent proposal of General A. G. L. McNaughton, that water be carried from Columbia river to the Fraser by means of a series of dams, for hydroelectric power purposes.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Frederick George Hahn: I see the minister is highly amused at the statement that it could be Senator Reid. Senator Reid is chairman of the international Pacific sockeye commission. I think possibly it might be highly amusing to the minister to discover that the chairman
3772	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs of an international commission for the protection of sockeye salmon is somewhat disturbed about the possibility that there might be a series of danis on the Fraser river. I feel that the senator has had considerably more to do with the fishing industry than any other member in this house. He had a considerable amount to do with the installation of the method of getting these fish up the Fraser river past Hell's Gate at an earlier time when there was considerable difficulty in protecting the salmon.
I wonder just exactly what investigation has been made at this time to ensure that there will be protection for the fishery on the Fraser river.


Jean Lesage: That is what the whole study is for, and that is why I was asking who the expert was who could say in advance what the result of the surveys will be. The surveys are for the purpose of indicating, among other things, if it is possible to divert the waters of the Columbia river into the Fraser river without endangering the fisheries of the Fraser river. They will indicate also if it is economically feasible and advantageous, but the first condition is that it does not harm the fisheries. That is exactly why these studies are going to be made, and that is why I was surprised to hear that somebody already had the answer before the surveys were made.


Frederick George Hahn: Are you planning to discover whether you can divert the river before you discover whether or not the fish can make the grade up half a dozen dams on the Fraser river?


Jean Lesage: It is all part of the study, because the effect on the fish depends on the height and character of the dams and on the volume of water that might be diverted. The whole study is integrated. You cannot give an answer to one part of the question without giving an answer to the whole question.


Frederick George Hahn: That is why I am objecting to this particular expenditure, because you are now proposing to take water from the Columbia river to a particular spot up on the mountainside, and then divert it down into the Fraser, without knowing first whether or not the fish will live.


Jean Lesage: I have to interrupt the hon. member because I did not say we were proposing to divert the waters of the Columbia to the Fraser. I said we would ask parliament to provide the money to study the possibility of that diversion, to see if it would be possible to divert these waters to the economic advantage of Canada without endangering the salmon fishery of the Fraser. It seems to me that is pretty clear.


Frederick George Hahn: It is quite clear that you do not want to divert the river at this time, you just want to spend money to find out if it is feasible.


Jean Lesage: Without endangering the fisheries.


Frederick George Hahn: Before wondering if the diversion is feasible, why not find out if the salmon will make it?


Jean Lesage: We know the diversion is
physically possible, but what we are looking for is the answer-


Douglas Scott Harkness: What is physically possible is financially possible.


Jean Lesage: I do not want to get into an argument about economic theories tonight. We want to know if it is economically feasible, without endangering the fishery; we know it is physically possible.


Frederick George Hahn: You know it is physically possible, then why have you put in here that you want to discover if it is feasible?


Jean Lesage: Economically feasible.


Frederick George Hahn: I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that before looking into the economics of it we should discover whether or not- apparently the minister meant economically possible, though he did not say so in his answer-the salmon industry is going to be destroyed. This fact could be discovered through the international commission without spending this sum of $641,360. If the fish cannot make the grade, as I said earlier, we are just throwing this $641,360 down the drain.


Mr. Green:: My question concerning this item, Mr. Chairman, is a little different from that of the hon. member for New Westminster. As the minister knows, a lot of impatience has been developing with regard to this Columbia river basin. The provincial government is in a great hurry to get projects moving in that area, and the United States interests seem to be in a great hurry as well.
I am wondering whether the amount of this vote is such that there can be some speeding up of the investigations into the Columbia river basin in Canada. We have understood from General McNaughton that it will be some years before this survey is completed.
I do notice that the vote this year is considerably higher than the vote last year. Is there any way in which the investigations can be brought to a conclusion at an earlier date than had been expected?


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, may I say we hope that by next year we shall know definitely whether a diversion is economically feasible under the conditions I just mentioned.

Suppose that diversion is not feasible. Then we shall know right there that, whatever the total plans for the Columbia are, a dam at Mica creek could be built. That is what I am informed by General McNaughton.


Howard Charles Green: You know that now, do you not?


Jean Lesage: Yes, we know that now; but of course it would make a difference at Mica if there is to be a diversion. By next year we shall know definitely about the kind of dam that can be built at Mica.
I do not want to enter into the work of another committee, Mr. Chairman, but this is linked up with what is going on in that committee. It is a sure thing that it will take some time before we can hope to have an understanding with the United States authorities on downstream benefits, and I believe that is the first thing we should do. We should ask the international joint commission, which is the body best prepared for that, to try to work out a formula of some kind for downstream benefits adaptable to all cases; or if such formula cannot be found the international joint commission could agree on a list of principles in order of priority from which a formula could be worked out in each case for downstream benefits.
But again, Mr. Chairman, I am myself out of order, and I shall ask the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra to allow me next Wednesday, when I come before the committee as a witness, to explain the whole question as regards the implications of downstream benefits, and the full studies on the Columbia and the possibility of a diversion.


Howard Charles Green: Does this vote provide also for a study of the possibility of diverting the upper waters of the Kootenay river into the headquarters of the Columbia river?


Jean Lesage: Yes, it deals with the Columbia reference as a whole, I am informed.


Howard Charles Green: Is that survey to be concluded during the present fiscal year?


Jean Lesage: Yes.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I listened to the hon. member for New Westminster who quoted Senator Reid. In the other place, and in other places, he has expressed the opinion that this proposed investigation of the Columbia is a most feasible and reasonable project. He is fully in favour of the investigation, and has expressed every confidence in General McNaughton as one who will consider all aspects of the situation.


Frederick George Hahn: I am very pleased to get that information from the hon. member who has
Supply-Northern Affairs just taken his seat. But I wish to say this. As I said before, I do not think this expenditure is fully justified in view of what the senator had to say later. I quote from the same article, and these remarks are in quotation marks:
"After 20 years of study, no one yet has found a way of getting the little fingerling salmon safely over a dam or through a turbine," Senator Reid
said.
The fingerling is the year to year and a half old salmon on its way from the spawning ground out to sea.
The last statement is not in quotation marks. I think we might save the expense of this examination. The senator seems to speak with authority. He says:
"In three years of research, our commission has found that at a 250-foot dam, the mortality rate for fingerlings is 65 per cent," the senator said.
There have been three years of research already. I continue with the quotation:
"Everyone has been talking about this mortality rate, but we were the first body in North America to find out the exact facts about it."
This gentleman has a very responsible position, and he certainly seems to be speaking with authority. I do not see the need for an expenditure of $641,360 if we already have the facts of the matter. If he is incapable of acting on the commission, I suggest he be asked to resign.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Since this matter has come up, I should like to make one or two remarks. I should like to make it clear that I certainly do not agree with the hon. member for New Westminster in regard to the inadvisability of the amount included in this vote. I am much more inclined to agree with the point of view expressed by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, that if by virtue of an increase in this grant the progress of this survey can be speeded up, I would be quite willing to support it.
Since the relationship between the possible development of the Fraser river system for power purposes and the sockeye salmon fishery has been mentioned, it would be useful to this committee and to those who are particularly concerned with the problem, if the minister could give us some indication of the form of liaison that has been set up or is contemplated between the work being done by the international joint commission, Canadian section, and the officers and personnel of his department who will be under their direction, and the Pacific salmon fisheries commission, the fisheries research board and the federal Department of Fisheries. There is no question but that this matter is vital to the people of British Columbia, and they will want to be satisfied about any developments that take place on the Fraser.

Supply-Northern Affairs


Jean Lesage: There is the Fraser river board. A member of the Fraser river board is the chief officer of the federal Department of Fisheries in Vancouver. The Fraser river board is being reconstituted. I am not at liberty at this time to divulge the new terms of reference, nor the number or the identity of the members of the new board, because I have just reached an agreement with the government of British Columbia. It is a joint board. When I was in Victoria on Tuesday I talked to Mr. Sommers, and he asked me to wait until he wired me before making a press release about the new terms of reference and the names of the members of the board. But I can assure hon. members that the fisheries interests will be fully and entirely protected.


Frederick George Hahn: In view of what the hon. member for Comox-Albemi said, I think I should let it be known now that last year I spoke on the need for adequate research in every industry. I am satisfied that there is need for research if-and I put a condition into this-the work has not been done before.
I shall just refer to what I quoted a short time ago. My understanding was that the senator was speaking with absolute authority; that they had carried on work for three years and were convinced in their own minds that salmon could not swim over these dams. For that reason I suggest we should be careful to get the facts with respect to this before we go ahead and discuss the economic feasibility of spending several million dollars on a project that possibly will never be built because we were told beforehand by someone in authority that we would be destroying another industry by doing just that thing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
309. Fraser river-federal expenditures in connection with investigations to be carried out by "dominion-provincial board Fraser river basin", $127,750.
Mr. Leboe:: Is some of this money going to be spent on the north fork of the Fraser or the McGregor river?


Jean Lesage: I am informed that this covers that part of the Fraser river basin.


Bert Raymond Leboe: Is there a possibility of cooperative action between the provincial government, through the board which has been set up, and the federal government to have on-site power and flood control at the same point on the McGregor river?


Jean Lesage: The Fraser river board is charged with the responsibility of making engineering studies and surveys; it is not

charged with the responsibility of building dams or installing on-site power. I cannot say anything more about the new terms of reference because I have an undertaking with Mr. Sommers, the minister of lands and forests, not to make them public before he does the same in Victoria. I have not received, since I talked to him the other day, the telegram which I have been expecting and which would fix the date.


Bert Raymond Leboe: I was not thinking about the actual construction; I was thinking about the engineering possibilities and investigations to determine whether or not a dam built at that particular place could be used for both flood control and on-site power.


Jean Lesage: That is correct.


Bert Raymond Leboe: I notice there is a decrease of $37,250 in this item. Because of the urgency in respect to flood control I would have thought that this item would be larger.


Jean Lesage: This is a matching contribution on the part of the federal government. The British Columbia government really sets the level of expenditure.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Northern administration division-
314. Administration, $306,037.
Douglas Scott Harkness: Is this the point where the minister was going to give me information as to the reduction in freight rates to certain points in the north?


Jean Lesage: Is the hon. member interested in water transportation rates, and to what point?


Douglas Scott Harkness: I was interested in water and air rates to the points I mentioned, which were Fort Norman, Norman Wells, Yellowknife, Hay River and Fort Smith.


Jean Lesage: There has been no reduction in freight rates by air from Edmonton; the reductions have been in passenger rates.


Douglas Scott Harkness: None at all?


Jean Lesage: Not to my knowledge. The reduction in passenger fares has been quite substantial, ranging from 17 per cent to as high as 60 per cent in the fare from Edmonton to Aklavik. I have here a table which gives a comparison of air rates, rail rates, water rates and rail plus water rates from Edmonton to different points in the north. With the consent of the committee I would place this table on Hansard.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Jean Lesage: The table is as follows: Rates from Edmonton
Cents per pound
	Air	Rail to		Rail plus
	Freight Waterways Water			Water
Fort Smith ...	.. 11.00	.88	1.15	2.03Hay River ...	.. 14.97	.88	2.40	3.28Yellowknife ..	.. 14.97	.88	1.90	2.78Fort Norman	. . 39.86	.88	2.84	3.72Aklavik 	. . 60.00	.88	3.84	4.72


Douglas Scott Harkness: I must say I am disappointed to learn that there have been no reductions in freight rates, because I understood the minister to say there had.


Jean Lesage: I am sorry; the hon. member must have misunderstood me.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I understood the minister to say there had been a 20 per cent reduction in these rates to the north. I am sorry to learn there has been no reduction in air freight rates. I would express a personal opinion that the reason there has been no reduction is the difficulty of providing effective competition in the carrying of air freight into that country.
In the interests of opening up this north country and enabling freight to get there more readily than at present, the minister should exert some influence on the Minister of Transport and the government generally in an effort to remove some of the blocks which exist at the present time against the movement of freight. This may not be the place to discuss this, as it has more concern with the Department of Transport, but I think the minister might profitably exert influence in order to remove some of the blocks which prevent effective competition in the movement of freight by air into the north. This is most necessary if the extremely high rates which now prevail are to be brought down. In the case of air freight from Edmonton to Fort Smith, which is approximately 400 miles, the rate is $11 per hundredweight, which is very high.
I am glad to hear of the reductions that have taken place in the water rates. The whole system has now been modernized, the old wooden barges have been replaced with modern steel barges, and the old tugboats have also, I think, been replaced with new diesel-powered equipment. I should think it would be possible to reduce these rates further. If as a result of that reduction there were an increase in the amount of traffic-which would no doubt be the case- then once again the rates could be reduced. In other words this is the sort of thing that snowballs and mounts up. I would hope that when we discuss these estimates next
Supply-Northern Affairs year there will have been a reduction in air rates and a further reduction in these water rates.


Mr. Churchill:: With regard to item 314, dealing with the Northwest Territories and Eskimo problems, I should like to say this. I do not want to go into the whole matter of the Eskimo population. We had a good discussion of that in the estimates committee. In the information that was brought out, which is scattered over about 30 pages of the reports of that committee, we discovered the total number of Eskimos in the country. Seven thousand are in the Northwest Territories, and 2,000 are under the administration of this department in northern Quebec. They are dependent for subsistence very largely on caribou.
One of the things that was left incomplete in the committee was this. I was asking questions concerning the 2,000 Eskimos in the northern part of Quebec who at one time, according to Mr. Cunningham, who gave us most of the information on this problem, were in a relatively happy state as a hunting population because caribou were extensive. In recent years, however, the caribou have entirely disappeared, and further evidence brought out the fact that these particular Eskimos are being trained to become water hunters, which they were not before, and to hunt the seal and walrus.
It was mentioned that they do not have immediate adaptability and it is not easy to retrain them. I asked if that area of northern Quebec could be restocked with caribou. It was pointed out that this had been considered, but it was thought an extraordinarily slow process and that therefore other methods of providing for the livelihood of these people were being considered.
That is the point which I think was left incomplete. I wonder if the minister would take into consideration again the restocking of that area with caribou, even if it does take a long time. There has been considerable experience in Canada in, for example, the preservation of buffalo and elk. They are living in restricted areas, and as they multiply they keep up their numbers. There has also been considerable experience in developing reindeer herds. We were informed that the 800,000-odd caribou to the west of Hudson bay are sufficient to support the Eskimo population in that area who are dependent as hunters on caribou.
For the northern Quebec area, using the estimate we have been given, it would take perhaps 200,000 caribou to support the Eskimo families there, who require, we are told,

Supply-Northern Affairs between 70 and 100 caribou a year to give them sustenance. As I say, we have had experience in saving other types of wildlife, and in restocking. I read an article in a newspaper the other day, which may or may not be accurate, stating that moose had been non-existent in Newfoundland until they were taken there 55 years ago, but now, even with the hunting, the moose population has increased to 50,000.
Would it not be wise to reconsider introducing caribou into that particular area? The seal and walrus might fail; then we are left with the problem of simply providing subsistence for the native population. The reason the native population has been placed in these dire circumstances was brought out in the committee and I shall not go into it again now, but I simply ask the minister to reconsider this matter. Next year we shall put two or three questions to him and see what the answers are.


Jean Lesage: I shall, with pleasure.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Forest conservation and wildlife management including Wood Buffalo park-
318.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $134,639.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am acting as a sort of chore boy tonight. I have been asked to bring up a matter concerning the Yukon. I do not know whether this is the right item, but this concerns the Yukon so I suppose I can fire in all directions. I have been asked to bring to the minister's attention certain motor vehicle regulations-


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order. I wonder if the hon. member would permit us to pass item 318, which deals with wildlife, and go on to item 319.


Douglas Scott Harkness: There is nothing wilder than a motorcycle.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Yukon Territory, including forest conservation-
319.	Operation and maintenance, $624,629.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased that you put me in order. I have been asked to bring to the minister's attention certain motor vehicle ordinances that have been given effect in the Yukon.


Jean Lesage: On a point of order; I am sorry, but this involves a territorial ordinance and I have nothing to say about it. There is autonomy in the Yukon and Northwest Territories. There are local councils, and the motor vehicle ordinances come under the jurisdiction of the elected members of the Yukon council.


Howard Charles Green: But you always follow their
recommendations.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The point is that there are residents of northern British Columbia who think the tariffs for trucks entering the Yukon are excessive.


Jean Lesage: I shall bring to the attention of the commissioner and through him the elected representatives of the Yukon council the representations of the hon. member, but I cannot force them to do anything. This is really a provincial matter.


An hon. Member:: Carried.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, someone over there is calling "carried". I have listened to him long enough-


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is the specialist on inane remarks on the other side who is calling "carried".


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: This concerns certain truckers in northern British Columbia. I am glad the minister explained that this matter comes under the jurisdiction of the territorial council, and I am glad he has said he will bring these complaints to its notice. I thank him for that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Forestry branch-
Forest research division-
322. Operation and maintenance, $1,030,604.
Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask the minister whether the forest research division of his department has made any further headway in the matter of research into the extent of fire damage caused in this country by tailor-made cigarettes, and whether or not anything is going to be done about it?


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, the last news I had was that it had not been possible to find a kind of cigarette that would not light fires in forests if thrown around while still lighted.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, quite seriously there are a number of people and organizations that are concerned about this matter.


Jean Lesage: I know.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Some of those most directly concerned with forestry operations have regulations prohibiting the use of tailor-made cigarettes in those areas. As a matter of fact, while it was not exactly in the minister's department, I was reading an item in the newspaper again this evening about a fire not very far from here believed to be caused by a cigarette. This is a matter that deserves intense research, in the hope that something

might be done to minimize the fires that take place and the loss of life which is the result of many of these fires.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Alfred Johnson Brooks: Mr. Chairman, you went over item 327 so fast that I did not notice it. I wonder whether the minister would tell me why the contribution to New Brunswick in connection with combating the budworm is being reduced.


Jean Lesage: As the hon. member for Royal is aware, this is a contribution to a threeway operation. The amounts we vote each year are determined by the program, which is the responsibility of Forest Protection Limited, which is one of the three parties to the agreement.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Is that an indication that the situation is fairly well under control?


Jean Lesage: I might tell the hon. member that the government agreed this week to extend the program for a further three years, to continue on the same basis, because only $1,585,000 will have been spent on March 31, 1956. The program will therefore be extended to March 31, 1959, the ceiling remaining at the original $3 million as far as we are concerned.
331. Grant to pulp and paper research Institute of Canada, $130,000.


Jean Lesage: The increase in this vote was occasioned by a preliminary arrangement with the institute to provide additional assistance in order to permit that organization to build a new laboratory to take care of increased research accommodation.
Since the printing of the estimates an alternative to this preliminary arrangement has been tentatively agreed on, through which the laboratory will be built by the government and made available to the institute on the condition that the present annual grant of $100,000 will cease at the end of the present fiscal year, and that no further government financial assistance will be forthcoming.
Under those circumstances the amount of $130,000 should be reduced to the original grant of $100,000 as provided under the existing agreement. I shall ask my colleague the Minister of Finance-because I want to please him-if he will move that the item be reduced from $130,000 to $100,000.


Walter Edward Harris: With pleasure.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: On item 331, it is moved by the Minister of Finance that the item of $130,000 be reduced to $100,000. Shall the amendment carry?


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Supply-Northern Affairs
Mr. Cameron (Nanaimo):: I may still discuss item 331, may I not?


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Yes.


Colin Cameron: I was wondering what is the amount of the investment we are going to make in this laboratory.


Jean Lesage: I cannot hear the hon. member.


Colin Cameron: How much are we going to spend on this new laboratory that we are building? Have you any figure on that?


Jean Lesage: It is not certain yet, but I believe it is about $2 million. The annual contribution of $100,000 in these last years amounted to about one-tenth or a little less of the total expenditure. The research institute is spending about $1 million. This expenditure will increase with the increased facilities which will be provided by this new laboratory to be built with money provided in the estimates of the Department of Public Works.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: There is one point I should like to raise on this matter. Apparently we are spending public moneys in connection with research. I wonder whether the minister could give us a word or two as to the nature of the research work which is being conducted by this institute?


Jean Lesage: It is research in the processing and manufacture of pulp and paper. As members of the committee are aware, this pulp and paper accounts for the highest figure of our exports. We are all the time trying to improve the processing and manufacture of this commodity which is vital to the economy of Canada.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I have just one further question. The particular point of my question was this. I am glad to see that the Minister of Justice is sitting behind the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. One of the problems which concern many people who have some close association with the pulp and paper industry-I refer to those who reside in areas near at hand-is the rather unpleasant odour that is produced. My particular point in raising this question is whether any portion of these funds which are being provided in this estimate are to be devoted to research looking to the elimination of what some of us consider to be quite a serious public nuisance; and whether or not, because of the fact that parliament is being asked to provide this vote, the government and the minister might have any authority to direct the investigations in that particular direction.

Supply-Northern Affairs
I might say that I know some research has been done into such matters, but there are many people in Canada-and some of them live in my own constituency-who would be quite interested in seeing an accelerated program of research into that particular aspect of the pulp and paper industry. Can the minister give us any indication as to how the situation stands in that connection?


Jean Lesage: Oh, yes. I will certainly direct the attention of the pulp and paper research institute of Canada to the representations made by my hon. friend.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Shall the item as amended carry?
Item as amended agreed to.
Canadian government travel bureau-
333. To assist in promoting the tourist business in Canada, $1,561,367.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Strangely enough, Mr. Chairman, this evening I was talking to an oldtime resident of Kootenay West who was actually born in the district. We were discussing the function and purpose of the Canadian travel bureau. He thought it would be a good idea for me to bring to the attention of the committee the summer bonspiel that is conducted annually at Nelson. It is a most unusual event, which attracts people from all parts of Canada.
In discussing this matter, this gentleman said he thought in the past the Canadian travel bureau, in its publications, had not given sufficient notice to this event. He suggested that I should suggest to the minister that, in view of the almost nationally-known nature of this event and its importance to the Kootenays, he should bring to the attention of the Canadian travel bureau the advantage it would be to Canadians generally to advertise it in their publications.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Edward Turney Applewhaite: Shall I report the resolutions and ask leave to sit again?
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported, read the second time and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: On Monday we shall move to go into supply and when the motion is carried will call four departments and have them stand. We shall then take Bill No. 259, to amend the Railway Act, the resolution with respect to the Yukon Quartz Mining Act, the resolution with respect to the Canada Elections Act, second reading of Bill No. 351, respecting Canadian National Railways, second reading of Bill No. 350, to amend the
Blind Persons Act, second reading of Bill No. 352, respecting meat and meat products.
The above will be the order of business for Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. Should the debate on the supply motion carry over into these days and these items be completed before Wednesday adjournment, we shall move to go into supply again on the understanding that if there is no debate we shall not call any additional departments but will proceed with the estimates of post office, labour, veterans affairs and agriculture, and continue throughout Thursday and Friday.


[Stage Direction]
It being fourteen minutes after ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[The following Items were passed In committee
of supply]:

[Stage Direction]
293.	Departmental administration, $509,310.
294.	Northern research co-ordination centre, including a grant of $5,000 to the Arctic Institute of North America; and an amount of $10,000 for grants in aid of northern research subject to allocation by the treasury board, $60,595.
National parks branch-
295.	Branch administration, $86,425.
National parks and historic sites services-
296.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $4,560,496.
297.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $4,609,032.
298.	Grant to Jack Miner migratory bird foundation, $5,000.
299.	Special grant to the antiquarian and numismatic society to help defray costs of urgent work for the restoration and preservation of the Chateau de Ramezay, Montreal, $15,000.
300.	Grant in aid of the development of the international peace garden in Manitoba, $10,000.
301.	Contribution to the women's Wentworth historical society of Hamilton, Ontario, towards the costs of urgent work to combat erosion and flooding on the approach road to the battle of Stoney Creek national historic site, $1,000.
302.	National battlefields commission-to provide for special works at national battlefields park, Quebec, $8,000.
303.	Canadian wildlife service-wildlife resources conservation and development, including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act. $455,703.
304.	National museum of Canada, $330,840. Engineering and water resources branch-
305.	Branch administration, $54,283.
Water resources division-
Water resources division, including federal share of expenses of the Lake of the Woods control board-
306.	Administration, operation and maintenance, including grant of $350 to the international council, world power conference, $725,819.
[Stage Direction]
307.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $91,500.
308.	To provide for studies and surveys of the Columbia river watershed in Canada, $641,360.
309.	Fraser river-federal expenditures in connection with investigations to be carried out by "dominion-provincial board Fraser river basin", $127,750.
310.	To provide for a contribution to the cost of constructing a dam on the Conestogo river near Glen Allan, Ontario, for the purposes of flood control and water conservation, in accordance with the terms of an agreement entered into between Canada and the province of Ontario, $1,000,000.
311.	Engineering and architectural division-administration, operation and maintenance, $336,487. Northern administration and lands branch-
312.	Branch administration, $157,214.
313.	Lands division-administration of territorial and public lands; seed grain collections, $405,837.
Northern administration division-
314.	Administration, $306,037.
Northwest Territories, including Wood Buffalo park and Eskimo affairs-
315.	Operation and maintenance, $1,717,263.
316. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $1,567,131.
Forest conservation and wildlife management including Wood Buffalo park-
317.	Operation and maintenance, $433,970.
318. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $134,639.
Yukon Territory, including forest conservation-
319.	Operation and maintenance, $624,629.
320.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment, $1,101,930.
Forestry branch-
321.	Branch administration, $114,636.
Forest research division-
322.	Operation and maintenance, $1,030,604.
323.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment, $78,743.
Forestry operations division-
324.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $184,760.
325.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment, $154,265.
326.	To provide for contributions to the provinces for assistance in forest inventory and reforestation
Supply-Northern Affairs
in accordance with agreements that have been or may be entered into by Canada and the provinces, $1,225,000.
327.	To provide for a contribution to the province of New Brunswick for assistance in a program designed to combat the spruce budworm infestation, in accordance with an agreement entered into by Canada and the province, $300,000.
Forest products laboratories division-
328.	Operation and maintenance, $581,030.
329.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $21,770.
330.	Grant to Canadian Forestry Association,
[Stage Direction]
331.	Grant to pulp and paper research institute of Canada, $130,000.
Reduced by $30,000 to $100,000.
Eastern Rockies forest conservation board-
332.	Remuneration and expenses of the federal member of the board, $5,575.
Canadian government travel bureau-
333.	To assist in promoting the tourist business in Canada, $1,561,367.
Loans, investments and advances-
541.	To authorize the making of loans in the present and ensuing fiscal years in accordance with such terms and conditions as the governor in council prescribes not exceeding in the aggregate $1,150,000 to the government of the Yukon Territory-
(a)	for the purpose of constructing a hospital at Mayo Landing at an estimated cost of $400,000, and
(b)	to enable the government of the Yukon Territory to contribute approximately $750,000 towards the cost of constructing a hospital at Whitehorse; and to authorize the commissioner in council to make ordinances for the borrowing of such money by the commissioner of the Yukon Territory and for the repayment thereof out of the Yukon consolidated revenue fund, $1,150,000.
542.	To authorize the making of loans in the present and ensuing fiscal years in accordance with such terms and conditions as the governor in council prescribes not exceeding in the aggregate $780,000 to the government of the Yukon Territory for the development of a new subdivision adjoining the present city of Whitehorse: and to authorize the commissioner in council to make ordinances for the borrowing of such money by the commissioner of the Yukon Territory and for the repayment thereof out of the Yukon consolidated revenue fund, $780,000.
[Stage Direction]

[Stage Direction]

[Stage Direction]


Monday, May 16, 1955