1956-03-07

THE ROYAL ASSENT

Mr. Speaker:: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received from the secretary of the Governor General the following communication:
Sir:
I have the honour to inform you that the Hon. Patrick Kerwin, Chief Justice of Canada, acting as Deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to the Senate chamber on Wednesday, the 7th March, at 5.45 p.m., for the purpose of giving the royal assent to certain bills.



STARRED QUESTIONS


[Stage Direction]
Question No. 24
Mr. Girard:: 1.	Has the civil service commission ever asked for a report on the bilingualism of civil servants of the various departments of the government?
2.	If so, on what date?
3.	What departments have answered?
4.	What is the result of this inquiry?


Mr. Pinard:: Mr. Speaker, part 1 of this question reads as follows:
Has the civil service commission ever asked for a report on the bilingualism of civil servants of the various departments of the government?
The answer is yes. The commission requested the assistance of each department in providing an indication of the number of bilingual employees.
Part 2 of the question reads:
If so, on what date?
The answer is: On November 25, 1955.
Part 3 of the question reads:
What departments have answered?
Replies were received from the great majority of departments before February 21, 1956, when this question was raised. Since then, all the other departments have sent in their answer.
Part 4 of the question reads:
What is the result of this inquiry?
A number of departments indicated that information of a reasonably accurate nature was not available; others based their reports upon unverified claims as to language qualifications. It should be pointed out that it is not easy to know whether or not an employee is bilingual. In a number of cases, it is
impossible to answer such a question by an unqualified "yes" or "no" because it is a matter of degree requiring a qualitative evaluation. In the light of the information obtained, the commission concluded that it would not be possible to arrive at any reasonably accurate figure as to the proportion of bilingual civil servants.


C.N.R. STATION, SWALWELL, ALTA.
Mr. Johnston (Bow River): 1.	Are steps being taken by the Canadian National Railways to close the station at Swalwell, Alberta?
2.	If so, for what reason?


Mr. Marler:: Mr. Speaker, the management of the Canadian National Railways advise that the answer to the first part of the question is no.
The reply to part 1 answers part 2.


POST OFFICE BUILDING, BANFF, ALBERTA
Mr. Johnston (Bow River): What progress is being made towards the completion of the post office at Banff, Alberta, and on what date is it expected the building will be finished?


Mr. Winters:: This building is just about completed. It will be officially opened on Friday, March 9.


DEPORTATION ORDERS
Mr. Fulton: 1.	How many orders have been made since January 1, 1946, providing for deportation of persons who (a) were landed immigrants but were not yet Canadian citizens; (b) were or claimed to be Canadian citizens?
2.	What are the names and addresses of the persons who will be members of the immigration appeal board?
3.	What are the principles which will be followed in deciding whether the board will hold its hearings in Ottawa or elsewhere?


Mr. Pickersgill:: The answer to the first part of the question is that statistics were not kept differentiating orders against visitors and orders against immigrants before January 1, 1952. I think general statistics for the earlier periods have been given in certain returns which were brought down at the last session. From January 1, 1952, until December 31, 1955, 2,553 persons who were landed immigrants but who were not yet Canadian citizens were ordered deported.

Questions
As far as the second question is concerned, without going through all the flies, there would be no means of finding out how many of these people claimed they were Canadian citizens. I think the number is infinitesimally small, but to the extent that anyone made such a claim and it was substantiated he would no longer be subject to the Immigration Act in any way.
As to the names of the members of the immigration appeal board, they are set out in a regulation which appeared in the Canada Gazette of January 23, 1956, volume 90. I shall be glad to send this over to the hon. gentleman.


Mr. Fulton:: Could those names appear on the record?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The chairman is Colonel J. Colin A. Campbell, whose home I believe is in St. Catharines but who is at present living in Ottawa. The vice-chairman is Mr. P. T. Baldwin, formerly of the immigration branch in Ottawa and who lives in Ottawa. The other members are Mr. L. A. Chevrier, who is temporarily living at the Lord Elgin hotel in Ottawa and who was formerly with the immigration branch in Montreal; Mr. E. B. Reid, who I believe lives at Stittsville, Ontario, and who was a member of a branch other than the immigration branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration prior to his appointment.
In answering the question as to where the board will hold its hearings, this will be settled by the board itself. Every effort will be made to avoid imposing any hardships on appellants.


FEDERAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS
Mr. Knowles: 1.	Has consideration been given to the establishing of a federal bureau of standards, so that advice and protection might be given to consumers with respect to the quality of goods sold in Canada?
2.	If so, what is the result of such consideration?
3.	If not, have representations been received by the government asking that such a bureau be established?
4.	From whom have any such representations been received?
5.	Will consideration now be given thereto?


Mr. Dickey:: This question relates to the establishment of a federal bureau of standards, and the answer is that the government has not given consideration to establishing such a bureau. As far as I am aware no representations have been received relating to this matter, but more extensive inquiries are being made to make sure that this is the case. While the government will of course examine any such representations, hon. members will be aware that considerable advice and protection are now available to the public 
by reason of existing federal and provincial legislation as well as certain industrial associations.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Fraser (Peterborough): 1.	What was the total cost to the government for the storage of butter during the year 1955?
2.	To what company or companies was this money paid, and how much to each?


WHEAT SHIPMENTS FROM PRAIRIE PROVINCES TO ONTARIO
Mr. Howe (Wellingion-: Huron):
1.	From the beginning of the crop year 1955-56 how many carloads of wheat have been shipped from the prairie provinces to Ontario?
2.	What were the grades respectively of each such carload and what was the price per bushel paid at the elevator by the purchaser in respect of each carload?


ASSOCIATED SCREEN NEWS LIMITED
Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame: de Grace):
For each of the fiscal years ending March 31, 1952, 1953, 1954 and 1955, and for the nine-month period ending December 31, 1955, what was the total value of federal government business awarded by any means to Associated Screen News Limited?



MOTION FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 36-Mr. Stuart (Charlotte):
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents, exchanged from January 1, 1953 to date, between the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and the attorney general of the province of New Brunswick, regarding applications for citizenship and fees therefor.
John Whitney Pickersgill: Since 'the motion appeared on the order paper I have communicated with the attorney general of New Brunswick, but have not yet heard from him. But I think it is unlikely there would be any objection and, unless there is, I would be glad to comply with it. I hope that understanding will be satisfactory to the house.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the remarks made by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, the motion is carried.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, from the newspaper reports which I saw this morning I gathered

that there may have been some misunderstanding concerning certain remarks I made in the house yesterday afternoon in response to questions concerning arms shipments to the Middle East. What I said yesterday was that I was under the impression that there are no arms going forward at this time. I did not say that all exports of arms to that area had been stopped or placed under an embargo.
No requests for arms for export to the Middle East have, in fact, been approved during the present year, and therefore there could be no question of shipments resulting from any such requests. There remains, however, the uncompleted part of an order for Harvard training aircraft for Egypt, about which we had considerable discussion about a month ago. That order was one which was approved last July. The remainder of that order was cleared by customs for export on February 20 last. It has, however, not yet left the country, though it is awaiting shipment. Consideration is at present being given to the question whether there should be any interference by the government with the completion of this order in the light of the situation in the Middle East, and a statement will be given to the house when a decision on this matter has been made.


Mr. G. R. Pearkes (Esquimalt-Saanich):: When I rose a minute ago, I had intended asking the Prime Minister a question regarding these aircraft which are reported as being crated on the docks at Halifax, addressed to the Egyptian air force, and awaiting the arrival of a freighter. I was going to ask whether the ban or the embargo that was placed on the new permits could apply to that aircraft now.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: No, not at
this moment. As I informed the house on February 6, the embargo was lifted at that time, and it has not been reimposed.


Mr. D. S. Harkness (Calgary North):: Might I ask the Prime Minister a question subsequent to his statement? What is the situation now in regard to the $30,000 worth of 25-pounder ammunition, shipment of which was being considered by the cabinet to Israel? Has that matter been decided, in view of the statement that no further permits had been issued? Does this mean this ammunition is not going to go forward?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: No decision has yet been reached in that connection, and the situation is as I last stated it to be when I was asked about it in the house.


Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinton):: May
I ask the Prime Minister within what period
Inquiries of the Ministry of time the house may expect the government to reach its decision with regard to the forwarding of the 12 Harvard aircraft?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: That will depend upon events as they develop. We shall lose no time in implementing our policy to avoid doing anything that might increase uneasiness about the Middle East situation.


Mr. G. C. Nowlan (Digby-Annapolis-Kings):: May I ask the Prime Minister a supplementary question? Is it to be left to the students of Dalhousie University to maintain the embargo on these shipments?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I do not
know that the students of Dalhousie University have any right to impose any embargo.


George Randolph Pearkes: I should like to ask the Prime Minister this question. Earlier this year, when the embargo was placed on the export of all arms, was the permit for the export of those Harvard aircraft at that time withdrawn?


Mr.   Si. Laureni@Quebec Easi: No, Mr. Speaker, it was not withdrawn. There was a suspending order made at that time which, as I stated a moment ago, was lifted on the 6th of February.


George Randolph Pearkes: Yes, but prior to that the embargo was put into effect, and was not the permit for the export of those aircraft withdrawn?


Mr.   Si. Laureni@Quebec Easi: No, the
permit was not withdrawn.


Mr. Coldwell:: May I ask a supplementary question in order to clear up some confusion that I think exists? I take it these permits are issued to a private company and the planes are not the property of the government. Am I right in that respect, and what company is it to which the permits are issued?


Mr.   Si. Laureni@Quebec Easi: It is the Canadian Car and Foundry Company to which the permit was issued.


Mr. Diefenbaker:: In view of the inflammatory situation in the Middle East, does the Prime Minister not consider that the shipmenl of the planes now loaded on the ship ir Halifax ought to be stopped, having regard tc conditions in the Middle East at the presenl time?


Mr. St. Laureni (Quebec Easi):: I have jus-said that when a decision has been reachec a statement will be made to the house.
1884	HOUSE
Inquiries of the Ministry


INQUIRY AS TO REQUEST FOR VISAS BY U.S.S.R. DELEGATION
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. Wilfrid Dufresne (Quebec West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Is the minister aware that a delegation from the U.S.S.R. calling themselves "members of the Russian fishermen's syndicate" has requested visas from our Canadian embassy in Moscow to visit Canada during the course of this month?


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):: No, Mr. Speaker. I am not aware of any request made for visas by any Russian delegation as suggested.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I should like to ask a supplementary question. Knowing that visas are going to be asked for, could the minister-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member is basing his question on what is a hypothetical ground. I recognize the Minister of National Revenue.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question to ask. Assuming that these visas will be asked for-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: That is just the point. The hon. member cannot base a question on an assumption.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Speaker-


An hon. Member:: Sit down.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Just say "if".


Mr. Speaker:: Order. It might be preferable if more attention were paid to the one who is occupying the chair.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Will the Secretary of State for External Affairs state whether or not idsas will be granted to a Russian delegation which is reported to be attending a meeting if the united fishermen's union in Vancouver in March 19 next?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I cannot answer that question intil I find out if the report is accurate. I will ie glad to do that.



MIDDLE EAST


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question o the Secretary of State for External Affairs? 's Canada pressing for a meeting of the ;ecurity council in view of the situation in he Middle East?



OF COMMONS

Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker. Canada is not a member of the security council and is not pressing for such a meeting. I do not know that any of the parties most directly concerned with the disputes there have themselves asked for such a meeting.



CZECHOSLOVAKIA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. R. Argue (Assiniboia):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Has a contract been signed for the purchase by Czechoslovakia of a substantial quantity of Canadian wheat and is such purchase being financed through the Export Credits Insurance Corporation?


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I was handed this memo as I came into the house. I have not read it. It was handed to me by my staff.


Major James William Coldwell: You had better read it first.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, I do not think so. Hon. members are aware that it is not my practice to disclose current sales-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Clarence Decatur Howe: -by the Canadian wheat board.


An hon. Member:: You should have read it first.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Oh, that is all
right. That is my policy. In the case of Czechoslovakian negotiations, however, the Czechoslovakian government has already announced its intentions. I am pleased to confirm therefore that the government of Czechoslovakia, through its official grain procurement agency, will be buying between 100,000 and
320,000	tons of Canadian wheat for shipment during the present crop year. The purchases will be made from agents of the Canadian wheat board on the basis of 25 per cent down payment and the remaining 75 per cent within one year. The Export Credits Insurance Corporation will insure the board's agents with respect to the outstanding balances.


Hazen Robert Argue: Has a substantial sale of barley also been made to Czechoslovakia?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes. As I remember it, sales of barley during the present week have been about 40,000 tons, and these have been paid for in cash.


Mr. O. C. Trainor (Winnipeg South):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Has any quid pro quo been offered to Czechoslovakia

in return for the wheat purchases from Canada in the way of trade concessions or otherwise?	.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The answer is that no quid pro quo has been asked for and none has been offered.



WHEAT-INQUIRY AS TO DATE OF FINAL PAYMENT

[Stage Direction]
ON 1954-55 crop
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. On February 2 he indicated that as soon as the two companion pieces of legislation on wheat were dealt with he would be in a position to advise when the final payment on the 1954-55 wheat crop would be made. Is he now in a position so to advise and is it the intention of the government to make that final payment in time for the spring work on the part of the western farmer?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, I do not think I ever said that. I said that I could not make any statement about the matter until the two pieces of legislation had been disposed of. I regret to say that the two pieces of legislation have not been disposed of in that royal assent has as yet not been obtained. When royal assent is obtained, perhaps if I am asked the question I can do a bit better.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Edmund Davie Fulton: May I ask
the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration a question arising out of the oral answer he gave a little earlier today? Do I understand from his answer, in which he gave the names of the members of the immigration appeal board and used the words "formerly members of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration"* that the three members of the board, apart from the chairman, have resigned their positions or appointments with the department?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think the hon. gentleman misunderstood what I said. I said that two of the gentlemen were formerly members of the immigration branch and one was formerly a member of another branch of my department. On being appointed to the appeal board they ceased to be members of these branches of the department because they are members of the appeal board, which
Inquiries of the Ministry is a separate entity but which is also under the jurisdiction of the minister, of course.


Edmund Davie Fulton: If the minister had wanted to create an appeal board that would really give the right to an impartial hearing in accordance with the generally accepted principles of justice, could he not have arranged to set up a board with less than three out of four of the personnel from the department whose decision is under appeal?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I understand that it is not an appeal from the decision of the department. It is an appeal from the decision of a particular civil servant, and I do not think that these conscientious and experienced civil servants, only two and not three of whom have served at any time in the immigration branch, are going to be any less impartial because they know something about the Immigration Act. What the hon. gentleman is saying is tantamount to suggesting that no member of the bar should ever be appointed a judge.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to comment on the minister's usual distortion.


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Edmund Davie Fulton: However, I should like an answer to my question as to whether, if they wanted to give a really independent hearing or appeal, they could not have found other than three out of four of the members of the board elsewhere than in the department, when it is the decision of one branch of that department which is under appeal. In other words, is this going to be an appeal board or a whitewash?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: I recognize the hon. member for Quebec West.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Is my question out of order?


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member reads in Hansard tomorrow the question he has asked and which I allowed in the first instance, he will see that his question was not of the type that should be asked at this time. The minister answered and-


Edmund Davie Fulton: He did not answer.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. Fulton) contends that he did not receive an answer. I allowed him to try to repeat what I thought would be a proper question but when I noticed that it was not I recognized another hon. member who wanted to ask a question. I think most hon. members
1886	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry will agree with me. I must insist that the hon. member do not pursue the point.


Mr. J. H. Ferguson (Simcoe North):: Although the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is not a lawyer he can probably answer this question. Is he aware that most judges, when a case comes before them concerning the firm with which they were formerly associated before appointment to the bench, retire from the case and ask another judge to take their position?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Answer.



CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. J. McCann (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, on February 29 the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) asked me if I would inquire of the C.B.C. as *to whether there was any complaint in regard to a C.B.C. telecast on the evening of Sunday, February 26.
I have asked the C.B.C. about this matter. They inform me that they have received no particular complaint about this telecast.


Donald Methuen Fleming: May I ask what a particular complaint is?


James Joseph McCann: I presume they use that term in place of a comment.


Mr. Rowe:: It was just general, was it?


James Joseph McCann: General what?


William Earl Rowe: A general complaint.



LIVESTOCK


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. G. McCullough (Moose Mountain):: Can the Minister of Agriculture inform the house of the latest developments in respect to the sheep disease called scrapie in Alberta? Can he inform the house of the extent of the losses to date, and whether or not this disease is confined to Alberta, as well as whether or not any compensation has been paid in respect of such losses?


Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture):: There is a question put in by another member asking for all that information which is in my office now, and it will be answered in due course.



TRADE AND COMMERCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce or to his parliamentary assistant arising out of the answer given to my starred question regarding a federal bureau of standards. Is the government not aware that representations concerning this matter were made in the briefs presented by the national labour organizations when they appeared before the cabinet recently? Is the government not also aware that the Canadian Association of Consumers has asked for such a federal bureau of standards?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The government is aware that there is a desire that its work in establishing standards for articles offered for domestic sale be speeded up. My hon. friend knows that there is a federal standards act, administered by the Department of Trade and Commerce. He is aware also that arrangements for labelling under that act are being advanced as rapidly as standards can be set up. I do not know that the formation of a bureau of standards would speed up the work particularly. In any event, the work is going forward.



TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Clyde Nowlan: Is the Minister of Transport in a position now to tell us how long the ferry Bluenose will be in drydock, and what arrangements are being made for supplementary service during that period?


George Carlyle Marler: I am unable to predict how long the Bluenose will be in drydock, and the reports I have had to date are not sufficiently clear for me to judge whether we should give further consideration to establishing a substitute service.


George Clyde Nowlan: May I ask a supplementary question? The Evening Times-Globe of Saint John reports that the minister has told Mr. Dan Riley the boat will be in drydock for six weeks. I wonder if he could be as generous with the House of Commons as he was with Mr. Riley?


George Carlyle Marler: My attention had not been drawn to that statement. I may say I have told no one that the ship would be six weeks in drydock.



REPORTED OUTBREAK IN SOUTHERN ONTARIO

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. A. Charlton (Branl-Haldimand):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. What is the government's policy with regard to the recent rather serious outbreak of rabies in southern Ontario? Is a charge made for the vaccination? If so, what is that charge?


James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Speaker, I only know that the officials of the department are taking action in accordance with the general policy as set out in the act and regulations. I shall see that the hon. member's question is taken as notice and bring down an answer to the direct question.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Speaker, on Friday, March 2, the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort (Mr. Bryson) asked why June 30, 1956, was advanced as the cut-off date for applications to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for hostel type accommodation.
The answer is that in May, 1955, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation established a formula relating to the number of hostel rooms that might be included in a limited-dividend housing project for aged persons. It was decided that the number of hostel rooms should not exceed 50 per cent of the number of self-contained units in a limited-dividend housing project.
In establishing a limitation the corporation had in mind the definition of a "housing project" contained in the National Housing Act.
Correspondence had taken place prior to May of 1955 between the corporation and the Saskatchewan government which the latter interpreted as containing a commitment to finance limited-dividend housing projects sponsored by the government of Saskatchewan which contained a higher percentage of hostel units.
The corporation, because of the interpretation placed on this correspondence, agreed to
National Capital Plan
accept projects in Saskatchewan with the number of hostel rooms being equal to the number of self-contained units that are designed for two or more people. When the corporation agreed to this special arrangement it stipulated that it would apply only to applications received up to the 30th day of June, 1956. This date was selected in order to give municipalities in Saskatchewan which had planned such projects ample time in which to bring them forward. The province was advised on August 29 last that June 30, 1956 would be the cut-off date.



INCOME TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of National Revenue. Has the minister received a reply to the representations which he made to the United States secretary of the treasury on behalf of Premium Iron Ores Limited? If so, what is the nature of the reply?


James Joseph McCann: Mr. Speaker, no reply has yet been received.


Mr. Mclvor:: A good answer.



NATIONAL CAPITAL PLAN


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, March 6, consideration of the motion of Mr. St. Laurent (Quebec East):
That a joint committee of both houses of parliament be appointed to review and report upon the progress and programs of the federal district commission in developing and implementing the plan for the national capital;
That the members to act on behalf of the House of Commons as members of the said committee be designated at a later date;
That the said committee have power to call for persons, papers and records; to sit while the house is sitting, and to report from time to time;
That the said committee have power to print such papers and evidence from day to day as may be ordered by the committee and that standing order 66 be suspended in relation thereto;
And that a message be sent to the Senate requesting that house to unite with this house for the above purpose and to select, if the Senate deems advisable, some of its members to act on the proposed joint committee.
Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition);: Mr. Speaker, at the time of the adjournment of this debate last night I had just referred to the fact that emphasis had been placed upon the need for the control
1888	HOUSE OF
National Capital Plan
of the development of any capital plans by parliament itself. The setting up of a committee does fulfil that idea if the committee in fact-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


George Alexander Drew: -if the committee in fact does deal with the problem with which it is now confronted. Mr. Speaker, I shall wait until it is possible to have my remarks heard.


Mr. Speaker:: Would hon. members be good enough to use the lobbies to carry on private conversations instead of using the house for this purpose; and may I ask all those who intend not to remain in the house for the purpose of this debate to leave the house now.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, ordinarily I am not concerned about any interruptions but I do believe there are some hon. members who are sufficiently interested in the national purpose of a capital plan to wish to hear what is being said not only by myself but by other speakers who will be making comments on this subject.
The plan that was brought into existence by Mr. Jacques Greber under the instructions of the government has been a guide in so far as the general purposes of the commission have been concerned. It would, however, be a great mistake to imagine that this plan has become the definite pattern and that there is any very substantial fulfilment of the intention of that plan.
A number of public spirited citizens from the ten provinces and from the Ottawa district have taken their part as members of the federal district commission. The time has come, however, to say very definitely that a thorough examination of the responsibility of this commission, of its purpose and of the way in which the desire of parliament will be carried into effect is overdue. There has not been any effective measure of supervision by parliament. Parliament is not called upon to deal with specific proposals; parliament has been called upon to vote $2J million a year for the purpose of making it possible for the federal district commission to carry out certain designated operations. The decision upon the recommendation of the commission is made by the government. If the full amount of the $2,500,000 is spent, the commission will simply have operated within the amount of the appropriation. On the other hand, if the amount is not spent it accumulates and goes forward and the fact is that the amount available is in excess of the $2| million a year at this time.
I think it is well to look at what did happen at the time the last joint committee of the


two houses met and reported in order to see how necessary it is that this committee go much farther.
That committee reported in 1944 and at the time it made its report it covered certain subjects which have not been substantially carried into effect. That report was dated August 1, 1944. The very first recommendation was in regard to the co-ordination of the activities of the federal district commission and the various bodies which would be called upon to deal with the plan for a national capital.
There was reference to the railway facilities and the necessity for negotiations between the federal district commission and the railway companies with the idea of removing certain of the railways and in that way making it possible to produce a much more attractive central area within the city. No effective steps have been taken to implement that part of the recommendation. There were certain other recommendations that were made but substantially very little has been accomplished that was recommended by that last committee.
I should hope that on this occasion the committee will deal with the fundamental problem which the federal district commission faces in trying to implement any national capital plan. When Sir Wilfrid Laurier many years ago spoke of his hope that Ottawa might become the Washington of the north, undoubtedly behind that thought was his recognition of the fact that it had been possible to carry out integrated plans because the whole of that area was placed under one authority.
I do not intend to express my opinion as to how far this authority should be extended or whether it should be extended at all. One thing is certain. If an effective capital plan is to come into operation there must be a clearer definition of the functions of the commission in relation to the municipal authorities, and that means the authorities of several municipalities. There must also be some workable plan under which there would be a measure of continuing supervision by parliament of such agreed pattern as may be brought forward by this committee in its report to parliament.
The fact is that there are a number of developments in this area which provide considerable reason for satisfaction. The various driveways along the rivers and canals are in themselves as attractive as could have been produced under any integrated plan that might have been developed. On the other hand it would be dodging reality to pretend that anything in the nature of integrated development in the central part of the city close to the parliament buildings has in fact been carried out.

There is a very small park area around the war memorial but outside of that there is very little beyond the boundaries of the grounds in which the parliament buildings stand which shows any signs of a capital plan in so far as any visitor to the parliament buildings is concerned. This site is a magnificent one. The view of this site from along the river banks or from across the river is one of the finest of any parliament building that can be seen anywhere. Nevertheless there are some most unattractive buildings and a complete absence of any sign of integrated development in the immediate proximity of the parliament buildings.
It is true that bridges have been constructed, certain new highways built and other preliminary steps of that kind taken, but we are far from seeing even the beginning of the real fulfilment of the concept which was placed before parliament in 1951 when the plans prepared by Mr. Jacques Greber were tabled in this house along with the report which accompanied them. Much land has been acquired in the outlying areas. One of the very desirable purposes of increased authority for the commission was accomplished when the cutting of forest areas in the neighbourhood was prevented. Undoubtedly effective steps in some substantial measure have been taken to preserve a green area around the city of Ottawa. But we are far from seeing any effective realization of the concept of a capital plan which was put before parliament by Mr. Jacques Greber as a result of the work which he had done at the request of this government.
There are a number of things that must be decided by parliament itself if the concept of a national capital which will be a source of pride to all Canadians and be regarded as something which is the common property of all Canadians is to take form within a measurable number of years ahead. The fact is that the federal district commission is not able to operate effectively at this time. That is a matter of common knowledge. The balance of authority between the commission and the various municipal authorities is not satisfactorily established.
The fact that certain municipal grants have been made to the city of Ottawa has very little to do with the fulfilment of these plans. The Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) referred to them last night. These are intended only as payments in lieu of taxes on buildings occupied by the government, whether in Ottawa or in other municipalities, which upset the balance of taxation when they reach a certain percentage of the whole assessed area within the municipality. That payment is made simply for the purpose of providing a fair compensation to the municipality and
National Capital Plan
has really very little if anything to do with the possible fulfilment of these plans.
It is not to be expected that the municipal corporation of the city of Ottawa, the municipal corporation of the city of Hull, the municipal corporation of Eastview or of any municipality in this area could be expected to carry out on their own any of the developments which are essentially a part of the concept of a capital area. What might be fully satisfactory from the point of view of the needs of a municipality in its ordinary position as a municipality would be within its financial ability and undoubtedly would be accepted.
If we are to regard this capital area as something that belongs to all Canadians and that is to be an appropriate show place as the capital of the nation to all visitors who come here, whether they be tourists, diplomatic visitors or otherwise, then the things that are done must be on a scale that could not possibly be undertaken by any one of these municipalities. The ability to carry those out is not greatly furthered by these payments in lieu of taxes which were not intended for that purpose but for the ordinary requirements of the municipality.
Let me deal with some of the questions that must confront anyone who is charged with the responsibility of seeking to carry into effect an appropriate capital plan in this area. These are things which I hope the committee will consider, these are things upon which I hope the committee will report, these are things upon which I hope parliament will ultimately make some decision and give appropriate directions.
Is it part of the proper concept of plans for a great capital city that there should be a well designed auditorium, in which concerts, operas and musical performances of all kinds and great national meetings should be held? I hope the committee will make some decision on that. Many of the hon. members in this house must have been impressed, as I have, by the fact that in other countries even the smallest capital city has its own opera building, has its own auditorium where musical concerts and great meetings can be held, has its own art gallery where there is, in fact, a real presentation of the art of the nation. These are things which have not yet been decided.
I do not believe that the city of Ottawa, as a municipal corporation, can be expected to take the necessary steps to erect the kind of auditorium that should be here in the capital for the purposes I have mentioned. I think that is something that must be undertaken by the federal district commission in association with the municipalities, if that

National Capital Plan
is to be done. Above all, the committee might well consider the desirability of diverting an appropriate amount of whatever sum is set aside for the activities of the federal district commission to the erection of a truly fine structure that will be in keeping with the fine architectural standards of these parliament buildings in which we now meet.
I hope no one will suggest that, because Ottawa is not one of our largest cities, it will not be possible to have fine music, opera, theatre, ballet and other artistic productions here in this city in keeping with the national character of the culture of our people. If anybody was in doubt about the fact that people will go to a place where any artistic performance of high standard has been developed, that question was answered by the city of Stratford, Ontario, in the Shakespearean festivals which they now hold every year. I think that every Canadian owes a debt of gratitude to the people of Stratford, who were responsible for starting that great festival, which now is one of the best known theatrical festivals in the whole world. In all earnestness I say that they have shown what can be done. I hope other municipalities will follow in other artistic fields and become the centres of musical festivals, of art festivals and of other annual events that will attract crowds of people and give greater impetus to the cultural development of this country. That is the way we shall advance our national culture, far more than any declaration that we desire it. The development of culture will come from the opportunity for culture itself to emerge through the things that we do.
I should think it would be one of the appropriate functions of the federal district commission, under the authority of this parliament, to provide those facilities which would bring here to the capital the cultural activities that would give a truly national character to some of those achievements. From here, then, there would go out to the people of Canada by radio and by television an effective representation of what was taking place. I hope the committee will consider the advisability of urging prompt action in this respect.
We are proud of our great material achievements. We are proud of the way in which our resources have been developed within these past few years. There has been a very natural measure of satisfaction expressed about the rapidly mounting annual income of this country. What has already happened is only a promise of what is going to happen in the years ahead. Therefore I hope that the committee, when it is set up, will consider

these subjects and will make appropriate representations that are not only an expression of hope but that indicate the way in which it can be done.
One of the features of this proposed committee that commends itself very much to me is the fact that it is to be empowered to call witnesses and ask for the production of papers and documents. I think that is very useful. I would go further and suggest that this committee might well consider the advisability of visiting Washington, as the nearest large capital, and discussing on the spot the way in which their very effective plans have been carried into effect. Whether or not that is considered desirable, in any event I would hope that this committee would bring here before it experts who can speak with authority about the kind of planning that should be done.
Each capital city must have its own particular character. Ottawa is not going to be a smaller image of Washington, for several reasons. In the first place, we have our own distinctive architecture for our parliament buildings. In the second place, we have a geographical location that makes this the central part of a nation with a wide variety of interests. In the third place, we are surrounded by a countryside far more beautiful than that which surrounds Washington or, in fact, most other capital cities in the world. This committee should consider the way in which we may take full advantage of the magnificent rivers, the rolling countryside, the lovely hills in the distance and all the natural advantages that are available to us for the establishment of a capital city which will be recognized throughout the whole world as one of the most beautiful that can be visited anywhere.
It must be a Canadian city. It must be a city that recognizes the fact that we are not starting, as Washington did, immediately after the occupation of a relatively undeveloped area. We must incorporate within any capital plan a city that has grown without any integration of the various municipal areas that form a part of it. A great deal of attention must be devoted to the question which arises as to how there can be effective integration of these municipalities with connecting driveways and highways while, at the same time, recognizing that each municipality has attained a substantial measure of maturity in a way that makes a completely new development an utter impossibility. We should not strive for that. Some capital cities have done little to go beyond the actual environs of the parliament buildings themselves. London, with all the beauty that surrounds Westminster, has done little to change the streets,

the buildings, that lead into Westminster, and there is no reason why they should. They already have all the beauty of fine architecture and of age and of the history that surrounds them. Ours is a much newer picture. In many parts there are areas which should be removed if that is a practical possibility and give way to a finer type of building.
Something more is needed, however, than the Greber plan. What is needed is a pattern recommended by a joint committee and approved by this parliament. After that I believe it is very desirable that there should be a continuing committee which will review from year to year, and not once in twelve years as in this instance, the stages of development which have resulted from what has been done. I hope the committee will really tackle this problem. It needs to be tackled. The federal district commission, with all the earnest effort of its members, is not able to tackle it under the existing arrangements.
I feel sure that the corporation of the city of Ottawa, the corporation of the city of Hull and the other municipal corporations involved are anxious to co-operate. Let that committee be the place where this effective plan for co-operation is developed. Let us hope that the committee will not merely review what has happened and report to us but will put before us positive, imaginative and dynamic recommendations which will place before us the possibility of the fulfilment of the dream of a capital city which is in keeping with the proud future of Canada in the years immediately ahead.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Speaker, last year I was very anxious that this committee should be established and I am happy indeed that the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) has moved for the appointment of a joint committee and that he has given us some indication of what the order of reference may mean. When I saw the order of reference on the order paper I wondered whether it was sufficiently wide to cover the kind of inquiry and the kind of recommendations that this committee might ultimately make. But last night the Prime Minister said this, as found at page 1876 of Hansard:
... it is proposed that the committee this year shall direct its attention fully to the substantial work of the federal district commission and the relation of this work to the activities of the municipal and provincial authorities in so far as they bear upon it.
Therefore I take it that, with the exception perhaps of the matter of the review of municipal grants and that kind of thing, the inquiry is to be wide open. May I say, before
National Capital Plan
I begin what I was going to say, that I was very happy indeed to hear the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) so warmly support the idea that this city and Canada in general should have suitable cultural facilities. Some members of the house may remember that during the war when we were discussing the possibilities of a war memorial I said I hoped that we might establish in this city a cultural centre, a centre in which there might be a national gallery to house some of the lovely pictures that we have acquired, perhaps a national library and certainly a national auditorium or national theatre, and that we might go even beyond that and do what many of the smaller countries to which the Leader of the Opposition alluded do, namely, not only provide for the opera, drama, ballet and the symphony but also subsidize suitable companies, beginning perhaps with good music or good drama.
I think it is a great tragedy that in this capital city of Ottawa there is no place where a good theatrical performance can be undertaken. There is no place where one can in reality enjoy good music or anything of that sort. Because of the lack of facilities I think the attempts that have been made to establish a repertory theatre have almost invariably met with great difficulties and except for a few public spirited citizens might have failed. One knows how inadequate is the auditorium in which these theatricals are produced-for the production of drama and so on. Therefore I want to support very warmly the plea made this afternoon by the Leader of the Opposition because it is a plea I made a good many years ago and have been repeating from time tc time ever since.
As has already been said, this is one of the most beautiful sites for a city in the entire world. There is no city in the world with more beautiful surroundings than the city oi Ottawa. Here we see the meeting of the Laurentian granite rock with the limestone rock and subsoil of this area. Here, as il were, is the meeting place of two of the geological regions of this part of Canada. In ordei to make this a more beautiful city I quite agree that we must have the co-operation ol the municipalities and the provinces. One oi the jobs that I think the committee shoulc undertake is to make it more possible to have the co-operation of the provinces and the municipalities.
Much of the beauty of this city site is, o: course, on the other side of the river in the province of Quebec, and I think everythin! should be done to ensure the co-operation o: that province. I am quite sure that the presen government of that province would look upoi
1892	HOUSE OF
National Capital Plan
the beautification of that area as being advantageous not only to the province of Quebec but to the country as a whole. I think every attempt should be made to get that co-operation and, of course, the co-operation of the surrounding municipalities.
The city of Ottawa, for example, needs to be zoned. It needs zoning very badly. There are all kinds of little laundries and so on in residential sections throughout the city and they should not be there. I know that there are difficulties because I happen to have been a member of the council of the city of Regina when some 30 years ago we established, in the face of a great deal of opposition, I might say, a zoning by-law in that city. I know the difficulties that followed because of the necessity of dealing with some of these laundries and so on that were scattered throughout the city in all kinds of substandard buildings. Therefore I think the city of Ottawa should be encouraged to undertake a real zoning plan for this capital city and follow out that plan over a period of years.
I know that something is being done in the newer subdivisions. In the newer subdivisions we find that as residential sections they have their shopping centres located in a particular spot instead of being scattered all over the subdivision, and that is as it should be. We should encourage the city and even help it if necessary to remove some of the many unsightly and substandard buildings that are to be found in this capital city of Ottawa. You need only to go into some parts of this city to realize the near-slum conditions, I was going to say, that exist here and there. I remember that a few years ago a young lady who was doing some canvassing for an association came back to her people and, in my presence, expressed both horror and indignation at the conditions she saw in certain parts of this city of Ottawa, conditions that she did not realize existed. But they exist and they should be removed.
Then we recall all the tragic fires that we have had lately which have taken the lives of so many young children. Those tragic fires have been due, in large part, to substandard housing in this capital city. I regret to say that, in one instance at least, it was substandard housing owned by the federal district commission. I suppose the commission felt that with no other housing to which the family could go, they could not turn them out; and one understands that point of view. But it places squarely before us the condition that exists here in this city. Even around our own buildings improvements could be made. One of my colleagues was remarking to me this afternoon about a certain condition. He asked me if I had [Mr. Coldwell.l

driven my car out the west gate down the cobblestones. I said that I did not usually go that way. He said, "I have a new car and it is already being shaken to pieces because I am obliged to go up and down those cobblestones every time I come to the House of Commons." We could do a great deal to improve our own surroundings and set an example to the city of Ottawa.
I think also that all parts of this city should be within the city limits. I am rather amazed that the best residential section of this city is outside the city limits and has not even a public sewerage system. The people there have put up for years with no sewerage system; they have nothing but septic tanks. As we all know, in time septic tanks become a health hazard in a district. Yet we have this beautiful subdivision or village of Rockcliffe, which should be within the city limits, with sanitary conditions that would not be tolerated in many countries where they have strict sanitary laws. It is about time that something was done about the matter. I do not know what the federal district commission can do about it or what this committee can do, but I am saying something about it in the house this afternoon in the hope that it will arouse some interest among the citizens who live in Rockcliffe. There are one or two of them on the other side of the house among the ministers and there are one or two close to me on this side of the house. I hope they will take an interest and see that the sanitary conditions in Rockcliffe village are greatly improved.
In connection with sanitary conditions, I think the other thing that must be done around some of the residential areas in this city is in connection with the pollution of our rivers. I have heard the Ottawa river described as an open sewer. For some years we had a cottage some little distance up the Ottawa river. I asked the health authorities to tell me whether the river was fit to bathe in. I was told that they thought it would be all right to bathe in the river while there was a good flow of water in June or July but that as soon as it got hot in August at that particular point one had better not let children go into the river because while the water did not show serious contamination, there was contamination; one had better not bathe in it in late summer. That situation prevails for miles all down this beautiful Ottawa river. The thing is a scandal in this progressive country, to find one of our finest rivers, which flows right beside the parliament buildings, characterized from time to time as an open sewer. Of course the river Thames was once that way. I remember reading that about 100 years ago they had to erect curtains around the windows of the

House of Commons in London in order to keep out the smell from the river Thames. Fortunately we have not had to do that here, probably because we are on a rather high piece of ground up above the river; also, as somebody suggests, the sulphur fumes coming from the paper plant may neutralize the germs that may be found in the air above the Ottawa river. Hence we are perhaps safe in that respect.
Then I also hope that quite soon the unsightly buildings around the Rideau falls will be removed. For years we have heard that those unsightly buildings belonging to the government were going to be torn down or were going to be put out of the way. I was once told-I do not know how true it is- that, when France built the large and expensive French embassy adjacent to those buildings, we gave an undertaking that those buildings would be removed. I do not know whether that is true. Did we give that undertaking?


Mr. Harris:: Yes.


Major James William Coldwell: If we gave that undertaking, let us carry it out and restore the Rideau falls to their pristine beauty.
Something was said about the green belt. I think we must be careful. When the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) last July 27 discussed with us the matter of the federal district estimates, I distinctly remember that he said there was no positive prohibition of building in the green belt areas but that the national housing authority had exercised some negative persuasion there. But we need to enter into agreements and to do what we can to preserve these green belts because they are an integral part of the capital plan as outlined by our town planning experts.
We have a very beautiful city in many respects. This afternoon the driveway was mentioned. I know of nothing much finer than that driveway around the city which is now being extended by parkways up towards Gatineau park. I want to say something about Gatineau park too because I think that park must come under the review of the proposed committee. I give all credit to the federal district commission for what they have done within this city but I am wondering whether they are not neglecting their responsibilities in connection with Gatineau park. When I was driving out to Kingsmere last summer and autumn I noticed that new buildings were being erected along the way. My understanding was that this park was to be kept for the people of Canada and that, bit by bit as opportunities occurred, the federal district commission would buy out certain properties around Kingsmere and in the park
National Capital Plan
area as they came on the market. If you are going to do that, why was not the property bought from private interests and the erection of further buildings prevented in that national park area? I cannot understand the policy that would allow the building of new cottages and indeed new permanent homes in that area if the policy as I understand it-and as I think it was generally understood-is the policy that was to have been followed.
In the Kingsmere area we now have, of course, the property of the former prime minister. During this summer we had open-air concerts. I was surprised to learn that a new road had been built around the back of the buildings on that property in order to give access to the area where the concerts were to be held. Why? Because, I was told, the dust and the noise of the approaching vehicles on the old road interfered with the people who lived in that vicinity along Kingsmere lake. Kingsmere lake is the only lake we have near to this city. I understand that the property that had been left by the late prime minister was left to the nation and that persons who live or holiday around there were staying there on sufferance for the time being.
Now, I was also told that there were objections to the band concerts because they interfered with the quiet enjoyment of the people who lived in that area. This property and the cottages on it were left to the people of Canada and not for the enjoyment of the few people who happened to be in possession of them when the late prime minister died. I feel the federal district commission has to look into this and carry out what I believe was the intention of the late prime minister and this parliament in connection with that property.
I was told also that the new road that had been built went through shrubs that had been planted to encourage the development of a bird sanctuary there. I believe these shrubs were largely destroyed in building this road so that the residents in the neighbourhood would not be annoyed by the noise of automobiles, dust and so forth. I believe these are matters that have to be investigated by the committee. Of course, it is essential that the trees that remain in Gatineau park should be carefully safeguarded. I understand there was a woodlands association organized in the city of Ottawa in the thirties during the depression when trees were being cut down for firewood. At that time much beautiful timber was destroyed. I think we have to see to it now that in the planning of this capital district the beauty of the national park should be not only preserved but enhanced.

National Capital Plan
I may say that I have been all over this park. It is a glorious thing, with wonderful views. Go there in the summer; go there in the fall or go there now and follow the ski trails, and you will see the beauty of that landscape. When the parkways are built thousands of people will be able to drive along the escarpment and look over the Ottawa valley, as I believe the planners intend. What a wonderful national park that will be adjacent to our capital city. Of the four desirable lakes there, Kingsmere, Philippe, Meach and Harrington, only one has so far been unspoiled along the shoreline and that is Harrington lake. The federal district commission is obtaining property at Philippe lake as the opportunity arises. Of course, the longer they leave these properties in private hands and the more the beauty of that park is enhanced, the more valuable that property will become and the more costly it will be for the people of Canada to acquire it either by negotiation or if necessary expropriation. I think we have to make haste in order to acquire the entire parkland for the enjoyment of all the people of Canada.
Then, of course, situated in that area there is one of the historic settlements of this part of Canada, Old Chelsea. I was in Old Chelsea last autumn. When I was there I went down into the little river valley and learned for the first time that that is where Philemon Wright erected his first mill. Some suggestions have been made from time to time that just as in some other parts of the world they are re-erecting buildings of historic value- they did in the Annapolis valley not so many years ago-while the ancient buildings of log and frame which have some historic interest exist in the neighbourhood, they might be preserved in a pioneer village. In this way our children and our children's children will enjoy the facilities and historic significance of this beauty spot in the years to come.
I know that in the past few years as I have gone out with my daughter to the ski trails or picnicking in the summer in Gatineau park, nothing has appealed to me more than the beauty of this area and the opportunities that this country and this city together have to preserve for the future that wonderful parkland, so that there may be picnic grounds, ski trails, bathing spots and all the other f acilities that go to make life a little more beautiful than the pioneers of the area knew in days gone by. I should like to see spots set aside, either in the park or near the park along the parkway, where there could be open air concerts. Anyone, for example, who has been in Vancouver and who has seen the beauty of Stanley park, preserved in all its original beauty, will know what I mean. Yet, in that
{Mr. Coldwell.]
park there is what is called the Theatre under the Stars which is greatly enjoyed by the people of that city. How much such a spot would be enjoyed here!
I am looking forward to the report of this committee. I hope I may be on the committee. I think, as the Leader of the Opposition has said this afternoon, the committee should not only review what has been done but assist the federal district commission and this parliament in making plans for the future, so that we may carry out the plans made over a period of time.


Mr. Ambrose Holowach (Edmonton East):: 
Mr. J. T. Richard (Ottawa East):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to make a few remarks concerning this resolution. You will realize no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that I am most happy that a committee is to be formed to look into the program of the federal district commission. This I have requested very strongly for a number of years. I have asked for the setting up of such a committee on many occasions and I am gratified to know that such a committee will be set up at long last. No doubt this has been the result of many years of requests for such a committee from various hon. members. It is true that this committee sat 12 years ago but as one speaker said a few moments ago a committee such as the federal district commission committee should be a continuing committee and not an occasional one.
The constitution of the federal district commission provides for members representing each province in this country. I do not think, however, these men can replace the opinion and the information of the representatives of parliament on the committee. I think that what the national capital needs more than anything else is the proper distribution of information and publicity about its program throughout the country.
This can best be done if hon. members of this house are better acquainted with the workings and programs of the commission. I am therefore happy to congratulate the Prime Minister upon having decided to form a joint committee this year to look into the operations of the federal district commission.
I should also like to join with the hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Drew), the Leader of the Opposition, who made reference to some of the great men who served as chairmen of the commission. I was particularly pleased when he mentioned Hon. Thomas Ahearn and Hon. Frederic Bronson who were most public spirited citizens and were devoted

National Capital Plan
to the work of the federal district commission. Other men serving on the commission today are also public-spirited and deserve our praise for the work they are doing. I would also add that the officers of the commission are people who are both qualified and willing to do a very good job.
It has been said, Mr. Speaker, that a capital city should be the mirror of a nation, and while it is true that this house of parliament is the voice of the nation and that the population of the city of Ottawa represents a cross-section of the population of this country, I do not think we have reached the point where we can say that our national capital is truly a picture of the architectural and artistic evolution of this nation. Progress has been rather slow in implementing any suggested plan to make this a truly national capital.
As I have said before, the great difficulty with the whole plan is the fact that there is a conflict of jurisdictions. The eminent architect, Mr. Jacques Greber, submitted a plan to the government years ago, but that plan has never received any approval, in whole or in part, by all the jurisdictions involved, municipal, provincial and federal. When any part of the plan has had to be put into effect a decision has had to be reached on the particular part. This takes a long time. Some way must be devised by this committee whereby the greater part of the plan can be outlined for the future for approval by the federal government and for sanction by the provincial governments and the municipalities involved.
No one will deny that we have made great progress in beautifying the city of Ottawa. Other speakers have referred to our excellent driveways and beautiful parks; A number of bridges, including the Sussex street bridge, Hurdmans bridge, Bronson avenue bridge, as well as a number of other projects, have been completed, but we are far from having what could be called a planned city. As one speaker has said, there has been no approval of a green belt. There has been no approval of zoning regulations in the city. Our zoning is some 25 or 50 years behind because even in the best residential sections we find small stores being erected alongside beautiful apartment buildings. One of the duties of this committee should be to direct the federal district commission to exert efforts to convince the municipalities in this area to provide proper zoning.
When we refer to the progress that has been made in the plan to beautify the city of Ottawa I do not want hon. members to think that this has all been done at the

expense of the federal government. We who are residents of the city of Ottawa appreciate the fact that we live in the national capital, but it must be remembered that the improvements being carried on in this area represent a great deal of expense to ourselves. As the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) said, I believe last night, some of the things that have been done and have been shared in by the city of Ottawa were much greater projects than would be required or would be undertaken by the city for its own purposes.
In order to assist in the Greber plan the city of Ottawa some years ago annexed thousands of acres around the city which it did not immediately need. This represented considerable expenditures for sewage, water and transportation, and also increased taxation for the people who had settled in those areas. Many people in Ottawa had their property taken over by the federal district commission. Those people were quite satisfied to live alongside the Ottawa or Rideau river as many of them had been living there for years. However, they had to move to new locations which they acquired at greater cost and on which they had to pay greater taxes.
I say these things in order to indicate that the citizens of Ottawa are co-operating. It is costing them money to be part of the national capital plan. They are willing to incur this cost and they welcome the spirit in which this resolution has been received and the manner in which speakers have expressed themselves yesterday and today. When the committee has received all information from witnesses who will be appearing before it, it should be able to recommend to parliament a more substantial amount of money to be voted immediately to the federal district commission, and also to indicate a program to be followed so as to accelerate the completion of the plan. I hope that the committee will recommend that greater assistance be given by the federal district commission in implementing any particular project in co-operation with the city of Ottawa.
I think there are certain projects in connection with which the city should not be asked to contribute. I have in mind the need for a bridge between Ottawa and Hull. The building of this bridge should not be delayed. I think it is shameful that there is no proper approach by car or on foot between the province of Quebec and the national capital of Ottawa. The federal government has acquired considerable land on the other side of the river and the printing bureau has been moved to Hull. No doubt

the government intends to build other buildings in Hull and the building of a bridge across the Ottawa river should be considered as part of the national capital plan. It is all right to refer to the beautiful buildings we have in Ottawa, but if you are thinking of the aesthetic I do not think there is anything more useful and attractive than a beautiful bridge across such a lovely river as the Ottawa. I hope that the committee will give consideration to the building of this particular bridge which is in such great demand at the present time.
I do not intend to repeat what I said last year about what I considered to be the unfair way in which land was taken over by expropriation proceedings for use by the federal district commission.
I shall only repeat what I have said on previous occasions, that I consider that the Expropriation Act, being an impingement upon the civil rights of a citizen, should be used lightly, sparingly but generously. Many of our people are not very happy. Hundreds of homes in this area have been expropriated by the federal district commission. There was no question of going to court. A private citizen cannot go to court against the government when an amount of $10,000 or $12,000 is involved, though big corporations or religious institutions can afford to do so because the amount involved is substantial. I have had very many complaints in the past about this kind of thing, and I hope this committee will consider the effects of expropriations upon individual owners of property in this area. I am not going to speak any more about it. My suggestions about the Expropriation Act will go to the Minister of Justice when the proper occasion arises, but at present I shall leave it at that.
I only hope this committee will have full opportunity and time to look into all the matters that have been raised by the different speakers here this afternoon. I hope also the government will take into consideration the suggestion I and others have made that this committee sit more often in order that we may play a more important part in planning a truly national capital around this area.


Douglas Scott Harkness: think everyone in the house welcomes the setting up of this committee for the purposes outlined in the resolution:
-to review and report upon the progress and programs of the federal district commission in developing and implementing the plan for the national capital.
The terms of reference and powers of the committee seem to be sufficient for the purposes for which the committee is being set up. Possibly the fact that this is a joint committee of members of this house and members
National Capital Plan
of the other place is a good thing from that point of view. In the years I have been here I have noted that joint committees generally have a freer hand than many of the committees composed of members of this house alone. Probably the experience of members of the other place will be of great advantage to this committee.
This is probably an appropriate time to set up the committee and inquire into what the federal district commission has done and proposes to do, because the capital grant of $25 million in annual instalments of $2J million each, I think, runs out in about a year's time. Therefore undoubtedly recommendations will need to be made in regard to a further capital grant to enable the commission to carry on its activities.
A great deal has been accomplished in the past. One has only to look at photographs taken of various parts of Ottawa 50 years or so ago and from that time on to see what a difference there is in the general attractiveness, shall we say, of the city now as compared to what it was in the old days. I am not going into what extent this has been accomplished by the commission and to what extent it has been accomplished by the municipal authorities of Ottawa and the surrounding municipalities. Probably the major part of the work has been due to the commission. If not done by them directly, at least it was due to the impetus they have given to this whole matter of the beautification of Ottawa.
During the ten years or so that I have been down here, during the times when the house was in session, it has seemed to me that the permanent residents of Ottawa-and this is also reflected in the Ottawa daily newspapers-are seized with the idea that the beautification of Ottawa is primarily a local matter, that it is an Ottawa matter. I think that is a wrong attitude. Certainly if that were the primary idea in the beautification of the city it would be difficult to justify the comparatively large capital grants, to say nothing of the maintenance grants, which are made to the federal district commission, and the work that it does.
In other words I think the work done by the federal district commission must be looked upon as a national undertaking to create here in Ottawa a capital of which the country can be proud and in which every citizen of the country, when he comes here, can go about and take a proper degree of pride. The grants made by this parliament to accomplish this beautification process are justified, I think, on those grounds.
In his statement last year the Prime Minister referred to the national capital as a symbol of the unity of the country and
16S8

National Capital Plan so on. The city, of course, is naturally very much interested. The people who live here permanently are the people who receive the greatest benefit from the various beautification projects that are put into effect, the parks that are established and things of that sort. I noted that when the Prime Minister was dealing at some length with the federal district commission on July 27, 1955, he spoke of the municipal grants and went on to say:
Given these grants, there is no reason for regarding the activities of the federal district commission in the planning and creation of a national capital as being in any way a substitute for the payment of full taxes to the city.
It is extremely desirable that the idea be made very plain, and I hope it may be one of the things the discussions in the committee will make plain, that the work done by the federal district commission should in no way be in lieu of taxes or in lieu of a grant or anything along that line, but that this work is undertaken as a means of creating here a city which all Canadians can look upon as a proper capital for this great country.
One of the most important things the federal district commission has to do is in connection with the green belt, which has been mentioned by several speakers already and with which the Prime Minister dealt in his remarks last year at considerable length. This green belt, as I see it, will particularly provide park land on this side of the river. As indicated by the hon. member for Rose-town-Biggar, we have in the Gatineau park a very beautiful natural park of considerable size, which provides a playground to which people from here and from other parts of Canada can go to enjoy themselves. However, to round out the development of this whole area as a capital city we need a very considerable amount of park lands on this side of the river, as envisaged in this green belt.
I should hope that the committee will give a good deal of attention to the green belt and make specific recommendations that will result in something definite being done in regard to the setting up and preserving of this green belt. Some of the remarks made in connection with that green belt last year by the Prime Minister led me to wonder whether at that time the government had any very strong intention of ensuring that this green belt be preserved. The only thing that he definitely indicated was being done was that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation was instructed not to make loans to people who wanted to build houses
[Mr. Harkness.l

in what was envisaged as the green belt. In connection with the green belt he went on to say:
. . . we find ourselves frequently met with the suggestion that the federal district commission or the government should acquire land in order to control its use.
Then he mentioned various types of property and went on to say:
. . . and finally, properties in the areas which have been proposed as a green belt around the cities comprising the national capital.
A little later, as found on page 6902, the Prime Minister said:
These situations which I have described and illustrated all require some zoning and control. It seems to us to be inappropriate that the federal government should undertake this function, even in the capital area. It belongs more appropriately to the provinces and the municipalities to whom our constitution and traditions give jurisdiction in these matters. But this government hopes that these local responsibilities will be effectively discharged.
I would hope they would be effectively discharged, too, but unless the dominion government gives a strong lead in the matter through the federal district commission, even extending to the purchase of a certain amount of these lands in order, as the Prime Minister said, to control their use, I doubt very much that the green belt will actually be preserved. I understand there has been a certain amount of building in it already and, with the rate at which Ottawa is growing and expanding rapidly into the suburbs and beyond, unless some purchasing of land is carried out by the federal district commission or there is a much closer integration of effort among the commission and the municipal and provincial authorities concerned the green belt will disappear. Then the task of restoring it will become very much more expensive and difficult. As I say, it seems to me that one of the things necessary at the present time is to take action to ensure that the green belt is held and made a definite part of the activities of the federal district commission with respect to the whole plan of beautification of the city.
There is one other point I should like to mention briefly, and it has to do with the preservation of certain historic buildings. The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar said something about Old Chelsea and the possibility of erecting there a replica of the first mill established in this part of the country. There are certain buildings of some considerable historic interest in and around Ottawa which I think the federal district commission might very well acquire and preserve as one of their activities. They actually own two or three such buildings at the present time. In my opinion one of them is one of the best

examples of domestic architecture, a very fine stone house built somewhere around 125 or 130 years ago.
There are a few other buildings of that nature which I think should be preserved in the interests of all Canadians in order to indicate the type of building in which our ancestors lived. In addition, in many cases they are extremely attractive buildings that are worth preserving simply from the esthetic point of view. I would hope the federal district commission would do more along that line than it has so far and that the few buildings it has under its control at the present time will not be destroyed in order to make way for the erection of some other buildings. This could readily happen, and of course it has happened in the case of a lot of buildings both here and in other parts of Canada.
When the committee is set up I trust that it will have sufficient time during the remainder of the session to cover what I regard as the very considerable amount of work with which it will be faced, and that it will be able to bring in a satisfactory and comprehensive report.
(Translation):


Mr. Rodolphe Leduc (Gatineau):: Mr. Speaker, 1 wish to congratulate the government for setting up a committee to review the progress and the work of the federal district commission in the implementation of the national capital plan. Like all Canadians, I am anxious to see that plan fulfilled so that we may have a capital worthy of such a young, rich and prosperous country as Canada.
As member for the constituency of Gatineau, I am interested in the development of the national capital because two thirds of the national capital district are located within Gatineau county and 17 municipalities of my constituency are within that district.
Moreover, a national park has been planned for the Gatineau hills. It is a scenic area and this will be the first national park in the province of Quebec.
The members of the committee will have much work to do in investigating the present situation and in preparing a report on future projects.
In listening to the comments of hon. members in connection with that committee, I noticed that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) is not well informed on part of the implementation of the program.
(Text):
At this point I wish to make a few comments in the English language in order that the Leader of the Opposition will understand what I have to say with regard to certain
67509-120J
National Capital Plan
remarks he made this afternoon which I feel are inaccurate. In his remarks he mentioned that in its report in 1944 the joint committee had suggested that the removal of the railway lines in Ottawa and the station should be carried out as soon as possible. He stated that there had been very little done in this regard.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, I must correct that immediately. That is not what I said. What I said was that the report had recommended that negotiations take place between the commission and the representatives of the railways to discuss what should be done with the rail lines. I did not mention the station or refer to any detail concerning it. As a matter of fact I was merely summarizing the very general statement in the report of 1944 and indicating that it had not been specific enough to produce any result.


Rodolphe Leduc: I have here the 55th annual report of the federal district commission for the year 1954 and I wish to read a paragraph on page 14 having to do with the removal of the railroads and the station in Ottawa. This is the key to the plan of Mr. Greber. When the tracks and the station have been removed, arteries will be available for new streets and parkways in the centre of the city. In the report it is stated:
The national capital planning committee studied the physical features of greater Ottawa and found that the waterways of the Rideau river and canal and the existing railway trackage divided the city into nine separate "islands", thus causing many bottlenecks and hampering the free flow of trafflc. In addition the railways had induced the development of industry in residential districts and in areas of government buildings. While the present railway and industrial areas are considered out of keeping with the character of a national capital, the committee recognized the vital role played by industry in the economic life of the metropolitan area. It therefore recommended the removal of all railway lines from the central area and their replacement by a new line along the southern boundary of the future city. Substantial areas of land in the southeast section of Ottawa and the northern section of Hull were acquired for new railway yards, freight terminals and a future union passenger station. The land acquisitions provide space for light and heavy industry which would have to be relocated as a result of the railway revisions.
Construction of these new railway facilities was started in 1950. The work included overhead crossings on the new railway line for the Russell and Metcalfe roads. In 1951 a connection was made at South March between the Beachburg and Renfrew subdivisions of the Canadian National Railways, permitting trains to reach central Ottawa by the new Walkley road line and thus releasing the crosstown tracks for conversion to highway purposes. In November 1953 the Canadian National Railways Montreal-Winnipng manifest freight trains began using the new line and yards. At the end of 1954 the Canadian National Railways also began to transfer its yard office operations from Bank street to the new facilities. Service trackage will be maintained between the present Union station.

National Capital Plan
Ottawa East and the Chaudiere areas until the completion of the relocation of existing industries and the union station.
Mr. Speaker, a great deal of work has been done in connection with the removal of the railway tracks in Ottawa. Already talks are being held between the C.P.R. and the C.N.R. with a view to construction of a union station outside of the city of Ottawa. Mr. Greber, when visiting Ottawa last year, stated in a press conference that he was greatly impressed with the progress that had been made in the development of the master plan in Ottawa.
Many people do not realize what has been accomplished since the report was tabled in this house in 1950. Many bridges have been erected in Ottawa. I should like to mention some of them. They include the Mackenzie King bridge, Hurdmans bridge across the Rideau, the Bronson bridge across the Rideau, the two bridges across the Rideau on Sussex street and the improvement of the Chaudiere bridge last year. If more progress has not been made toward the realization of this project, it is owing to the fact that the amount voted each year by this parliament is not sufficient to permit work to be carried on more rapidly looking to its completion. The house must understand that the federal district commission in the last six or seven years has acquired many valuable properties. It has acquired those properties in order to save the Canadian taxpayers' money in connection with the future development of this capital.
I am sure this committee has a real function to perform. With the advice of the members of the federal district commission and of the technical advisers of the national capital committee, I am confident that we shall get all the information we need to prepare a substantial report so that in the near future we shall see the realization of this vast project.


Mr. W. Ross Thatcher (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: National Capital Plan
He agreed to do this on the understanding that he might not necessarily support it. I wish to move, Mr. Speaker:
That alter the words "national capital" in paragraph 1, the following words be inserted:
"and also to consider the advisability or otherwise of forming a federal district under the jurisdiction of parliament in the Ottawa area."


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I have some doubts as to whether this form of amendment to the resolution is in order, but I shall express an opinion on that later.
(Translation) :


Mr. Alexis Caron (Hull):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few minutes to express my views on this matter.
Let me first of all congratulate the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) who wishes to afford the house an opportunity of getting better acquainted with the work of the federal district commission. It is a necessary step and I know that the members of the commission are anxious to have their activity investigated by the house so that all hon. members may be conversant with developments concerning the national capital.
During the two years that I was mayor of the municipality of the city of Hull, I had the privilege to sit on the federal district commission and to appreciate the tremendous and serious work it has accomplished. It is made up of 20 members, who serve without remuneration and work voluntarily to ensure the development of the national capital. These people deserve the admiration of the nation because they do their work cheerfully and as a service to their country.
As representatives of the city of Hull, we had the opportunity to deal with the federal district commission and those dealings have been indeed most pleasant. The commission did not try to enforce its views; it came to discuss matters intelligently in order to secure certain concessions in exchange for other concessions on its part.
I can therefore state that, in those two years, the city of Hull received fair treatment and, in return, gave fair treatment to the commission, as was only right. A number of matters, especially the matter of expropriation, came up during those discussions. In connection with the Gatineau area for instance, there was a complaint about the fact that, in the neighbourhood of Kingsmere, some private properties had not yet been bought by the federal district commission. It was even suggested at that time to resort to

expropriation in order to oust people who had owned these properties for years.
Had the hon. member who spoke thus taken the trouble to study the matter of expropriation in relation to Quebec provincial legislation, he would have found that jurists disagree on that score. We rather feel that the federal government cannot expropriate unless it plans to build a public building to house some of its administrative services.
Since, therefore, the federal government, according to certain authorities, has no right to expropriate, we would very much like these purchases to be made by mutual agreement. In any case it is very unfortunate, as the hon. member for Ottawa East (Mr. Richard) has pointed out, that certain people should be dispossessed of their property and allowed in return only the present real value since they have to spend two or three times as much for new accommodation.
If we must expropriate, we should pay a price based not on the present real value but on the replacement value, so that those who have been deprived of their homes in this way should not have to run into debt when they rebuild. A great many property owners, particularly on the Ottawa side, had their homes expropriated, got $8,000, $10,000 or $11,000 for houses in which they had spent a lifetime and then had to finance the payment of a house costing $20,000 or $22,000 to build. People of 65 or 70 were therefore forced to borrow money they might never be able to repay. Even though it is legal under certain conditions, it becomes somewhat costly, and the eviction of people who have been property owners for years should not be encouraged.
I want to state again that, when we speak of having an auditorium for the development of higher culture, I am all for it.
The federal district commission and the federal government should do all they can to help develop a taste for the arts. However, before we put up such a building, it seems to me we should make it accessible to the people. Traffic between Hull and Ottawa is unbelievably slow. In fact, it takes over three quarters of an hour to cover the distance between Parliament hill and Laurier street, across the river. It is well known that the Alexandra bridge, built in 1900, is a monstrosity and no longer answers today's requirements. It is absolutely necessary that this bridge be replaced, especially as we cannot go on waiting hours to move from one city to the other.

We are told that the situation is now under consideration and that the provincial governments concerned have been approached on the subject.
I think these negotiations should take place without delay, so that this matter will not drag on for ten years, and that the situation may be remedied as soon as possible.
I think it has become essential to build that bridge, and I believe that responsibility should be transferred from the Department of Public Works to the federal district commission. And to those who would remind us that funds are lacking, as it has been mentioned, and that some $60 million have already been spent, I submit that we should spend a few millions more on that construction, and I am all for it.
We should also consider changing the name of the federal district commission to that of the federal capital commission. Some one might say ' What's in a name", but I know that people are prone to attach a derogatory sense to the words "federal district". In the past, and again this afternoon, we heard the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre (Mr. Thatcher) ask for a federal district similar to the District of Columbia.
I am certain that my fellow citizens do not share this view at all and that they would not like to be transferred from a town or province into another, nor be submitted to a federal district where we might have difficulties with our system of education and otherwise. If the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre had discussed the matter with Mr. Greber, he might have learned that not only the District of Columbia, but also the Federal District of Mexico and another such district in South America, that were patterned on the District of Columbia, have been failures from every point of view. This is the reason why Mr. Greber has never recommended setting up such a federal district.
It is useless to think about it, for you may be assured that not only my fellow citizens from Quebec, but also those in Ontario, will vigorously oppose it. We like our present position and want it to remain as it is. We do not want to lose our rights as citizens and we shall preserve them, whatever the expressed wishes of some members may be. Indeed, the mayor of Ottawa told me that she was opposed to it and*that the government of Ontario would never allow such a project to be carried out.
Well, Mr. Speaker, before I suggest any such amendment, it would seem to me that
National Capital Plan
we should study the results obtained in other similar districts, so as to know the reactions of their residents who see their tax burden growing and have nothing to say about it. It is true that, in the District of Columbia, the government of the United States pays part of the expense, but the portion attributed to the municipalities constantly grows while people cannot very well say whether they are satisfied or not. We do not propose to act in this way; nor, in my view, does the government.
Someone has referred to the Gatineau park and to some of its charming localities, to Kingsmere in particular. This centre is very beautiful and I do not think that summer cottages could mar its natural beauty. The old wooden buildings found there give the centre its quaint, individual, character. The homes themselves are neither unsightly nor dangerous. We should try to preserve not only the natural beauty of the area but that of the houses which have been built since, as it is part of our heritage.
I need not go any further, I think. I could perhaps object to some of the remarks which have been made on that subject but I know that all these matters will be fully gone into by the members of the committee we are being asked to set up. If, as I hope, I have the privilege of sitting on the committee, I will have an opportunity to refute these arguments.
(Text):


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: When the amendment to this motion was presented I immediately expressed some doubt as to whether it was in order. I have since refreshed my memory as to the authorities, and I should like to direct the attention of hon. members to citation 546 in Beauchesne's third edition, which reads in part as follows:
When the house is considering a motion, of which notice has been given, for the appointment of a select committee, a member cannot move in amendment that the committee be given wider powers than those which were set down in the notice.
The citation goes on to give several instances of amendments which were ruled out of order on that account. At page 642 of Beauchesne's third edition hon. members will find a ruling by Mr. Speaker Black to the same effect. Also, citation 355 reads:
An amendment was ruled out because it raised a new question which could only be considered on a distinct motion after notice.

National Capital Plan
For these reasons I am afraid that I must regretfully rule the amendment of the hon. member out of order.


Mr. Ray Thomas (Welaskiwin):: Mr. Speaker, I shall be brief because I have no intention of entering into a general discussion of the work of the federal district commission. However, I do want to bring one matter to the attention of the house, and to support the suggestion made by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar that we should have something along the line of a theatre under the stars' or, as suggested by the hon. member for Edmonton East, that the federal district commission should build an auditorium which would be available for dramatic plays, concerts and the like.
I would point out that the province of Alberta took a step in this direction which the federal government might well follow. The provincial government gave auditoriums to Edmonton and Calgary on the celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of Alberta becoming a province. Those auditoriums cost the provincial government something over $3 million each, and they were donated to those cities to be used in furthering culture, drama and so on.
In order to point up the need for such an auditorium in this area I should like to mention what happened to me last summer. Hon. members will recall how hot and humid it was here in Ottawa during the latter part of the session, and on Sunday afternoon I drove out to Kingsmere in order to get out into the country for a little relaxation and some country air. I wandered around looking over the ground, and started up a path where I found someone taking tickets. Apparently the facilities of the park had been turned over to some organization to put on some sort of concert, play or something of the like. The public was unable to go there and range over the grounds and look around as they should.
The only way I would have been able to get into Kingsmere that Sunday afternoon was by buying a ticket for the play which was going on. There were literally hundreds of people out there that day who no doubt wanted to look around this wonderful show place and avail themselves of the facilities provided for tourists. Walking around the parking lot I saw licence plates from practically every province in Canada and a good many of the states of the United States. Those people were all turned away because the grounds had been turned over to this organization to put on a play.
I have no objection whatever to the furthering of culture Qr the providing of facilities for charitable and religious organizations


or other types of organizations which might want to put on productions of different kinds, but I do not think one of Canada's show places should be closed on a Sunday afternoon in order to provide facilities for some organization to put on a performance for which an admittance was being charged.
I do not mind saying that I felt pretty badly about it. I was rather upset to think that this park which had been turned over to the people of Canada as a show place should be closed to those very people on a Sunday afternoon. I think this points up the need for some sort of auditorium which the federal district commission could turn over to worthy organizations.
I heard a lot of complaining among the people who were there. I did not speak to any of them, but it was quite easy to see what their feelings were. A good many of them had travelled many miles only to find that they could not get into this park.
As I said before, I should like this committee to consider this matter of providing facilities for organizations such as little theatre groups, orchestras and so on.
This or any other park in Canada set up for the welfare and enjoyment of the Canadian people should under no circumstances be closed to the public and the facilities turned over to private organization, no matter what that organization may be. I ask the house, the Prime Minister and this committee to follow the lead of the Alberta government and provide an auditorium somewhere under the control of the federal district commission. This could be located in the green belt or in one of the parks, and these facilities made available to various organizations.
Then our parks and show places could be maintained for the public and made available to them whenever they desired to visit them. As I say, there were a good many people there that Sunday, and I imagine many of them will not be able to make a further visit. I could not blame them for feeling discouraged and rather badly about being turned away that Sunday afternoon.


Mr. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, I think it is advisable in considering a resolution of this kind that we have as widely representative a viewpoint as possible. The last occasion parliament had a chance to review the activities of the federal district commission in connection with the national capital plan was in* 1944, at which time considerable interest was generated throughout the country in the prospect of a place of beauty, a city of beauty, arising here in Ottawa.

However, since that time there has been no direct discussion of the matter by a committee, and I have the feeling that Canadians living in provinces more remote from Ontario and Quebec are somewhat out of touch with the developments which have taken place following the plan laid down during the sessions of the committee in 1944. At that time, I recall, looking at the problem from the viewpoint of an outsider, there was considerable interest generated. However, more recently, I am afraid, in other parts of the country the general public has not been keeping in touch with the developments taking place.
I first had the opportunity to visit the capital in 1942. Like most Canadians who come to Ottawa for the first time, my first reaction was that of disappointment. We tend to regard the capital of any nation as a place of beauty, a show place to a certain extent, because of the peculiar position it occupies in the affairs of the country. Unfortunately, because of the lateness in starting to plan our capital city on an organized basis, up to the present time Ottawa, like most of our Canadian cities, has just grown. There has been no organization of any kind. Fortunately during recent years, since the committee of 1944, there is some obvious evidence that the plans laid down on that occasion are at long last beginning to take shape.
Ottawa is also in the fortunate position that it has one of the best possible natural locations for a capital city. In 1942, when I viewed the city for the first time, I did so from what might be called the bird's eye view, from the air. Being connected with the air force at Uplands airport at the time I had a chance to fly over this area quite regularly, and from that perspective the district surrounding our capital city certainly appears one of extreme natural beauty. Any of the deficiencies that are criticized by visitors to Ottawa from more remote parts of the country are the result of delay in development and the unplanned growth of the city since it was first chosen to be capital of this young country. The nature of the early commercial activities, of course, has added some eyesores to the surrounding district which are only gradually being eliminated.
It was more by accident than by good judgment that the most attractive feature of the city at the present time, the federal district commission driveway, associated closely with the Rideau canal, grew out of that early defence measure Colonel By took in the years Canada was under threat of attack from our neighbour to the south. That has now become a central feature of the city and is one part 67509-121
National Capital Plan
of the capital that we can show to visitors with a great deal of pride.
As we come to the activities of the committee about to be set up, there are one or two suggestions I have in mind that I think should be drawn to the attention of those who have the privilege of serving on the committee. It has been pointed out already in this discussion that the original intention of the planners who first began to think in terms of a more rationalized development of our capital city was to pattern it after the city of Washington, the capital of the United States. As I see the development taking place, particularly in reference to buildings already constructed by the Department of Public Works, I get the feeling that the pattern in that regard is almost too close. The buildings that have already appeared on Wellington street, for example, seem to suggest that we are going to emphasize heavy stone types of structures reminiscent of an architectural age that is now some 200 or 300 years in the past.
I have not examined this question in any detail at all, nor am I any authority on architecture, but the general impression from casual observation is that the emphasis in our public buildings in this downtown area is going to be on huge monuments of stone. Maybe it is a deliberate attempt to reconstruct in Canada the equivalent of Constitution avenue in the city of Washington, D.C., but it seems to me the reverse of the architectural trend that is under way on this continent, where the emphasis in recent years has been on less ponderous structures designed for utilitarian, functional purposes, where the emphasis is not on the appearance of grandeur but rather on the suitability as work areas.
Most of these buildings are going to be occupied by civil servants. I take as a concrete example of this new modernistic trend the sort of structure that you see in the United Nations building, with emphasis on accessibility, surrounded by grassed areas, with a considerable part of the building devoted to window space. The United Nations secretariat building is often referred to as the glass house, mainly because at a distance the walls appear to be entirely constructed of glass.
As I have pointed out at the commencement of these observations, Canada has delayed somewhat long in coming to grips with this problem of building a capital worthy of the nation. That has had certain disadvantages, which have been outlined. We have seen a city grow up around parliament hill that has all the undesirable aspects

National Capital Plan
of the rapid growth of our modern cities, but it has this advantage. We are now in a position to start from scratch, as it were, so far as the architectural features of our capital plans are concerned. It would seem from a common sense standpoint much more desirable to project our thinking into the future and try to gear our architectural developments to the future, rather than tie them into the past.
It might be true that a certain atmosphere of grandeur is required in order to provide the necessary stately avenues for ceremonial and state occasions. But if we are thinking in terms of the era of capital city develop' ment of two or three hundred years ago; if we are trying to recreate here the atmosphere of some of the European capitals, I feel that we are decidedly out of touch with the general atmosphere of a country such as Canada, where there is a certain degree of modesty surrounding the living habits of the people as a whole. That is the main point I want to make in this discussion.
I have one final suggestion I should like to put before the house. The sittings of the committee will provide another occasion to arouse the general interest of the people of Canada from one end of the country to the other. I suggest that we use every possible opportunity by means of television, radio, every form of mass media communication that we have today, to bring the results of the deliberations of the committee before the people of Canada, and to bring before the people of Canada such outstanding events as the annual tulip festival. Only by so doing can we create the sentiment right across the country that will draw the attention of every Canadian citizen to the importance of the comprehensive development of our capital city.
In view of some of the difficulties that have been outlined with respect to the relationships between the various levels of government in trying to come to a coordinated agreement on national capital development, if there is no other solution whereby closer co-ordination can be maintained perhaps it would be advisable for this purpose to have a committee of this type sit more frequently so that we will be assured of a capital city, a capital area, worthy of a nation occupying the position that Canada does in the modern world.


Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, I want to add one or two brief remarks and relate them chiefly to some of the things said by the Leader of the Opposition. I read in the resolution that a joint committee is to be set up, and so on, to

review and report upon "the progress and programs in developing and implementing the plan for the national capital". The Leader of the Opposition spoke at considerable length about the physical aspects of this development. He spoke about streets and bridges and all the necessary things which enter into a plan, but the point I wish to refer to and which he stressed greatly is what one might call the cultural side of the matter.
He referred to a national theatre and the national gallery. I want to mention that for this reason. It seems to me that the communists are facing us with an entirely new threat, and it is in a sense not a physical but an educational threat. They are making us apprehensive lest, unless we distort our education, unless we stress technical education almost wholly, we may be left behind and one day find ourselves faced with overwhelming threats in the economic world.
It is for that reason that I wish to emphasize what the Leader of the Opposition said. I think there is a danger in our country that we may become not only exhilarated but even fascinated by our material progress. That is natural and inevitable, and I think healthy too, but on the other hand it does mean that we need to be called back, so to speak, from time to time to consider these other aspects of life. Therefore I was glad that the Leader of the Opposition spent a good deal of time not merely talking about the mechanical processes of our day to day lives but speaking about the art of living. By that I mean, of course, literature, painting and all the other things that go with it. When we look back we do know that in ancient days there were cities that have left their mark ever since. The city of Athens 2,500 years ago was, I suppose, about the same size as Ottawa, and it has influenced the whole world by the literary and artistic legacies it has left.
So I venture to express the hope that the committee in considering its work may feel there is a wonderful opportunity here in Ottawa for a lead to be given, and what an opportunity we have in this country, a kind of double opportunity because we have two great cultures. It seems to me that the committee would do well to consider its responsibilities in that direction. We are prospering greatly. We read almost fabulous figures of our material progress, and I hope that in the consideration of those we will not be lead to disregard these other things.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. W. G. Weir (Porlage-Neepawa):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask leave to revert to motions?


Mr. Speaker:: Has the hon. gentleman leave
to revert to motions at this time?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


William Gilbert Weir: Mr. Speaker, by unanimous consent I move, seconded by the hon. member for Portneuf (Mr. Gauthier):
That Miss Aitken and Messrs. Blair, Buchanan, Caron, Coldwell, Dumas, Fraser (St. John's East), Fulton, Gour (Russell), Houck, Leduc (Gatineau), Low, Mang, Mcllraith, Noseworthy, Nowlan, Philpott, Richard (Ottawa East), Robichaud and Weselak act on behalf of this house on the proposed joint committee of both houses of parliament to review and report upon the progress and programs of the federal district commission in developing and implementing the plan for the national capital as provided for in the motion adopted this day; that the provisions of standing order 67 be suspended in relation thereto; and
That a message be sent to the Senate to inform Their Honours that the foregoing members have been appointed to act on behalf of the commons on the said proposed joint committee of both houses.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Hon. Sluari S. Garson (Minister of Justice) moved:: That a joint committee of both houses of parliament be appointed to inquire into and report upon the questions whether the criminal law of Canada relating to (a) capital punishment, (b) corporal punishment or (c) lotteries should be amended in any respect and, if so, in what manner and to what extent;
That Miss Bennett, Messrs. Boisvert, Brown (Essex West), Brown (Brantford), Cameron (High Park), Castleden, Fairey, Garson, Leduc (Verdun), Lusby, Mitchell (London), Montgomery, Murphy (Westmorland), Mrs. Shipley, and Messrs. Thatcher, Thomas, Valois and Winch be members of the joint committee on the part of this house; that the quorum of the said committee be 9 members thereof; and that standing order 67 of the House of Commons be suspended in relation thereto;
That the committee have power to appoint, from among its members, such subcommittees as may be deemed advisable or necessary; to call for persons, papers and records; to sit while the house is sitting and to report from time to time;
That the minutes of the proceedings and the evidence of the special committees appointed at the last two sessions to inquire into and report upon the foregoing questions, together with all papers and records laid before them, be referred to the said committee;
That the committee have power to print such papers and evidence from day to day as may be ordered by the committee for the use of the committee and of parliament and that standing order 66 of the House of Commons be suspended in relation thereto;
That the committee have power to engage the services of counsel;
And that a message be sent to the Senate requesting that house to unite with this house for the above purpose and to select, if the Senate deems advisable, some of its members to act on the proposed joint committee.
Committee on Criminal Law


George Alexander Drew: Is there going to be any statement in connection with this motion?


Walter Edward Harris: There is no statement to make except that this is a continuation of the committee work that has been going on, as I recall it, for the last three years. I understand that the nature of the problem was fairly clearly defined in the latter days of the last session, and that it was the unanimous opinion at that time of the committee and I think of the house that the committee should be reconstituted at this session.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, we conour in the purpose of the motion and welcome the intention to set up this committee. My only reason for asking if there was a statement was that I wanted to be sure if there was one that it was made before I made the brief remarks I wish to make.
I do not intend to make any comments about the subject matter of this motion. I say that for this reason. I would not wish it to be thought that we are not greatly interested in every one of the subjects covered by the terms of the motion. We believe, however, that this committee has an extremely important task in dealing with these important subjects, and we do not intend to anticipate the deliberations of that committee by making any comments with regard to the various subjects mentioned.
I have in mind particularly the subject of capital punishment, which has naturally engaged the attention of hon. members here in recent months, as it has that of all Canadians. I thought it appropriate that I should say at this time I would hope that this matter, under no circumstances, would become the subject of partisan dispute. I cannot imagine that a problem that is related to society as a whole and of such an important nature would be dealt with on that basis. I feel sure that it will not be.
I express the hope that when the time comes to deal with whatever recommendations are made with regard to all these matters affecting all society, and as to which there are deep personal feelings that have nothing to do with politics, there shall be a free vote. I may say at this time that so far as the party I have the honour to lead is concerned, there will be a free vote. I feel that it would be useful if that were the understood position throughout the whole house. However, that is for others to say. I am speaking on behalf of the party to which I belong, and I say that our vote will be a free vote whenever it comes.
We look forward to the inquiry into these extremely important subjects, because it is

Committee on Criminal Law not only capital punishment but also corporal punishment and lotteries, which will engage the attention of this committee. We shall await with interest the result of their deliberations.


Mr. G. H. Castleden (Yorkion):: Mr. Speaker, I just wish to say a brief word in regard to the setting up of this committee. The committee which has been doing such excellent work during the past two sessions should be congratulated on the wide range of knowledge they have obtained from a large field of experts. The calling of those experts has resulted in some very interesting evidence which I believe should be studied not only by all members of this parliament but by the people of Canada as a whole. I believe any person in Canada-at least the vast majority of us-would gain a great deal by reading the evidence of this committee and learning something about modern trends and about the history of capital punishment within our own country.
Among the names of those called before the committee is that of Mr. J. V. Fornataro, director of corrections. I refer also to the evidence given by Professor C. W. Topping, who is professor of sociology at United College, Winnipeg, Manitoba. We find the name of such a man as Mr. J. Alex. Edmison, Q.C., assistant to the principal, Queen's University, and who is director of American Prison Association and also a member of the special committee of the Department of Justice to study remission and parole; Mr. Virgil W. Peterson, operator of the Chicago science commission. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police gave evidence. This association in their brief, I note, state they could almost agree with Professor Sellin that there is a trend away from capital punishment these days and that it will disappear in all countries of western culture in the near future.
The general consensus of opinion, I would say, expressed by these experts supported the idea that capital punishment should be done away with. People interested would be surprised to learn that capital punishment has not served as a deterrent to the committing of murder. In the evidence given by Mr. Fornataro he stated emphatically that he was against capital punishment, and that sufficiently significant changes had occurred in today's understanding of behaviour since the original framing of the Criminal Code in Canada which would lead us to the conclusion that the very purpose of our system of justice should be redefined. It is a study of great interest, a matter of public concern across Canada. He states this-


Mrs. Shipley:: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I expect that I am out of order, but I may say that the hon. member was not a member of this committee last year whereas many of us were. I do not think it would be quite the right thing for the members of the committee to discuss the evidence until such time as we bring in our report. I wondered if it would help if I just mentioned that matter. Positive opinions are being expressed here. If I do not happen to agree with them, as a member of the committee, I do not want them to stand unchallenged until such time as the report comes in. I wondered whether, if I could say that, the hon. member would reconsider the discussion.


George Hugh Castleden: I am pleased to have those remarks from the hon. member for Timis-kaming. It is because I was not a member of that committee last year, and because I am looking forward to being a member of that committee this year-I have already been named on it-that I was referring to some of the material which I found in reading the evidence which was presented.
If the hon. member had been in the chamber when I began my remarks she would have heard me state that the committee was to be commended for the great work it has done. It was my opinion, on reading the evidence, that the majority of those giving evidence, from their knowledge and scientific study of the matter, were generally opposed to capital punishment. It was not my intention to influence anybody in that regard. I was merely making the suggestion that every member of this house should read that evidence and should make himself as familiar as possible with the information that has been given to us. I think it is most valuable.
I merely made that suggestion to the house. After all, we cannot ignore the verdict of history which rapidly leads us to the conclusion that crime has seemed to flourish most widely in times and in places where the punishment was most rigorous. If you look at the evidence heard during the past two years, I think by and large you will find that it will support that contention.
As an example, it might be of interest to the members of this house to know that just a little over 100 years ago history records the fact that a lad by the name of Nicholas White, a boy of 9 years of age, was sentenced to death at Old Bailey in England for stealing two pennyworth of paint. It would indicate that we have come a long way. It would also indicate that we should continue our study and make it a matter of law in this country that in the punishment of crime we see that we are doing the thing which we expect punishment to do.

I was surprised to learn that the evidence against hanging was that it did not deter. I think one of the strongest arguments that were used against capital punishment-this is how I feel myself, and I approach this with an open mind-is that there has been evidence that people have been hanged, and then some years afterwards it was discovered that they were innocent. As someone has said, hanging is so permanent. To whom can one appeal for justice when such a thing occurs, and when the state has carried out the punishment for a crime which he did not commit?
Speaking of the kind of evidence that might be given and the effort that might be made under such circumstances, Professor Topping said this. He was indicating his belief that capital punishment was discriminatory. He said:
When a man is battling for his life he will exert his full force and he will draw upon all his resources and the resources of his friends. Specifically this means that he will employ the best counsel possible, even at a fee of $20,000, and that he will rally what friends he has to his assistance. This counsel and these friends will use their best skill to avoid so severe a penalty as death. Legal knowledge, psychology, and experience will be drawn upon. Since the evidence is likely to be circumstantial and based on the principles of logic, conviction is difficult. Murder is a low-visibility crime with few eye witnesses who can be called in to testify at the trial. With powerful friends and resources the struggle will be a long one; no quarter will be asked or given. And there may be delays until the furore has died down; and appeals.


Mr. Speaker:: May I interrupt the hon. member? I do so because I fear that the pattern he is establishing in making his speech may be one that will be followed by other members in the course of this debate. It seems to me that the house is not called upon to decide now whether capital punishment should exist, but we are deciding whether we want to have a committee to inquire into it.



THE ROYAL ASSENT

[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by Major C. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, the Right Honourable the Deputy Governor General desires the immediate attendance of this honourable house in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker with the house went up to the Senate chamber.
And being returned:
Mr. Speaker informed the house that the Deputy Governor General had been pleased to give, in Her Majesty's name, the royal assent to the following bills:
An act respecting the payment of carrying costs of temporary wheat reserves owned by the Canadian wheat board.
The Royal Assent
An act to provide for short-term credit to grain producers in the prairie provinces to meet temporary financial difficulties arising from inability to deliver all their grain.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Garson:
That a joint committee of both houses of parliament be appointed to inquire into and report upon the questions whether the criminal law of Canada relating to (a) capital punishment, (b) corporal punishment or (c) lotteries should be amended in any respect and, if so, in what manner and to what extent;
That Miss Bennett, Messrs. Boisvert, Brown (Essex West), Brown (Brantford), Cameron (High Park), Castleden, Fairey, Garson, Leduc (Verdun), Lusby, Mitchell (London), Montgomery, Murphy (Westmorland), Mrs. Shipley, and Messrs. Thatcher. Thomas, Valois and Winch be members of the joint committee on the part of this house; that the quorum of the said committee be 9 members thereof; and that Standing Order 67 of the House of Commons be suspended in relation thereto;
That the committee have power to appoint, from among its members, such subcommittees as may be deemed advisable or necessary; to call for persons, papers and records; to sit while the house is sitting and to report from time to time;
That the minutes of the proceedings and the evidence of the special committees appointed at the last two sessions to inquire into and report upon the foregoing questions, together with all papers and records laid before them, be referred to the said committee;
That the committee have power to print such papers and evidence from day to day as may be ordered by the committee for the use of the committee and of parliament and that Standing Order 66 of the House of Commons be suspended in relation thereto;
That the committee have power to engage the services of counsel;
And that a message be sent to the Senate requesting that house to unite with this house for the above purpose and to select, if the Senate deems advisable, some of its members to act on the proposed joint committee.
Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the house would find it possible to permit the hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Castleden) to conclude his remarks-I understand they are almost finished-and the hon. member for Wetaskiwin (Mr. Thomas) to associate his party with this motion, and then it would carry.


Mr. Speaker:: Is there unanimous consent to that effect?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: When I interrupted the hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Castleden) I was merely asking for his co-operation. I fully realize that the merits of the question to be inquired into are usually debated whenever a committee is proposed. It has been the practice to do that and I do not want to

Committee on Criminal Law curtail the hon. member in that respect, but it seems that this time the matter which is referred to the committee for inquiry is one that does not lend itself to the type of debate which was conducted, for instance, when we wanted to institute a committee to go into research. If we were to have a debate as to whether we were for or against corporal punishment I think we would be getting away from the motion that is before the house. I simply ask the hon. member for his co-operation.


George Hugh Castleden: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I had nearly completed my remarks, and was suggesting that the material and evidence placed before the committee has been adopted by the house and will be available to hon. members to read.
After the sentence of death has been imposed by the courts in this country an individual has one further recourse. The matter of commutation to life imprisonment is the prerogative of the cabinet of this government. I should like to recommend that until such time as the recommendations of this committee have been brought down, until such time as this house has dealt with those amendments to the Criminal Code which it may wish to make, it would be an excellent thing for the cabinet to refuse to permit any further death penalties to be carried out, until such time as the house has acted on the recommendations of this committee.
I am looking forward to sitting on this committee. I have read the evidence the committee has heard, and I trust we can bring forth recommendations which will be in line with Canada's position as one of the leading nations in relation to capital and corporal punishment and penology generally.


Ray Thomas: Mr. Speaker, I simply want to say that I am extremely thankful that last year the committee was not forced to bring down its decisions and

recommendations, and that it is being reconvened this year for this purpose. I was not a member of the committee during the first session, and I found it practically impossible to reach any decision during the sittings of last session. I was therefore extremely pleased to have had the opportunity during the recess of going over the evidence of the last two sessions. I have never served on a committee where there was so much conflicting evidence, all of which was very well presented. In every case the witnesses were extremely helpful, sincere and co-operative, and gave themselves to the most thorough questioning.
I should like to offer a word of congratulation to the Minister of Justice and the officials of his department, because I found them, as I am sure all members of the committee did, extremely co-operative throughout. Without exception they went out of their way to be of as much assistance as possible. At the same time I should like to say one word concerning how well the joint chairmen of the committee carried out their duties. They did an extremely good job. I hope the committee will be able to come to a good, honest decision on these extremely important matters.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we shall begin with the resolution with respect to the industrial development bank, then take second reading of the Small Loans Act and then second reading of the Canadian Farm Loans Act. If time remains at our disposal I shall inform the house what will be taken next. I am inclined to think it will be the resolution with respect to the trans-Canada highway, but I am not certain at the moment.


[Stage Direction]
It being ten minutes past six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.

Questions
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS	Answer by: Mr. McCann:
The following answers, deposited with the The secrecy provisions of section 133 of the Clerk of the house, are printed in the official Income Tax Act operate to preclude the taxa-report of debates pursuant to standing tion division from furnishing any information order 39:	in answer to this question.

Mr. Dufresne: 1.	Who was awarded the contracts for the post offices at Dolbeau and at La Malbaie, Quebec, and at what price?
2.	Who was awarded the contract for iron and steel, and at what price?
3.	Who submitted the lowest tender for iron and steel, and what was the amount of this tender?
Answer by: Mr. Winters:
Federal building at Dolbeau:
1.	Louis Dallaire, Normandin, P.Q., at $289,900.
2.	(a) Iron and steel is part of the general contract. The contractor listed the following subcontractors on his tender form: Structural steel, Eastern Canada Steel and Iron Works Ltd.; steel joists, Dominion Structural Steel Limited; reinforcing steel, Pierre Warren.
(b) Information not available.
3.	Information not available.
Federal building at La Malbaie:
1,	2 and 3. A contract has not yet been awarded.



PREMIUM IRON ORES


Mr. Knowles: 1.	Has the Department of National Revenue any information concerning any transaction involving the sale to Premium Iron Ores of shares of stock in Steep Rock Iron Mines Limited?
2.	If so, will this transaction be studied by the Department of National Revenue?
3.	Has the department any information as to the position of the United States internal revenue department concerning this transaction? If so, what are the details of such information?
Answer by: Mr. McCann:
The secrecy provisions of section 133 of the Income Tax Act operate to preclude the taxation division from furnishing any information in answer to this question.



GEORGE E. ALLEN  PURCHASE OF STOCK

Mr. Knowles: 1.	Has the Department of National Revenue any information concerning any transaction involving the sale to one George E. Allen of shares of stock in Steep Rock Iron Mines Limited? If so, what are the details of such transaction?
2.	Will this transaction be studied by the Department of National Revenue?
3.	Has the department any information as to the position of the United States internal revenue department concerning this transaction? If so, what are the details of such information?



POST OFFICE BUILDING, ROTHESAY, N.B.

Mr. Brooks: 1.	What was the total cost for the site and construction of the public building (post office) at Rothesay, New Brunswick?
2.	Were tenders called for the purchase of a site?
3.	If so, what tenders were received and what was the price paid?
Answer by: Mr. Winters:
1.	Cost of site, $6,000; cost of construction of building, $26,479.72.
2.	No-property acquired by expropriation.
3.	Answered by No. 2.



PUBLIC BUILDING, NANAIMO, B.C.

Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace): 1.	On what date did the contractor for the public building in Nanaimo, British Columbia, inform the architect concerned that, in his opinion, the building was completed?
2.	Did the architect, in his subsequent inspection, locate any deficiencies and so inform the contractor?
3.	If so, what were these deficiencies?
4.	Have these deficiencies now been corrected to the satisfaction of the architect concerned?
Answer by: Mr. Winters:
1.	On January 25, 1956, the contractor informed the district architect that the building was ready for inspection.
2.	Yes.
3.	Miscellaneous minor deficiencies; black topping of loading area not completed; sidewalk to be completed by city of Nanaimo.
4.	Yes, except that weather conditions will not permit completion of the paving until spring.



WHARF, LEPREAU, NEW BRUNSWICK

Mr. Brooks: 1.	Are steps being taken by the federal government to build a wharf at Lepreau, New Brunswick!
2.	If so, is a survey being made and when wil tenders be called for construction?
Answer by: Mr. Winters:
1.	No.
2.	A survey is being made to determine th< possibility and estimated cost of developing harbour facilities in the Lepreau area.



MEAT EXPORTS

Mr. Pommer: 1.	What number of cattle and how much bee; was exported from Canada in 1955?
2.	To what countries, and how much to eacl country?

Questions
3.	How much pork and pork products were exported from Canada in 1955?
4.	To what countries, and how much to each country?
Answer by: Mr. Howe (Pori Arlhur):
1 and 2. Canadian exports of cattle and beef, and the countries to which they were exported, were as follows:-
(a) Cattle (statistical items 2010, 2035, 2040, 2045, 2050, 2055): Exports of Exports of		
Calendar year 1955	Canadian produce	foreign produceCountry	No.	No.Union of South Africa	3	-Bermuda 	5	-Barbados 	
Leeward and	1	-Windward Is	2	-New Zealand 	5	-Argentina 	12	-Brazil 	5	-Colombia 	592	-Cuba 	41	-Dominican Republic ..	33	-Ecuador 	58	-El Salvador 	1	-St. Pierre and Miquelon	1,594	-Italy 	6	-Japan 	11	-Mexico 	466	-Peru 	593	-Spain 	19	-Alaska 	23	Puerto Rico 	306	-Uruguay 	7	-Venezuela 	430	-United States 	63,400	76Total	67,613	76(b) Beef (statistical items 2605 and 2640): Exports of Exports of	Calendar year 1955	Canadian produce	foreign produceCountry	Cwt.	Cwt.Bermuda	__British Guiana 	. 564	.British Honduras 	. 166	r .Barbados 	' .Jamaica 	.Trinidad and Tobago ..	. 6,183	_Bahamas	
Leeward and	. 1,441	-Windward Is	. 141	Dominican Republic ...	. 8	St. Pierre and Miquelon 1,729	Haiti 	. 36	Japan 	. 228	.Surinam 	. 36	Netherlands Antilles ..	. 1,352	
Exports of Exports of Calendar year 1955 Canadian foreign Produce Produce
Country	Cwt.	Cwt.
Israel 		. .. 90		
Switzerland 		... 448		
Alaska	... 5,113	-Hawaii 	. . . 245	-Puerto Rico 	.. . 6	-Venezuela 	... 245	-Taiwan 	... 3	-United States 	. .. 76,851	2,678Total 	. . . 98,181	2,6783 and 4. Canadian	exports of	pork andproducts, and the countries to which they were exported, were as follows:- Exports of Exports of	Calendar year 1955	Canadian produce	foreign produceCountry	Cwt.	Cwt.United Kingdom ....	... 145	Bermuda 	... 2,356	British Guiana 	... 7,852	British Honduras . ..	... 1,459	Barbados 	... 38,953	Jamaica 	... 12,219	Trinidad and Tobago	... 21,537	-Bahamas	
Leeward and	.. . 1,495	-Windward Is	. . . 4,587	Afghanistan 	... 20	Colombia 	... 15	El Salvador 	. . . 92	__St. Pierre and Miquelon 924	Guatemala 	. . . 63	Haiti 	. . . 43	-Japan 	Surinam 	. .. 48	-Netherlands Antilles	... 955	Norway 	. . . 194	-Panama 	. . . 190	,Peru	.. . 2	-Alaska	. . . 3,301	Hawaii 	. . . 2,602	Venezuela 	. . . 2,381	Taiwan 	. . . 1	United States 	-Total 	. .. 732,746	-



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE OFFICE, MONCTON, N.B.

Mr. Van Horne: 1. How many cases, of all kinds, regarding applications for unemployment insurance were referred to the Moncton regional office by the Campbellton and Edmundston offices, since September 1, 1955, to date?

2.	How many cases so referred were not settled within two weeks?
3.	How many additional employees, part time and full time, were hired by the Moncton regional unemployment insurance office, since September 1, 1955, to date?
Answer by: Mr. Gregg:
1. The number of claims referred to the regional office at Moncton in the period, September 1, 1955 to February 29, 1956 by
Questions
the Campbellton and Edmundston offices was 3,654 and 3,452 respectively.
2.	Information not available.
3.	No additional regular employees were hired for the Moncton regional office in the period, September 1, 1955 to February 29, 1956. A total of 69 casual employees (fulltime employees paid on an hourly basis) were hired during the period and the number on strength at February 29, 1956 was 57.

Thursday, March 8, 1956