1956-08-02

Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, today Her Majesty the Queen is giving royal assent to United Kingdom legislation enabling the creation of a British Caribbean federation. The federation will not legally come into being until a constitution is adopted and a governor general appointed. Nevertheless, the passage of the Caribbean federation bill is such an important milestone that in those colonies which will eventually comprise the federation, that is to say, Jamaica, Trinidad, the Leeward islands, the Windward islands and Barbados, today is being celebrated as Federation day.
I am sure all hon. members will wish to join with me in expressing, on behalf of the people of Canada, our gratification at the substantial achievement represented by the legislation which is being submitted for royal assent today, and our warmest wishes for the future of the federation.


Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):: I know that every hon. member of this house, and I am sure every Canadian, welcomes this historic milestone. I think there is one reason why all of us must feel a sense of the historic significance of what is taking place, and that is the fact that it was from the area of the Caribbean that the first reported knowledge of the new world was brought back to Europe. Christopher Columbus discovered what became known as America first of all by a visit to the Caribbean. Therefore today we are seeing the fulfilment of a great historic event, and I know that every one of us here will wish to the new federation success, happiness, prosperity and a great future within the commonwealth of free nations which we all respect.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT


Hon. Milton F. Gregg (Minister of Labour) moved: that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution, which has been recommended to the house by His Excellency:
That It is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act to authorize the unemployment insurance commission with the approval of the governor general in council to make regulations providing for the extension of the act to persons engaged in fishing notwithstanding that they are not employees of other persons, and for including as an employer of a fisherman any person with whom the fisherman enters into contractual or other commercial relationship in respect of his occupation as a fisherman, and also to modify the provisions relating to the requalification requirements for certain subsequent benefit periods and to adjust the duration of regular and seasonal benefits accordingly.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mrs. Ellen L. Fairclough (Hamilton West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the report which I noticed in the press the other day to the effect that the civil service association has made representations to the Prime Minister for action in the filling of the vacancy on the civil service commission, will the Prime Minister say when he expects to make that appointment?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I hope it will be made very soon. We have had the matter under active consideration. As the hon. lady knows, there are a great many ladies who feel that they would be well qualified to occupy that position. It is a matter to which we have to give serious consideration, because it is never easy to make a proper selection as between so many qualified candidates.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I am sure the Prime
Minister is quite correct, but may I take it from his words that the appointment will be a woman?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I sincerely hope so, and we have not been considering anything else.



STATEMENT ON UNITED STATES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. J. McCann (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I took
notice of a question by the hon. member for

Inquiries of the Ministry Lambton West as to the action being taken by the Department of National Revenue in the light of the announcement of the United States government's policy of subsidizing exports of cotton. Section 6 of the Customs Tariff provides for the application of dumping duty on imported goods of a class or kind produced in Canada where the selling price to the purchaser in Canada is less than the fair market value as sold for home consumption in the country of export. On July 25 instructions were issued to all collectors of customs requiring them to alert their appraisers to the present situation and to require extra vigilance with respect to imports of these commodities. I shall now read the instructions and place them on the table. They are as follows:
Value for Duty Cotton Textiles
For some time, there has been a two-price system in the United States for raw cotton. Manufacturers in that country have been required to pay a price for their supplies of raw cotton that was approximately 6 cents per pound higher than the price at which similar cotton was sold for export.
Beginning August 1, 1956, United States exporters of yarns, fabrics and manufactured articles made from cotton will be eligible to claim an equalization payment from their government based upon the estimated amount of cotton used in the manufacture of the goods and the difference between the United States domestic price and the export price of raw cotton.
This arrangement could enable exporters to sell their products to Canada at prices below the fair market value obtaining on sales in their home market. It will, therefore, be necessary for appraisers to exercise extra vigilance. All entries of goods from the United States containing cotton are to be taken subject to amendment and careful attention is to be given to ensure that invoice descriptions are adequate and certified fair market values are in compliance with the law.
In respect to any importations where the appraiser considers investigation by the department is warranted, a copy of the invoice and, where possible, a sample of the goods are to be promptly forwarded to the department. Samples of fabrics should not be less than 12 square inches in area and should be large enough that the pattern may be identified. In each instance, where invoices are submitted, the importer should be advised that the value is being inquired into and amendment of the entry and any subsequent entries of similar goods may be required at a later date.



WATER RESOURCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. E. Lennard (Weniworih):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Is the minister now prepared to answer the questions asked by the hon. member for Lambton West on Tuesday and Wednesday, of this week with respect to diversion of the waters of lake Michigan? fMr. McCann.]


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Yes, Mr. Speaker; I have the answer here in reply to both those questions.
A bill providing for temporary diversion of an additional 1,000 cubic feet per second of water from lake Michigan to the Illinois waterway for experimental purposes for the aid of navigation and for a period of three years was passed by the United States congress in Washington in the session which just recently ended. The President, however, according to our information, has not yet taken any action with regard to signing that bill or vetoing it.
By the definition in the boundary waters treaty of 1909, lake Michigan is not a boundary water. It does, however, come within the scope of the treaty because article II makes specific reference to "all waters which in their natural channel would flow across the boundary or into boundary waters", as is the case with lake Michigan. The interpretation of article II is a rather complicated matter and I think it would not be very useful for me to go into it now. It was, however, discussed at some length in the standing committee on external affairs in 1955. It appears that the proposed diversion of the waters of lake Michigan would not come under the jurisdiction of the international joint commission unless it was referred specifically to it.
The Canadian government expressed its views to the United States government on the proposed additional diversion in a note dated February 13, 1956, which was tabled in the house on March 8. In this note Canada took the attitude that the enactment of the proposed legislation would be prejudicial to the navigation and power interests of both countries. By doing so we have already expressed our concern with regard to it.
In so far as the other question was concerned regarding the Long Lac-Ogoki diversion, I should point out that Canada consulted the United States concerning this diversion into lake Superior, because the effect of this diversion was to increase the total amount of water at Niagara, and Canada wished to receive due credit for that increase in the arrangements for the division of water at Niagara for power purposes. This being a diversion into boundary waters and not out of boundary waters, it did not require agreement between the two countries under the boundary waters treaty, though a special agreement was reached and embodied in the Niagara treaty of 1950.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops):: Mr. Speaker, press dispatches recently have reported a tour by a committee surveying immigration needs in Canada. I should like to ask the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration whether this is a new committee or whether it is just the annual survey of employment opportunities for immigrants being made by his department. In either event, can he say whether that survey has yet reached British Columbia and, if so, whether any action is being taken to meet the acute shortage of farm labour out there, about which he knows?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, from the rather vague description which the hon. gentleman gives I cannot identify what it is he is talking about. However, I will see my deputy minister shortly and see whether he can throw any light on the matter.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Perhaps the minister would refer to his colleague the Minister of Trade and Commerce, because the press dispatch is datelined Fort William, and it says the committee was in Fort William and was having interviews in that city.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not doubt that it was.



TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct to the Minister of Transport this question which will create a record that will never be equalled again in this parliament. Has the minister received any complaints with respect to the shortage of box cars for fertilizer and lumber in British Columbia?


Hon. George C. Marler (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, that question may be answered in the negative.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Can the minister tell us whether or not there are any-whether few or many-Canadian citizens in Egypt at the present time?
Inquiries of the Ministry


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell the hon. member the number. However, we are taking steps to inquire of our embassy how many Canadians have registered there. I hope this reply will not be taken as indicating that there is any special crisis or emergency in Egypt with respect to Canadians at the present time.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: May I ask a supplementary question. In view of the fact that this morning's news report over the Canadian broadcasting system pointed out the British government had warned its nationals to leave Egypt, I was wondering if any similar action was being contemplated by our department.


Lester Bowles Pearson: We have had no official confirmation that a warning of that kind has been given by the United Kingdom government. We have also made inquiries about that.



DEFENCE PRODUCTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John B. Hamillon (York West):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Defence Production. What was the basis for the price paid by Avro and Orenda for the crown-owned machinery and equipment sold to them, as announced yesterday? Was it fair market value or depreciated value, and was any consideration given to the company for the undertaking to maintain these facilities for aircraft and engine production for 10 years with a prior right of user for the crown?


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minisier of Defence Produclion):: Mr. Speaker, the basis of the sale was the cost of the machinery less straight line depreciation at economic rates usually provided for. There was no special compensation for the undertaking to maintain the machinery for 10 years. We do not sell machinery of that kind unless we get the undertaking to maintain it for 10 years.


Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinton):: Is the
minister in a position to table a copy of that agreement?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I do not think there is any agreement. A price was quoted and accepted. I doubt if there is any agreement, but if there is one I shall be glad to table it.

Inquiries oj the Ministry CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS



CLEANING OF CARS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. O. White (Middlesex East):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Is it the intention of the Canadian National Railways to let by tender the cleaning of passenger cars in each of the cities where that type of work is done, instead of having it done by the regular employees of the Canadian National Railways?


George Carlyle Marler: If the hon. gentleman would care to put that question on the order paper I will endeavour to obtain an answer from the Canadian National Railways.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Paul Hellyer (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of National Defence):: On July 24, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Comox-Alberni asked a question concerning a shooting incident which occurred recently in Hawaii. The commanding officer of H.M.C.S. Crescent reports that able seaman I. W. Thompson was shot and seriously injured by a United States marine corps private in civilian clothes, who was attempting to rob him during a car ride that this Canadian seaman had accepted from Honolulu to Pearl Harbor.
The bullet lodged close to Thompson's spine, resulting in partial paralysis of the lower limbs; but medical authorities at Tripler hospital, where he is under treatment, consider this a temporary condition and there is every hope that he will make a complete recovery. Criminal charges are being prepared against his assailant by the United States police authorities in Honolulu. I might add that seaman Thompson's interests are being looked after by the British consul in Hawaii.



WINNIPEG


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gordon Churchill (Winnipeg Souih Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Defence, and ask him whether he has yet received a report concerning the alleged low flying of R.C.A.F. planes over the cities of Winnipeg and St. James? This has become a weekly question that I put to the department.


Paul Theodore Hellyer: I have not yet received the report, Mr. Speaker, but I shall make inquiries and try to have an answer for the hon. gentleman within a day or two.


Gordon Minto Churchill: That is what the minister said last week.



PARLIAMENT HILL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. George H. Hees (Broadview):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. Is the minister aware that the height of the weeds in the jungle which his department is cultivating to the north of the parliament buildings has now reached about three feet, and they are doing nicely?


Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister of Public Works):: I wish to thank the hon. member for the information on the subject.



PASSAMAQUODDY PROJECT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: Yesterday the hon. member for Charlotte asked me, as he has asked me previously, whether I could report on the proposed reference to the international joint commission concerning the Passamaquoddy tidal power project. I can now announce, Mr. Speaker, that the governments of Canada and the United States have agreed upon the text of a joint reference to the commission on this subject. The reference was delivered to the commission this morning in Ottawa.
Hon. members will recall that in 1948 a joint reference was submitted to the commission by Canada and the United States for the purpose of carrying out a preliminary investigation to ascertain the scope and probable cost of a full scale investigation of the Passamaquoddy tidal power project. Based upon the report submitted by the commission in 1950, the governments of Canada and the United States have agreed, as previously announced in this house, to submit a reference on this matter. The terms of that reference are being made public this morning in Washington and in Ottawa.


Mr. A. J. Brooks (Royal):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a supplementary question of the Secretary of State for External Affairs with reference to the statement he has made. Has the agreement that has been reached by

the United States and Canada in this connection been based on a memorandum sent to the United States on April 5, 1956, in which Canada said that she would bear no part of the cost of the investigation outside of that connected with the fisheries, and also that in joining in the reference to the international joint commission the Canadian government would make no commitment regarding the eventual construction of this proj ect?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I have not the text of the reference, which is of considerable length. My hon. friend will be able to read it, because it is being made public. However, it does provide for a division of the cost and on our side we have set a limit to what we think should be our proportion.
I am not aware at the moment of the latter condition which the hon. member mentioned, but I will see that he gets a copy of the reference this morning.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I have here a copy of the recommendation the department made, which indicates that Canada would bear $300,000 of the cost and the United States would bear $3 million, and that Canada would in no way be obligated to help with the project even though it was found feasible.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am not sure whether those conditions are repeated in those terms in the reference, but I will be glad to look into that right away.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. F. G. Robertson (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, on July 31 the hon. member for Selkirk asked the following question:
When Peter Thom, treaty Indian, was admitted to Fisher River reserve hospital, was a third-year medical student the only person available to treat him?
This Indian was admitted to the Altona, Manitoba, hospital on July 1 following injuries he had received across the border. At the request of the doctor in charge at Altona he was transferred by ambulance to St. Boniface hospital the same day. He was treated there for dislocation of both hips and placed in a plaster cast. His condition improved, and on July 13 St. Boniface hospital authorities asked the regional office of the Indian health services if he could be transferred to an Indian hospital. A bed was available in the Fisher River Indian hospital and he was transferred that day to this hospital.
Inquiries of the Ministry
The doctor in charge at the Fisher River hospital had resigned and his replacement had not yet arrived, and his assistant, a third-year medical student employed for the summer, was at the hospital. This medical student had instructions to call a practising physician 20 miles distant for assistance at any time, and it was this physician who was the designated physician in charge at the hospital and available when required.


Mr. William Bryce (Selkirk):: May I ask a
supplementary question. Why was this treaty Indian, Peter Thom, moved to Fisher River hospital when no doctor was due there for three or four days? I should like to know this, also. At the inquest was it established whether the Indian, Peter Thom, was run over intentionally or accidentally?


Frederick Greystock Robertson: Mr. Speaker, I presume the authorities at St. Boniface hospital felt that this man was in a suitable physical condition for transfer to the Fisher River hospital. As to the latter part of the question, I do not believe that that feature of the case comes under the jurisdiction of the Indian health services, but I understand that a further investigation is being carried out by the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.


William Scottie Bryce: May I ask the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration whether he will look into it? The man died in this hospital.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I have looked into the matter. The regional supervisor in Manitoba drew this case to the attention of the attorney general of Manitoba and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police have investigated it; but since this accident or crime, or whatever it may have been, took place in the United States, in the state of North Dakota, the only thing the attorney general was able to do was to draw the proceedings at the inquest to the attention of the state authorities in North Dakota. I am informed that is being done and that the police are keeping their file open.
Of course, it is not the duty of my department, or indeed of the federal government, to enforce the law in the province of Manitoba, and much less in the state of North Dakota; but because this man was an Indian we did follow the matter up with the appropriate provincial authorities.



PIPE LINES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. M. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Mr. Speaker, has the Minister of Trade and Commerce any information as to
6848	HOUSE OF
Supply-External Affairs when shipments to Canada of 34-inch pipe for the trans-Canada pipe line will be resumed?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, the shipments of 34-inch pipe have been coming in regularly, and as far as I know they are still coming in regularly. I do not think I have any information I can give my hon. friend.
I could point out that the building of the pipe line is a private transaction. We like to keep posted on its progress, but we do not feel obliged to give day to day bulletins concerning it.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.


DEPARTMENT OP EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
95. Representation abroad-construction, acquisition or improvement of buildings, works, land, equipment and furnishings, and to the extent that blocked funds are available for these expenditures, to provide for payment from these foreign currencies owned by Canada and provided only for governmental or other limited purposes, $1,987,207.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Chairman, last night I had been engaged in bringing to the attention of the committee the facts concerning the purchase by the Canadian government of a residence for a Canadian embassy at Rio de Janeiro, the capital of Brazil. I had pointed out that the house was purchased at a price -of $350,000. The renovations cost $25,000 and the furnishings when complete will, according to the department's estimate, cost a total of $95,000 making a grand total for the building, renovations and furnishings of $470,000.
I said to the committee last night that I looked on this as an example of prime extravagance. Sir, what is it that has led the department to spend so much money on this one embassy abroad? I think the department sought to plead as extenuating circumstances the statement which I read last night from the proceedings of the committee on external affairs at page 390, that at Rio-
. . . the standards of representation are pretty high.
That was the statement of Mr. Macdonnell, the deputy under-secretary of state for external affairs in relation to the level at which other countries are apparently embellishing their embassies in that beautiful city. I submit to the committee, Mr. Chairman, that the taxpayers of this country should receive more consideration than they have been given in connection with this particular expenditure. Canada in its representation abroad, it seems to me, should see that its 

representatives are adequately accommodated, but there is no occasion for Canada to engage in any contest with other countries to keep up with the Joneses, or to compete with them in the luxury attached to the accommodation provided for their diplomatic representatives abroad.
An expenditure of $470,000 on this one embassy is, in my submission, an example of inexcusable extravagance. Rio de Janeiro is, of course, an important capital, but the post there is not regarded as a senior Canadian ambassadorial appointment. It does not rank in priority within the department with London, Washington, and Paris, and it is not the place, I submit, to engage in this race to keep up with the Joneses.
Now let us look a little further into what extravagance of this kind means. I have referred to the fact that at one time the department was considering the purchase of the residence of Major MacCrimmon, a Canadian and a senior official of the Brazilian Traction Company in Rio, at a reported price of $80,000.


Lester Bowles Pearson: That is quite a wrong figure.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I said that was reported.


Lester Bowles Pearson: It is a wrong report.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I should be glad to have the minister's correction of that report, but that was a property in which the department was interested at one time. But it turned from that to a much more expensive property.
As I said, let us look a little further at what these furnishings mean, and let us consider that in terms of the interests of the Canadian taxpayer. The department furnished for the committee a breakdown of the principal expenditures on furnishings at this embassy. That is to be found on pages 441 and 442 of the proceedings of the committee on external affairs. The expenditures are listed by rooms:
Main salon No. 3
Furniture	$4,079.02
Rugs	 1,575.00
Drapes	 487.48
Chandelier and lamps ... 1,738.35
Piano	 2,405.50


[Stage Direction]
Salon No. 2
Furniture	$4,937.98
Rug	 1,386.00
Drapes	 387.86
Chandelier and lamps	 1,296.00
[Stage Direction]
Dining room No. 4
Furniture	$7,749.00
Rug	 1,386.00
Drapes	 375.03
Chandelier and lamps	 1,185.50
[Stage Direction]
The list extends down through the library to the bedrooms:
Bedroom No. 21
Furniture	   $3,111.60
Hug	 472.60
Drapes and bedspread	 281.12
Lamps	  441.90
[Stage Direction]
Bedroom No. 22
Furniture	 $3,123.00
Rug	 472.50
Drapes and bedspread	 355.60
Lamps	 301.50
[Stage Direction]
I shall not delay the house with details of some of these other rooms. In bedroom No. 18 the furnishings cost in the aggregate $3,191.92. For bedroom No. 16 the total is $2,500. For the hallways, the furniture, rugs and lamps cost $3,223. For the terrace off the library the furnishings cost $1,392; those for the terrace off the dining room, $1,816; those for the swimming pool gallery, $1,898. Then there are miscellaneous furnishings; silver flatware and hollowware, $4,400; china, $648; formal and informal table linen, $2,305; and so it goes.
John Whitney Pickersgill: What did they pay for the
Hag?


Donald Methuen Fleming: The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration regards extravagance as a very light matter. In this he is far out of contact with the experience of the average *Canadian taxpayer. The exemptions allowed to Canadian taxpayers are quite inadequate; [DOT]and if the minister would exercise his ingenuity to eliminate extravagance it might be possible for the Minister of Finance- I think it is possible now-but it might bring the Minister of Finance to make these exemptions adequate, to raise them beyond the present inadequate figures of $1,000 for single persons and $2,000 for married persons without dependents.
There was a point raised about mirrors, and the question was asked in the committee about the price of two eighteenth century mirrors, that were purchased for the embassy. The first information we had from the department is shown at page 390 of the report, where the official said:
I am told that it was approximately $2,000 for "those mirrors.
Later on the price of the mirrors was inquired into further by the department and the answer was brought back to the committee at page 433 that the two mirrors did not cost $2,000 but cost $1,078.
I have read these details to bring to the attention of the house the rather impressive items which lurk behind some of the big rfigures that appear in these estimates. It
Supply-External Affairs seems to me that we are too disposed in this committee to take these items in the aggregate without going back into the details behind them. When we go back into the details, this is the sort of thing that unfortunately we find there.
As I said last night, we cannot now undo this extravagance. This expenditure has been incurred, but I bring it to the attention of the house in order that the house may warn the government and the Department of External Affairs that it does not intend to tolerate extravagance on this scale in the future.
There is, however, one thing we can do in reference to this year's estimates in this respect. We are dealing with item No. 95, which provides approximately $2,000,000 for construction, acquisition or improvement of buildings, works, land, equipment and furnishings. In this item, as we see in the details at page 178 and following, there are specific amounts set out for capital as well as operational expenditures at various embassies and diplomatic posts abroad. There is one subitem at the end, at the bottom of page 183, to which I invite the attention of the house. After listing in detail the proposed expenditures on operations of a capital nature at all these posts abroad, there is one item headed "Miscellaneous- unallotted capital items"-$805,000.
The facts I have brought to the attention of the house in connection with the embassy at Rio ought to alert the house to the necessity of exercising as much supervision over proposed expenditures by this department in this respect as may be possible, but here we are told that there is in this item a sum of $805,000 that has no tag whatever attached to it and which, if it is passed, the department is at complete liberty to expend in the purchase or improvement of any property or the purchase of furnishings anywhere in the world. There are no strings attached to it.
I submit to this house, as I submitted to the standing committee on external affairs, that this is not the way in which the House of Commons ought to do its business. One of our duties here is to assert the principle of strict parliamentary control over expenditures, and here we are told, on the face of these estimates, that there is a sum of $805,000 that is not earmarked for any place in the world and which can be used for the purpose of a capital outlay by the department anywhere in the whole globe.
I submit that is not a proper way for the House of Commons to deal with proposed expenditure. I moved in the committee that the subitem should be stricken out, because while we are quite prepared to deal on its
6850	HOUSE OF
Supply-External Affairs merits with any proposed expenditure for which a case is made out, nevertheless we do not believe in just providing money loosely after this fashion for the government to use in any way it sees fit. I am glad to say that in the committee my amendment came very close to passing. It was defeated by a vote of only nine to six. It was supported by all Conservative and C.C.F. members of the committee although, of course, it was opposed by the Liberal members, and they were supported by the Social Credit member on that committee.
Mr. Chairman, I am going to renew that motion now, and I hope that what I have said about the extravagance in connection with the purchase of the embassy at Rio and its furnishings will alert the house to the danger of placing large sums of money like this at the disposal of the department without any strings attached to them. It is difficult enough in the case of these expenditures that are made abroad, where it is only very rarely that a member of the committee or a member of the house has an opportunity of seeing with his own eyes the results, without placing a sum of nearly $1 million at the disposal of the department without any strings attached to it save that it must be expended abroad on capital account for buildings or furnishings.
The excuse given by the department is that they may have the opportunity of making a good buy somewhere, that there are capitals in the world where the department wishes to acquire property for the housing of its diplomatic representatives and if opportunities present themselves they should be in a position to take advantage of them. I think that is a very dangerous doctrine to follow. That doctrine, if followed, could result in a very serious weakening of parliamentary control over expenditures. We are sitting here now seven months a year, or perhaps even more, and we have estimates and supplementary estimates introduced about four times a year. I cannot see that any lengthy period is ever likely to elapse before parliament would be in a position to deal with any opportunity that is offered.
The principle of parliamentary control over public expenditure is a very important principle and we should not be parties to weakening it. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I move:
That item 95 of the estimates of the Department of External Affairs be reduced by the sum of $805,000 by elimination of the "unallotted capital items" on page 183.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, this matter was, of course, discussed in detail in the committee on external affairs, and I am glad it was. The hon. member has also discussed it in

detail last night and this morning, and I certainly have no quarrel with that because I am just as interested in the avoidance of extravagance in the expenditure of Canadian funds as he is. The hon. member knows, of course, because he has been a guest and I am sure a very welcome guest at a good many of our missions abroad, that an embassy or a legation is not a private residence. It is the official residence of the representative of Canada, and when we buy property naturally we try to keep that in mind. It is Canada in that particular foreign capital and we want that property, that residence, to be suitable. We also want it to be permanent. In the case of Rio, for instance, we hope that this embassy will be the official centre of Canada in Brazil for 50, 75 or maybe 100 years, and so we purchase for a long time.
In purchasing we look for something suitable, a house for the job and not for any particular person. That means that an embassy, which is not a private residence, has to have accommodation for official receptions, official dinners and all those things which are an important part of diplomatic activities especially, if I may so, in a South American state. There is nothing in our mind-and I mention this because the hon. member referred to it two or three times-of keeping up with the Joneses. That does not seem to me to be a very pertinent observation in any event, because whether one wants to keep up with the Joneses in any activity would depend very largely on where the Joneses are and where they are going. Very often we should be well behind the Joneses and possibly at times we should be well ahead of them.
So far as Rio is concerned, in this capital we are not concerned with aping the customs and the habits of the diplomatic representation of any other country. We do what we think is right for Canada. If we had wished to keep up with the Joneses in Rio, some of the Joneses have spent between a million and a million and a half dollars on their embassies in that capital. We buy buildings when we are able to buy them with economy as well as efficiency, and with representational propriety in mind. So far as Rio is concerned, it is a great metropolitan capital of an important South American state, the South American state with which we in Canada probably have our most important commercial' and political relationships, and I say that without implying any reflection upon our relations with any other South American state. But it is possibly true that our commercial contacts with Rio are more important than those with any other South American country.

It is also true that Rio is one of the most expensive capitals in the world, and that has a bearing on the purchase of property there. In other places where it is not so expensive we get property much more cheaply, and that does not mean that we attach less importance to our representation in those capitals or more importance to our representation in Rio. It just happens that in those capitals, some of which are comparable to Ottawa in real estate and residential values, we are able to purchase residences for our representatives at $42,000 in one place, $85,000 in another, $44,000 in another, $56,000 in another and $73,000 in another. Those residences for those sums of money are suitable for Canadian representation there and we do not pay any more if we do not have to.
As for Rio, there is obviously an advantage in trying to buy property there rather than renting, if we can do so. We have been renting a property in Rio for 14 years, and if my hon. friend could see some of the rental figures and compare them with rental figures in Rio generally he would realize that this is not an economic or effective way of doing business there. During that time we have turned down places for purchasing because they were too expensive, and we have been offered residences there which were less expensive but which were entirely unsuitable.
My hon. friend referred to the fact that we had an option to purchase Mr. MacCrim-mon's residence there at $80,000. The fact of that particular matter is that two or three years ago we offered the owner of this house $190,000 for that residence and were turned down. We made that offer even though our ambassador on the spot said that in his opinion it was not suitable for a Canadian embassy in Rio. However, after further investigation we thought it was suitable and we offered $190,000 and were refused. Meanwhile we were paying a very high rental. In this last year we were told that we would have to vacate the house we were renting at a figure of something over $2,000 a month, and the owner of a very good residential property in Rio came back to us with an offer which was about $250,000 less than he had made to us a few years before.
Having regard to all the circumstances and after an independent valuation by, I think, three real estate dealers, and as the alternative was renting another house at a figure comparable with the rental we were paying, we decided this was a satisfactory purchase. If we had rented another house we would have had to pay a rental which included all the taxes on the property and other charges. When we purchase diplomatic property we get diplomatic exemption from these taxes
Supply-External Affairs and these charges, and that fact normally makes it desirable to buy. The furnishings of the embassy have been gone into in detail. This house was not furnished by the man who happened to be ambassador at the time. It was done by somebody brought from Canada, an independent interior decorator.
More important, possibly, is the question which is the subject of this amendment, that we should not have in our estimates a sum of money-the figure is $800,000-for the purchase of properties abroad without specifying how much we want for each property in each country. We would be limited in this way to the purchase of properties within that amount in any country.
I submit that this would be an uneconomic procedure, and I make that suggestion for two reasons. One is that we in this department are still in a period of expansion. I hope we are reaching the limit of our expansion, though we are continually approached by other governments and indeed we receive suggestions in this house that we should expand our diplomatic representation. When the period of expansion is over we will have satisfied our residential property requirements and we will not need more houses for that purpose. But we need them now. We need to have accommodation in five or six capitals, and we may need more if we have to open more offices.
There are times during the course of the year when we are offered property which is satisfactory and economic for the job to be done. Sometimes those offers are kept open only for a few weeks, because in some of these capitals it is extremely difficult indeed to get property. If we had to specify our purchases in advance, one of two things would happen. We would only put in the amount we were absolutely certain of spending because we had agreed on valuations for properties which we know we would need during the course of the year. Or we would put in for each capital where we needed property an estimated amount, and at the end of the year we might find that as offers had not been forthcoming at prices we could pay we would have been able to spend only one-third or one-fourth of that amount. Hence we would have either inflated estimates on the one hand or we would have to miss economic opportunities to purchase on the other.
That is why we in our department have considered it good business to put in this lump sum, so we can take advantage of opportunities during the year when we know there are certain places where we want to buy property if we can get suitable property.
It is not correct, Mr. Chairman, to say there are no strings attached to this amount.
6852	[DOT]	HOUSE OF
Supply-External Affairs Whenever a suitable property is available and it is felt by the department to be suitable on representational as well as business grounds, treasury board has to agree to purchase after a very careful examination and valuation of the property. Of course we in the department cannot spend any of these sums of money without treasury board approval and without an exhaustive survey by the board. It is therefore my opinion that this amendment, far from leading to economy, might have the effect either of the inflation of our estimates to take advantage of any opportunities that might arise, or might lead in the other direction, namely that of extravagance; because we might not be able to take advantage of good offers during the year. With property values going up in these capitals, in common with property values in Ottawa, if we did not have the money to buy a property on the spot, next year we might have to pay 50 per cent more for something else.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, there is one question I should like to ask the minister, in view of his statement, and it is this. When the national gallery purchased some pictures which cost a great deal of money-I believe about $800,000-from the Prince of Liechtenstein last year, they did not have the money on hand with which to do it. However, the deal was made and then the sum was put in the supplementary estimates. That seemed to be the policy of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, or rather the policy of the minister under whose jurisdiction the national gallery comes. What would be the objection to using that same method in the Department of External Affairs?


Lester Bowles Pearson: There would be no objection, Mr. Chairman, if it could be done in connection with property purchases. But our experience has been that the owners of property that we consider suitable to purchase are not willing to hold the property for us until we can get an estimate passed by parliament at the next session. We feel that if it were not done in the way in which we are proposing to have it done, we would lose these properties.
We have taken this matter up with treasury board in order to see whether there is some way in which we could work out interim financing, so we would be able to have the exact amount later in the estimates to confirm the interim financing. We are still discussing the matter with them, but so far treasury board has not come up with any solution which appears to be any more effective or economical than the one we are proposing.
[Mr. Pearson.1


The Chairman:: Is the committee ready for the question?


John Borden Hamilton: In his remarks the minister indicated that furnishings for residences of this kind were recommended or purchased through an independent interior decorator who, I assume, is taken down for that purpose. What is the basis of compensation for such a man? Is it a percentage basis, or does he get a fixed fee?


Lester Bowles Pearson: When we ask an interior decorator or someone with those qualifications to advise us on a matter of this kind we normally pay his travelling expenses to the foreign country and a fee for the services performed.


John Borden Hamilton: Then the fee is not tied in any way to the amount of money that is spent in the purchase of the equipment?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No. I am informed that the fee is not related in any way to the value of the property or the value of the furnishings purchased.


Donald Methuen Fleming: May I ask the minister this question. What was the fee paid to this gentleman, and what was the amount of his travelling expenses?


Lester Bowles Pearson: In the case to which the hon. member refers, the interior decorator was willing to give us his services and his advice on this matter for travelling expenses only.


Donald Methuen Fleming: What were they? Can the minister give us the amount?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I have not that amount with me, but I shall be glad to find out, Mr. Chairman, and give it to my hon. friend.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is it concluded in this particular figure, or does it come under another item in the estimates?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I think it is under another item. We are looking it up. I shall give it to my hon. friend just as soon as I can get it.


William Alfred Robinson: Is the committee ready for the question?


Some hon. Members:: Question.


William Alfred Robinson: The question is on the amendment of Mr. Fleming.
Amendment (Mr. Fleming) negatived: Yeas, 20; nays, 66.


William Alfred Robinson: I declare the amendment lost. Shall the item carry?


George Harris Hees: No, Mr. Chairman. This is perhaps not the item under which this matter should be brought up, but I do not

think there is such an item, so I will bring it up here. I know it is an item in which the minister is interested. I just received a telegram from Mr. Milan Babic of Toronto, and perhaps I should read it. It is addressed to me and reads:
Reason no protest my solicitor Louis Herman just arrived Toronto from Mexico. As per news story detained over 20 hours after being taken out of steamship pier by back door and apparently listed as missing. Friends unable to ascertain my whereabouts and when I requested permission to communicate with Canadian consul I was told by officer consul's office closed and could not be contacted. Strongly protest gestapolike treatment without slightest justification.
(sgd.) Milan Babic.


William Alfred Robinson: May I remind the hon. member that we are discussing an item in connection with the construction, acquisition or improvement of buildings. I do not see how this matter can be taken up under such an item.


George Harris Hees: I asked permission to bring it up. I am speaking very briefly.


William Alfred Robinson: Has the hon. member unanimous consent to speak on this item?


Some hon. Members:: No.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall item 95 carry?


George Harris Hees: On a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman; if the Liberal members of the house are not interested in the trials and tribulations of Canadian citizens, then-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


George Harris Hees: -then those citizens know where they stand with those Liberal members.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: The members on this side of the house are interested in the proper administration of the Department of External Affairs, and they do not think that administration should be guided, to the extent to which the hon. member himself feels it should be guided, by him.


George Harris Hees: I understood, Mr. Chairman, the minister said he was interested in receiving a communication from this man. Here is the communication-


Some hon. Members:: Order. Sit down.


George Harris Hees: -and I should like to know what the minister proposes to do about it.


William Alfred Robinson: May I point out to the hon. member that there are proper times for bringing up these matters, but under this item a matter of this kind could not possibly be brought up.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: On page 179 of the estimates there is an item for diplomatic missions abroad. One of those items is for China,
Supply-External Affairs Nanking, and it is for $6,305. Then on page 183 there is an item for Shanghai, China, $2,625. I inquired about these items when we were in committee and was told they were for maintenance. What I should like to know is why, if these are maintenance expenses, it requires $6,000 to maintain whatever buildings there are in Nanking and $2,600 to maintain the office in Shanghai. Are those the expenses of a caretaker or two caretakers, or exactly what is involved?
In addition, I should like to know whether or not we have any buildings or a place of representation in Formosa?


Lester Bowles Pearson: In so far as the Nanking expenditure is concerned, Mr. Chairman, we still own property in Nanking where our embassy, as my hon. friend knows, was situated before the communists took over. That property has not been interfered with. It is in charge of a housekeeper and a parttime gardener, and this $6,000 is the expense of keeping the property in shape and looking after it during the period the communist Chinese government is in charge of China. We are not permitted to inspect the premises ourselves.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Perhaps the minister could tell us who makes these arrangements. Is it the British embassy there?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Yes. When we have to have contact with the government in Peking we make it through the British government representative in Peking.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: The other question I asked was, do we have any buildings or offices of any sort in Formosa?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am informed that the Shanghai charge is related to the fact we had a consul in Shanghai before the Chinese communists took over. This charge is to pay for the storage and maintenance of our office equipment there. We operate through the British consul in this matter.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I have asked the minister twice now if we had any office or building, of any sort for representation in Formosa?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Chairman, we have no representation in Formosa. Our diplomatic contacts when required in Formosa, as in other cases where we are not represented, are maintained through the British representative there.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
96. To provide for official hospitality, $30,000.
Mr. Diefenbaker:: Realizing the difficulties that are inherent in the present dispersal of this department amongst several buildings and the resultant difficulty of providing for

Supply-External Affairs official hospitality, would the minister care to say whether or not consideration has been given to bringing external affairs into one central location, and to the establishment of a foreign office? I mention that because as the situation is today I realize that entertainment is done either at the Chateau, at other hotels or at one of the clubs, and I should like to know what consideration has been given to the establishment of a foreign office in Ottawa?


Lester Bowles Pearson: A good deal of consideration has been given to it by our department in consultation with the Department of Public Works. It is true that external affairs employees are scattered, but that is true also of other departments in the government, where the situation is probably worse in that respect than it is with us. So we have taken our place on the list of priorities. We are not at the top, but in due course we hope there will be a separate building in Ottawa as a foreign office where all the employees of the department can be working under one roof and where provision can be made for the kind of activity which my hon. friend has mentioned.


John George Diefenbaker: Would the minister say whether or not any plans have been drawn in connection therewith, and the general idea and concept of this foreign office? What is the general concept the department has in mind?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Plans have been drawn up, but as I have said our priority is low and they are not likely to be realized for some years. I doubt very much, though I have not the details of the plans in my mind, whether there is any provision even in those tentative plans for the inclusion of facilities for entertainment. I think that will have to be done in the future outside the foreign office.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
98. Canadian representation at international conferences, $200,000.
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: There is one question on item 98. I see the amount in the estimates this year is the same as it was last year. Could the minister tell us whether there will be approximately the same number of conferences each year?


Lester Bowles Pearson: There are international conferences which are held annually and we can provide for them. But in addition there are conferences that are periodic and some that are called in emergency situations. All we can do is estimate for those. This amount is designed to cover the ones we know we will have to attend, and to make some provision


for emergencies. For instance, the newspapers this morning talk about a possible conference in connection with the Suez canal. If that took place and if we were invited to it and went, that is the kind of conference for which we really cannot provide in advance except in this way.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Does this item take into consideration any conferences which are held as a result of United Nations activities, for example?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Yes, Mr. Chairman; this is designed to cover the regular United Nations conferences.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
99. Grant to the United Nations association in Canada, $11,000.
Mr. Nicholson:: Is the minister making any progress in discussions with the United Nations association on the possibility of having better public information services in Canada in connection with the work of FAO, WHO and UNESCO?
I raise this question each year when the estimates come up and also discuss it with the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of National Health and Welfare, but apparently no department of government in Canada seems to worry a great deal about making known to our people in Canada the problems that are being faced by these international organizations.
I noticed that in the Toronto papers yesterday a great deal of publicity was given to a swimming star, but rarely do we see anything in the Canadian papers regarding the very imaginative work which is being undertaken by some Canadians in different parts of the world.
The last Colombo plan release I had gave information that some 40 Canadians are in different parts of the world. It is on a typewritten sheet, but there is no information about their names, where they are or what they are doing. It would seem to me that some of these people come from Halifax, Regina, Calgary or Vancouver, and some of the people in the cities where these young people live should be given some information from time to time regarding their work. I think it is going to be increasingly difficult to get additional funds for these agencies that must have additional funds if the taxpayers of Canada are not given more information from time to time.
About a year ago the minister mentioned that probably a United Nations organization would be the organization-it would not be the responsibility of government-that should be given this responsibility. If they are

given that responsibility then more funds should be made available. Can the minister make some comment as to whether any discussion has taken place with a view to increasing the grant, or whether his own department feel they should set up an agency? I realize that criticisms have come from the Progressive Conservative party from time to time regarding what is being done with respect to new expenses, but I feel that here is one important sector of the work of external affairs that should have additional funds.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Well, Mr. Chairman, I know that my hon. friend has a very special interest in this matter, because we have discussed it, and I know that for some time now he has not been satisfied with what is being done in this respect, both in the government and possibly outside the government, through grants of this kind. All I can say is that in our information division we have not been allotted appropriations which would enable us to do more than we are doing in publicizing the activities of international organizations and the Colombo plan in Canada.
But I would point out to him the grant we make to the United Nations association to assist it in this work, and I think the more of this work that can be done by voluntary organizations the better. This particular grant has helped the United Nations association do a good deal of publicizing of the activities of the United Nations and its specialized agencies. For instance, the association prepares and distributes the world review of United Nations activities for Canadian schools, and about 52,000 copies are printed monthly, which are distributed by the provincial departments of education. I also know that the Colombo plan organization has increased its information activities through its central office fund in the last year; but I am not going to quarrel with the suggestion of the hon. member that more could be done, and I am not going to quarrel with him that more should be done. In fact, the resources we have now do not permit us to do any more.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
102. To authorize and provide for the payment of fellowships and scholarships and travelling expenses to enable Canadians to study in France, The Netherlands and Italy, and to the extent that blocked funds are available for these expenditures, to provide for payment from these foreign currencies owned by Canada and provided only for governmental or other limited purposes, and for payment to the Royal Society of Canada of amounts not to exceed $10,000 in all to meet travelling and other administrative costs incurred by the society for those it may designate to act on its behalf in selecting persons to receive fellowships and scholarships, $125,000.
Supply-External Affairs
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, in connection with this item to authorize and provide for the payment of fellowships and scholarships and travelling expenses to enable Canadians to study in France, The Netherlands and Italy, will the minister give some general idea as to the qualifications required of applicants in connection with these fellowships? There seems to be a lack of general information in this regard. I think it is a most laudable purpose and one that deserves every co-operation on the part of the Department of External Affairs. There is a worthwhile contribution to be made under this system of fellowships, and I do feel there is not that general knowledge of the basis for qualification that should be available to those who might consider applying, if they knew of its existence.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, this amount covers, as my hon. friend knows, the graduate fellowships and scholarships which are granted to Canadian students from federal funds for study abroad. As he also knows, the scholars in question are chosen not by the government but by the Royal Society, which administers these schemes.
In 1955-56 the Royal Society allotted 16 scholarships, 12 fellowships and 28 other awards. These awards are given for study abroad not only in the natural sciences but in the social sciences. As my hon. friend knows, the money was originally paid out of blocked funds in European countries which accrued after the war, but that source of assistance has come to, or is coming to, an end. It is hoped that we can continue this assistance to scholars through a regular appropriation of this kind, not from blocked funds.
I agree that possibly there has not been as much publicity given to this as is desirable, but the Royal Society of Canada has from time to time issued pamphlets to universities where the information is available. The most recent one I have before me was issued just a few weeks ago, which gives a good deal of information as to how to apply, the qualifications required and the nature and scope of the assistance. This should supply all the information that is required by any applicant for a scholarship, and I am informed that it is given quite wide distribution by the Royal Society.


Mr. Slewart (Winnipeg North):: Mr. Chairman, when the day comes that blocked funds are used up and we shall appropriate money in this parliament specifically for this purpose, would it be the intention of the government to see that scholars and students are able to go to countries other than those mentioned in this vote?

Supply-External Affairs


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, if or when the time comes that this is a normal vote and not out of blocked funds, there will be no limitation except those limitations laid down by the Royal Society itself, on the institutions where this work may be carried on by the fellow or scholar.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
105.	To provide for the Canadian government's contribution to the United Nations expanded program for technical assistance to under-developed countries in an amount of $1,800,000 U.S., notwithstanding that payment may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of December, 1955, which is, $1,798,875.
Mr. Patterson:: Mr. Chairman, this item is to provide for the Canadian government's contribution to the United Nations' expanded program for technical assistance to underdeveloped countries. This matter was given considerable attention in the committee, and it is not my intention to make any extended remarks on this item. I am sure we all appreciate the work that is being done in this connection.
I was somewhat perturbed to come across an article in my home town newspaper, the Abbotsford, Sumas and Matsqui News for Wednesday, June 27. The heading of this article is "Critical of Assistance Given Asiatic Countries" and it has to do with both the technical assistance programs and the Colombo plan. I want to read just two or three paragraphs from this article and perhaps the minister would like to take notice of the contents. The first paragraph is as follows:
That the technical assistance agencies attempting to raise the standards in industries in Asiatic countries are failing in the task for which they were designed, is the personal opinion of Dr. John W. A. Brant, physiologist, who is currently vacationing with relatives in Abbotsford.
The third paragraph from the top in the article reads as follows:
His work during the past year was similar to his year in Ceylon with a team of United Nations technical officers.
I am just picking out pertinent paragraphs. Further down in the article the following appears:
Dr. Brant suggests the technical programs are far-fetched. They are not in step with the culture and historical progress of the country. Dr. Brant explains that United Nations technical experts and experts from other similar agencies, when they are sent to the Asiatic countries, are assigned to government branches or commercial and academic institutions. Quite often those who are trained turn their knowledge to personal gain, rather than passing it on to the masses.
Another paragraph is as follows:
In many instances, the technical assistance being given is causing more harm than good. In effect, the present programs are attempting to force 1,000 years of progress on these countries overnight.


A final paragraph reads:
Of the three agencies, Colombo plan, United Nations, and the United States, which are currently supplying assistance to Asiatic countries, the Colombo plan is the most effective, Dr. Brant believes.
I do not know just how qualified this gentleman is to make these observations, but certainly if he has been a member of the teams in these various countries his words should be worth something. I thought possibly the minister might be interested in making some inquiries regarding this gentleman, learning by what authority Dr. Brant speaks and whether or not his observations are correct.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I shall be glad to do that, Mr. Chairman. I know, of course, there have been some criticisms made of the technical assistance programs. It would be surprising if that were not the case, because there are great difficulties in the provision of technical assistance in these countries. So often it is not possible to get enough of the best technicians to do the work. That is one of the reasons I wish we could have some kind of international civil service organized under the United Nations, so people would be continuously available for this kind of thing. Having regard to these difficulties, I nevertheless think the project itself has been effective and successful although, as I have said, it has had its disappointments.
I hope the committee will feel this expenditure of $1,800,000 is very worth while. In some ways the Colombo plan-and we are not talking about that-has been more successful than the United Nations technical assistance program because of the intimate relationship between the member countries, which has made it easier to develop cooperative projects; but the United Nations scheme which is now under good organization and administration-the head is a Canadian- is doing a very worth-while job. I shall be glad to look into the particular matter raised by the hon. member.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if it might not be possible to do something under our own civil service in this regard. We know there is a great shortage of competent personnel to assist countries whom we would wish to assist in a technical way. Would it not be possible to open up a new sort of career for Canadians, both men and women, who would be interested in devoting their lives to this very significant form of aid to those who are less fortunate than we are? In other words, is the department considering at all giving some sort of moral support to universities in the training of young men and women who would be prepared to enter this new concept of civil

service, nomadic perhaps in a certain way, whereby they would be on tap, as it were, to be sent to different countries when requests come from them.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, I know our own civil service commission has tried to help whenever it could in the provision of experts of this kind for the United Nations, but I realize that my hon. friend would go further than that. I should tell him that this very matter is now under active consideration at the economic and social council meeting now being held in Geneva. This is a matter in which our delegation is very interested, and the secretary general of the United Nations is also very interested in it. I hope that in the course of time something will be developed along these lines on an international basis.


Mr. Hahn:: Mr. Chairman, unfortunately there are many committees sitting which makes it impossible for one to be here when one wishes. The hon. member for Fraser Valley indicated in his address on the first item that I would take part in this debate. I rather hoped to deal quite extensively with the United Nations, but I see that we have reached the technical assistance stage, so I will have to try to confine my remarks to the particular item we are discussing.
I am thinking now of the question that was dealt with to some extent in the United Nations. That is the matter of SUNFED, the special United Nations fund for economic development. I found in the discussion, which interested me a great deal, the suggestion made by a great many of these countries who would take part in it that in the operation of the fund those who were the contributors would not be in a position to regulate the use of the fund. I know there is a great deal of argument in favour of that course, though I would personally prefer to see those who are contributing in some way have a greater say in the actual expenditure.
Earlier in this debate the hon. member for Prince Albert quoted a statement to the effect that every dollar put into investment in this field is worth $5 in defence. Possibly he is quite right, but I would say we should only invest to the degree that the investment can be absorbed in the particular country that is being given assistance. I think that is one of the problems we have to deal with specifically.
We find that the countries of southeast Asia are generally considered to be neutral. I do not know what a definition of neutrality would be, unless it could be that a decision would be reached by that country as to whom they might think would be the victors in
Supply-External Affairs the event of a catastrophe and on that basis they would decide on the country of which they would be in favour. Be that as it may, that is the only field from which we are going to be able to draw any reserve in the event of war or a similar catastrophe; therefore I think we should do everything within our power to see to it that we assist these people in every way possible.
I am satisfied that if the United States today is being held in some disregard by these countries-or for that matter, if we ourselves are being held in disregard by them- the reason is that they feel every time they receive financial assistance of any kind certain strings are attached to it. For that reason we have to revise our thinking on technical matters.
Asians, I believe, fear it. They have just got over a long period of colonialism, over 300 hundred years of it, and they do not want to have any more of it. I have listened with a great deal of interest on former occasions to speeches in this house having to do with United States investment in this country. We find in this country and in this house a great number of people who are completely opposed to further United States investment in this country because, they say, there are strings attached to it. We might only place ourselves in the same position in Asia in some of these underdeveloped countries, and we come back to the same conclusion that these people reach in this country. They are no more desirous of that help than we are, because they feel there are certain strings attached.
Therefore, as I said earlier, I think we should revise our thinking to a degree on this particular problem. I wonder whether the government has given any thought to a different approach to the question. We have the field of technical education and university training, authority for which is given to the provinces alone. I would propose, though, that instead of just continually giving aid to the underdeveloped countries we change our thinking and possibly develop in Canada an international university and technical training school, to which Canadians would not be allowed to go, perhaps centralized in one of the prairie provinces because of the facilities we have there, agricultural and otherwise. We could invite students from India and some of the other underdeveloped countries to come to this college or school, whichever you call it, for the purpose of training them in our field of agriculture, in irrigation methods and any other things we feel it necessary that they must know before they are able to utilize the machinery and equipment we send them.
6858	HOUSE OF
Supply-External Affairs
I am satisfied that our provinces would not take exception to this, because we would not be entering into their field of education. We would be doing something for the world in an effort to stimulate an interest in those underdeveloped countries in becoming more familiar with our techniques of operation. I am satisfied that the U-S.S.R. is doing something along similar lines. In reading the text of many of the bulletins they send us in this house I find that they frequently make reference to students who are there. But because of our charter under the British North America Act our government is not in a position to assist at this time in a similar way to the Soviets, and it is my suggestion that this other course be given due consideration by the government, only for the purpose of teaching these people how to utilize machinery and giving them the technical training they require and, indeed, going on to give them a university training, or the engineering training that is required if the underdeveloped countries are going to become of any value to us.
The over-all effect might be that coming into contact with Canadians as they are bound to do, they would appreciate more of the problems that we have, for indeed we have certain areas of our country that are underdeveloped in the way of capital investment by this government. However, instead of continually putting more and more dollars into a field of investment which is not appreciated because of the strings attached, I think we should find some new approach that would be acceptable to these former colonial countries.


Mr. Blackmore:: Before the item carries I wish to discuss a matter which I intended to discuss the other day. I have been greatly intrigued by the "package deal" that the Minister of National Health and Welfare endeavoured to negotiate in relation to the United Nations last fall. On July 26 I asked the minister if he would be here during this discussion, and he said he would be; but yesterday he gave me to understand that he is prevented from being in Ottawa because of an unfortunate accident to one of his children, which detains him at home.
X wonder whether I might ask of the Secretary of State for External Affairs the questions that I desired to ask of the Minister of National Health and Welfare, if he does not feel that that would be imposing on him? If he would be willing to answer the questions or give his idea as to what the Minister of National Health and Welfare would have said, then I should like to talk about that matter for a little while.
I am interested not only in the fact that there was a "package deal" which this house


did not know was going to come up. There was no announcement whatever about it, and as far as we know the government knew nothing about it. If people, with no more permission from this house to go and speak for it respecting international affairs than, as far as I know, the Minister of National Health and Welfare has, are able to go to the United Nations and commit Canada by implication as that minister did last year, I do not know what outrageous things we might expect to be sprung on us at almost any time. I feel that under the circumstances a matter so serious as that should never have been taken up until we had a chance to discuss it. Perhaps I am quite wrong; I just want to be advised in the matter.
I had several questions which I desired to ask the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Probably I would be well advised to read those questions first so the minister will have a chance to give them some thought.
First, will the minister give the house an account of his attempt in November and December, 1955, to obtain the admission of 18 nations into the United Nations general assembly in the so-called "package deal" which he supported?
Second, what in a general way did the minister conceive to be the advantage to be derived from the admission of this "package" to the United Nations general assembly?
Third, why were these particular nations chosen?
Fourth, name in order the nations on the list, and in the case of each give the special reason for including that particular nation on the list.
Fifth, where was that list made up-in Ottawa, in New York, in Moscow-or was it the result of the collaboration of all three?
Sixth, it was reported that when a United Nations person asked the minister what was the reason for Canada's stand to admit all 18 of these nations, including Mongolia and other communist countries, the minister said, "Our interest in the matter is government policy." Did the minister say those words?
Now I think I have something on which the Secretary of State for External Affairs can go to work, if he so desires; but while his experts are going into this matter, which probably is quite a surprise to them, may I say just a word or two about this question of Outer Mongolia? This matter of attempting to get Outer Mongolia into the United Nations brings up the whole question of the recognition of red China and the whole question of Chiang Kai-shek, the Chinese nationalist government, and their right to be recognized as the government of China and to be in their position in the United Nations.

It probably is not generally known that Outer Mongolia never did belong to Russia except during the years 1912 and 1913, when it belonged to czarist Russia for a little while. Mongolia, Manchuria and Sinkiang formed a belt of territories or possessions along the northern border of China. They had been Chinese possessions since the days of Genghis Khan, if I am correctly informed. Consequently these three provinces were under the control of the Manchus, and when the Man-chus were disposed of as the result of the work of Dr. Sun Yat-sen and Chiang Kai-shek, naturally the ownership of these three territories would come into the hands of Chiang Kai-shek and nationalist China. There can be no doubt about that.
Russia did nothing sufficient herself to get control of these three provinces although she had been trying to do so for a long long time, even before the days of the communists. Why should Outer Mongolia, which, as far as rights are concerned, still belongs to nationalist China and Chiang Kai-shek, be made into an independent nation, "a liberated nation" I suppose, according to modern terminology used by the communists, the pro-communists and the communist dupes? Why should a nation like that be admitted as a member of the United Nations general assembly? That is a question that will require a lot of answering and a lot of explaining. I should like to have the minister say a word or two on that matter. Perhaps his experts are not prepared to do so. If they are not, I shall read a statement which will indicate-


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, I should like to hear what the hon. gentleman is going to read but I am quite ready to deal with the question he has raised, though I am not sure how it can be brought under this item in the estimates. I would tell him on this matter-


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. Before the minister replies, may I say that I am afraid if he does reply at this moment he may be just as badly out of order as I am afraid the hon. member for Lethbridge is. I do know that notice was given by the hon. member for Lethbridge of his intention to bring up this matter and that it was delayed in order, if possible, to have the Minister of National Health and Welfare in the house at the time, but I should like to suggest to the hon. member for Lethbridge and to the Secretary of State for External Affairs that item 105 now before the committee is to provide for the Canadian government's contribution to the United Nations expanded program for technical assistance to underdeveloped countries.
Supply

External Affairs
I might point out that item 617, which we have not yet reached, is to provide for the Canadian government's assessment for membership in international organizations. I think the points brought up by the hon. member for Lethbridge deal entirely with the policy to be adopted by Canada. Perhaps his arguments might deal with the desirability or otherwise of paying our assessment to certain international organizations, but they hardly deal with our contribution to a program of technical assistance.
Therefore I suggest to both hon. members that we would have a more orderly discussion if we completed item 105 and the similar items which are for specific purposes, on the distinct understanding that the questions raised by the hon. member for Lethbridge will be dealt with under item 617. If that is agreeable to the committee, I think it is the proper conclusion to arrive at.


John Horne Blackmore: I entirely agree with you, Mr. Chairman.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I want to say a word or two about the item. I have had the opportunity and the pleasure of getting to know a number of students from India, Ceylon and other countries who have come to Trail to receive additional training at the plant of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company. These people are all very intelligent, in many cases highly trained and well versed, and I must say that I have made a point of asking them what they thought of our system of technical assistance. In every case they have thought that it was to their advantage to be trained in various industrial plants, universities and so on in Canada, and I am quite sure from my experience and the experience of the people of the district that it is to the mutual advantage of the student and the community concerned to have these associations. They have been most happy ones in the Trail district.
I might also mention at this time that I have had some long conversations with these men. They are most interesting people to meet. I have asked them what they thought of our Colombo plan and in every case they have expressed the highest appreciation of the work that is being done by Canada in their countries under the Colombo plan.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
106.	Contribution to the United Nations children's fund, $650,000.
Alistair McLeod Stewart: Mr. Chairman, this is a vote which, of course, is going to get the support of the whole house because we are all interested in the United Nations children's fund. I am glad to see the government taking the lead in providing money for

Supply-External Affairs that fund, but I do not think it is good enough just to have the government do it. We have to spread the idea that individuals should help. We have tried in the past, though not altogether successfully, and we have to spread the idea amongst the citizenry of Canada so they can play a greater part in helping this most essential fund. The most important citizens of all are the youngsters of Canada, and I am going to suggest to the department that perhaps they have a job here they can do.
I noticed that last year at Halloween quite a number of children, instead of going from door to door dressed up in various disguises and getting apples, candies and other little benefits for themselves, went around collecting for UNICEF. It was an excellent idea indeed. I wonder whether it would not be possible for the Department of External Affairs to get in touch with the provincial departments of education and suggest that they in turn write to the school principals suggesting that on the last day of October, Halloween, the children of the various schools be encouraged to go around not gathering gifts for themselves but for the United Nations children's fund. It would be a good thing for the youngsters to do for their own sakes, and I am sure it would be of inestimable value to UNICEF. I think perhaps a lead might be given here by the department, if it would follow out this suggestion.


Lester Bowles Pearson: This department has a great variety of activities, but I confess that this is one that had not occurred to us. However, we will be glad to follow it up.


Mr. Dinsdale:: I believe the Canadian branch of the United Nations association is doing very excellent promotional work in this regard. Is that not right?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Yes, they have done some good things in this regard. UNICEF is an organization that appeals to everyone; nevertheless these efforts, governmental and non-governmental, might very effectively be supplemented by what my hon. friend has just suggested although, of course, it is a matter for the provincial education authorities. We will take it up with them.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization-[DOT]
107.	To provide, subject to the approval of the governor in council and notwithstanding the Civil Service Act, for special administrative expenses, including payment of remuneration, in connection with the assignment by the Canadian government of Canadians to the international staff of the North Atlantic treaty organization (part recoverable from the North Atlantic treaty organization), $35,484.
Frederick George Hahn: Last year it was my privilege to be in attendance at NATO with a group of parliamentarians from this country. As a matter of fact it was just about a year ago now. The session had been called for the purpose of seeing what could be done to implement the economic aspects of NATO. I was very pleased indeed that the Secretary of State for External Affairs saw at the time of the drafting of the charter a need for this particular clause, for it becomes more and more apparent as time goes on that NATO itself would be dying more quickly or would be dead if it were not for the hope that there would be some greater binding force than the military aspect that we have at the present time.
I know there are certain newspapers or certain groups that take a dim view of parliamentarians making these annual excursions. I might say this, however, Mr. Chairman. Aside from the matter of fellowship, which was irrelevant and unimportant, I certainly obtained a greater degree of understanding of the problems that are facing our European friends and other members of NATO in this regard. While it is true that some of us can speak from time to time on questions pertaining to our own country, when it comes to this matter of international problems it is necessary that we be somewhat more familiar with them than we are at the present time if we are actually to understand what are the problems that face these member nations.
The only way in which that can be done, so far as I can see, is to take a group of parliamentarians to Europe-and I would say a different group each year-in order that they might become more familiar with those questions and might come back with some intelligent reasons for what they think should be done to assist our cause.
In my discussions with these friends I found that it was the fear of war that was responsible for the bringing into existence of NATO. But fear is not a binding force, in my estimation, and we want a binding force. I would therefore say that the other aspect which the Secretary of State for External Affairs emphasized when he was on the committee drafting the charter is the more important one, and that it should be emphasized more and more. It is up to us as members of this house to try to give him ideas. As one of the three wise men I am sure he would be anxious to hear how we would implement the economic factor, for in that way alone lies the continuance of NATO.
The world today is divided into several blocs. We have the Arab bloc, the Soviet

bloc, the China bloc, the Southeast Asia bloc, and the American bloc, as it is sometimes called. In trying to analyse these problems as we see them, we can arrive at a reasonable solution only by integrating ourselves, by becoming more closely associated more particularly with the nations which we have reason to believe are our friends and allies, and by co-operating with them. General Gruenther, who is to leave the association, has certainly gained the respect of everybody. However, I am satisfied that his successor will prove to be just as able and capable as he was.
We were particularly well represented. We were very fortunate I might say, in our own organization in having with us-he has now been transferred to the head office-Air Vice Marshal Campbell and Brigadier Anderson, who are doing a noble work. Indeed, I am satisfied that it is only as a direct result of the fine work that Brigadier Anderson has done among our troops in Soest that we have today men and women who have become ambassadors at large in Europe, following the unfortunate incidents when the Canadian troops first came over and settled in that area. It was only through his work, his integration, his ability to sell the fact that Canadians are human beings just the same as other people, that they were made so acceptable to the German people. I am sure we cannot compliment this man too highly for the work he has done and for the high regard in which he is held by Europeans, particularly by the Germans in the community with which he is associated.
There is, however, one other factor that interested me. When I was at the United Nations last year I was privileged to be in attendance at a special meeting that was called by some of the original signatories to the North Atlantic treaty. Senator Robertson was the guest speaker, and at that meeting were representatives from each of the NATO countries. I believe the only country which was not represented on that occasion was Turkey. Each one of us was privileged to give a five-minute address following the senator's remarks. The feature that stuck with me most was the statement by every last representative from those countries that NATO would die unless the economic aspect was brought forward and developed.
This suggestion is very definitely borne out by the action of Iceland. There just the military aspect has been emphasized at all times; we have sacrificed the economic aspect. I would say that we must develop that aspect in order that we may re-establish ourselves as a North Atlantic Treaty Organization that will continue to function in order to offset the forward march with which the Soviets
Supply-External Affairs are plaguing us today. NATO can be, and in the future should be, developed more and more in the economic field.
I see that it is just about one o'clock, Mr. Chairman. However, if the committee will bear with me for about two minutes, I shall have finished. I have only one or two observations to make with respect to methods.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Is it agreed that the hon. member has consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Frederick George Hahn: My reference is to methods of developing the economic end of NATO. They are only three in number, in fact. I would make the suggestion that while we have the three wise men, the organization might set up a special committee for the purpose of studying only the economic aspect of this matter. It would be more a committee to inquire into the possibilities of integrating trade between these nations.
First I would suggest an overseas investment program. There would be no giveaways as far as I am concerned, because of the strings attached on the basis I mentioned earlier in respect to the United Nations, but it would be just as applicable in NATO. This program would be administered through an advisory council in consultation with investors.
Then, in the matter of civil production, it would be most important to develop primary production for use and marketability; develop a nation in proportion to its adaptability, but at all times decentralize the organization so no part is solely dependent on the other. I think every nation wishes to keep its sovereignty and that it wants to seem independent even in this matter of trade, and not dependent solely on what someone else is producing. There should be a recognition of NATO by all members, they should recognize that they have a role to play either in economic or military matters, or both, to be protected at all times.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Alistair McLeod Stewart: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the minister could tell us how many Canadian cabinet ministers attended meetings of NATO in Paris last year, and for how many days each were they at those meetings?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Offhand, Mr. Chairman, I am not sure if I have that exact statistical information in terms of days. I attended

Supply-External Affairs three meetings of the NATO council last year myself, and the average length of the meetings was two or three days. I am now talking of the full ministerial council. My colleague the Minister of National Defence was also with me at the annual meeting. I think we were the only two, although I should like to check whether or not the Minister of Finance was at one of the meetings.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I think that points out one of the weaknesses of the NATO organization. There is no real meeting of minds between governments. I have a very high regard for the civil servants who are acting there on behalf of the governments, and particularly for the one who represents Canada. But if there is going to be reality in this subject of Atlantic unity there has to be what I call this meeting of minds, and it cannot come through meetings, no matter how frequent, of civil servants. It can only come through the meeting of ministers, those who really make policy.
What has happened all too frequently in the past is that arrangements have been arrived at, and properly so; then cabinet ministers have gone over and within a matter of a few hours have agreed to the arrangements which had hitherto, of course, been agreed upon. I do not think that is good enough. If we are going to make something out of NATO ministers must meet ministers, and problems must be threshed out in the council. I hope Canadian ministers will take a far greater interest in the work of NATO than they have in the past. I exempt the Secretary of State for External Affairs from that condemnation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
International joint commission-
109.	Salaries and expenses of the commission including, subject to the approval of the governor in council and notwithstanding the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act, as amended, payment of salary of the chairman of $17,000 per annum, $100,745.
Mr. Green:: This item, Mr. Chairman, has to do with the international joint commission. It would be helpful if the minister would explain the scope of the instructions given to that commission with regard to the Yukon river. Apparently there is some difference of opinion between the United States and Canada concerning the use of that river for power purposes. In any event, some problems have arisen. This is very important to Canada because of the tremendous power potential in the headwaters of the Yukon river and its tributaries.

Incidentally, these headwaters lie not only in the Yukon but also in the northern part of the province of British Columbia. I should like the minister to explain just what is being done with regard to this matter.
While the minister is dealing with that, perhaps he could tell the committee whether the government has in mind undertaking any negotiations with the United States concerning access from the western boundary of British Columbia through the panhandle of Alaska to salt water. As the minister knows, this panhandle drops down over that western boundary for about half the whole length of the western boundary of British Columbia. In recent years there have been extensive developments taking place in the mining field in that part of British Columbia. There has been some suggestion that there should be a very large power plant somewhere on the Taku river a few miles inside the Canadian border, but always they run up against this problem of getting access to the sea.
At the same time, the Alaskan centres at tide level are not progressing very rapidly. I believe they are very anxious to have some solution so they can do a great deal more business than they are doing at the present time. If some arrangement is not made I think it will be only a short time until British Columbia will be forced to open up a highway system north and south through that part of the province's territory. While that would be more expensive, it would give an outlet by means of which the resources of that part of the province could be taken to market.
This is a question which will have to be handled quickly. It cannot be left indefinitely because of the developments that are taking place at the present time in that portion of the province. I wonder if the minister would deal with those two points this afternoon.


Lester Bowles Pearson: In regard to the second point, Mr. Chairman, the proposed Yukon river reference for which there is an item in the estimates, the government of the United States has made overtures to the government here regarding a reference to this commission, the international joint commission, on the water resources of Alaska and the Yukon river. The Canadian government, up to the present, has not indicated whether it is willing to join in such a reference. At present, however, there is little or no factual information on the resources of the Yukon river and the Canadian section of the international joint commission-General Mc-Naughton had something to say about this when he appeared before the committee on

external affairs, and his evidence on this point appears on page 333-feels that at least a preliminary survey should be made of the river in the event a joint reference is agreed upon. This is being done.
In the light of past experience of the Columbia river reference in 1944, when Canada had very little information on the potentialities of that river thereby placing the Canadian section of the international joint commission in a difficult negotiating position, it is felt that this preliminary investigation should be made on our side before a decision is made in regard to referring the matter to the joint commission, and that is being done.


Howard Charles Green: There has been no agreement yet to refer the question to the commission?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Chairman, there has been no agreement and will not likely be an agreement until we get the information from our side of the joint commission to which I have made reference.
The question of the panhandle was rather exhaustively discussed in the committee, and I submitted a statement on that matter to the committee which my hon. friend may or may not have read. I wonder whether I could refer him to the page-I think it is page 421 of the committee hearings-where this matter is gone into in some detail. I might add at this point that there is a difference of opinion as to whether a corridor of the kind he suggests would be desirable or is necessary at this time in the interests of the people of British Columbia. We have had evidence both for and against that.
In any event, we felt that nothing would be gained at the present moment by bringing this matter up officially in Washington, because we were quite convinced that we would get nowhere if we suggested some cession of territory for the sake of creating a corridor across the panhandle to the Pacific coast. On the contrary, we felt that if we raised that matter officially at this time we might get some counter-proposal from the United States government which would be embarrassing.


Howard Charles Green: What is the United States asking for with regard to the Yukon river? On what basis are they requesting a reference to the commission with regard to that river? The only part of the river which flows through Alaska seems to be a very long way from the area where power can be produced. On what basis is the United States asking for this reference?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am not quite sure whether I can answer that question, Mr. Chairman, without further information. All I know is
Supply-External Affairs that at the present time we have not given them any reason to believe that any such reference would be acceptable, and we would want to look into it very carefully before we came to a decision. In view of our lack of response I do not think the basis on which they made the request has quite so much importance. My colleague the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources would know. His estimates are coming up next.


Howard Charles Green: Can the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources give the committee any further information on that point?


Mr. Lesage:: I do not recall, sir, exactly what was the basis of the request of the government of the United States for a reference to the international joint commission on the Yukon river, but I believe our attitude has been pretty well described by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Our response, as he said, has been pretty negative; in the discussion that we shall be having with the United States we will be discussing the Yukon river as well as other important international rivers.


Howard Charles Green: When are those discussions to take place? Has a date been set?


Jean Lesage: No date has been set, sir. We are having preliminary exchanges of an exploratory nature in order to try to define exactly what are the questions that are to be discussed.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, I wanted to ask about a very closely related subject which is going to be one of the matters to be discussed, I understand, at the forthcoming meeting of governments just referred to by the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, namely the question of the Columbia river.


Jean Lesage: My estimates are coming up next.


Edmund Davie Fulton: But this is the item for the international joint commission.


Jean Lesage: I also have one.


Edmund Davie Fulton: While I am prepared to
co-operate, I do not want to be foreclosed by one minister saying, "You should have brought it up under the other's estimates".


Jean Lesage: Bring it up and we shall see.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What I wish to ask is simply this. Is the Secretary of State for External Affairs prepared to discuss the present situation with regard to the Columbia river in so far as the international joint commission is concerned and the problems about which we both know, or would he himself

Supply-External Affairs prefer to leave the whole matter to be discussed on the estimates of the other department; because if we can have a better discussion there I would be prepared to defer it.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I think there would be a better discussion on the estimates of my hon. friend's department, because his department is making the preparations for these intergovernmental talks that are about to take place with which the international joint commission, the Canadian side, will be associated; therefore I think it would be more constructive if we could postpone it until his estimates come up, and they are coming up right after mine.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
110.	To provide for Canada's share of the expenses of studies, surveys and investigations of the international joint commission. $199,180.
Alfred Johnson Brooks: Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a few remarks on this item. This morning I was pleased to hear the minister say that the proposed Passamaquoddy development had been referred to the international joint commission. The minister will recall that on May 7 I moved:
For a copy of all letters, telegrams, memoranda and other documents exchanged during the past three years between any department or officials of the federal government and the international joint commission, the government of the United States of America, and any other government or organization or individuals, relating to a survey or surveys of the economic feasibility of the development of the Passamaquoddy tidal power project.
I had a partial return from the department, and I had hoped for a full return before the minister's estimates came before the house. However, the minister said this morning, I think, that tomorrow at Washington there would be a joint statement-


Lester Bowles Pearson: Today.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I wish to thank the minister for sending me a copy of the reference, which I received just a few minutes before I came down to the house. It is too bad that this reference had not been made public earlier, so that a study could have been made of it while the minister's estimates were before the house. From a cursory study I notice that the reference to the commission authorizes them to determine the costs, to determine the effect on the economy of the United States and Canada of this development. They are given the advantages of the reports of 1950 and 1952. I also note that the United States government, subject to the availability of funds, is to incur costs of up to $3 million and the Canadian government up to $300,000.

It does seem to me, Mr. Chairman, that there is a great discrepancy in the amount Canada is contributing to this investigation as compared with that which is being contributed by the United States. It is ten to one. We in the maritime provinces are interested not only in the proportion of one to ten in this development, I can assure the minister. I wish to assure the government that is not the case. We feel that if this Passamaquoddy project is developed it should be more or less a fifty-fifty proposition, and any benefits which accrue from the development of the Passamaquoddy-I see the hon. member for Charlotte here and I am sure he will agree with me in this-should go to the United States and Canada, and the maritime provinces in particular, in equal proportions. There is no doubt as to the interest that exists in this project in the maritime provinces, because in the return I received from the minister there were recommendations from boards of trade of the county of Charlotte which the hon. member represents and from other boards of trade in the maritime provinces.
I do think, Mr. Chairman, our federal government was rather dogmatic in its reply to some of the representations made by the United States government with reference to this development. I am afraid there has been a very lukewarm attitude on the part of the federal government with regard to this development. This has been recognized not only by the people in the maritime provinces but also by people in the state of Maine. I had a letter from Senator Smith of Maine which I read here some time ago in which she said she was very much afraid that the Dominion of Canada was not taking the vital interest in this matter that the state of Maine was, and which she hoped the United States in general was taking.
I should like to quote from a memorandum sent by the Secretary of State for External Affairs to his excellency the ambassador of the United States. It is dated April 5, 1956. I quote from this memorandum:
The Canadian authorities concerned have given careful consideration to this matter-
That has reference to the international joint commission. I continue:
-and it is assumed that further discussions will take place concerning the specific terms of the reference which might be presented to the international joint commission. It also seems desirable to include in the joint reference provision for an investigation into the effect that the proposed tidal power project would have upon the fisheries in the area.
That is naturally very important, but it is not the only consideration which we in the

maritime provinces have in this proposed development. The memorandum goes on to say:
Having regard to the foregoing, the Canadian government is prepared, on the following conditions, to join with the United States government in a reference to the international joint commission on a survey of the proposed Passamaquoddy tidal power project:
(a)	It is proposed that each country assume responsibility for part of the required surveys and investigations. Canada would be responsible for the investigation into the effect the project might have upon the fisheries, and Canada would assume the cost of this investigation to an amount not exceeding $300,000.
I point out again, Mr. Chairman, this rather indicates that the main interest Canada has in the Passamaquoddy development is simply in connection with the fisheries. I continue:
(b)	Each country would facilitate the extension to it of the required surveys by agencies of the other country, as well as the entry of personnel and equipment, on the understanding that all information obtained in the various surveys would be made currently available to each country through the international joint commission.
(c)	In joining in the reference to the international joint commission, the Canadian government would make no commitment regarding the eventual construction of the project.
I hope this is not an indication that the Canadian government is not anxious to bear its full share of the Passamaquoddy development if it is found feasible and practical. We do not wish to see the United States achieve control and have the absolute use of the Passamaquoddy development, and we do not wish to see Canada having an interest only in protecting the fisheries of the bay of Fundy.
I understand, and I think it is general knowledge in the province of New Brunswick, that there are quite powerful fishery interests in that province that are more concerned over what might affect the fisheries in the bay of Fundy than they are over the great power project in that province. I also understand that from inquiries made in 1950 the fears of the fishermen in the bay of Fundy are rather unfounded, and there is no great danger to the fisheries there. However, this investigation will determine that. 1 also understand it will take three years in order to complete this investigation, and possibly we will not know what the attitude is going to be until the three-year period has elapsed.
I would like the minister to tell us this afternoon whether the federal government is as concerned about the development of Passamaquoddy as is the United States, and particularly the state of Maine, or whether we are interested only in protecting the fisheries in that area.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, I can assure my hon. friend that we are sincerely interested in both aspects of this investigation, the
67509-436J
Supply-External Affairs development of power and also the effect any such development might have on our fisheries there. We share the interest of the United States in this investigation, and we will share fully with them in the results of the investigation.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Financially?


Lester Bowles Pearson: We will share in every way in the results of the investigation. If this investigation shows it is economically feasible to proceed with this matter and we are satisfied to that effect, then naturally we will be happy to share with them in future developments. It has been felt, however* that the fisheries aspect of the matter is one in which we have a very special interest,, possibly a greater interest than our friends, on the other side of the line, and therefore we have taken a special responsibility in regard to that aspect of the investigation.
The cost of that part of the survey will be about $300,000. The United States will be putting up about $3 million in this investigation, but that does not mean the ratio of our interest or the ratio of our participation in the results of the investigation will not be 50-50. There have been technical experts on our side, I know, and my hon. friend knows this better than I do, who in the past have been sceptical about the economic feasibility of this development. It has already been investigated.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Some have been optimistic, I might say.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Yes, some experts have been optimistic about this, possibly more on the other side of the line than on this side. However, the investigation is going to take place. We must all hope that as a result it will make possible a power development which will be economically advantageous to that part of Canada, and will not interfere with our very important fisheries industry.
I think there is nothing more I can add at the present time, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry this reference was not before my hon. friend prior to today. We have been doing our best to get the United States government to agree to a joint reference. We had ourselves agreed on terms some weeks ago. They have been considering it in Washington ever since, and we received their final agreement to this particular document only yesterday.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Terminable services-
111.	Colombo plan, $34,400,000.
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I might say, Mr. Chairman, that the question of the Colombo plan was discussed in some detail in the committee

Supply-External Affairs and I shall not take the time of the house in repeating all the evidence that was produced there. However, I would like very briefly to indicate the point of view of a great many members of the committee, in fact I think I would be safe in saying practically all members of the committee.
There was a considerable interest in the Colombo plan revealed in the committee, probably a greater interest than in any other single item. Most of the members of the committee I listened to felt that the government would increase the appropriation for the Colombo plan in coming years. Mr. Nik Cavell, the witness who appeared before the committee, indicated that it was not always possible to spend all the money that could be spent because there were not always technicians readily available. In the light of what Mr. Cavell pointed out, there was some hope expressed that through the cooperation of industry and so on, if further moneys were advanced by the government ibr the Colombo plan we could obtain this technical assistance. In other words, the intimation was that if more money were advanced by the government in the coming years for the Colombo plan Mr. Cavell could certainly find the technical assistance to carry it out.
The question of the Colombo plan is something which is of great interest to the general public, at least that is the case in my part of Canada. During the last three or four months I have received 70 or 80 letters not only from individuals but from various organizations including missionary groups, the women's institute and various church groups as well, concerning the request I put forward in this house that the government should increase its annual appropriation for the Colombo plan. From what I have been able to learn many other hon. members have also received similar letters.
It is to be hoped that next year the government will see fit to increase this annual appropriation for the Colombo plan. We all know that the Soviet union and its satellites have apparently adopted a new method in their aim for world domination, and the new method, as all hon. members know, is the smiling war, the economic war, the handing out of promises of more assistance than we are giving to those parts of tiie world that have not taken sides as between the east and the west.
I think it is worth while on this point to note that since hundreds of millions of people in India, Pakistan, Indonesia and parts of Africa have just recently regained their political freedom, they are now very anxious to obtain their economic freedom as well.

It is probably quite truthful to say that most people in these countries have never had enough to eat at any time in their lives, and now when they have obtained their political freedom they see an opportunity for economic freedom so they will be able to get enough of the necessities of life. Naturally they will be very anxious to look to any country that promises such help, regardless of its political ideology.
The people to whom I have talked who have spent a considerable time in those countries and speak with some authority on the subject point out that people who have not enough to eat are not interested in political ideologies. I think that is something any hon. member could easily understand. They tend to look with favour on countries that promise them aid and so on. I know that in previous debates in this house various hon. members have shown the amount of aid the Soviet union is promising to these various so-called underdeveloped countries, and an article in one of the principal newspapers of Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, which pointed out that aid under the Colombo plan was a mere pittance by comparison. Of course the Soviet union apparently has not delivered much of the aid it has promised these various countries, but there is little doubt that it could, if it wished, deliver a good deal, particularly in the form of technical assistance and machinery, since it has been pointed out in this debate and many times in this house before that the Soviet union is no longer a land with an ox-cart economy.
Bearing all this in mind, and particularly in view of the great interest in this country in the Colombo plan, the government should see fit to increase the appropriation in another year. If nothing else, it is a matter of self-defence. Apparently the Soviet union is going all out in an attempt to gain the minds of the so-called underdeveloped countries and, if you will pardon me for coining a phrase, it is entering the mind by means of the stomach, so to speak. Unless we want to see all the sympathies of the people of these countries slip away from us, it is in our interest to increase aid to them.
There is one other matter I wish to mention in this regard, and that is the question of training people from underdeveloped countries to help themselves. All hon. members know, I think, that many students from Pakistan, India and so on have come to this country and obtained training of one sort or another. I believe the hon. member for Kootenay West mentioned this morning that he thought it was a very good idea for the students to actually work, if necessary, in our factories, farms and so on.

I should just like to say that I have had some experience of that in my constituency. We had nine students from Pakistan who were there under the Colombo plan. They were learning about farm machinery at the Massey Harris Ferguson plant in my city, and they were there for about six months. They lived in homes throughout the community. They took part in all the social activities of the community. They played badminton, took part in little theatre activities, spoke at the service clubs and so on. They were invited out socially at all times and everybody, if I may say so, treated them very hospitably and, I might even go so far as to say, made a fuss over them. This treatment was genuine and from the heart, and I am quite sure it would be the same in any community or small city in this country.
After those people went back to Pakistan I received letters from them, as did many other people in Woodstock. The impression that was created in their minds as to the merit of our way of life is something those people will never forget and will carry with them always. Now that they have gone back to Pakistan they will hold positions of considerable importance in the country, and they cannot help having a very great influence on the thinking of the people with whom they associate. I have no doubt that the administrators of the Colombo plan will continue to carry this out. I think it is something that can be carried out and expanded, because I can think of no better way of selling our way of life to people in the eastern countries.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: During the past year or two, very often the Soviet union has been either threatening or promising-I am not sure which it is-to indulge in large-scale schemes of assistance to underprivileged countries. I am not sure that their performances have matched up with their promises, but we would be making a very serious error, as has been pointed out before, if we in the west tried to enter into some form of competition with the Soviet union in the giving away of forms of assistance. The most productive way of stopping this rivalry, of course, is through the United Nations. If the Soviet union is really serious about improving the lot of the underprivileged people of the world, and if we are really serious about improving their lot, then let us together help them through the only international agency which really can do it; that is, the United Nations.
I see no reason why Canada cannot do far more than we have in the past to make the special United Nations fund for economic aid a reality. If we want to avert this competition in give-aways with the Soviet union, we
Supply-External Affairs can only do it through the United Nations, and we in Canada have to do far more than we have in the past through that agency.
I, too, would like to see the funds allotted to the Colombo plan increased, as would all my colleagues. But, important as the Colombo plan is, I do not think we ought to forget that, taking the over-all picture, the assistance which can be given by the United Nations in the long run would be more important. I have always opposed unilateral programs of giving money and assistance to other nations, because no matter how generously it is done or how genuinely it is done, there nevertheless rests in the minds of the recipients a certain fear that the donor has perhaps some ulterior motive. However, if we were trying to help the underprivileged people collectively through the United Nations, then I am sure that fear would disappear.
Yesterday the minister told us that the increase in the funds allotted to the Colombo plan was very substantial. There is an absolute increase of $8 million, which even these days is substantial, an absolute increase of some 32 per cent. But when one breaks it down into the per capita contribution by the people of Canada, what does it amount to? In our supreme generosity, from the fund of wealth we have in this country-and next year when there is an election we shall be told how well off we are-we are only giving away another 5 cents per capita per month. That is what $8 million amounts to. I am convinced that were there any will in this government to do better, they could do so, because they would have the support of the people of Canada. Time after time I have said in this house that the Colombo plan has caught the imagination of the people in a way much more obvious than, of course, has NATO.
I say we could make a much more substantial increase, and I am convinced it could be used productively. The minister yesterday reminded us that we could advance money to our friends under the Colombo scheme and it could be wasted. That I grant. But we can also waste money in this country just as easily and just as expeditiously. However, I doubt very much whether there would be the waste which perhaps some fear.
Let us take the case of India alone, and what applies to India of course applies to other nations. Within the next five years the Indian government intends to invest some $10 billion in capital goods in that country. I do not think for a moment that the Indian government has that amount of money behind it, either in its own treasury or in the savings of the people. Then how is it going to finance this great scheme of

Supply-External Affairs industrialization, which is only another five-year plan, another instalment of a general plan? Either India has to get more generous help-I am not talking about gifts but about loans at low rates of interest-from the more fortunate nations of the world, or India is going to print paper money, and the result of course will be devastating inflation with all the social consequences which will ensue.
I am quite sure that India and the other Asian nations who are partners of ours in the Colombo plan could very productively use much more money than we are prepared to give. We also ought to remember this fact, which a recent United Nations economic survey has pointed out. We industrial nations find that our standard of living is constantly rising, but the nations which are the primary producers of the world, the nations of Asia, find that their standard of living is constantly falling, so that as the years go by there is a greater disparity between the industrial nations who have much of the riches of the earth and these people in Asia who have not. We can afford to give much more than we have given, and I am convinced that the people of Canada would like to see it done.
But there is another aspect of the Colombo plan or of any other plan such as this. This, after all, is a plan to assist other nations, aid from government to government. I am not yet convinced that is always the best way of achieving the end we have in view, and I am certain that the end we do have in view is that of improving the lot of the less fortunate people in this world. Just a few months ago a brief was presented to the Gordon economic commission by the United Church of Canada, of which I happen to be a member, and if I am critical of that body then I am inferentially critical of myself. But this brief said in part:
Empty stomachs do not linger over the dissertations on the advantages of democracy. They go where food is and make friends with those who can provide it, without too much regard for political theories. If communism outwits and outruns the western world in feeding the hungry, we will have only ourselves to blame.
That is true. The United Church brief asks the government to do very much more than is covered by these estimates, and I am convinced that the government should have done very much more. But there is something else which the people of Canada can do. I believe the government of Canada ought to give the lead, but I think the people of Canada as responsible citizens ought to ask themselves, what can we do as individuals? I remind the committee of a scheme started in Norway two or three years ago, when the people of Norway collected money amongst

themselves to give to the less privileged people, a gift from people to people. A gift from people to people is a much more significant thing than a gift from government to government.
The other year I put a proposition before the congregation to which I belong, which happens to be a fairly well off, middle class congregation of about 1,500 people. I suggested that we might all perhaps give the sum of $1 each, no more and no less, not somebody giving $10 and nine others giving nothing, but that each of us might give $1 each as a gift to less fortunate people in another part of the world, a gift obviously without strings attached, a gift without any connotation other than that we felt a sense of brotherhood and a sense of responsibility for those who were not as well favoured as were we. I received the most inestimable assistance from Mr. Escott Reid, our high commissioner in India. I wrote telling him what the plan was and asked him if he could find in the area of New Delhi a village of perhaps some thousand souls who might be able to use productively as a gift from Canadian people the sum of $1,000.
Mr. Reid went to great pains and great trouble. He located a village, sent me photographs of it and gave me a breakdown of the social characteristics of the village. I thought for a while that I had sold my colleagues in my congregation on an idea which I considered worth putting into practice. Unfortunately I was wrong. The matter came before the governing board of the congregation and they took the position that this was the responsibility of government. I think that was an abdication of citizenship. We cannot pass everything to government. Individuals themselves must take some responsibility, and I suggest to the officers of the United Church that they approach their own congregations and see if we as individuals in Canada cannot build up a scheme whereby in our own small way we will do something to show the people of Asia that in our own well-being we have not forgotten them.
Two Canadians did do something about it, and I believe the minister knows of this case. A couple of Canadians who live in British Columbia, Dr. and Mrs. Naranjan Grewall, went to India two years ago. Dr. Grewall happens to be a native of the Punjab. He had come to this country as a young man, worked hard, arduously and successfully, and he took his Canadian wife back to the area where he was born. He saw once again the poverty from which he himself had fled. He saw the need of the people in that community. He saw children who had no building in which they could be taught.

There was no school of any sort whatsoever. He said right then and there, "I am prepared to build you a school. I have gone to Canada and have been lucky. That is now the land of my adoption. I should like to share some of my wealth with you in the land of my birth." He built a school for the people of his native village.
A little later his wife, Mrs. Grewall, offered to build a hospital, and it is now being built. The school was opened by one of the officials in the office of the high commissioner. There, I think, is a very practical example of citizenship at its best, the sort of citizenship that realizes that out of our own wealth, out of our own well-being, we must give some part to help those who are less fortunate and less well favoured.
This does not in any way mean that the government can abdicate responsibility for giving leadership, but I do think the people of Canada, if they were given the proper lead, would be ready to play a much more significant part in helping others by way of gifts from people to people.


Mr. Mclvor:: Mr. Chairman, I do not hesitate to congratulate the minister on increasing our gift to the Colombo plan by $8 million. I think that has been endorsed by all Canadians. But, Mr. Chairman, I am not going to get on the band wagon and say that we should give another $10 million or $20 million'. I do not forget that the Leader of the Opposition, the leader of the C.C.F. and others-and I agree thoroughly with them in their position have said that there should be an increase in the pensions of civil servants who are not getting enough to keep them living. I can give as examples some cases where they do not get two meals a day. I know the good book says that charity begins at home. I say it begins at home here with respect to the civil servants who have spent their lives in the service. I think of one man especially. He was a mail carrier. He is getting $85 a month, and he is keeping a wife who is ill. I think those civil servants have the first call. I am not going to vote for any increased contribution to the Colombo plan until these civil servants are taken care of.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I want to join with the
other hon. members who have spoken in support of the increase in the assistance to the Colombo plan this year. I do so because I feel that it is one of the most positive aspects of our Canadian foreign policy. It seems to point in the direction of the new diplomacy of economic assistance. Canada has come through various stages of assistance to underdeveloped countries since the war.
Supply-External Affairs After the war Canada took part in aid to Europe, which was largely based on the need for reconstruction in war-devastated areas. Then indirectly through the Marshall plan we rode on' the United States coat tails in further assistance to Europe. Today I feel that in the Colombo plan, in the program of mutual aid and technical assistance, we are pointing in the direction of an objective in the field of external affairs that is greatly to be desired, namely the time when we shall be able to match our program of military assistance with a program of technical and capital assistance.
The reason I wanted to say just a word at this time, Mr. Chairman, is that I feel that in the Colombo program we are making a real contribution to the moral aspects of the problem of international relations. It is a program that is carried out largely within the framework of the commonwealth. I have always felt that Canada's position as a member of the commonwealth of nations places her in a very favourable role so far as international affairs are concerned. But during a short stay at the United Nations last fall I was very much impressed to find that actually it is Canada's position as a commonwealth nation that gives us a role in world affairs, as one of the middle powers, far exceeding in importance that which our numerical and economic strength would otherwise justify. I think this commonwealth Colombo plan is evidence of the excellent contribution we can make in this regard.
The commonwealth is one of the few positive moral forces in world affairs today. We had the Earl of Home speak to us recently, and I was impressed as he gave us his interpretation of the new role of the commonwealth in world affairs. He referred to it as a positive moral force. He referred to it as a community of nations which is actually operating in that respect in this day when we are depending upon an atomic stalemate to give us a rather uneasy peace or, in the phrase often used by the minister, to establish a balance of terror. It is an encouraging aspect of Canada's foreign policy that we are able in this way to make a positive contribution to the role of Canada in world affairs. It is one that we trust we shall be able to increase as the years go by, as the immediate military emergency declines and as we are able to move into the more positive external affairs policy of providing economic assistance rather than military assistance on a large scale.
On this point, Mr. Chairman, there is just one question that I should like to present to the minister. In making personal contacts in the UN with members of the delegations

Supply-External Affairs from the southeast Asia countries, especially the members of parliament from those countries, I found that they had an extremely warm attitude toward Canada. We are not suspect in any way as a colonial power. Our background is absolutely beyond suspicion in that regard. We thus have a tremendous advantage in promoting the program of the west in that very important arena of world affairs.
However, I had pointed out to me by several of these representatives the fact that very little literature presenting the western viewpoint is available in cheap form. It would appear that the U.S.S.R. is making available all sorts of penny pamphlets telling of all the marvellous things the Soviet is doing or is intending to do in this new phase of foreign policy, of economic and technical assistance. These pamphlets are made available at a nominal sum to the millions of people in these Asiatic countries, and they are read avidly. They are mainly political tracts.
On the other hand, these people who have been in touch with the situation point out that there is available very little cheap literature presenting our side of the story. The only books they saw that would be within the price range of the ordinary people in those countries were our cheap paper-back novels. I am wondering whether that is a legitimate observation, and whether the Department of External Affairs has any interest in this particular problem.


Mr. Gillis:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say just a few words on this particular point. There are a great many things that I should like to have said on the minister's estimates, but some of us were tangled up with the labour estimates. At this stage of the session it is necessary to figure out where one is needed most. I figured that my main concern was at home, so I stayed with the Minister of Labour. I knew, of course, how well our interests in this department were being looked after by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre-


An hon. Member:: The hon. member for Winnipeg North.


Clarence Gillis: Yes; I mean the hon. member for Winnipeg North. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre is so prominent around here that everybody forgets that there is any other Winnipeg member.
The particular matter under discussion, namely the Colombo plan, is something that I believe we should think about a little bit more. I am not concerned about the amount of money, provided it is spent in the right manner and provided that the people who are

contributing it are getting some credit for doing so. I might say that I have always taken the position, and I always will, that the United Nations was set up for the purpose of handling all the problems of rehabilitation after the war and the maintenance of peace. That organization has within it all the machinery to take care of all the problems that we are attempting to sort out on a regional basis. Because we are getting away from the United Nations, in my judgment it not only weakens the United Nations but it will make for a lot of duplication and waste in the money that is appropriated for such purposes as economic aid under NATO or the Colombo plan which have separate administrations.
I am not so sure whether the ordinary people who are the recipients of such aid under the Colombo plan are getting the full benefit of it or whether the countries contributing are getting any credit for it. The history of aid for the last 15 years, at least in countries such as China and Egypt and others, has been that it has not paid off by way of friendships. The governments presently in power in those countries which need economic aid take the money and distribute it for their own purposes, so very little is made known to the people as to the country that was the source of the relief.
My main point in making that statement is this. If you take a look at the United Nations set-up you will find that, starting with the general assembly, the security council, the trustee council and those small bodies, which with their secretariat run the show, built around that organization there are committees and commissions designed to take care of every problem connected with rehabilitation and maintenance. I do not believe the scheme of taking pieces out of the U.N. and setting up duplicate organizations in every part of the world is going to strengthen the U.N. in the final analysis. In my judgment, the future peace of the world will hinge upon the proper operation of the United Nations as such. For example, if it is desired to distribute food to any part of the world, there is an adequate organization connected with the United Nations to take care of it, the world food organization. When it comes to building up and taking care of the children of the world, there is also a committee of the United Nations functioning for that purpose.
As the hon. member for Brandon-Souris said a moment ago, the Soviet union makes a lot of promises on paper. Canada and the other countries of the commonwealth contribute a great deal towards that children's fund through the United Nations. I have

seen a lot of films and a few magazine articles on this subject, but I have never yet seen a film in which there was one Canadian shown. It is always United States nurses, doctors and technicians. No other country has received any credit in any of the films or articles that I have seen, except the United States. Now, perhaps the United States is the only country that has doctors, nurses and technicians out in these far-flung parts of the world.
A moment ago the hon. member for Winnipeg North suggested that we could set up a citizen to citizen organization in this country through which we might make our contributions individually. Such an organization is already in existence, with all due respect to his efforts. There is a national organization now with headquarters in Ottawa at 106 O'Connor Street and that is known as CARE. I received a copy of their 10th anniversary report in the mail. It shows that in this very field in which the Colombo plan is working, in the last 10 years they have distributed some $7 million. This has gone towards providing some equipment, aid to children and general rehabilitation in those countries that require aid similar to that for which the Colombo plan was designed. So, there is an organization and that is the address. Anyone who wants to make a contribution to any section of the world in which relief is needed will find that is an international organization set up for that purpose. The hon. member for Winnipeg North did not get the co-operation of the church organization, but the parishioners who were ready to gather $1,000 can send it in to CARE and parcels will be made up and shipped to any section of the world where assistance is needed. I am only trying to help the hon. member, I am not criticizing.
Now, Mr. Chairman, that is about all I wanted to say. I wanted to stress that we should take advantage of those agencies that have been set up around the United Nations. If we have anything to contribute to any section of the world there are these trained people heading up these different committees and commissions of the United Nations through which we should channel our contribution. Any section of the world that is getting relief should get it through the United Nations. As I have said many times, I do not think putting people on relief, nation by nation, is going to make any friends for us. It is like backing a note at the bank for one of your friends. He may be a good fellow, but he generally defaults on that note. He resents you forever after, so you have lost a friend and you have lost your money. I think that is equally true of Canada putting India or some other section of the world on 67509-437
Supply-External Affairs relief. If the relief is given through some United Nations agency, the money is channelled through it and you avoid duplication. Then, too, the proper organization gets the credit. We all contribute to the United Nations. I wish I had been in the house earlier for the minister's estimates because there are several things I would have liked to say. I will not say them now because they might open up a whole new series of speeches.


Mr. Enfield:: I will not add to the length of the debate or the erudition of the discussion with the few remarks I wish to make. I just want to say a very few words-if that phrase has any meaning now-to put something on the record which I think might be worth putting on the record. This refers to a petition I received from a United Church. When my petitioners receive this copy of Hansard, which I will send them, perhaps they will read the remarks of the hon. member for Winnipeg North at the same time and perhaps his remarks will not fall on barren ground.
This is a petition from Washington United Church in Scarborough and reads as follows: Dear Mr. Enfield,
It has been brought to our attention that consideration is being given by the parliament of Canada to an increase of $9,000,000 in Canada's contribution to the Colombo plan. We, the undersigned members and adherents of Washington United Church, Scarborough, believing that moneys thus spent are well spent for peace, urge you to use your influence in support of this increase.
This petition is signed by over 51 members of the congregation and happily I was able to report to them that, although the increase was not $9 million it was $8 million and this is a very substantial increase indeed. I think this is the type of expression of opinion that is very important to us and very encouraging indeed. It comes to me unsolicited and as a complete surprise. It shows us all that the people of Canada

I think these people speak for the majority of the people in the country-are extremely interested in the type of help that we are giving under the Colombo plan, which is the finest type of help because it helps other people help themselves. I would encourage the government to carry on in their liberal attitude in this regard. I think we can spell "Liberal" with a large "L" and a small "1" in this context. The government should carry on its good work and gradually increase our contributions to the Colombo plan as long, of course, as they are consistent with common sense and good economy.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Just one question. I mentioned earlier that most of us were quite glad to see that the Colombo plan appropriation was increased by $1 million this year.

Supply-External Affairs As I recall what was said in the committee, actually this $8 million is not an increase for this year. As I understand it, most of this $8 million is to be expended on the atomic reactor to be built in Bombay, India. Actually, it will be spent in slightly more than two years. Therefore, there is not an $8-million appropriation for the coming year but rather it is to be spread over a period of time amounting to 28 months, I believe. Perhaps the minister might comment on that.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, before I deal with that last point I would just like to say that I am in hearty agreement with all of the things that have been said in the house as to the value of the Colombo plan, both in terms of international friendship, political co-operation and economic aid, so that the underdeveloped countries may be able to help themselves.
I agree with the hon. member for Cape Breton South that it is undesirable to duplicate activities of this kind, and when otherwise practicable it is a good thing to do everything we can through the United Nations. But there is room, I think, for a commonwealth initiative such as the Colombo plan. It has, in certain respects, some advantages over the multilateral aid under the United Nations; although I certainly do not think there is any contradiction between the two because, under the Colombo plan, we can make arrangements directly with the country that we are assisting. We can share with the experts, the technicians and the workers of that particular country the construction of the project in question, and I think that has some obvious advantages. But we must not expect to get credit for these things. If we do these things merely in the hope that we are going to get a lot of credit, as my hon. friend said, we will be disappointed.
I think he suggested that the United States, in some of the pictures he had seen, was getting all the attention and therefore getting all the credit. I think there are a lot of Americans who would question how much credit they are getting in some of their activities in this field. That brings me to the point made by the hon. member for Brandon-Souris on the desirability of publicizing more what we are doing and, I am sure he meant by "we" not only Canada but other countries of the western world. He had a very important point there. I have had personal experience of the inadequacy of our own side in this regard. It is quite true that when you travel through Asia, if you happen to stop at a station in India, in Pakistan or in any Asian country, you will see a lot of literature, Marxist literature, or communist propaganda 

literature sometimes disguised, that sells commercially for a penny or two. It is very hard for some of the people in those countries to pay more than a penny or two, and it is very hard for them to find any literature expressing our way of life for a penny or two. There is obviously some subsidizing going on. I have more than once interested myself in this aspect of our general propaganda activities and I have often expressed the hope that we could form amongst ourselves, not as a government enterprise, but as a private enterprise, some kind of international book society which would devote itself to the distribution of that kind of good western literature well below cost with a subsidy which would be received from official sources.
I have now to go from the sublime almost to the ridiculous. We have increased our vote for books and subscriptions for presentation this year from, I think, $2,000 to $10,000. Therefore, we have $8,000 more with which to distribute literature on this subject.
Then, there is the last point raised by the hon. member for Oxford. The increase-and I share in the general satisfaction expressed about this increase-is $8 million this year. It could be more. There could always be more; but I am glad we have $8 million more, and it will enable us, I think, to increase our activities under the Colombo plan, with the qualification that has already been expressed that one of the difficulties is getting suitable experts, technical people, to carry out the projects which we already have under way. That $8 million is for the financial year. It is an additional appropriation for one year, but under our system, which has been approved by parliament, any unexpended funds during the year can be carried over and I think we have already about $3 million unexpended funds from a previous appropriation. It is expected that this $8 million will be spent during the next year.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Just one question: Is that $8 million entirely for the atomic reactor?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Chairman. It is
thought that this $8 million will take care of our expenditures for the atomic reactor, and probably more than take care of items in the coming year; but it is not earmarked specifically for that purpose. If we had not received this increase this year it might have been more difficult for us to undertake this additional commitment.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I am sorry to keep labouring this point. I realize the hour is getting on.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Chairman, I want to go on but I shall wait until the noise stops. At

page 151 of the minutes of proceedings, No. 6, of the standing committee on external affairs, Mr. Cavell, in reply to a question of Mr. Michener, said:
No, it was last year. We had $25 million in the first two years and $26 million last year and that increase ol $1 million was provided tor technical assistance to countries to which we had not given technical assistance. The increase this year is from $26 million to $34 million and that takes care of the reactor to India which cost $7 million.


Lester Bowles Pearson: That is correct, Mr. Chairman. If we had not obtained that increase we would not have been able to accept this extra commitment for the reactor without cutting down on some of our others. We expect to spend about $5 million this year on the reactor; but I do not think there is anything inconsistent between what I have said and what my hon. friend has read. We did not earmark the $34 million for any specific project in whole or in part, or any part of that money; but without that $8 million we might have found difficulty in carrying out the existing projects in which we are engaged and adding to them.


Mr. Argue:: Mr. Chairman, I think there is general agreement in the house that the provision for aid under the Colombo plan is a good one. There are some of us who would like to see such provisions made through the United Nations. Whenever, for some reason or another, it does not appear feasible, we certainly support a commonwealth program like the Colombo plan.
I do not think that in the general field of economic assistance Canada is measuring up. I believe that in relation to the needs of the world, in relation to the needs of democracy, in relation to Canada's ability to provide assistance, we are doing a dismally poor job. Even with the increase in the Colombo plan provision our contribution is just over $2 per capita for the year under review. It is something less than one-seventh of one per cent of our gross national product.
I was amazed at the remarks of the hon. member for Fort William when he said that as far as he himself was concerned until the government did something to improve the lot of a certain group of Canadians he was opposed to any further increase in provisions under the Colombo plan.
I do not think any modern nation would be making progress in the world today if its governing representatives took the attitude that until a given situation were improved they would not do anything to help anybody. I think the hon. member's view is one that is not shared by a majority of Canadians.
I have taken some interest in the Colombo plan for some time. I do not know all the
67509-437J
Supply-External Affairs details concerning how it operates but I am aware that certain allocations have been made to counterpart funds, as they are called, in the past. According to the minutes of the external affairs committee for June 7, 1955, steam locomotives valued at $23; million were sent to India and the account had been set up as a counterpart fund. The same is true of trucks, buses and workshop machinery valued at $4 million, copper and aluminum valued at $5 million, and so on. Under the Colombo plan in the past certain provisions of grain have been made to India totalling $15 million, to Pakistan totalling $5 million and flour valued at $1,300,000 was sent to Ceylon.
I would like to learn from the minister what has been done recently under the Colombo plan to explore with India, Pakistan, Ceylon aid other nations that participate in the plan the possibility and practicability of making additional funds available for the purchase of food from Canada and the provision of that food along the same lines followed in the past.
There can be no argument to the effect that Canada does not have the food. The crop year is just ending and while these are tentative estimates it has been estimated that even with the increased sales in the crop year just ended the carryover of Canadian wheat will be up some 23 million bushels. Although the prospects for a large Canadian crop of wheat were rather doubtful six weeks ago it now appears that if good weather conditions prevail over the next four weeks the chances are this year Canada will produce only slightly less wheat than was produced last year. There is no question about our not having an abundance of wheat. The question is, can India use additional quantities of wheat?
India is not receiving any wheat from Canada now. In the crop year just ended India did not purchase a single bushel of wheat from Canada for the first time in many years. In 1951 India obtained 18 million bushels of wheat from Canada, 14 mih lion in 1952, 4 million in 1953 and in the period 1954-55 the purchase dropped to 2.3 million bushels.
From information I have been able to obtain I believe India wants more wheat and needs more food. As a matter of fact, an associated press report which appeared in Canadian newspapers on June 28 last indicated:
India today announced its decision to open negotiations with the United States for the purchase of 3 million tons of wheat worth more than $200 million.

Supply-External Affairs
That would amount to negotiations tor "the purchase of a quantity in excess of 100 million bushels of wheat. The report went [DOT]on to say:
Informed sources said India hopes to obtain as .much wheat as possible under the U.S. surplus program which would enable India to pay rupees and then borrow the money back for economic development projects.
It would appear from this report that India is entering into negotiations with the United States to obtain a large quantity of United States wheat under precisely the same type of arrangement by which India purchased substantial quantities of wheat from Canada a few years ago.
I am asking the minister if the Colombo plan officials have discussed with India and other nations involved in the plan whether they need additional food and whether the Canadian government would be prepared to provide additional funds in order that such food may be made available?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, we have discussed with the Indian, Pakistani and Ceylon governments on accasion the provision of food under the Colombo plan and it has been agreed that the Colombo plan should not be used for that purpose except in a case of emergency and that it should be restricted to its original aim which was the provision of capital and technical assistance.
It is quite true that we have provided Pakistan and India with wheat-I think in 1952 and 1953-for which counterpart funds were set up, but those were during emergency food conditions. I think there was a famine condition in India at that time and we were requested by India as an exception to the agreed principle to provide food under the Colombo plan. They have made it quite clear to us that normally they would prefer to receive our help under the plan in the form of capital and technical assistance.
One form that assistance takes is in irrigation and power projects. We have participated in such projects. The irrigation part of these projects makes possible the growth of food in the country concerned. We have made it possible notably in the Mayurakshi project, for hundreds of thousands of agricultural acres to be brought under cultivation. In the long run that is of much more help to India than sending food directly from Canada.
It is also my information that India had a good crop this year and does not require wheat to meet the needs of her own people. She may have made a special arrangement under advantageous financial circumstances with the United States; however, I am not aware of it. The Colombo plan was not
fMr. Argue.]
designed for this purpose and we have been told by the three governments in question that they would much prefer our contribution to take the form of capital and technical assistance under the Colombo plan.


Hazen Robert Argue: I do not know whether or not the minister understood my question. I was not asking him whether the money now appropriated under the Colombo plan or any part of it could be used for the purchases I referred to. I can well understand the position of India that they would be prepared to tighten their belts today in order to go forward with irrigation and other development projects in order that they might have an abundance of food in the future.
My question was this. Has any consideration been given in discussions with India as to whether she would purchase substantial quantities of grain from this country if our government were prepared to allocate funds in addition to the funds that are now being discussed?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry if I misunderstood my hon. friend. To my knowledge we have not discussed additional funds to be provided under the Colombo plan for this particular purpose with any Colombo plan government.


Hazen Robert Argue: Did I understand the minister to say when he was speaking formerly that India has no need for wheat in the immediate future? If that is the case, is the minister saying that India is not now undertaking negotiations with the United States for the purchase of an extremely large quantity of wheat, namely over 100 million bushels?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, I did not say that, Mr. Chairman. I am not acquainted with that particular negotiation. When the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce are under discussion they will deal with exports of wheat specifically and my hon. friend can no doubt obtain some information concerning that aspect of the question.
All I have said is that while we are anxious to sell wheat wherever we can, and India is included in the countries with which we would like to do business, I have been informed that India had a good crop year and this makes it unlikely that she would want to obtain much wheat from Canada.
I went on to say that we had not discussed with India or any other country an increase of this kind to our appropriations under the Colombo plan because the Colombo plan was not designed for that purpose. The Colombo plan was designed for the provision of technical and capital assistance.

Supply-External Affairs


Hazen Robert Argue: Someone in the government is falling down very badly. I am surprised that, with the plans under the Colombo plan, such a discussion, at any rate an exploratory discussion, has not taken place. The minister said that India does not require wheat, but in the crop year just ended a few days ago, according to the very latest report, whilst India did not purchase a single bushel of Canadian wheat in that crop year, it purchased from the United States 10,170,000 bushels and from Australia 6,170,000 bushels. So India is buying wheat. India is buying wheat from countries other than Canada, and India is now, according to this report, having discussions with the United States to get a very large quantity of wheat and on precisely the same kind of terms as Canada dealt with India a few years ago.


Mr. Low:: I am interested in this discussion between the minister and the hon. member for Assiniboia. I have been interested in the Colombo plan for years. I am very glad to see the increase in the appropriation. I believe that it will be all to the good to make available larger funds for the work which, the minister said, is so well in hand. I am also inclined to believe that the Colombo plan was never designed for the purpose of distributing relief foods for other products. I can understand the anxiety of the hon. member for Assiniboia in the light of the fact that we have a very large surplus of wheat in our country.


Hazen Robert Argue: And these negotiations with the United States.


Solon Earl Low: And the negotiations that have gone on with the United States, but I am also of the opinion that the distribution of surplus products and commodities ought to take place through such an organization as was envisaged by the Food and Agriculture Organization a few years ago: an international commodity clearing house. Until we get such an organization set up and working effectively, I am afraid that we shall go on as we are at the present time, with countries needing and going without while other countries have their large surpluses, and perhaps surpluses that may eventually be destroyed or deteriorate. If we press more strongly for the international commodity clearing house, which was turned down some years ago-


Hazen Robert Argue: And by this government.


Solon Earl Low: Unfortunately, it was not pressed too strongly by the government.


Hazen Robert Argue: The government opposed it.


Solon Earl Low: But I can quite understand the position of the minister in connection with the Colombo plan. These funds are made
available more for capital assistance, the purpose being to make it possible for the people who are the beneficiaries of the plan to help themselves; not so much to bring relief at the moment. I think that is what they want: capital assistance, the building of works, increasing their capability of production. I think that is right. I can understand why the minister would hesitate to offer much encouragement that we could distribute our surplus wheat under the Colombo plan, but I think the hon. member for Assiniboia is quite right in pressing for the recognition of a need there. That need is growing, and it seems to be daily more impressive.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: In the meantime they should! have all the bread they need.


Solon Earl Low: I think that is correct. As long as there is surplus food in the world, certainly it should be made available through some means to the needy people. There is great virtue in some of the things said by the hon. member for Winnipeg North earlier this afternoon. He thought that gifts of produce, foods and other things, from people to people would be the ideal arrangement. I think it would be, too, if you could get the people to do it.
We have got into the habit of looking to the government for almost everything. If anything goes wrong, we say that the government is to blame. However, frankly I believe that such a thing as providing relief to other nations could very well be undertaken by private agencies and the citizens of a country where the surpluses exist. I can see the possibility of forming an organization of the people themselves. That has been done; I have seen it done. Our people for many years -and when I say "our people" I mean my own church group in particular-have formed what we call a church welfare program. Under that program we co-operate in building up a stockpile of all kinds of produce. That is not the general stockpile of the nation; that is supplementary to the stockpiles of the nation, one we build up as a consequence of a co-operative effort amongst ourselves and in our spare time. That is set aside, put into warehouses and prepared thoroughly; what has to be preserved is preserved, and so on. We had done this for years and, when world war II was over, within hours we had trainloads of those goods on their way to the seaboard where they were trans-shipped and sent to Europe and distributed as from our people to the people there who needed them. There was no thought of getting credit for it. We thought only of making available to those people, out of the surplus of goods we had, enough to keep them from starving.

Supply-External Affairs
That principle is good. It is a sound principle, and particularly what it would do for the people who produce and made available the commodities is something we cannot possibly estimate. It would be far more effective than if we looked to the government to do it all. Just the same, in relation to this business of distributing surpluses of produce, particularly foods, throughout the world, we need the international commodity clearing house set up. The sooner we can get it, the better it will be. I commend the minister and his department on what they have been doing with regard to the Colombo plan. It has been something you could not have done through the United Nations, with all the intransigence of some of the members of the United Nations. It is filling a tremendous need, and the people who are the beneficiaries of it are remembering that Canada is putting up a sizeable sum of money each year, which can be increased, I am sure, as technical assistance and technical direction are made available so that the money is properly spent. I agree with that principle.


John George Diefenbaker: I had not intended to
say anything on this matter until my hon. friend from Assiniboia raised this rather interesting suggestion. However, since he has done so, I should possibly say, to begin with, that over the years I have been a most strong supporter on behalf of an increase in the amounts being expended under the Colombo plan.
I have a strong recollection of an occasion in 1951 when, having been in Australia and New Zealand and having met there with representatives of India, Ceylon and countries in the other commonwealth areas in Asia, I returned to Canada and asked that the amount then being expended on behalf of the Colombo plan, which was $25 million, should be doubled if Canada was to take its place among the nations of the commonwealth in preserving and maintaining our defences against the on-rush of communism. Over and over again at the parliamentary conference in Australia and New Zealand the representatives of those countries warned us that, unless material assistance of this type was forthcoming, in a few years communism, by its propaganda and by its promises of improving the economic lot of the peoples of those countries, would make invasions into the hearts and souls of the peoples of those countries to a degree that might never be retrieved by the free world.
Having said that, I come to the suggestion of my hon. friend with regard to wheat marketing. I am at one with him that we should do anything that is necessary in order to secure markets for our surplus products,

and in particular for our wheat. However, from that point on I do not follow the same path as he has followed. He suggests that we should get into line with what the United States is doing. To me that is a dangerous course to follow.
What the United States is doing is simply this. With its vast surpluses of wheat, cotton and the like it is going to underprivileged areas in various parts of the world, making available amounts of these surpluses and receiving a credit in the form of local guarantees and then using these local guarantees for economic assistance in those countries. What the United States is doing in fact by that policy is breaking up the markets for farm commodities all over the world. It is part and parcel of its giveaway, fire sale assistance agricultural policy.


Solon Earl Low: That is where an orderly system of international distribution would be helpful.


John George Diefenbaker: Some aspects of the
Uniied States disposal plan mean disorderly distribution. The plan is having its effect and to some degree has disturbed Canada's markets for agricultural products in various parts of the world. I believe that the only way in which we can hope to compete against that policy so dangerous to Canadian agriculture would be through the medium of advances to these NATO countries with which advances purchases of our wheat and other products can be made.
What we have been condemning has been the United States attitude of going throughout the world without regard to its responsibilities under GATT and NATO and under the guise of this plan undermining our markets for agricultural products. I think it would be a dangerous course to follow to endeavour to emulate the United States in this regard. What I believe should be done is to protest to the United States government, as members on this side of the house have asked over and over again, against a policy so dangerous to the maintenance of a free economy among the free nations and so detrimental to those countries that are joined together in freedom in the marketing of their agricultural products.
In saying that I am all for the objective that the hon. gentleman has in mind, but I must say that I believe that for us to imitate the United States in this regard would be detrimental and dangerous to future farm markets, in particular markets for Canada's wheat, and would be using the Colombo plan in a manner that was never contemplated.
One of the aspects of the Colombo plan to which our attention was directed by representatives from India and Pakistan was

that the cost of transportation of wheat and wheat products was so high as to render practically useless the importation of these commodities except in emergency cases. What they wanted was some form of material assistance that would enable them in their own countries to transform areas at present unproductive into productive areas, thereby enabling them to meet their own needs.
While I am altogether in favour of the objective of the hon. gentleman, I am afraid that in adopting the course he has suggested we would be in fact following a course which we have been condemning on the part of the United States and with respect to which I for one have suggested over and over again to the government that the strongest note should be sent to the United States government indicating that by that course they are undermining the free economy of the world and denying Canada and other nations joined with them in freedom the opportunity to maintain the strongest and most effective agricultural organizations.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: I believe that the hon. member for Assiniboia perhaps did not understand what I said. Probably an Irishman needs a second chance to make himself clear. I congratulated the minister on the increase of $8 million. I support the United Nations completely, just as strongly as anybody in the house, but I think that next year we should give the first consideration to retired civil servants who have not got enough to live on. I support that before I will support any further increase in our contribution to the Colombo plan over and above the $8 million. I think that is quite clear.


Hazen Robert Argue: I think the member for Prince Albert has completely misunderstood and misinterpreted what I have said. He said, as I understood him, that I was advocating the same kind of policy as the United States, and I said nothing of the sort.


John George Diefenbaker: I thought you did.


Hazen Robert Argue: I said nothing of the sort because, as I believe the hon. member for Prince Albert well knows, the Americans do not have just the one so-called give-away policy but have policies under three different acts of congress.


John George Diefenbaker: That is one of the means.


Hazen Robert Argue: This is not a give-away program at all. According to the report I read to the house, the Americans are not giving anything away. It is not a give-away. All the indignation that the member for Prince Albert was able to generate was completely misdirected because I did not say anything like what he said I did. However, if you
Supply-External Affairs are going to say that the whole United States policy is wrong and that Canada should not do any of the things the United States is doing-I emphasize "any"-then it means that we say to the nations of the world that unless they have hard currency, unless they have dollars, they can starve to death because we are going to keep our wheat until they find the dollars.
I do not agree with that kind of policy. We have lost the Indian market for Canadian wheat. In the last crop year just ended a couple of days ago we did not sell or send a single bushel of Canadian wheat to India, and that is what I think is wrong. I think we should adopt policies that will not only enable us to dispose of Canadian grain but will also enable us to do our part to see that the people of India, who are hungry and need grain, have a chance to obtain grain.
I want to say that the farm organizations support this point of view. The Saskatchewan wheat pool, the Alberta wheat pool, the Manitoba wheat pool and the Interprovincial Farm Union Council support this point of view. They say that wherever a nation is in need of wheat and has not the currency- the dollars-with which to purchase the wheat, Canada should negotiate with such country to the end that we may be able to accept their currency and to provide them with a reasonable quantity of Canadian wheat over a period of time. That is precisely, as I understand it, what India is endeavouring to do with the United States. It is the same thing precisely as we did under the Colombo plan a few years ago, namely provide wheat, set up counterpart funds and pay the Canadian producer for the wheat and by that means assist in economic aid and economic development.
I want to assure the hon. member for Prince Albert that I had no intention of saying that we should adopt the United States wheat policy, and I do not believe the record will show that I said that.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, may I say just one word. I am surprised at the use of the expression "indignation". There was no indignation. It was simply argument. When my hon. friend says that this is the plan of the farmers union and these other organizations, may I say that I do not believe that it is. What these organizations said is this. They said that we should take foreign currencies-that is soft currencies-for our wheat and sell for those currencies. But what the United States is doing is accepting the currency of India-and then using that currency in India for the amelioration of conditions in India. That is quite a different

Supply-External Affairs proposition from the one that has been advanced on the part of the organizations to which my hon. friend has made reference. What this plan on the part of the United States simply amounts to is this: The United States has available many millions of dollars for economic assistance abroad. It says to the countries In question, in effect:	We are
going to give you this assistance. You accept our wheat or other surplus agricultural products. We will take your money. Then we will use that money within your territory, within the limitations imposed by the agricultural laws of the United States, in order to raise conditions and to improve the economic lot of your country. What it amounts to, in fact, is that the United States is granting direct assistance to those countries in the billions of dollars. It uses this means as one of three methods to assist needy nations and at the same time dispose of its surpluses.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
114. Contribution to the United Nations relief and works agency for Palestine refugees in the Near East, $500,000.
John George Diefenbaker: This is a contribution for a grant to the United Nations relief and works agency for Palestine refugees in the Near East. In this regard I should like to ask the minister what if any advance has been made during the last year to meet the extremely serious problem created by these refugee camps in Arab countries. As one visits these camps one cannot but be impressed by the need for their existence while at the same time realizing that they constitute festering sores among the individuals occupying them. Has any advance been made in the last year towards the demobilization of these refugee people? How many were in these camps a year ago? To what degree has there been any decrease during the last year? Has the minister any message of hope that this, one of the darkest blots on the probability of maintaining peace in the middle east, may be obliterated and removed?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, I am more anxious than confident about the nature of this problem and a solution if it. As my hon. friend has said, it is a desperate problem. It is a desperate problem economically for those concerned and it is a dangerous problem politically. In those refugee camps in Palestine I think there are about 905,000 refugees. I think that number is greater than it was when this problem first faced us. The contributions that are being made to this fund are for the purpose of relief, in order to keep these refugees alive, and also for the more constructive purpose of rehabilitation and resettlement. Not so much has been done

in the latter category because the activities that have been under way for purposes of rehabilitation and resettlement have been bedevilled by the political difficulties which it seems will have to be solved before rehabilitation can take place. Some progress has been made by the agency in developing a works program-the Sinai Works Program- and some refugees have been settled in works projects of one kind and another. But there has been a very inadequate response to the challenge of this problem. The larger project of the Jordan dam which would take care of a good many of these refugees and give them employment is not likely to be implemented as long as political conditions remain as unhappy as they are. With great reluctance I say that we feel that in making a contribution to this problem now we are not making a very constructive one because about all we are doing is keeping these people alive. However, someone must do that. We must hope that future developments will make possible both rehabilitation and resettlement. So far as resettlement is concerned, that aspect of the problem is complicated by the fact that the refugees themselves want to go back to Israel. There is not room there for all of them, in and around Israel, and I doubt whether it is possible to find a solution by wholesale repatriation there, although the state of Israel has agreed to receive some. The other way to solve this problem of resettlement is to find other parts of the world-that is of the Arab world and other places-where they might be resettled. The refugees themselves are showing great reluctance to leave the camps for that purpose and are not being encouraged to do so by the Arab governments. That is all I can say, Mr. Chairman. I am afraid it is not a very encouraging report.


Mr. Caslleden:: I should like to ask the minister this question. Is there any possibility of increasing the amount so that these people can get a more adequate allowance than they are getting at the present time? According to reports that we receive-and there has been very excellent commentation here through the C.B.C. recently-it is not adequate. Is there any possibility of United Nations increasing this amount so that these people will not be left so much on the verge of starvation? Apparently the amount that is given is, according to our standards, terrifically low.


Lester Bowles Pearson: That is true, Mr. Chairman; but my information is that the condition of the refugees in the camps-though rather deplorable, no doubt, when comparison is made with our own standards-is as good as if not better than that of those Arabs in the

same position outside the camps. I do not think there is any foundation for the stories that go around to the effect that the refugees in these camps are on starvation diets, and that sort of thing. That is not the case. They are not badly looked after.


Solon Earl Low: Mr. Chairman, I can vouch for the truth of what the minister has just said. All one has to do is to visit some of the Arab settlements that are outside the camps. He will see that those who are inside the camps or the compounds are not being too badly treated by comparison. Indeed, the horrible thing about the camps is that these people are deteriorating year by year. They have been in there now since 1948 and they have become completely dependent. As the minister said, it grows worse daily. It looks to me as though the United Nations organization will have to be prepared to spend a considerable sum of money in developing some settlement schemes in Syria, Jordan and the other Arab states.
One of the things it seems to me they could be doing is to develop the potential irrigation projects out of the waters that come down from northern Syria. There is a lot of land that could be irrigated and made habitable for these people. If they are given a chance to settle on a piece of land where there is some water, I feel quite sure that in a few years at least they will put themselves on an equal basis with the Arab peoples elsewhere. I am quite sure that Israel is not prepared to take them back, not only because there is no room but because a good many of these people took up arms against the government of Israel in the war of liberation in 1948 and therefore are guilty of treason in the true sense of the word, so they could hardly take them back. This does not for one moment, or should not at any rate, militate against every effort being made to see that they are being rehabilitated in a proper manner.
I can understand what a difficult problem it is when you can get the full co-operation of the governments of the Arab states, but you have not got it. How you are to get it is a problem. May I right here issue a word of warning? We in the western world have done so much now to lose the friendship of the Arab states generally that I think we had better be careful of the sort of sanctions we attempt to impose for the purpose of getting this rehabilitation complete. Just the same, it is a great humanitarian problem that has to be solved somehow.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply

External Affairs
115. To provide for the cost of Canada's participation as a member of the international commissions for supervision and control in Indo-China including authority, notwithstanding the Civil Service Act, for the appointment and fixing of salary rates of commissioners, secretaries and staff by the governor in council; and to ratify the appointments made by the governor in council to the said commissions and the salaries relating thereto fixed by the governor in council prior to the current fiscal year, $564,500.
John George Diefenbaker: I should like to ask the
minister in this regard what the present position of Canada's supervisory commission or the members of it is. Were they not supposed to leave at the end of two years and has that period not expired? Has there been any culmination of the idea that there should be elections between the peoples of north and south Viet Nam? Is it or is it not a fact that what is taking place there, in the continuing delays and procrastinations imposed by the communists, is just another example of duplicity on their part?


Lester Bowles Pearson: We had hoped that we would have discharged our responsibilities in IndoChina by now as a member of the international commission, but that has not been possible. As my hon. friend knows, there are three commissions. The one in Cambodia has had its activities reduced greatly. Military teams have been disbanded and we have merely a skeleton military and external affairs staff in the capital. We would, I think, have been able to withdraw completely from Cambodia by now but for the fact there is a connection in the Geneva agreement between the three commissions.
The commission in Laos has not been able to complete its work because of the difficulty of absorbing the two northern provinces now under Pathet Lao communist control into the state of Laos. The commission is doing its best to bring that about because if these provinces remain under communist control and the communists become established there, it would be an unhappy development.
So far as the Viet Nam commission is concerned, under the Geneva arrangement elections were to have been held by July 20 of this year, this has not been possible because the government of South Viet Nam, the Diem government, has not been willing to accept the legal responsibilities that were accepted by the French under the Geneva agreement. French troops and French authorities have now withdrawn from South Viet Nam. Negotiations are going on now by which we hope the Diem government will accept in practice, if not in theory, certain responsibilities under the Geneva agreement which will enable the commission to carry on. The other difficulty is the understandable reluctance on the part of the Diem government to take part
6880	HOUSE OF
Supply-External Affairs in any elections unless they can be given absolute assurance that these will be free elections, in our meaning of the word. They have no confidence whatever in the co-operation of the communist authorities in the north in bringing that about.
So it looks, Mr. Chairman, as if we may be in Viet Nam for some months. We have an obligation to stay there as long as the commission is able to do a useful job in preserving peace and stability in that area. There are about 170 Canadians still in Indo-China.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Edward Turney Applewhaite: Supplementary estimates-item 616.


John George Diefenbaker: Is this the item on departmental administration?


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Yes, this is for departmental administration.
616. Departmental administration-further amount required, $121,199.


John George Diefenbaker: That is what I thought. My hon. friend the hon. member for Broadview brought up a question some hours ago with regard to the treatment accorded to Mr. Milan Babic, who was travelling on a Canadian passport and who, according to the telegram my hon. friend read to the committee this afternoon, was forced to submit to two hours of interrogation. In addition to that, he had to wait overnight until word was received from Washington to permit of his clearance being granted. I should like to know from the minister what justification there is for more than a mere cursory examination being made of a person travelling under a Canadian passport, having arrived in the United States and having no intention to do more than pass through the United States to his Canadian destination. Is such a person not entitled to receive more courteous and considerate treatment than was accorded to this man? According to the Associated Press dispatch from New York on July 31, this man's name was on a list which called for close check by the service. A spokesman said a name may be placed on the list for 101 reasons. Sir, most of us would be satisfied with one of those reasons being explained.
Why was this man treated in this way? Does a Canadian passport not convey to the holder certain rights which were apparently violated in this case? Was this an examination that applied to a Canadian any of the principles of McCarthyism? Why should a Canadian, once the Canadian government has seen fit, through its Secretary of State for External Affairs, to grant him a passport, be required to be examined as to whether or not he is a fit and proper person, since he has been so designated and considered by the
[Mr. Pearson.l

Canadian government, before a passport is issued? I would appreciate it if the minister would advise the committee of the latest information on this question, because it is one that has aroused a considerable amount of feeling in our country. I am sure that such feelings should be appeased at the earliest possible date.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, as I advised the house, I have already sent a telegram to this naturalized Canadian in order to get his version of the facts as they have been related in the press. So far as I know a reply to that telegram has not yet been received, although I have had a chance to see the telegram that he sent to my hon. friend opposite who brought this matter up earlier. I would say that on the basis of the information that I have already received there appears to be no justification whatever for the treatment that was given this shipwrecked Canadian when he reached New York.
Of course, the possession of a Canadian passport does not give anyone immunity from the investigations and the attentions of the representative and the officials of a foreign government once the holder of that Canadian passport reaches the land of that foreign government. As I said yesterday, the United States has the legal right to question and to detain anybody on its soil. A legal right is one thing, propriety and justice are something else. I do not feel that the United States authorities should have taken the action they did take in these circumstances. We have been informed by those authorities that he was treated and questioned with courtesy. In that respect the information which appeared in the press does not coincide with that which we have been given by the officials of the United States government.
We were also informed, Mr. Chairman, that this particular man, for some reason or other and I do not know why-was on some security list of the United States and that was why he was singled out for this special attention. After the case was cleared up, I believe through intervention from Washington, he was allowed to proceed.
I am not going to challenge the right of any government to detain any foreigner on its soil if it has a legitimate reason for detaining him on security grounds. But we have no reason to believe that this particular Canadian was a security risk in any country. He is certainly not on any security list of ours, and therefore I regret very much that he should have been subjected to this kind of treatment. After we hear from Mr. Babic himself, if the facts of his own message indicate that it should be done, we shall

follow this matter up by protesting to the United States authorities in Washington.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
617. To provide for the Canadian government's assessment for membership in international (including commonwealth) organizations, as detailed in the estimates, including authority to pay the amounts specified in the currencies of the countries indicated, notwithstanding that the payments may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of May, 1956-further amount required, $160,491.
John Horne Blackmore: Is this the item under which the minister was going to answer questions that I asked a few minutes ago about the package deal?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to go into this matter at this particular moment in very great detail and I wonder whether my hon. friend, who is always so considerate in these matters, would agree if I sent him a pretty full and complete written report on this whole question of the package deal? I will, however, say to him now in answer to his particular questions, that the policy of the government in this matter was stated long before the United Nations assembly met in New York and therefore we were not, as he rather suggested this morning, doing something behind the backs of the people of this country, who had no reason to believe that we were taking this stand.
I said previous to the assembly of last year that we supported the principle of universality of membership. So we did support at the United Nations assembly all outstanding applications for membership in the United Nations except those on behalf of states which were divided. Those applications included some strongly anti-communist states like Japan, Italy,. Spain, Austria and Ireland. It included some states that we call now uncommitted, and it included some communist states. In order to get our friends into the United Nations-and we thought they certainly should be there-Japan was one of them-we had to accept the whole list that I have mentioned, and an arrangement was made that all of those countries should be brought into the United Nations at this time. That arrangement was not carried out because the government of nationalist China, at the security council, vetoed Outer Mongolia, and because of that fact the Soviet union vetoed Japan. But the rest of them were admitted, and I think, with respect to my hon. friend, there is a good deal to be said-notwithstanding the views we may have about the governments of some of those countries-for having them as sovereign states in the United Nations. At least that is the view that we took at that time.
Supply-External Affairs


John Horne Blackmore: Mr. Chairman, I have no desire to be difficult about this matter. I shall welcome the full statement that the minister will send me but I do believe the people of Canada are entitled to be able to read some details in Hansard about this whole experience we went through, especially as we find such statements as the one I propose to quote from the Daily Mirror of New York of December 15, 1955, which in an editorial referring to this matter of the package deal said:
It was an obvious, childish trick to get Red China into the United Nations by subterfuge.
This paper is not a minor paper in the United States; I think it has over 2 million circulation and is rather reputable. The editor and the staff were right there where they were able to follow the whole situation right through. This particular editorial, which is entitled, "The United Nations Veto", closes with these words:
Canada is also at fault for serving Russia's purposes, even if unwittingly.
This is a pretty strong indication, I would say, that it is important to have some explanation. Here is another editorial entitled, "Suggestion for Dulles". I do not know whether this is the same paper-no, it is another paper. It is one called The News. In its editorial are these words, reporting Nationalist China's delegate T. F. Tsiang:
As U.N. Nationalist China delegate T. F. Tsiang says, four of these are nothing but captive nations of the red slave empire:	Albania, Bulgaria,
Hungary and Romania.
By letting them in, Dr. Tsiang adds, the U.N. in effect recognized their present robber governments and promised never to lift a finger to help free these enslaved peoples. For that, Tsiang doubts the slaves "will ever forgive us".
As I said before the committee recessed for lunch, it looks to me as though in recognizing Mongolia we recognized first of all that red Russia has a claim to Mongolia which I do not see how she can possibly establish, and second that she has a right to take any province of Russia and erect it into an independent nation and have it admitted to the United Nations.
Under such a rule it ought to be possible for the United States to gain admission to the United Nations for everyone of the 48 states and Alaska as independent nations. It also ought to be possible for Canada to gain admission for every one of the ten provinces in this country; but I will wager that if we made a request or even hinted that Ontario, for example, should be admitted into the United Nations there would be plenty of protest forthcoming from Russia and many other nations.

Supply-External Affairs
That is a serious principle, too. In addition to that, the admission of outer Mongolia into the United Nations is tantamount to saying that this section of territory no longer belongs to nationalist China and she has no claim to it whatever.
Every one of the assumptions I have mentioned is an unsound assumption. No matter how we may look at it, there is still in effect a state of war between nationalist China and red China because they have never come to terms nor agreed to a treaty. That is a serious matter. If we are going to go forward in the world with any principles of international fair dealing we will have to give consideration to matters of this kind.
There has been a great deal of suggestion on the part of Canadian authorities-more or less veiled, ambiguous and in a form that could be denied-and a great deal of pressure for the recognition of red China. It is pointed out that Great Britain has recognized red China and consequently we should do the same. I feel that in the interests of international fair dealing and the stability of moral principles we should draw up a standard and a set of principles which would have to be met by a nation in order to have it be worthy of recognition and admission to the United Nations.
I do not believe communist China could qualify under any combination of valid principles as being worthy of entering the United Nations. I have no desire to labour this point but those people who are interested in pursuing this matter in a scientific way might with some profit read my House of Commons speech of April 21, 1955 and my House of Commons speech of May 5, 1955. They will find plenty of evidence and authorities to back up my statements. I will challenge any man on earth to question the conclusions which are drawn in those two speeches or the authorities which are used.
They show beyond a question of doubt that China was simply stolen from Chiang Kai-shek. Communists and members of the United States communist organization, working through the United States state department, are guilty of robbing Chiang Kai-shek of China. There is evidence beyond any possibility of question that such was the case. In the light of those considerations I say that while the minister has given a reply it is far from being an adequate answer. I think it leaves the whole international situation absolutely awash. No community of people knows where it stands.
Personally I object to Canada being a party to the recognition of principles which in the history of this world up to the present time have never been deemed valid by any

reputable nation. People may say, "Well, the reds are in charge of China; they are the government de facto. What are you going to do about it?" This amounts to saying that if a gang of robbers carries off 1,000 steers into the mountains and holds them there for a year the gang of robbers owns the steers. I do not think anyone will recognize any validity in that assumption.
Now, may I say a word or two concerning what did occur in connection with China? I do not wish to go into too much detail concerning what did occur in connection with China but one or two of these considerations must be taken into account, it seems to me. Franklin D. Roosevelt at the Yalta conference in February 1945 granted Stalin rights to Manchuria which gave Stalin a chance to overrun all of China unless China was ably assisted by those countries she had already befriended, such as the United States.
What conceivable right had Roosevelt, who was visiting from the United States, to make any commitments whatsoever in respect of land which he had no right to by any conceivable stretch of the imagination? Fundamentally, however, it was that commitment upon which Russia acted and this put Chiang Kai-shek in a set of circumstances from which it would have been difficult to extricate himself.
Harry S. Truman followed up that course of action at the Potsdam conference and confirmed that commitment. Again, what right had Truman doing that? From that point on some of the most treacherous manipulations, scheming and downright interference from the United States took place, as in the case of General Marshall, who was sent over to China in 1946 by the United States administration with the express mission of stopping Chiang Kai-shek from driving the red communists back into Russia.
By the most disreputable and disgraceful set of actions, the United States, under the guidance of Dean Acheson, succeeded in putting Chiang Kai-shek into a position in which he had to withdraw to Formosa. Then apparently the Korean war was brought on by the administration of the U.S.A. with the calculated purpose of giving the United States an excuse for putting the U.S. seventh fleet in the strait so that Chiang Kai-shek could not possibly go back to the Chinese mainland and recover it, notwithstanding the fact that, when Chiang Kai-shek withdrew, he left 1,250,000 loyal, fully-trained soldiers in China, facing the communists there, he left 150 million loyal Chinese on the west and southern borders of China, and with his navy he was able to blockade and prevent ships from going up and supplying the north red

China people with munitions, and with his air force of 250 aircraft he was able to deliver goods to support his 1,250,000 soldiers on the Chinese mainland.
There are people who revolt at the idea of saying that the south Korean war was engineered. The evidence to support that presumption is so strong that I believe that any judge of any reputation whatsoever would rule that, on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the south Korean war was engineered, by the United States administration and for no purpose whatsoever other than to prevent Chiang Kai-shek from getting back on the Chinese mainland and reconquering China, and at the same time also to let Russia get control of south Korea.
I do not wish to labour this any further but I certainly think that we should have no more tormenting and tantalizing of any Canadian government official, from the Prime Minister right down, urging that red China be recognized. The Chinese are just a group of red robbers. They do not undertake to keep any treaty. What they are doing now in Burma, according to the reports, if we can rely on them, indicates that what I have said is true, that they are just a lot of robbers. I think I have said enough to show that I have good reason for bringing this matter up. I shall take up the minister's promise and accept the material he sends me and read it through with great care, and probably next year I shall talk to him again about this matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Terminable services-
619. To provide for a contribution towards the erection of a monument at Steinkjer, Norway, in honour of the Arctic explorer, Otto Sverdrup, $1,400.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Could the minister explain this item?


Lester Bowles Pearson: This is a contribution to the erection of a monument at Steinkjer, Norway, to Otto Sverdrup, who discovered the islands in the north of Canada which now bear his name during his voyage as captain of the Fram in 1898. The Norwegian government later, after discussions with the Canadian government, renounced any claim to sovereignty over the islands by virtue of this discovery, but many of the Norwegian people since that time may have felt some resentment towards Canada for ignoring the Norwegian interests there and the fact that Norway discovered these islands. When the proposal was made in Norway to erect a monument to this great explorer, who discovered, among other islands, these Canadian islands, we thought it would be a
Supply-Northern Affairs friendly gesture to participate in the erection of the monument to the extent of $1,400.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I think it is an excellent
gesture.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
292. Departmental administration, $543,934.
Jean Lesage: On July 12, when we were able to devote about ten minutes to the study of these estimates, I had time to make a general statement, and then I said I wished to place before the house a statement of our fundamental concepts and policy in administering the national parks of Canada.
I believe that the first question that we should ask ourselves is: what are, in fact, the national parks of Canada? I believe we have across our country a system of national parks that are second to none. There are 17 of these parks from British Columbia to Nova Scotia, and it is likely that one other will be added in the near future in the province of Newfoundland. They have a total area of more than 29,000 square miles. They contain examples of the finest scenic beauties in mountain, forest and water that can be found anywhere. They provide refuge for wildlife where it can be seen and enjoyed under natural conditions. Some of the older parks such as Banff and Jasper have become famous throughout the world. Above all, the parks provide Canadians in all walks of life with beautiful areas preserved for all time for their benefit and enjoyment.
The next question, and it is very important that we ask these questions of ourselves from time to time because of the requests we have to build and make various installations in the parks, is: why do we have the parks? Year after year, the members of this house have shown strong interest in the further development of the national parks, in having them made more available and enjoyable for the Canadian people. Today there are few who do not recognize and appreciate the value of the parks, but this was not always the case. Years ago, both in Canada and the United States, many persons interested in the exploitation of natural resources looked on the establishment of parks for the use of the people as a foolish dream and a waste of potential profit for themselves. It is to the credit of our legislators in the past that they had the foresight to see the needs of the future and to ensure for us the preservation of that great heritage which is ours in the national parks of Canada today.

Supply-Northern Affairs
We hear so much now about the parks in the travel advertising; we hear so much about their value to the tourist industry, the stimulus they provide to draw tourists from outside Canada, the contribution the parks make through the tourist and other industries to the general economy of Canada, that it would almost seem that the parks were created for the economic benefits they bestow. How far people can depart, even in this day and age, from the ideal that inspired our fathers and forefathers and that, I am convinced, rests firmly in the hearts of the great majority of Canadians who know and love the parks and who know why they have been established.
The parks are dedicated under the National Parks Act to the benefit, education and enjoyment of the Canadian people, and the act requires that they be used and maintained in such a way that they will be left unimpaired for the benefit of future generations.
The parks were not established for the tourist industry; they were not established for commercial pursuits, or for their direct and indirect economic benefits. They were established, I repeat, for the benefit, education and enjoyment of the Canadian people. They were established so that Canadians would have for all time great areas where they could relax and renew their strength in settings of unrivalled beauty.
To be sure, there is value to Canada in the industries that derive benefits from the parks, but infinitely greater is the value our people derive, in their hundreds of thousands, in happier minds and healthier bodies gained through rest and recreation in our great park areas. The important reasons, therefore, that we have the national parks are: first, to provide unspoiled areas, and I draw this to the attention of a number of members who sometimes make suggestions for installations in parks which will spoil the parks. Our aim is to provide unspoiled areas where people can enjoy rest and recreation in surroundings that are a complete change from what they meet in their normal lives; to provide unspoiled areas where people can enjoy and appreciate the God-given beauties and wonders that we in Canada are fortunate to possess as part of our national heritage; to provide unspoiled areas wherein people can learn about the world of nature, and become better people through the knowledge that there are other things in life of importance apart from man's creations. It is obvious that the value of the parks to the Canadian people rests more in the realm of the spirit than in the realm of commerce, and that this value of the parks can be lost forever unless they are preserved unspoiled and unimpaired to the greatest possible extent.
[Mr. Lesage.l

How then, Mr. Chairman, should we approach the administration of these parks? In the United States, where the pressure of population on land use and a growing appreciation of conservation principles led to the establishment of a great parks system even earlier than in Canada, the fundamental value of the parks was fully realized by many public spirited citizens, even when commercial interests were fighting the creation of the parks with every instrument at their disposal. In 1918 the then secretary of the interior, Franklin K. Lane, set out the basic principles behind the parks in these words:
First, the national parks must be maintained in absolutely unimpaired form for the use of future generations as well as those of our time.
Second, they are set apart for the use, observation, health and pleasure of the people.
Third, the national interest must dictate all decisions affecting public or private enterprise in the parks.
These words of secretary Lane, set down almost 40 years ago, could not be improved upon in describing our own approach to the administration of the national parks of Canada. In meeting day to day problems and in planning future developments we must never lose sight of the ideal. To leave the parks in an absolutely natural state would mean that they could be used by very few people. We must have some man-made improvements but no more at any time than are necessary to make the parks accessible and to meet the needs of visitors in their enjoyment of the parks.
The most difficult problem, therefore, in national parks administration is to preserve at all times the best possible balance between visitors' needs and the preservation of the unspoiled beauties they come to see and enjoy. In achieving this balance there are four rules of the utmost importance that we endeavour to follow with the greatest care. 1. Impairments of the parks must be accepted if without them the average Canadian could not get into the parks, stay in them and reach the natural features that are there for him to enjoy. 2. An impairment for that purpose should not be incurred if it is very serious and if the added benefit in enjoyment of the park is not substantial. 3. All impairments should be regulated and controlled so that they are as small and as few as possible. 4. No impairment should be permitted if its purpose is to provide an enjoyment that can equally well be achieved elsewhere unless that impairment contributes towards or promotes the enjoyment of outdoor recreation in keeping with the purposes for which the parks are established.
Because the parks are preserved for the people of Canada as a whole for very special purposes, not for the inhabitants of one area

but for the people of Canada as a whole, it follows that special groups and interests do not have within the parks all the rights and privileges that may be theirs in other parts of the country. To maintain areas in a special way requires special rules and regulations which in other places would be quite unnecessary. When we realize that the government of all community life across the country is based primarily on the needs and wishes of the local people and is conditioned by a desire to stimulate their commercial and industrial life to their greater gain and higher living standard, we can appreciate that, without special regulations, the natural beauties of the parks would be destroyed within a very few years.
We have seen countryside ruined by billboards. We have seen ugly industrial buildings erected in areas that formerly were beautiful. We have all seen these things, and in most areas we have to accept them as part of our normal way of life, but is there anyone among us who has not thought of this occasionally with regret?
In the national parks we have the priceless opportunity to avoid all this and to preserve some of the most beautiful parts of Canada for all time for all the people. To this end, the National Parks Act and regulations made thereunder are designed, and the government of Canada is charged with an important responsibility. Our regulations must meet the needs now and in the future of a nationwide park system. There are basic management requirements common to all the parks and our approach to these must always be the same. To give special treatment in one place would lead to special treatment in another, and the national character of the system would be lost. For this reason, decisions have to be taken nationally here in Ottawa, in spite of the criticism that we hear at times from the local people. These decisions have to be taken on a nation-wide basis because they could affect more than one park and some of the cases have to be handled with great care.
Moreover, we have to consider the effect of our decisions on conditions that will exist 50, 100 or even more years in the future, and this is an administrative problem that is rarely appreciated. If at times our reaction in the department to changing times and modern innovations may be slow, there are, I am sure, few thoughtful persons who would wish us to make hasty decisions and in so doing endanger the heritage of Canada's future.
But, Mr. Chairman, what are these daily problems that we face? Many of our problems lie in trying to give the best possible service to a steadily increasing number of visitors with a limited budget. These are
Supply-Northern Affairs met without too much difficulty, and I can say with certainty that the vast majority of visitors to our parks have returned home well satisfied, to the credit of our dedicated staffs in the field and often as well to the credit of conscientious private operators of cabins, hotels, motels, restaurants and other concessions within the parks.
The most continuing problems that we face and the most criticisms that we receive arise from the desire of various persons to do things, to build things or to regulate things within the parks for their own personal or local benefit. Even the minister is in danger when he says "No" of being branded as a bureaucrat. There is a tendency for some people to imply that we make regulations for the fun of making regulations. I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that there is nothing that is less fun than the making of regulations. What we are doing we are doing honestly and conscientiously in order to try to protect the serious purposes that are basic in the parks.
When a person wishes to erect a large advertising sign and we say no we are told that we are standing in the way of business development. Would hon. members like to see billboards in our parks? I doubt it. There is room enough outside, as a matter of fact. I am sorry that the hon. member for Bow River is not here; because I should like him to hear this. When a person wishes to take up permanent residence in a park, to retire there, even though his presence is not required to serve the needs of visitors, and we say "no", we are told that we are interfering with personal freedom.


Solon Earl Low: May I just tell the minister that I will take careful note for the hon. member for Bow River. He is ill and is not able to be here today.


Jean Lesage: I am sorry to hear that.


Solon Earl Low: I will take careful note for him.


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, I was not complaining about his absence. I was just saying that I was sorry he was not here. I am sorry to hear that he is ill.
I am sure that hon. members can figure out for themselves what would happen if a private citizen demanded public land in a municipal park-or, let us say, in any park in Canada-for his private home. It comes to exactly the same thing.
When it becomes necessary, in view of the greatly increased numbers of visitors, to rearrange camp grounds or to restrict their use to the period of a normal holiday, and when in the course of these changes certain persons lose some of the privileges they have enjoyed in the past-such as that of

Supply-Northern Affairs occupying the best place in the camp grounds over a whole season-we are told that we are depriving people of their rights, and our decisions can be most unpopular among the groups concerned.
We do our best to meet particular interests when this can be done without prejudice to all the people of Canada; but once a situation becomes such that the interest of the people as a whole is suffering or is likely to suffer in future, we are duty bound to all Canadians-to whom the parks belong-to make the best arrangements possible.
There is a special problem in some of the parks, namely that of the townsites. I should like to say a few words about that matter. There are major townsites at Banff and Jasper and there are smaller townsites in a number of other parks. There is a tendency for those businesses serving visitors to concentrate at one point within a park, and as tourist volume increases these town-sites grow in size. A large proportion of our problems in administering the parks arise out of the townsites. They have many of the aspects of municipalities across Canada and there must be regulations to control their orderly development.
Outside the parks, municipal control is in the hands of the local people and is exercised through their elected representatives. The driving force in this control is naturally the economic betterment of the particular community, and the people there do not have to worry about the effects of their actions on other communities across Canada, or even to any great extent about the effects on visitors except from the standpoint of potential business. All of this is right and proper, as the community exists to meet the needs of the local people.
In the park townsites, however, the situation is totally different. The communities are in themselves an impairment of the natural state of the park, and can be permitted under the Parks Act only because they are required to meet the needs of visitors. That is their only reason for existing. For this reason, the development of park town-sites must be governed from the point of view of the needs of visitors to the parks- those of the present and those of fifty or even one hundred years from now-and not of the needs of those whose interest in the parks is commercial operation in one form or another.
In administering the townsites we endeavour to create an economic atmosphere within which sufficient businesses to meet genuine tourist needs may reasonably prosper; and to some extent, therefore, regulations must
[Mr. Lesage.l

take into account the needs of these businesses. Their needs, however, must always be judged in the light of the interest of all Canadians now and in the future in having the parks preserved for their benefit, and their right in that connection. The preservation of the parks is the essential object and at the same time, the limiting factor not the requirements of any particular business that is or would like to be within a park.
While residents and businesses in the park townsites do not have the same control of their local affairs that would be the case outside the parks, they do have the opportunity through their local representatives to present to the park administration their problems and needs. An example of this is the Banff advisory council, and at the present time one is being formed in Jasper. As far as possible, the wishes of these local representatives are met; and when this cannot be done we always endeavour to give full explanation of all our actions. Sometimes, of course, there simply are not funds available; at other times local wishes run counter to the principles on which the parks are founded and there is no choice but to withold consent.
While local people in the townsites do not have the normal control over the operation and development of their communities, they also do not have to bear the normal tax load. Townsite residents are charged nothing for construction and maintenance of streets, for snow removal, for police services, for public park areas or for administration costs. They contribute generally less than half the cost of the installation and maintenance of water, sewer and fire protection systems wherever these are provided. A resident of Banff townsite, with a property assessment of $6,000 would pay tax of about $107 per year, including school and hospital taxes. The average tax on similar property in three towns of comparable size in Alberta would be over $300. One may compare $107 with $300.
For a typical business site with an assessment of about $13,000 in Banff, the tax would be about $225. In the other three towns in Alberta which I have mentioned, it would be over $750 or more than three times as much. If townsite residents in the parks were to find themselves located outside the parks tomorrow, they would be faced with a tremendous added financial burden, even if an outright gift were made to them of the extensive capital works that have been installed almost entirely from taxes paid by Canadians as a whole.
Before I resume my seat, may I say this. We might ask ourselves what we are doing about the future of the parks. The most

immediate need is for better road facilities. A major increase is provided-as I mentioned on July 12-for this purpose in the 1956-57 estimates. This is part of an 8-year program completely to reconstruct all major park highways and bring them to adequate standards. The cost, apart from the trans-Canada highway across Banff and Yoho parks, will probably exceed $60 million. During this same 8-year period, while a large portion of funds made available by parliament will be devoted to highways, it is proposed to continue with the present major program of improvement and extension of park facilities used by the public, including camp grounds and picnic areas, comfort stations, bathing beach developments, and many others. Improvements and extensions will also be made in facilities required by the department for the better maintenance and operation of the parks.
Work is now proceeding on the establishment of a special planning group within the parks branch of the department which will be charged with the task of gathering data and working out and recommending long-range plans for the development of all the parks so that this development may proceed in an orderly manner and in keeping with the anticipated steady increase in the number of visitors over the years. I have outlined at some length our approach to national park management and development. I hope this will help all those who are interested in understanding our problems and the way in which we endeavour to solve them. Canada receives many benefits from the parks, such as increased tourist business, a livelihood for those catering to the tourist industry and the provision of work for many hundreds in the operation of the park. Above all, Canadians receive those intangible benefits of quiet relaxation and recreation in our priceless areas of peace and grandeur. The preservation of this heritage and placing it within easier reach of the people of Canada is the constant aim that I have, together with the officials of the department.


Mr. Harkness:: The minister has just given us a considerable discourse on national parks inspired, I have no doubt, by the fact that there has been a great deal of criticism of the administration of the parks, particularly in Alberta where the two largest parks are situated. Quite a lot of the minister's speech was taken up with the basic conceptions which were in mind when the national parks were formed, and with those I must say that I agree, on the whole, as I think does nearly everyone in the country. The minister also took up quite a bit of time I thought in setting up straw men and knocking them down.
Supply-Northern Affairs He took up some time also in making analogies which were not applicable in point of fact. I am not going to deal with all those points in detail at this time, as I think perhaps the criticisms which I have to make of the administration of the national parks might perhaps be more appropriate when we come to deal specifically with the national parks branch.
I would just comment on one of the points the minister made shortly before he sat down and of which he seemed to make a great deal. It was that taxes are a great deal less in Banff than they are in comparable towns. The fact still remains, Mr. Chairman, that there exists in Banff and Jasper, as well as any other town sites which may exist in national parks, taxation without representation.


Jean Lesage: They are not taxes, they are service charges.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I should like to remind the minister that the tea tax which provoked the Boston tea party was a very small tax, in fact it was only a token tax, but it gave rise to the American revolution. I think the minister, by trying to make a big point of the fact that taxes are less in Banff than in places of comparable size outside national parks, is batting on a very sticky wicket indeed.
I should like to deal somewhat generally with some of the phases of this department which, of course, consists of five more or less non-related branches. There is the northern administration of the Northwest Territories and the Yukon; national parks; water resources; the forestry branch and the travel bureau. There is very little connection between most of these branches, and therefore I will touch on some of them in a general way at this time and leave what we may call the detailed criticism and questions until we come to the specific items. I think perhaps that is a more orderly way of conducting a discussion.
The government administration and development of the Northwest Territories and the Yukon territories is probably the most important matter to come under this department, at least from the long-term development of Canada as a great nation. At the present time there is much more interest directed to our northland than used to be the case. There is a variety of reasons why this should be so. First of all, our other frontiers have disappeared and this is the only great frontier left. Naturally, people who are interested in new things and new developments have had their attention directed to the north. Then, the great improvement which has taken place in

Supply-Northern Affairs transportation, especially air transportation, has made the north much more accessible than it was before. This has made it possible for a greatly increased number of people to go into the north country, carry on developments there and see what the prospects were.
Then, there have been some considerable mineral discoveries which, of course, have excited a good deal of interest and have taken a considerable number of people into our north country; especially has this been true so far as uranium is concerned. Of course, there has been quite a bit of gold prospecting and development of gold mines in this territory. However, I think the greatest factor in opening up the north and increasing the interest of the people in it has been defence requirements. The string of radar stations now being constructed to constitute the D.E.W. line will, of course, be permanent establishments right across the Arctic. The supplying of these D.E.W. line stations means constant and regular transportation to areas of the far north in which no white man, or very few, had ever been up to a very short time ago.
Now, in connection with the establishment of the D.E.W. line, it seems to me that the Canadian government has not been sufficiently in evidence-in fact, it has not even been represented at all in some of the places where development is occurring in that area. In that connection I should like to read a few excerpts from an article which appeared in Maclean's magazine of May 26, written by Ralph Allen. The article is entitled, "Will D.E.W. line cost Canada its Northland?" I should like to read a few excerpts from this to indicate to the committee what the situation in the north was found to be by a very experienced writer. Talking of the D.E.W. line he said:
It is the charter under which a tenth of Canada may very well become the world's most northerly banana republic. For a sum of money that has been officially estimated at $400 million we have at least temporarily traded off our whole northern frontier. In law. we still own this northern frontier. In fact we do not.
I am not going into the military end of this at all. I am going to deal with it entirely from the point of view of northern affairs because the minister's department is responsible for administering northern affairs and for maintaining Canadian law and order in that area, maintaining our sovereignty over it. Therefore, the problem can really be placed squarely on the doorstep of the minister.
Another excerpt from this article reads:
The suggestion that Canada is only the nominal ruler of this important part of Canada and that the United States is the real ruler is not taken

seriously anywhere except on the D.E.W. line itself. There the truth is palpable and inescapable.
Now, I am not saying that Mr. Allen was the only newspaper reporter who went on the trip. There was a considerable number of United States and Canadian newsmen and all the articles I have seen written by Canadian newsmen were along the same lines as this article by Mr. Allen.
Another excerpt:
The significant point, it seems to me, is that in this single area alone-the whole vexed and tortured area of security-there lie the seeds of serious discord and possible further encroachments on Canada's control of the Canadian north.
I should like to emphasize that last phrase, "possible further encouragement on Canada's control of the Canadian north". Well, it is the job of this department to assure that this encroachment does not take place.
I have one final excerpt:
The most experienced and responsible Canadian I met in the north was a man I'd rather not identify more closely than that. I asked him bluntly:	"Do you and your friends resent the
presence of the Americans here?" "No", he said sadly, "It's the other way around. They resent our presence here".
I think that that article and articles by other people who were on this trip have caused a considerable number of Canadians to think pretty seriously about what our situation is in the north, the extent to which our control of that area still remains in our hands, the extent to which it has been lost and particularly what steps should be taken by our defence department, yes, but by this department particularly, to ensure that Canadian control of that area continues, is not further impaired and, as a mattter of fact, is restored.
There was an editorial which appeared in the Ottawa Journal in April on this same matter, and it gives some suggestions as to what might be done by this department in order to correct the situation which was found by the newsmen who went up to the north. I should like to read part of it: It reads:
It is not sufficient to proclaim a right and then walk away and forget it. There is need of official Canadian representation at every D.E.W. line site where more than a few men are stationed, a continuing reminder that the final authority is not the construction or operations superintendent but the government of Canada.
And the situation as found by these newsmen was that the final authority-in fact, practically the only authority at these various D.E.W. line stations-was the senior operations man present, who was an American. The editorial continues:
The representative may be a mounted policeman or northern service officer of the northern affairs department. It is essential that he be there

to see that Canadian laws and regulations-and if necessary Canadian dignities-are observed and it will be poor economy if the government thinks that this task can be done adequately by sporadic visits by policemen and service officers.
The present understanding is that there will be a man from the R.C.M.P. or other representative at every main site on the line when it is in operation within the next two years. There are also to be auxiliary and intermediate sites where it may be assumed there will be smaller groups of employees. In this ice-bound land each of these isolated units must be thought of as an island to which will come voyageurs of the air, some of whom will be from the United States with no landing until they reach their northern destination.
None should be left in any doubt, no matter how new Canada and the Arctic may be to him, that this is Canadian soil. This requires the Canadian ensign be given pride of place in displays of flags. It requires too that there be an agent of the Canadian civil power on hand to see the formalities of immigration, customs, game laws, and all the rest, are properly observed.
No citizen of the United States will object to such an arrangement but if Canada fails to see it is provided she invites embarrassment.
This is a matter which I would like the minister, when he speaks later when we get to this particular item of the Northwest Territories, to say something about, and it is a matter on which I hope there will be some immediate action taken, and that it will be provided that there will be a northern service officer or a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police at each of these stations, not only at a few of the main stations. The cost would not be very great, and I think the significance of it, and the effect it would have, would be far out of proportion to the relatively small cost which would be involved.
I should like to say something about the resources of our north country. They are, of course, much greater than was thought up to only a few years ago. As a matter of fact, until quite recently the north was considered only as a great non-productive waste, mostly rock and barren lands. We now know that there are great mineral deposits there. I have already mentioned uranium and gold, but there is, of course, one of the greatest lead-zinc deposits at Pine Point which has ever been discovered and one which makes it quite likely that a railroad will be, and could profitably be, built into that area. There is water power there to be developed. Some has been developed already to a limited extent. There is a field at Fort Norman which has been under development for some time and, of course, the whole valley of the Mackenzie river is potential oil and gas land, and undoubtedly a good deal of oil and gas will be discovered and produced in that area.
There is a considerable amount of forest cover in the Mackenzie river area, particularly the western Arctic area, and on the
Supply-Northern Affairs basis of that undoubtedly a considerable amount of timber will be cut, and there is the possibility of a paper mill or paper mills in this area.


Jean Lesage: The Slave river.


Douglas Scott Harkness: That is the Mackenzie river valley. When I speak of the Mackenzie river valley I mean the Mackenzie and rivers running into it. It is all the Mackenzie river valley or system.
There is also, of course, the possibility of a certain amount of agriculture, sufficient, at any rate, to supply the local inhabitants living up there with vegetables, dairy products and things of that sort.
Fishing in the lakes is already a considerable industry and will, no doubt, be expanded. And then, of course, there is what was the original only wealth of the country, namely, the fur industry, which unfortunately has now declined very considerably. However, rather than being a great non-productive waste, we now know this north country is rich in resources, capable of supporting quite a considerable population and capable of sending down materials to the rest of Canada which will support a great many more. In other words, we have a great area there which is well worth developing. Unfortunately, the development has been very slow in coming.
Transportation, of course, is the most important thing in order to develop our north country. The department now seems to be much more aware of this than they were even a year ago. When the estimates of this department were before the estimates committee last year we spent quite a bit of time, and a number of us placed a great deal of emphasis on the development of roads, waterways and air transport and the building of a railway. At that time the minister was rather discouraging in the remarks that he made to us and more or less gave the impression that this was fairly fanciful; it was quite a long way in the future, and so on. As I say, since then apparently there has been a change of heart and the department now seems to be more aware of the need of developing transportation, and developing it immediately, and not waiting until some long period in the future. I was greatly cheered by the brief entitled "The Northwest Territories-Its Economic Prospects" which was presented to the royal commission on Canada's economic prospects by R. G. Robertson, commissioner of the Northwest

Supply-Northern Affairs Territories and deputy minister of the department. On page 19 of this brief I find the following:
.	.	. any program designed to stimulate the
economic development of the territories must begin with a determined attack on the problem of transportation.
There is absolutely no question about that. I am glad the department has now recognized this fact and I am particularly glad that it envisages something more extensive being done than was the case a year ago. On page 23 of the brief the following appears:
The most important element, however, is a whole set of high costs due, directly and indirectly, to problems of transportation. These costs can all be brought down substantially.
That is one of the things we harped on last year and from the brief I gather that the department is now working on this question, I hope vigorously. The paragraph continues:
Nothing else will have so great an effect in stimulating economic development.
On page 24 and subsequent pages the brief refers to the building of the railroad to Pine Point. We spoke about this at some length last year. I will read just a brief section concerning this subject:
.	.	. three methods by which transportation
facilities into the Northwest Terrtiories might be improved. The first is the construction of a railroad to Great Slave lake. The second is construction of roads into promising resource development areas when and as indications suggest that these areas, given highway transportation, would be economic to develop. The third is the adoption of the policy of supplying the newly constructed defence stations in the Northwest Territories by commercial air services and the establishment of a network of scheduled commercial airlines in the Arctic.
I would really have liked to take up considerably more time dealing with transportation in the north and what might be done to improve it and I would particularly like to have referred at greater length to the projected railway to Pine Point; however, I will leave the subject of transportation at this point and merely ask the minister when he speaks if he will tell us how far along the plans are for this railway, if anything concrete has been arrived at and when construction may be expected to begin.
The problem of the native population is, of course, one of the greatest problems in the Northwest Territories. The old means of livelihood such as trapping for fur and fishing, particularly the former, are rapidly disappearing. I understand that the cariboo have been disappearing and have been killed off at a fairly rapid rate. The cariboo constituted the bulk of the food of a considerable proportion

of the northern population and something has to be substituted in its place.
Some of the Eskimos and others in the north are securing employment on the construction of the D.E.W. line which, of course, serves to accustom them to our way of life. As a result of accustoming them to our way of life it perhaps makes it difficult for them to return to their old way of life. What to do with the native population of the north, how most usefully to employ them, how to keep them fed and particularly how to put them in the position of being able to feed themselves are some of the chief problems in the whole matter of administration of the north.
The department concerned puts out what is called a northern affairs bulletin. I have in my hand a copy of the June-July 1956 bulletin and dealing with the subject of education it says:
. . . every effort is being made to provide adult education of a type which will equip all ablebodied men to take on jobs which will result in a higher level of economy and standard of living throughout this vast area.
I am in very great sympathy with the idea of training men in the north to take on jobs but after this has been accomplished the main thing is the provision of jobs. It is of little use to train an Eskimo to be a machinist, we will say, if there is nothing to which he can apply his trade. I realize that the problem is an extremely difficult one and I would like the minister to give us at least some indication of what is being done to meet this problem.


Jean Lesage: It is all in the annual report.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I would like next, Mr. Chairman, to say something about the system of tendering and the letting of contracts in this department.


Jean Lesage: The system of tendering?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Yes, the system of tendering and the letting of contracts in the Department of Northern Affairs. This applies particularly in the parks branch but I think it applies throughout the whole department. I do not think the system is good and I feel it could be improved. In my opinion the old patronage system is still in effect in this department to a considerable extent, perhaps to a greater extent than is the case in any other department at the present time. It has been eliminated to quite an extent from a number of other departments but I do not think it has been eliminated to any great extent in this department.


Jean Lesage: There is no park in the province of Quebec.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am not talking about the province of Quebec; I never mentioned Quebec. I do not know why the minister has brought up the question of Quebec.


Jean Lesage: You are talking about patronage?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Yes, and I said I think there is perhaps more patronage in this department than in any other department. I am talking about the whole of Canada and not any specific part of it. In any event there is a great difference between the matter of tenders and the letting of contracts in this department than is the case in the Department of Defence Production. In the latter department-


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Six o'clock.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Well, I am quite prepared to go on for a few minutes longer.


Jean Lesage: Yes, please finish; go ahead. We will take two or three minutes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I think perhaps I could conclude before we recess.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Mr. Chairman, the staff has to have time for dinner. We have been cutting down on our dinner hours.


Douglas Scott Harkness: All right, I will call it six o'clock.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Douglas Scott Harkness: Before we took dinner recess I had just been mentioning the fact that in my opinion the system of tendering and letting of contracts in this department leaves much to be desired and that the old patronage system is operating here perhaps to a greater extent than in any other department in the government.


An hon. Member:: May I ask a question?


Douglas Scott Harkness: No, I only have seven minutes left to me now and I do want to finish what I have to say. I shall be glad to answer any questions as soon as I have finished.
In connection with this matter, to begin with, there is not a free system of tendering, as far as I am aware, in regard to quite a number of items which are secured by this department. The only people who are allowed to tender are those who are on a preferred list. People who are not on that list do not even get an invitation to tender. In other words, the tenders are not advertised
Supply-Northern Affairs in the newspapers as they are in other departments, and only those political friends of the government who happen to be on that particular list get an opportunity to tender at all.
When a tender is put in, whether it is on that basis or whether it is on the basis of an open tender, the unsuccessful tenderer is not told who has got the contract or the price at which he has got it. In the Department of Defence Production, on the contrary, for example, if an unsuccessful tenderer sends in a stamped addressed envelope he can return a form which they actually give to him, and he will be sent the name of the successful tenderer and the price at which the tender was let. In this particular department, if a man asks for the name of a tenderer and the price at which it was let, they send him back a letter saying, "It is not the policy of this department to divulge prices or suppliers." In other words, the whole thing is kept under a veil of secrecy, and the people who have tendered have no means of knowing who got the contract. Perhaps they can send people to investigate and find out eventually, but they are not told and have no means of finding out what the price is.
I have just referred to what is done in the Department of Defence Production. It is quite plain that the method of tendering in that department is very much better than what prevails in this department as far as the public interest is concerned. A man sends in and he gets back the name of the successful tenderer and the price at which the contract is let. I am glad that the Minister of Defence Production is coming in, as I am holding up his department, as a model for the one that is under discussion in this particular case. As a matter of fact, the method used in the Department of Defence Production is a very much better system, as far as the public interest is concerned. The unsuccessful tenderer then can see at what price the contract was let, and the next time a tender is advertised and he puts in a bid for it, he is naturally going to sharpen up his pencil and put in as good a price as he can. As a result, the government and the people of Canada are going to get the contract filled in most cases at a better price than they would if this policy of secrecy and refusal to give prices existed as it does in the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.


Jean Lesage: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Douglas Scott Harkness: I have only four minutes.


Jean Lesage: Yes, but I shall consent to an extension of time.

Supply-Northern Affairs


Douglas Scott Harkness: But somebody else might not.


Jean Lesage: I am sure they would.


Douglas Scott Harkness: All right.


Jean Lesage: Could I ask the hon. member to give me an example or an instance of such a letter in which it would have been said by me or by an official of the department that it was not the policy of the department to give the name of the successful tenderer and his price? I have given that to whoever has written to me.


Douglas Scott Harkness: As a matter of fact, I have one here but I am not going to give it to the minister, because the man concerned probably would never get another contract as long as this government was in power. I certainly will not give the name of the person concerned, but there is no doubt that this sort of thing has taken place. In other words, the general tendering system of this department is not good. I should hope that it would be corrected and put much more on the same basis as exists now in the Department of Defence Production, where the unsuccessful tenderer can secure the price at which the contract was let and as a result perhaps be in a position to sharpen his pencil and give a better quotation the next time.
Of course, the basic difficulty comes from the fact that there is only a selected list of people who are allowed to give tenders, to begin with. So there are two difficulties, as far as this department is concerned. There is the selected list and the fact that the whole thing is kept secret and the unsuccessful tenderer cannot find out what the contract was let for.


Jean Lesage: Could I ask the hon. member the name, not the man who received the letter, but the man who signed the letter?


Douglas Scott Harkness: No. As a matter of fact, I do not think it is fair for the minister to try to get this information.


Jean Lesage: I deny the charge.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I think the only reason why he wants it is to ensure that this man never gets another contract. So I certainly am not going to put him in that position.
I know that my time has almost elapsed and I shall pass on very briefly to one of the other branches of the department, that is, the travel bureau. Travel used to be a very considerable source of income, as far as foreign exchange was concerned in this country. Last year, and for many years perhaps before last year, the number of United States dollars we received into this

country over and above the amount spent by Canadians in the United States helped us very considerably, as far as our balance of payments was concerned, and prevented our adverse trade balance from being nearly as bad as it might have been otherwise.
Last year exactly the reverse prevailed. Travel, instead of being an asset to the country, is now a drain as far as the general balance of payments is concerned. Last year we had $110 million deficit as far as travel was concerned. In other words, Canadians spent $110 million more in travelling to the United States and other countries than people in the United States primarily and those from Europe spent travelling in this country.
I do not think that that is a situation that should be allowed to continue. I think that much more vigorous steps are needed to improve our general travel situation to attract people to this country and to keep Canadians in this country and have them travel in this country rather than travelling across the United States. It is very easy for people in any part of Canada to get into an adjacent part of the United States, and it is perhaps not to be wandered at that a very considerable number of Canadians do travel down to the United States. Of course, I would be the last one to suggest that anything should be done in a compulsory way to stop that, but I think that we can correct the situation to quite an extent by taking steps in the way of publicity and otherwise to encourage people to travel in Canada rather than go across the border to the United States.
I realize that I am already over my time, and I shall leave the remainder of the remarks that I may have to make to the particular administrative items of the branches as they come up.


Mr. Purdy:: I should like to take this
opportunity to make a few remarks on this resolution, and I promise that I shall not be as lengthy or as inaccurate as the member who has preceded me. I should like, however, to direct a few remarks to the minister whose estimates are before us at the present time not particularly with respect to the problem of northern affairs although coming from Nova Scotia as I do I cannot help but remind the committee that Nova Scotia is one of four provinces, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, which should have more to say with respect to the development of our northern resources than we have because at one time we were equal partners in those great resources. However, at the

moment I wish to direct my remarks to the minister in his capacity as minister of national resources.
As I visualize his responsibility in that position, it covers the development of our renewable resources such as our forests, and of course I appreciate that while our forests are renewable they are only renewable within a limited time. You can cut down forests and it takes a good many years before they will reproduce themselves. Then we have water power, another important national resource and one which we must utilize to the fullest extent. Along with our water power we must consider our non-reproducing natural resources such as coal and similar minerals.
I am going to subdivide our water resources into two parts. First of all, I should like to refer to the water resources found in the natural flow of our rivers, and I am going to refer specifically to the province of Nova Scotia. Here I should like to say that in my opinion the development of hydro power on our non-tidal rivers in Nova Scotia is most uneconomical because in order to provide the necessary storage basins and a level flow of water throughout the year it is necessary to flood such large areas of the river basins that the natural growth in those basins, whether agricultural or forest, is destroyed, and the initial cost of such a development is not a true picture of the actual cost to the economy of the country. In other words, we should consider when we flood such tremendous areas of our province what the potential production of those areas would have been in future years and add that to the cost of the development.
We do have one great source of power in our province which I believe has never been actually explored to the hilt. It is true that an investigation was made, and there is one going on now, of Passamaquoddy bay to see just what we could do to develop power from the tides of the bay of Fundy. A few years ago an investigation was also made on the Petitcodiac and the Memramcook rivers, in New Brunswick. At that time I believe a report was brought in that the development of power there was not economical compared with the development of power from coal, but in that regard I want to make this point. The coal of the maritime provinces, Nova Scotia particularly, is expendable but the tides are not expendable. They have been going out and coming in ever since mankind was created and they will go out and come in just as long as humanity exists.
Therefore I am saying that while it might be more economical to develop power from coal in the immediate future nevertheless
Supply-Northern Affairs from a long-range point of view and knowing that our coal supply is exhaustible I believe the whole situation should be taken into consideration with that in mind. I suppose hon. members will say to me: What has this all got to do with the present situation? They may say that power, after all, is a provincial matter and that therefore the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources should not be concerned with it. However, I have great hopes from the announcement made by our great Prime Minister that he was fully aware of the financial problems some of the lesser provinces have to meet and that the federal government would go along with those provinces in any way possible to secure their development.
There is another feature. The minister is responsible for the tourist industry. I suggest to him that one of the greatest undeveloped potentials in our national production, or whatever you like to call it, is the undeveloped tourist industry in the maritime provinces. It does seem to me to be a crime that Canadians in the central provinces, who have waxed rich from the business they have received from the Atlantic provinces, should go to the United States when they have a chance to go to the sea coast for summer holidays instead of going to the coast of the Atlantic provinces. I suggest it is a responsibility of the minister to see that proper facilities are provided so that the people from the central provinces will come to our great Atlantic sea coast. I should like to go on to try to develop this idea a bit further and I am going to refer to my own constituency. In the area of Minas basin and Cobequid bay tremendous water power is produced by the tides of that great basin which rise 60 to 62 feet from low tide to high tide every day. Do you not agree that there is a great undeveloped water power potential in that tremendous tidal reservoir, one that renews itself every day and is inexhaustible? It will go on into eternity, and I am asking the minister to give consideration to the possibilities there.
As I said a moment ago, the survey of 1945 indicated that the development of power from the tidal waters of the bay of Fundy was not economical compared with coal. Again, our coal supply is exhaustible but our tidal power is inexhaustible. I have another thought to put to the minister, and I appreciate that what I am about to say fall* to some extent within the purview of the provincial government. Nevertheless, I come back to a thought I mentioned a few moments ago, namely, that one of our national resources is the tourist business and therefore so far as the tourist business is concerned it

Supply-Northern Affairs would be quite within the province of the federal government to help along the lines I have suggested.
I am coming now to the problem of highways and transportation facilities into our tourist attractions.
Would you gentlemen around me who are talking kindly go outside and carry on your conversation there while I am trying to talk to the minister?


An hon. Member:: Address your remarks to the minister.


William Alfred Robinson: Order.


Gordon Timlin Purdy: Thank you. Mr. Minister, I should like to direct your mind to this matter, on a dollar basis, of turning the tides into power, as an economic goal. I am suggesting to you at least two situations in my constituency, one at the estuary of the Shubena-cadie river and the second one on the Avon river. Not only could we turn the tides into power there but at the same time we could do away with the building and the maintenance of railway bridges and highway bridges. In other words, at one fell swoop, if practicable, we could make a triple-purpose utility at the mouths of those great rivers. I have in my files a letter from an engineer who was born in the vicinity of Windsor and who says that he is satisfied-he is now removed to the United States-that power could be developed on the Avon river. He says that 250 thousand horsepower could be developed at the rate of $100 a horsepower. He says that in the United States that is considered to be a low rate. If at that cost we could add the triple purpose of a railway crossing and a highway crossing and duplicate that at the Shubenacadie river, what a great thing we would do in the province of Nova Scotia. That is only a dream, I suppose, but still I suggest and consider that it is something that should be taken into consideration. This idea of the federal government, doing something for highways is not too far afield. If I recall correctly, I read in the paper yesterday that the federal government is going to make a heavy contribution toward a highway out of Ottawa. What has Ottawa got that the maritime provinces have not got? Certainly we have got to have our share in the maritime provinces. I stand up here prepared to fight for that share every time. Let us give the Atlantic as fair a deal as Ottawa is getting now that they are starting to deal with the highway problem.
There is one more thing I want to bring to the minister's attention. I want to say to you, Mr. Minister, that you have been very kind to me. I wonder, Mr. Minister, if you


would let the hon. member for Quebec East sit on his right side of the house for one moment.


George Harris Hees: The hon. member for Quebec East does sit on that side of the house.


Gordon Timlin Purdy: Mr. Minister, would you just listen to me. Let him sit back and blat by himself for a while.


An hon. Member:: It is the hon. member for Quebec West.


Gordon Timlin Purdy: It does not matter where he comes from. I am talking to the goat over here now; that is the one I am talking to.
Mr. Minister, what I was going to say was that you have been very kind to me in connection with some of the requests I have made to you in the past. At other times you have not been quite so fair. A year and a half ago I asked you if you would not consider having the spot where the largest sailing vessel in Canada was built and launched- and I was thinking of the William. D. Lawrence from Maitland-made a historic site. You very kindly arranged through the historic sites and monuments board to have that site commemorated. You have not told me when it is going to happen. Before this debate is through, at the proper time, I hope you will tell me that.
I spoke of the Shubenacadie crossing. That is the point that I wanted to bring to your mind from a tourist standpoint. There is the land where the sailing ships of the days gone by were built before confederation, where the men went out and the tides came in. But today it is a situation which is undeveloped. I believe if you will really sit down and consider the proposal to build this crossing from Black Rock to Maitland, you will come to a favourable conclusion. By the way, it was a service which was maintained before confederation. It was turned over to the federal government at confederation to maintain the wharves and ferry there and to give a subsidy on the ferry. For some reason or other- and I do not blame this on the federal government-it has gone down. But there is a certain responsibility there. If you will just take this matter into consideration and consider that not only could we build a power unit which would develop power but we could provide a crossing by means of a railway bridge and provide a crossing for highway traffic-a triple unit-I believe it would commend itself to you. I believe that your engineers would say it was economic and feasible. That is what my plea is tonight. I ask you just to give us a break and to send your engineers down to look at this place. I know that the

provincial government, if it gets a lead in this matter will co-operate one hundred per cent.
I am going to close in a moment, sir. I think it would be the greatest thing that could happen if this house would only decide to close its discussions and not let the members stay longer in Ottawa. Just let them take one week along the seaboard of the Atlantic provinces and it would do far more good than sitting here for the next week. I know they would come back here prepared to go along with me and that next year, after the minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources considers it as part of his responsibility to help us develop the highways into these great tourist areas, they would come with us and they would be very happy.


Solon Earl Low: Mr. Chairman, I want to say a few words on the first item in these estimates in order to impress upon the minister the importance of taking early and effective action to bring into the northern territories the one very important thing that will surely contribute to the development of that great country. Before I say what I have to say on that matter, I should like to comment just briefly on the statement of the minister this afternoon in connection with our national parks. These playgrounds of Canada come under the supervision of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. I listened very attentively to the statement he made and 1 found myself in almost complete agreement with his policy as he expressed it this afternoon. I was born and raised right close to one of these great national parks. For many years I have been somewhat concerned about the future policy in respect of them. More particularly I have wondered whether we might get into the same frame of mind as have people in the United States where the national parks have become commercialized and it is difficult for people to find rest and relaxation and the enjoyment of beautiful and natural things such as we have been able to find in our parks in this country. So I was gratified when he said it will be the continued policy of the department to operate the parks in such a manner that for many years to come they will be unspoiled, that the natural beauty will be retained. I took for granted from what he said that commercialism in these parks will be restrained just as far as it possibly can be. I commend the minister for that attitude because there are so many of us who would like to see these parks remain in perpetuity, if possible, unspoiled by the commercial hand of man.
I hope it will be possible for us to induce the building of sufficient facilities so that tourists will be able to come from far and 67509-438
Supply-Northern Affairs near to enjoy our natural beauties with us. I am convinced that in our national parks in Canada we have the most beautiful playground in the world, without any question. I have travelled over much of the world and 1 think that I have never seen anything to equal the beauties that we have in Banff, Jasper and Waterton national parks in Alberta. I am only naming those that are in my own province but there are others, also. I will support the minister 100 per cent in the expressed policy that he brought before the committee this afternoon.
Now, I should like to say just a word about the northern territories that the minister has visited on several occasions. I am glad to see that he has familiarized himself with the territory. I was very happy when the minister furnished me with a copy of the brief that was submitted to the royal commission on economic affairs by the commissioner of the Northwest Territories. I read what Mr. Robertson had to say about the development of that vast north country. Anyone reading the report and studying the maps and other facts that are obtainable about the north country cannot help but be convinced that the northern territories have a very great part to play in the future in the building of a strong and secure Canada. When we think of the recent developments in the area, what those who have been prospecting throughout the country have found, the evidence of great natural mineral wealth, I am sure that we cannot escape the conclusion that the earliest possible development of this territory would be desirable in the interests of a strong Canada.
I am not only interested in the northern territories from the point of view of having their development assured in the near future for building a strong Canada, which is of course our paramount consideration, but I am also interested because the development of the northern territories is so closely bound up with the development of my own area, the Peace river country. So I speak just briefly at this time in support of what Mr. Robertson has so well pointed out in his brief. I do not intend to read it at all, but merely refer to it in a general way. He has taken the position that the most important thing is transportation. I agree with him wholeheartedly. I will go further and say that the northern territories cannot contribute what they can possibly contribute to the strength and security of Canada until we do have adequate transportation. Further than that, I am satisfied that we cannot see the possibility of the early development of the resources of the great north country until we have rail transportation.

Supply-Northern Affairs
We can talk about water transportation and air transportation from now until doomsday, but it will not solve the problem of the area for the simple reason that water transportation into the northern territory is possible only during a short part of the year and it becomes exceedingly costly at other times. Air transportation is always expensive. There are only two ways of getting into the northern territories today by the water and land route. One way is through Fort Smith and the other way is through Hay River, which is a settlement on the Great Slave lake.
Now, the Fort Smith route starts from Waterways, the railhead, and is not a good possible route for the reason that you have a long portage and the costs are too great. Not only that, but the river and lake freeze over very early in the fall, making it impossible to carry on transportation beyond the latter part of September, usually. The other route by which you can enter the great northern territories by land and water is through Grimshaw, the railhead in the Peace river country, and down the Mackenzie highway into Great Slave lake by way of the settlement at Hay River. Now, that distance from Grimshaw on the Northern Alberta Railways to Hay River on the Great Slave lake is about 381 miles, almost the same distance as it would be from here to London, Ontario. This gives some idea of the tremendous distance. The route down the Mackenzie highway is an easy gradient. It is not a difficult one through which to build a rail route at all. Much of the clearing has been done along that route and every few miles one finds a very fine farming area which, when it reaches its full development, will contribute immeasurably to the support of a railway to cover that 381 mile distance.
Mr. Robertson quite correctly points out in his brief that if we had a rail route approximately 400 miles closer to the Mackenzie valley than it is now, which would be possible if we were to extend the Northern Alberta Railways from Grimshaw to Hay River, the rates would be cut down to the point where the working of the ore bodies that have been recently discovered at Pine Point would become quite possible and competitive. Now, that is an important point because we know that there are at least 60 million tons of high grade lead and zinc ore in that area that can be mined very largely by the open cut method. If we had the rail transportation to carry that ore out, then the mines would become competitive and that ore bed would contribute to Canada's strength because one of the things we do need is new sources of base metal.
There is one just across the borderline from the northern part of Alberta and along the southern shore of Great Slave lake fifty miles or so east of Hay River settlement.
I point these things out merely to emphasize the need for early action to get that rail connection from the Peace river territory into that area to make transportation possible the year round; to make it possible for these mines and ore bodies to be worked on a competitive basis. Not only that, but I am satisfied it would help open up vast areas of fine farm territory which would contribute to the support of the railway in the years to come. I am sure the minister agrees with me when I say that in times past transportation has preceded intensive development rather than following it. I am quite sure that he must agree with me when I say that in the early days of Canada the railways did not wait to see the development well on its way before they started building railroads. They had some pioneering spirit in those days.
Today it appears the railways do not want to move unless they see an assured immediate return from freight haulage that will make it possible for them to pay their full expenses from the beginning. I do not think that is the spirit at all, and I am certain-the minister I believe will agree with me-he will if he thinks upon it-that if the Northern Alberta Railways were not operated under a joint ownership, if there were more competition up there a rail line would be built into the Northwest Territories very early. I believe that the northern areas would have rail transportation much sooner if the Canadian National Railways owned and operated the Northern Alberta Railways by themselves. The Canadian Pacific Railway, of course, because of the fact that it is deeply interested in the Pine Point ore bed through the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company which owns, I think, the greater portion of the mineral rights there, will continue to stay in the area just as long as it possibly can. It may never get out. But I do believe that the minister, if he will put pressure on his colleague, the Minister of Transport, and others of his colleagues, could succeed in getting a railhead 400 miles farther down in the Mackenzie area than it is now, and he could get that soon.
I know the argument has often been raised -and I believe the railroads have said this recently-that if the government of Canada were to subsidize the full cost of the building of the road at the present time there would not be enough tonnage hauled over the railroad from Grimshaw to Hay River to pay the costs. Well, I am not so sure of that. I should like to see more figures. That may

have been true a few years ago, but I remind the minister that every few miles along that route down the Mackenzie highway farming areas have been opened up that are now producing very large quantities of grain and livestock and lumber. I remind the minister that those areas are being extended. The Alberta government is opening up very large tracts of land for settlement. They are offering it on a homestead basis to young men who wish to establish themselves in farming and for a $10 registration fee they are able to get 320 acres of that land for development, and it is going fast. The area is building up rapidly and within a few years, if transportation were provided, the tonnage of agricultural products coming out of that country would be a surprise to everybody because it is good country; it is productive, and the change that has taken place on the face of that land in the past four or five years is amazing to anybody who has seen it.
This is completely apart from what is being found in the northern territories, and I am sure the minister will agree with me when I say this: add the potential ore development, the potential oil development, the other developments in the north to the farming possibilities in the northern Peace river country and you can make a very fine case for the early building of a rail line from Grim-shaw into Great Slave lake. Therefore, I urge the minister to use every energy that he possesses to get that development. He should talk sternly and earnestly to his colleague, the Minister of Transport, and to the railways. We will back him, and we certainly do not want to do anything to make it difficult for him to talk. We want him to know that we are supporting him and, certainly, the policy which was outlined by him this afternoon and by the commissioner of the northern territories, Mr. Robertson, as we find it in his brief to the royal commission.


Mr. Bryson:: Mr. Chairman, because the hon. member for Peace River and the hon. member for Calgary North dealt with several of the matters which I had intended to bring to the attention of the minister I will attempt to save the time of the committee by not repeating some of the things that have already been said. Therefore, in the few minutes at my disposal I shall confine my remarks to a few general observations on one or two other aspects of the minister's department. I think everyone agrees that the prosperity of Canada at the present time depends very largely on our oil and mineral resources. The continued expansion of those resources will bring greater returns to the economy of this country, and therefore we can say that Canada's north holds the key 67509-438J
Supply-Northern Affairs to Canada's future economic prosperity in so far as it depends on our oil and mineral resources.
Someone said a while ago that the potentialities of Canada's north are tremendous. I would suggest-and I think everyone would agree, including the minister-that at the present time we are unacquainted with those potentialities. Certainly, the expansion and the development that have taken place in our north country have been very spectacular. Spectacular as that development may be, it must be remembered that little or nothing was done prior to the outbreak of world war II. For that reason, and because of recent happenings in the north, the developments have been somewhat of a spectacular nature. However, it seems to me the problem we are confronted with today is to see that there is a successful and orderly development of our north country.
I am sure that those of us who have had an opportunity-and the minister will agree with this, too-of flying over our Canadian north could not help being impressed with that vast land, its sparse population and the over-all inhospitality of the country. Certainly, it would be a bold and irresponsible person who would suggest that to develop the Canadian north does not present apparently almost insurmountable problems. However, we have to tackle the problem. The pattern of development must be such that the wealth that is created accrues to the people of Canada; and secondly, and possibly more important still, we must see to it that the social aspects of the native people are protected in order that there is the least possible dislocation so that those people might be integrated into the kind of life that they are going to have to come in contact with if they are going to survive and get for themselves the kind of welfare that is necessary. It is to be hoped that we shall not repeat the blunders and do the things that we have done in the past with regard to this very important problem of seeing to it that the native people of the north are given a fair break, a chance to retain their dignity and to get for themselves the kind of economic security that is so necessary.
Mr. Chairman, this problem of the native people seems to me to have been uppermost in the minds of the commissioners of the Northwest Territories when they presented their brief to the Gordon commission on Canada's economic prospects last fall, for these commissioners pointed out in many instances the great necessity for the immediate development of the mineral and oil resources of Canada's north in order to make it possible for the native population to survive. They point out that because of the

Supply-Northern Affairs health Services that have been given to these people over the past few years the population has increased and the effect has been that the game resources are almost depleted.
As those of us who have had anything to do with Indians are aware-I am not acquainted with Eskimos but I presume they would have the same characteristics-native people are not conservation-minded. Because of this the game resources upon which these people rely for their welfare have become depleted. We now have the situation where the native people are depending more and more upon commercial food supplies. Because of the fact that fur prices have declined and deteriorated substantially over the last two or three years the native now finds himself in a very precarious position. With the money he receives from his furs he is not able to buy enough food to maintain his health.
I wish to refer to the report made by Mr. Gordon Robertson, one of the commissioners, when he was giving evidence before the Gordon commission. He said that:
The Indian population had to live on sub-1933 incomes while paying 1956 prices plus high freight charges.
The result of what has taken place is that the natives are moving to the settlements and are accepting seasonal employment whenever it is available. They are recipients not only of the family allowance but also relief payments.
It has been suggested that relief payments should be increased and one suggestion is that they should be doubled. I think that would be disastrous because the recipients of large amounts of relief soon become economic derelicts. They lose their selfrespect and it automatically follows that they lose their place in society; and when the day comes when economic opportunities are made available for these people they will not be able to fit in nor grasp them because of their dependency on relief payments.
In the interim I think it is important to maintain their natural way of life. I think we will have to do that for some time to come until the day arrives when integration will be possible. This will facilitate an orderly and natural adjustment to a new way of life. I think the government is going to be forced to undertake a conservation program to conserve not only the fur but the game in that area in order that these people will have some source of income in the intervening period which they must face.
Along with the recommendations made by the Northwest Territories council I would also suggest that the government give serious consideration to supporting the price of fur.

I realize that this presents a genuine problem and I believe the commissioners who are close to the situation realize this, too. However, surely it is not an insurmountable problem; surely a solution can be found. I can foresee that there might be some abuses and some bootlegging might take place although supporting the price of fur would be comparatively costly. I wonder if we can afford not to do this. I would strongly suggest that this should be given serious consideration by the government in the interim period these people are going to experience.
I believe, too, it would be feasible for the government to establish trading stores in the north. We have established trading stores in the province of Saskatchewan and they have been of great benefit to the native population. It would appear to me that this would do away with many of the questionable practices that are carried on by the occasional free trader and also by the Hudson's Bay Company.
I recall being in a trading store in the comparatively far north not long ago and seeing on the shelves rows of canned dog food. I said to the trader, "It looks a little ridiculous to me to see Indians buying prepared dog food in cans and paying the price that would have to be asked for this commodity." I was told that they did not feed it to their dogs but were using it as the basic ingredient to make home brew. I think we have here a glaring example of the exploitation of these native people by unscrupulous operators. I would strongly suggest to the minister that he give consideration to the establishment of trading stores that would have the interests of the natives at heart.
I would also suggest that the government should undertake a program of providing free air transportation and other free facilities to native people in order that they may go out prospecting for minerals. I believe these people could do an excellent job in this regard. They have become perfectly adapted to the country and the climate and I am sure this would be one means of providing extremely profitable and suitable employment for them.
Concerning the question of education, while I agree that under some circumstances residential schools perhaps cannot be avoided I would suggest that wherever possible the government should establish day schools in preference to residential schools. I urge that there should be the closest co-operation between the officials of the Northwest Territories council and the minister's department in selecting a curriculum.

I was glad to learn this afternoon that the minister is co-operating with the council and that the curriculum being drawn up is emphasizing various skills that will be of some practical value to the native people rather than more academic subjects.
I also suggest there will have to be a revision of salaries for school teachers going into the north country. I think it is unfortunate that a school teacher going from a province into the territories is not able to have his or her superannuation recognized by the province which he or she has left to go into the territories to take up a teaching job for the minister's department. I know of one or two instances where qualified teachers with a certain dedication went into that country and found out that their superannuation ceased, and they immediately returned to the province which they had left. I think that is unfortunate.


Jean Lesage: Might I draw the attention of the hon. member to the fact that the teachers in the north are federal civil servants?


Hugh Alexander Bryson: That is the point I am trying to make. If they had ten years in a province, as an example, their superannuation would cease, and they would become civil servants.


Jean Lesage: I shall have to discuss that with the Minister of Finance. I am not aware of that policy.


Hugh Alexander Bryson: Much has been said today
about transportation. I am not going to deal at length with that. I think the question was covered ably by the last two speakers. I am not acquainted with the situation as it applies to the railroads and some other aspect of the subject that was discussed, but I suggest that the minister give greater assistance to the mining roads in the provinces. In many instances the provinces are unable to finance roads within their boundaries, and so I think it is imperative that the department give greater assistance for more roads from the provinces into the territories. If it means that a railroad would help, it should be built. Certainly the brief presented to the Gordon commission about that question showed very forcibly that it would be in the interests of Canada and the interests of the north country that such a railroad be built.
We have spent a great deal of money on the D.E.W. lines and on other military installations in the north, and I am convinced in my own mind that they will add little or nothing to the economic prosperity of this country in the future. I would stress again greater supervision of the native population. I think that point has been brought up over and over again in this house during this session, that the native population, Eskimo and
Supply-Northern Affairs Indian, will need to have greater supervision if we are going to get the kind of results we all hope for. I noticed an item in the press not long ago; I am not going to read it, but it is very critical of the kind of supervision that is being given to these people by the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.
In conclusion I should like to say that it is the prime interest of the government and the minister who has charge of this department to see to the welfare of our northern native people. We have two resources to develop: our natural resources and our human resources. I am sure that our record in the past has not been too good, but certainly, we can develop and integrate our northern native human resources if we tackle the problem with determination and imagination.


Harry Oliver White: I rise tonight to take part in the discussion of the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources because of the fact that, whilst the department deals more with northern Ontario, we in western Ontario are very much interested in the department, and I should like to make a few comments on it.
People from the United States are much more inclined to pay attention to their historical background, whilst we Canadians, on the other hand, are probably prone to under-emphasize our historical past. Those of us who pay any attention to history will realize that it is only through the building up of history and traditions that a nation becomes great. It has been said that at the time of the French revolution all the past was cut off and forgotten, and since that time the French nation has never been able to rebuild the traditions of that country as they once were.
Consequently, I am asking that the minister, through the historic sites and monuments board and otherwise, may influence the Canadian people to take a greater interest in our history. While I am dealing with that, I may say that the present chairman of the historic sites and monuments board, Professor Fred Landon of the University of Western Ontario-he	is from London,
Ontario-has done very fine and worthwhile work in that connection. However, whilst that is being done, I do not think that enough is being done. Some encouragement should be given to municipalities to pay some attention to their historical backgrounds. There are a good many societies of one kind and another-I shall mention only the women's institute-that could devote one day or one of their programs to the historical points of interest

Supply-Northern Affairs in the local community. I think there is a very worth-while field for work there.
History does not mean perhaps quite so much to present as to future generations of this country. It is because of that fact that I make this plea tonight. In my county of Middlesex there are now streams on which were situated water mills on which pioneers depended for the processing of their wheat into flour, and many of the people living in those areas are not aware that in those very communities there exist these water mills. I am thinking particularly of the one on the Medway creek, a tributary of the Thames- I am coming to the Thames valley-and that comes under the minister's department. That old mill stream there is almost within the boundaries of the city of London, which has now grown up around it. At one time there was a thriving community at that mill which is now forgotten and which could well be commemorated. It is almost within a stone's throw of the University of Western Ontario.
While we are speaking of historic sites and monuments, I should like to mention that the first minister of agriculture in Sir John Macdonald's government was a Londoner, Sir John Carling, and he established the experimental farm system throughout Canada. The first director of that institution was also one of the illustrious Saunders family of London, Ontario. I think some recognition should be given to the contribution these people have made to the development of Canada, not forgetting Sir Adam Beck, the father of Ontario hydro.
To change the subject for a moment, we are interested in developments thousands of miles from Canada and we spend a lot of money abroad, but at the same time I think we should give some thought to the conservation and use of our resources at home. I am thinking particularly of our water resources. We in western Ontario are very much aware of the scarcity of water at times and yet we are situated in a peninsula almost surrounded by the great lakes. While the minister and I are well aware of the fact that the Ontario water resources committee under the chairmanship of Mr. Snider is doing very worth-while work, the installation of water mains to serve the western Ontario area will be a costly process. As that region is bound to develop industrially and as federal income from that area is also bound to increase with the development of that part of the country, I think it would be wise to develop some plan that would guarantee long-term loans to the municipalities of western Ontario to assist them in the installation of water mains. I feel certain this could be worked out.

On unimpeachable authority I understand that a 12-inch water main could be installed from Ipperwash to London which would serve the many municipalities through which it would pass for some $8 or $9 million.
I also want to point out to the minister that western Ontario and the county of Middlesex particularly were rather disappointed that no provision was made in the estimates for the completion of the dams and water conservation project on the upper Thames river during this year. However, we are satisfied that while it was not included in this year's estimates it is certain that next year will be our turn. I think I should also point out to the minister that it would be wise to complete one river development as far as humanly possible and as quickly as possible in order to have it as a pilot plant, as it were, or pattern from which to gain experience in any future river developments, whether they be in Quebec, the maritimes or the western provinces. When we have gone as far as we have with the development on the Thames it should not take a great deal more to complete it, and then you would have a pilot plant in operation.
Fundamental to soil and water conservation is the development of forest. I think that is one thing about which a lot is said but about which not enough is done, and in my opinion many more submarginal areas than are now used for forest purposes could well be devoted to that use. Unless it is the growing of Christmas trees, it is not likely that any one private individual in western Ontario could plant a forest and expect to reap a harvest from it in his lifetime. Consequently, private individuals are not inclined to go into the reforestation of private land. Therefore I think the future of reforestation must be placed more and more in the hands of river development and conservation authorities if we are going to get the maximum results from forest planting.
I should probably mention here that the forest area in the county of Middlesex is somewhere around 7 per cent, which is about the lowest of any county in the province of Ontario. On the other hand, that only demonstrates how much of the land in the county is suitable for agricultural purposes and has been devoted to that for the last 100 years.
To return to the minister's opening remarks, I was certainly glad to hear him speak in such glowing terms about our national parks throughout Canada. Now is the time to make provision for these parks. As he mentioned, once the development period is over the costs will not be too great and we will have these parks as an investment for future generations for a long time

to come. With the vast area that we have in our country, 1 think we can well afford to have the beauty spots and large areas of Canada as national parks.
Finally, I want to join with the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings in his plea that the old supreme court building at the foot of the hill be kept as a national monument because of the associations that it has for the people of Canada and its historical association with the fathers of confederation and 1867.	.


Mr. Leboe:: Mr. Chairman, I assure you I shall not be long, but I do not want the minister to take it, from the fact that I do not intend to speak for very long, that I do not want him to listen to me. First of all, I should like to say that I appreciate a great deal the co-operation I have had from the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources and his department in connection with some very vexing problems. I assure him that I appreciate it very much. I was glad to hear the hon. member for Peace River bring to the attention of the house the need for transportation facilities in the area lying north of the Peace river. I should like to call attention to the fact that I believe it is the intention of the British Columbia government to push the Pacific Great Eastern Railway 50 miles farther north to Fort St. John in the Peace river area which is in a direct line toward the Hay river district. I do not know whether or not the route is feasible. I have been told that it is, and it would be a very direct route for trade going to the coast.
In dealing with transportation I would mention again that I should like to see closer co-operation between departments so far as that problem is concerned. I realize that highways are not a problem of the minister unless they are within the parks, but the development of the northern area depends on transportation facilities, air, rail and highway. I would hope that the minister would get together with the Minister of Public Works and the Minister of National Defence and try to work out some way by which at least a portion of the highway between Dawson Creek and Fort St. John could be paved. It is a very important section of the highway that leads to Alaska. The traffic is very heavy and the dust conditions have already caused loss of life in numerous instances.
I should like to make one more point before I sit down. I agree wholeheartedly with the minister in what he has to say about the national parks being for Canadians. However, there are some of our national parks which are astride great passes
Supply-Northern Affairs throughout the Rocky mountains. These parks having been laid out astride these passes in the mountains, it becomes evident that highway traffic for trucks and other commercial vehicles should be allowed to go through. The park with which I am mostly concerned is Jasper park. The total distance from the east boundary to the west boundary is only about 65 miles. I suggest that for 65 miles of highway it would not be amiss if the tourist traffic had roads for it only. Those people that are going to use the park- the Canadian people and others such as Americans-would like to have roads for tourists only. It is only a matter of 65 miles and there is lots of room for other highways, if necessary, to be built from one border to the other of the park and thus allow commercial traffic to pass through this particular area.
I know that the minister has the matter in mind and I know he is working towards that end. However, I do not know whether it is fully realized just how urgent the need is for something to be done in the very near future in that regard. I would hope that the park would be labelled as a natural playground as much as possible and yet have the facilities for. through traffic developed through this area within the very near future.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I listened with a great deal of interest to the minister's statement as given on July 12 and completed this afternoon. I agreed with his attitude towards our national parks so much that I had great difficulty in not saying "amen" a good many times. However, one must realize that the minister does not make a comprehensive and complete statement without a background of some fairly good officials. I want to pay a compliment to the officials of his department. I think we in Canada are very fortunate in having the officials we have in the water resources branch, the parks division, the forest branch, the wildlife service and the northern administration. In this department we have some officials whom I know other governments would be very pleased to take from us. I do not say that only from my personal experience. This is a particularly interesting department to me. I meet persons in universities and persons in other governments and I have heard those comments made on a number of occasions.
The minister has responsibility for a most interesting and important department. In fact, the welfare of millions of Canadians and their happiness to a great extent depend upon the policies and the administration of the minister's department. I have a few

Supply-Northern Affairs brief comments to make on particular items of the minister's estimates but at this time I want to advance what I consider to be a good idea. I must admit that those who know me say that I am rather fertile as far as ideas are concerned. Once upon a time I thought I had invented a device for perpetual motion but it did not work. However, I invented an everlasting stoneboat that would nearly run itself. I have experimented with so many things in my lifetime that my wife and daughters are now inclined to refer to me as Major Hoople. Anyway, I suggest that the idea 1 wish to advance briefly this evening is a sound and good idea.
For several years I have introduced a resolution urging a federal-provincial conference on conservation with a view to establishing a nation-wide policy on this question. However, at this time I wish to stress the necessity for a national voluntary organization that would promote an understanding, as a result of voluntary action, of the principles of conservation and would develop what I think should be termed an ecological conscience in Canada.
We in this group are concerned with the health of human beings and the health of our national resources. I think that fact has been very appropriately indicated this evening by the remarks of the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort who does not think it worth while to stop and listen to what I am going to say this evening. He dealt with the human resources that come under the administration of the minister's department. I am going to deal very briefly with the renewable natural resources. I think that on the health of both of those resources depends the prosperity and the happiness of the Canadian people.
I suggest that this department and the provincial departments of a similar nature require the co-operation of a national voluntary organization to assist them in the same way as the Health League of Canada assists the Department of National Health and Welfare and the provincial health departments.
I understand that the Health League of Canada was formed in 1921, at the request of this dominion government, to assist in a nation-wide publicity program and campaign in connection with the co-operative efforts of the dominion and provincial governments to control certain diseases at that time. In view of the need for popular education in many health fields, the scope of this organization has greatly broadened in recent years, and it now undertakes a nation-wide education program in the field of health generally. It also sponsors two annual events in Canada,
[Mr. Herridge.l
namely national health week and national immunization week which I understand are considered to be the greatest single annual events of this type recognized in Canada. These events receive the co-operation of the federal and provincial governments. I understand that the health league also publishes a national magazine known as "Health" and sends weekly news releases on health to all the newspapers in Canada in French and in English. In recognition of the valuable services it renders in this field-services that a government department cannot render, namely in education and the building up of public opinion in support of progressive health legislation-the government of Canada in recent years has been in the habit of giving a grant of $10,000 a year. I think that is far too little. As a matter of fact, had I been in the committee the other day when these estimates were under consideration, I intended to say so. But you cannot be in two places at once. I maintain, Mr. Chairman, that we need a similar type of national voluntary organization to perform similar services in preserving the health of our national resources in this country. I believe we need two aspects of co-operation. We need government organization, government conferences decisions and programs. If these are going to be promoted and administered effectively, we need the same type of voluntary organization in this field that we have in the field of national health and welfare. I know that in this country at the present time we have the Canadian Forestry Association, the Agricultural Institute of Canada and various engineering institutes and wildlife organizations all doing valuable work in their particular fields. However, while they all do a certain amount of educational and publicity work, their problems are largely technical and scientific. The greater part of their membership is composed of men with technical training and experience in the development of research and programs and things of that type.
I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that we need a national voluntary organization to supplement the activities of government. Such an organization, in my opinion, could deal with the subject in general, not in a scientific way, in order to build up a philosophy in support of the spirit of conservation and it would obtain the support of multitudes in this country. Its prime purpose would be to get the people interested in and concerned about the conservation of our natural resources. Now, before proceeding-I am not going to detain the house very long this evening-I do want to quote very briefly from an excellent article that came into my hands. This was an address, I believe, given by Mr. Mair, who is

director of the wildlife service, to a wildlife conference in the United States. It is entitled "Towards an ecological conscience". I do consider that an excellent title. I would advise anyone who is interested in this subject to get a copy of this address. I think in its general contribution to the whole question it is well worth anyone's while studying and publicizing the ideas contained therein.
I just want to quote two or three brief paragraphs because I think Mr. Mair has presented the subject in a most interesting and, in my opinion, somewhat unusual manner. He has this to say in one place:
Let us confine our thinking for the moment, however, to the more immediate future. There is grave reason to doubt that we are presently sufficiently aware of our own place in the web of life to intelligently utilize our natural resources. To quote from another article, published in the Pennsylvania Game News: ". . . We have never learned the art of living with each other in this world without destroying ourselves and the natural resources that have made possible this great technological progress. Our tendency towards wars of self-destruction is surpassed only by our devastation of the resources that support them."
Then, there are two more paragraphs which I think are well worth inserting in the record.
Those of us convinced of the vital place of nature, its waters, trees, flowers and wildlife, in our way of life must be strong to fight for retention of adequate living space for all these and ourselves today, and every day. But we must do very much more. We must be unceasing in our efforts to bring to others an understanding and an appreciation of the ecological concept and their place in it, of the land ethic and their close dependence upon soil and water.
Then, again:
We must ensure that our people become Intellectually and emotionally concerned with the land and water and the complex pattern of growth they support. Unless we can do this, to the end that every person, from the trapper and farmer to the business magnate and legislator, is proud to work with our living natural resources rather than ready to abuse them, we are fighting a losing battle.
I think Mr. Mair puts the ecological concept of the problem before us in very interesting language. I think if that is going to be done we have to have more than just government action. We have to have voluntary action along very much the same lines as we have voluntary action in support of the Department of National Health and Welfare. We have the foundation for such an organization now. We have the various conservation leagues in the various provinces across Canada. We have the wildlife associations:	we have
naturalists societies and we have youth organizations that could be utilized to great advantage. In British Columbia we have an annual provincial conference on natural resources. What we need is co-ordination of all these voluntary activities on a national 67509-439
Supply-Northern Affairs basis to focus attention on this question, to develop interest and carry on a continual educational program.
This will require three or four things. It will require naturally a small, devoted and well informed national staff. It would demand an annual conference something after the fashion of the conference held in the United States by the wildlife organization, which over there also includes forestry resources, water resources and so on. It will require a national magazine of popular content, not a technical magazine. It will require continual publicity, news releases in the press after the fashion of the national health league. Now, if we can get this type of organization going by co-ordinating all the persons and organizations interested in this country, I think we can do a great deal. The work ought to be supported by much greater expenditures on the part of federal and provincial governments in the protection of these most valuable natural resources.
Now, all this will require money. In my opinion the minister's department would be well advised to copy the example set by the dominion government in 1921 when it invited the public to form a national organization on a voluntary basis and at that time gave a grant of $20,000 a year. I think the minister's department would be well advised if it were to promote the same type of national organization that would have a popular appeal and that would build up support for this idea across the country, and I suggest do the same work for the health of our natural resources as the health league is doing for the health of human beings. Now, such an organization, if it were developed and promoted, should receive grants from the federal government and possibly some assistance from the provincial governments.
There is one point I wish to make. We have a lot of Canadians who have benefited materially and financially from the development and exploitation of natural resources. I think the support for such an organization provides a splendid opportunity for our wealthier citizens to assist in financing this type of educational organization. I believe this is a very necessary step in the development of the concept of an over-all conservation program across this country. In my opinion, we must use every effort possible to bring Canadians to an appreciation of their kinship with the soil and the resources which sustain and develop the abundant life which we in Canada at this time are fortunate to enjoy. I believe this can be done most effectively by the co-operation of the government and a voluntary organization such as I have suggested. When the minister replies on the various items I would very much like-I have

Supply-Northern Affairs submitted my resolution for quite a number of years without much success-to hear his comments on the suggestion I have put forward at this time.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: The Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources covers a great variety of activities. I do not intend at this time, and at this late hour in our proceedings to make any comprehensive or detailed survey. Rather, I would reserve any comments I have to make on the incidental items of the department until such time as we come to those items. Also, I would think it would be a good thing, if there are no other speakers, if we had a chance to hear a reply from the minister.
There is a matter that is in abeyance that I should like to bring once again to the attention of the house. I did so on June 22 and at that time the Minister of Finance, speaking for the government, said that a reply would be made at the appropriate time. I raise the matter again on the estimates of this department because it is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources that this matter now lies, according to the information I have. I refer to the Fontana case, which is becoming somewhat of a celebrated case in Canada. It concerns the expropriation of a certain parcel of property in the vicinity of the town of Virden in the province of Manitoba. Just to give the committee and the minister some idea of the nature of this particular case I will take a few moments to review it briefly.
The case is named after one August Fontana who was farming this parcel of land up until the year 1940. At that time a part of his farm was required for use as an airport and expropriation action was taken by the government through a representative of the Canadian National Railways land branch to carry out the necessary proceedings with Mr. Fontana. Mr. Fontana, incidentally, was a successful farmer by this time, after having passed through difficult years of the early 1930's, the dirty thirties of the drought, and was once again on his feet in cultivating this land. He had come to this country from Italy in the early part of the century, and became a naturalized citizen in the year 1904. Since he was a patriotic Canadian, as I indicated on June 22, he quite willingly allowed his land to be used for defence purposes. Unfortunately, Mr. Fontana is not literate in the English language, and he was not fully aware of all the legal niceties involved in the expropriation transaction. Therefore, no steps were taken to reserve the mineral rights, although at that time-and I
[Mr. Herridge.l
feel this is important to the case-he did request the privilege of continuing to remove gravel from this particular piece of property. Since that time-in 1950 to be precise- minerals in this particular section of the country had become valuable. Oil had been discovered, and Mr. Fontana took steps to inquire about the ownership of the mineral rights. He was under the impression that they had been reserved in his name, but he discovered that they had been reserved by the crown and through a series of proceedings the crown refused to take any action to reconvey them or to make any compensation for their loss. The original price that was paid to Mr. Fontana was $9,000. When the minerals were offered for lease by the crown I believe a bid of some $200,000 was received, with other concessions. Therefore, it would appear that the crown stands to make a substantial sum of money at the expense of Mr. Fontana.
Various parties have concerned themselves with this particular case. I had a return on the subject brought down in the house on June 25 of this year. It is sessional paper No. 243. It contained many interesting letters from various people, legal advisers and so forth, who were making representations to the government on behalf of Mr. Fontana. One letter I do wish to refer to is from Dr. Hannam, who is president of the Canadian federation of agriculture. On March 15, 1955 he wrote to the Minister of Agriculture, and the two pertinent paragraphs I should like to place on the record are the following:
Considering that the action taken by Mr. Fontana in selling his land was involuntary in the first place, and that federal acquisition of the mineral rights was not necessary to the purpose for which the land was expropriated, it would not seem unreasonable to us that these mineral rights should revert to their original owner.
However, we understand the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, which has administration of these oil rights, as in an advanced stage of negotiations for selling them on lease, and court action to halt these negotiations has, as of today, failed. Mr. Gerrand is asking Mr. Lesage if he will hold up the completion of sale of the lease until he can, if his request is granted, make further representations on this matter to a committee of the cabinet. You have, we understand, a copy of the letter to Mr. Lesage. We certainly feel that Mr. Fontana's claim to consideration is sufficiently well-founded that completion of the lease arrangements should be held up until further consideration is given the possibility of returning the mineral rights on the property to him.
In the hope you will do whatever you can to avoid an injustice being done in this case, I am
Yours sincerely,
H. H. Hannam,
President and Managing Director.
A copy of the letter was sent to the Minister of Justice as well. Now, I re-echo the

sentiments of Dr. Hannam in reference to this case when he says that unless some action is taken to compensate Mr. Fontana for the inadvertent loss of what would have normally been his had he not been asked to surrender the property, unless something is done to recompense him, to make some suitable adjustment, it seems to me that a grave injustice is going to be done to this Canadian citizen. He is 88 years of age today; he has a large family who are also interested in the matter and, as I emphasized on June 22, he is merely asking for the same privileges that have arisen from the possession of this land in this particular section by other farmers who, because of fortuitous circumstances, were not required to surrender their parcels of property for defence purposes.
Several prominent lawyers have interested themselves in this case. Dr. Hannam, of the federation of agriculture, as I have already indicated, has become extremely interested and I feel it is important because it concerns the rights of a private citizen being invaded by government. I am sure that if the government will view it in this way they will take every step possible. Certainly, there are all sorts of provisions in the Expropriation Act to make it possible for them to compensate Mr. Fontana or reconvey the mineral rights to him. In this day and age when governments more and more are invading the rights of private property owners I think we should lean over backwards to see that no injustice is done to this particular citizen. I leave the matter with the minister; I believe it is the responsibility of his department.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, at the suggestion of the hon. member for Calgary North and the hon. member for Kootenay West I will be answering the various questions that have been raised during the general discussion when we reach each branch of the administration. Because of the diversity of this department may I suggest that we pass the supplementary estimates as we go along. May I have the unanimous consent and cooperation of my hon. friends in this regard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
293.	Northern research co-ordination centre, including a grant of $10,000 to the Arctic institute of North America; and an amount of $15,000 for grants in aid of northern research subject to allocation by the treasury board, $75,158.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I raised this particular matter when the minister was introducing his bill concerning northern power development and I discovered I was somewhat out of order in doing so during the discussion on that particular piece of 67509-439J
Supply-Northern Affairs legislation. It would seem to me that item 293 concerning itself with the Northern Research Co-ordination Centre might have something to do with all manner of research that is taking place in northern Canada as well as the northern part of the U.S.S.R.
The minister will recall that the other day I referred to an article in the Financial Post of March 3, 1956 which suggested that rather interesting experiments were being carried out in weather modification and water diversion in the Soviet Arctic which would have some considerable bearing upon climatic conditions in Canada's northland.
In order to indicate that this is a subject which is being seriously considered I want to read a brief excerpt from this article which is entitled, "How Russ Plan to Heat Arctic Hits Canada". The author, a Mr. W. G. R. Cameron, is a responsible scientist, so I am told, and as the introduction to the article says:
This is not science fiction.
The article continues:
W. G. R. Cameron, the co-author of this article with Post staff writer Donald R. Gordon, is an eccnomist who has devoted special study to announced Russian plans to change the northern hemisphere. This article is based on Russian announcements and on the interpretation thereof by Canadian scientists.
Apparently our Canadian scientists are concerning themselves with this question. The body of the article goes on to say that as a result of the program that is to be undertaken by Russia we can perhaps anticipate:
A vast market garden in the Northwest Territories. Tennis in November on the shores of lake Athabaska.
The article goes on to state further:
. . . it's Russia's dream, and the dream could have that impact on Canada. As successive steps of the red master plan are completed, these disturbances could occur:
Disruption of the fragile climatic balance over Europe bringing longer, more bitter winter weather, eating into the vital European food growing season.
Diversion of chill Arctic waters down the Canadian east coast past Halifax, adding to storms and early frosts in the fall, lengthening the winter perhaps tying up Halifax as a winter port.
An estimated five foot rise in the world's ocean levels, flooding parts of London, New York, the Netherlands and hundreds of acres of coastal land.
Now, that sounds like science fiction-


Jean Lesage: I believe you have touched it.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: -but it appears in a responsible newspaper, the Financial Post, and the introductory statement which I have read indicates that this is not science fiction.
Already the U.S.S.R. is taking steps to cut off the flow of Arctic waters into the Pacific ocean and this will have a climatic effect.

Supply-Northern Affairs It is damming the two large rivers, the Ob and the Yenesei flowing into the Russian Arctic, and it would appear they are experimenting extensively with weather modifications.
I would like to ask the following question, Mr. Chairman. Just what negotiations go on concerning matters of this kind on an international level?


Jean Lesage: There is none, sir.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Pardon?


Jean Lesage: There are no international negotiations concerning this matter. I had occasion to read the article just mentioned by the hon. member for Brandon-Souris and that is the limit of my knowledge of the question.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: There are no international channels of communication?


Jean Lesage: On this question?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Yes.


Jean Lesage: There are no international discussions on this question, I can assure the hon. member.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National parks branch-
294.	Branch administration, $90,852.
Edward Turney Applewhaite: The hon. member for Saskatoon.


Mr. Nowlan:: Ten o'clock.


Mr. Knight:: Mr. Chairman, I want to say a word concerning national parks. I have just come from a committee meeting and I do not know whether or not this is the item.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: We are discussing item 294, concerning national parks.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Do you want me to call it ten o'clock, sir?


Jean Lesage: Please proceed.


Some hon. Members:: Go ahead.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I do not know who is going to make the decision but as I am on my feet, may I proceed? I understand we are on item 294 concerning national parks.
Some years ago I had occasion to quarrel with the administration of the national park at Waskesiu on the subject of what are commonly called shack tents. Might I say first of all that my main interest in Waskesiu as a national park is that it provides a healthful and pleasant holiday ground for many people who cannot afford to go elsewhere. I might say, too, that while it is outside of my constituency my particular concern is
[Mr. Dinsdale.)
due to the fact that the people of my city use that park almost exclusively as a holiday ground.
The shack tenter is usually a humble person. Quite often he does not have a car of his own and he has to use the facilities of bus transportation to go for his holiday.
I can well understand that it is a laudible ambition for the superintendent of a national park to keep the most frequented part in an orderly condition. He likes to have cottages built there that are a credit to the place; but if my conception of what a national park ought to be is correct, then I think there is some validity in my argument that these people should perhaps have even particular consideration.
The man who can afford a better holiday who is not pleased with the place can take his car and go off somewhere else and can afford to pay for accommodation. These people, however, are pretty well required to stay where they are because of their financial situation.
On the occasion I referred to a number of years ago, seven or eight years ago perhaps, these shack tenters had a very good location and were on the edge of the water. At that time the administration apparently thought of these shack tents as rather unsightly dwelling places and attempted to move them back into the bush away from the best facilities. They rented and sold the ground previously occupied by the shack tenters at expensive rates to people who could construct a class of cottage that was acceptable in the eyes of the park administration. I did take up the matter with the department. I think I had some influence in getting a better deal for those people, because, particularly in a national park, I think, those people have just as much right as anyone else to the waterfront. That went along for two or three years, but after that they were not able to resist the pressure and they were moved away from there, with the result that the location is not as good as many other locations were. That is the background.
Now I want to come to the particular situation today and I want to put in a particular plea with the minister for the type of person to make sure that those people have at least equal consideration with other people, and when they have set up homesteads-I use that word, of course, in a metaphorical sense -when they have squatted, if you like, or homesteaded on that particular piece of ground, I think it would have to be something important before they are moved away from a place which they have used for years. I expect that the same applies not only to the national park at Waskesiu but to other national parks of the same nature.

Now I come to my second point, and it is very short, that is to say, a great many of these people who build shack tents think that there is a good deal of unnecessary fuss about having to take them down every year. Whether they use this piece of land with the shack tent on it for one month or for two or three, they are charged the same fee, and under those circumstances they think they should be allowed to leave that building, because it is a little building, in position. Some of them think they should not be forced to take these things down in the wintertime. Although they are only going to spend a week or two weeks there, they have to have that erected again, and they are put to a considerable amount of trouble.
Just for the record, I want to define what I mean by a shack tent. A shack tent is a small building of which the walls are made of lumber, and it is customary to have on top, to cast off the rain, a peaked roof usually made of canvas. Those who complain about this say that most of them would be perfectly willing, if the department would allow them, to leave those things there permanently and that they would be perfectly willing to finish them off in a more substantial shape by putting on a permanent roof rather than the wobbly canvas thing, which gets out of repair and makes the place look not as neat as it otherwise would be. That is a cause for complaint, and, although it is not my constituency, I make no apologies for raising the point, because it is the people of Saskatoon city in particular, and more than other people, who use that as a playground.
However, the regulation of the department as it is now, I understand, is that these things have to be taken down. The top has to be removed. The sides have to be piled up. I presume that a caretaker or someone at the park takes care of them. When these people come up for a short holiday for a few weeks in the following summer, the whole process has to be gone through again and the thing has to be erected, only to be taken down in the immediate future.
Those are the two points I wanted to draw to the minister's attention. If I have to make a judgment, the first one is the more important, that is to say, a rather humble person who probably needs a holiday more than the others but who cannot be selective in a choice of a location or indeed of a park should get some special consideration in that matter, particularly if he has established through time something of a right in that particular manner. I should like to hear from the minister, who has his officials in front of him, his comment on what I have said and whether
Supply-Northern Affairs he could tell me if in fact I have painted something of a true picture of the situation.


Jean Lesage: The plea that has been made by the hon. member for Saskatoon is exactly the kind of demand that I deplored this afternoon when I outlined what the policy of the department was on the national parks. The shack tents in Waskesiu are not very beautiful to see. I do not know whether the hon. member for Saskatoon has seen them as I have seen them, but they are certainly not a great asset to the beauty of the national parks. It is not surprising that we have to have certain regulations.
This afternoon when I was outlining the policy that we should follow with regard to the parks, one which was approved tonight by the hon. member for Kootenay West, a colleague of the hon. member for Saskatoon, I said:
When It becomes necessary, in view of the greatly increased numbers of visitors, to rearrange camp grounds or to restrict their use to the period of a normal holiday, and when in the course of these changes certain persons lose some of the privileges they have enjoyed in the past, such as that of occupying the best place in the camp grounds over a whole season,-
And I could add "season after season."
-we are told that we are depriving people of their rights, and our decisions can be most unpopular among the groups concerned.
That is what I said this afternoon, and I added:
We do our best to meet particular interests when this can be done without prejudice to all the people of Canada; but once a situation becomes such that the interest of the people as a whole is suffering or is likely to suffer in future, we are duty bound to all Canadians-to whom the parks belong-to make the best rearrangements we can make.
I went to Waskesiu and I saw the shack tents. I know the condition of the people who use them, and I do not want to deprive those people of the only vacation they can get that is within their means, as the hon. member for Saskatoon has said, and I agree with him on that. However, they must understand that when they go to the parks they are not going to a summer vacation home that they have bought, on land that they own. They are going to a park which belongs to the whole people of Canada, and it is not the man who wants to stay in Waskesiu because he lives in Saskatoon and it is easy for him to go to Waskesiu. It is not his particular interest that should be the determining factor in our policy towards the park. It is in the interests of all the people of Canada that the natural beauty of this park be conserved as much as possible in its natural beauty for the whole of the people of Canada. That is our policy.

Supply-Northern Affairs


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Would the minister state that it is the intention of that particular section that being a thing of beauty is the most important function of a national park?


Jean Lesage: Why should the front view along Waskesiu lake be available to the same people year after year? Why should we not change the people who have the waterfront available to them? There must be some policy-


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I of course do not agree with the minister at all because these people have not been allowed to stay there year after year. As I said in the earlier part of my remarks, they have been moved back. Why should they be put out of there in favour of somebody else? I am going to ask the minister this question. If his rule is that they are going to move these people out in sort of checker-board fashion so that all members of the public may enjoy for at least some time the finest sites, is the minister prepared to apply that rule to those who have built cottages costing $5,000, $6,000, $10,000 or $15,000? That is different, I take it.


Jean Lesage: No, but since I have been in the department it has been impossible for anyone to lease land to build a cottage in the national parks. They have not been allowed to.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Cottages have been built there costing $5,000, $10,000, $15,000.


Jean Lesage: Not since I have been in the department.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: The minister is still the responsible minister, whether or not the cottages were built while he has been in office. I am asking him if he is prepared to apply to these particular cottages or houses the same rule that he is prepared to apply to these unfortunate people who can only afford shack tents.


Jean Lesage: The situation when I came into the department, and I do not know for how many years before I came there, was that these people with cottages had 21-year leases which I understand are renewable under our regulations for another 21 years. That is quite different from the renting of land from week to week or for a fortnight or from month to month. It is a different situation completely.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: My point is that the question of enjoyment has been sacrificed to a foolish idea of what the minister considers beauty. The minister says that the natural beauty of any park must be preserved. No one can agree with him more than I do, but I am going to suggest that the way to preserve the natural beauty of a woods and lake park is

not to build town houses in it with beer stores and all the rest of the silly things that we have to put up with around our homes. When we go to this place we find city conditions, exactly the same conditions that prevail in the cities, and the people who can least afford that sort of thing are shoved back into the woods.
I am not going to use the word "slums" but according to the minister's ideas apparently that is what he will be prepared to create. You will be prepared to create an aristocracy in the place close to the water with the best conditions and all the rest of it and, somewhere in the bush behind, you are going to put the people who do not matter too much. I am warming up a little on the subject, and may I say that this is not the only direction in which this government shows the same kind of preference for this kind of people and not for the others. If you do not believe me, go into the small loans committee or somewhere else.


Frederick George Hahn: Mr. Chairman-


George Clyde Nowlan: Ten o'clock.


Frederick George Hahn: -I do not wish to be critical in this instance.


George Clyde Nowlan: Do you see the clock, Mr. Chairman?


Frederick George Hahn: The hour is late, as I realize, but I understand that during the recent visit of the minister to British Columbia he had a discussion with the premier of that province as a result of which he made a certain undertaking in respect to an historic site in my area. I wish to compliment him on behalf of my constituents, the people of Fort Langley and the people of British Columbia generally for recognizing that the government does have a responsibility in preserving historic sites. The site I am speaking of is Fort Langley, the original capital of the province of British Columbia. I understand that the federal government has undertaken to pay half the cost of restoring the buildings on that site as well as the palisade and that it is to be opened for the B.C. centennial in 1958. I do not know whether the minister has anything to add on that point but I wish to thank him on behalf of the people of the province.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Chairman, 1 have a considerable number of remarks in connection with parks, and there are some members who wish to speak on parks who are not here at this time. I suggest that perhaps we might make more progress if we held this item over, went on and finished the other items under this particular section and then came back to the administration item, No. 294.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Is it agreed that item 294 shall stand?


Some hon. Members:: Stand.


Mr. Barnett:: Mr. Chairman, I have some remarks I want to make on item 294. I happen to be here now and if we are going to continue consideration of the minister's estimates in committee I cannot really see any reason why I should not go on. I do not want to interrupt the orderly procedure of the committee, but I came here from one of the standing committees hoping that I might have a chance to say a few words on this item. I do not want to extend the sitting tonight beyond the wishes of other hon. members, but I cannot see that we will make much more headway by doing one thing than by doing another.
As it happens, the subject matter on which I want to say a few words is related to the remarks just made by the hon. member for New Westminster. In considering the item having to do with the administration of national historic sites at this session I feel that something should be said about the forthcoming centennial celebration in the province of British Columbia. I hope that the centennial, about which something has already been said in connection with the minting of a special coin, will be an event which will enable members of the house from other parts of Canada and the people of Canada generally to come to realize that when British Columbia entered confederation it did so as a crown colony which already had something of a history behind it.
I have noticed that there is some little disposition on the part of the people in the eastern parts of Canada to fail to realize that fact. I think there is a tendency to regard British Columbia as an adjunct to upper and lower Canada which suddenly came into being because of confederation. I hope that a growing sense of appreciation of the history and traditions of British Columbia will arise out of the centennial. Not long ago it happened to come to my notice, and I was a little startled by it, that the historic city of Halifax which, if my date is correct, was founded in the year 1746-


Mr. MacNaughl:: 1749.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: 1749-is only 100 years older than the city of Victoria which some people may regard as being out in the raw, wild and woolly west. I think it is important to realize, that without British Columbia in being as a crown colony at the time of confederation, Canada as we know it today would probably not exist because there would not have been a western anchor to tie Canada together.
Supply-Northern Affairs I think it is also important to realize something of how that came to happen. Along with the member for New Westminster I also am very glad that historic Fort Langley is going to be restored. However, I should like to point out that Fort Langley and New Westminster are in fact by-products rather than the cause of the coming into being of British Columbia. They came into being because of the discovery of gold. If we are going to give recognition to what caused British Columbia to come into being to create the anchor which made Canada as a nation extending ocean to ocean possible, we must cast our minds into a rather plain and ordinary little gash between two hills in the heartland of the Cariboo in British Columbia and recognize that while, at a casual glance that little strip of land there is like a thousand and one other places in Canada, nevertheless, because in that valley there was discovered the richest piece of placer ground of its size that has ever been found anywhere on the face of the earth, British Columbia came into being as we know it today; that it became something more than a fur-trading outpost, which I think in all probability would have fallen into the hands of the expanding United States. For that reason, and because I happen to have lived for a number of years in that particular little area, and perhaps caught something of the spirit of the pioneers of British Columbia that I feel one can still hear whispering in the quiet hills of the Cariboo, I should like to suggest that, in this centennial celebration, and perhaps in some renewed interested on the part of the national historic sites and monuments people, the historic site of Barkerville will not be forgotten. I do not think that the matter of some suitable recognition and restoration of Barkerville would be as expensive as that of the restoration of Fort Langley. But nevertheless because of the fact that Barkerville came into being, I think I would venture to say that Canada as we know it today exists, and has its being as a national entity. I am very happy to know, in making particular mention of Barkerville tonight, that His Excellency the Governor General did see fit in his recent tour of British Columbia to make a special side trip from Quesnel back into the hinterland 60 miles to Barkerville, and that while he was there he met some of the oldtimers there, including that grand old man named Fred Tregillus, whom it would be a privilege for anybody to know. I hope the report which His Excellency will bring back with him of his tour of British Columbia will perhaps help to emphasize what I myself feel about Barkerville as a valuable historic site in Canada.

Supply-Northern Affairs
Barkerville was in its heydays in the early 1860's. Because of the fact that the entire town was burned in the winter of 1868-69, nothing really exists there which antedates the rebuilding in 1869. Some very interesting buildings were built by the people, many of them young sons of the province of Ontario who lie buried in the old graveyard there. Unfortunately many of those original buildings have gone which were there when I first saw the town. I think for example of the old Royal Cariboo Hospital building, of the No. 2 Masonic Lodge building of British Columbia, and of the old Theatre Royal which have all gone. In the days when Barkerville was the second largest place west of Chicago on this North American continent, stock companies used to travel all the way from San Francisco to play the Theatre Royal in Barkerville. You can imagine what a trip that must have been in those days.


An hon. Member:: They had a brewery, too.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Oh, yes. I myself have seen the remnants of some of the old stage settings that used to be used in the Theatre Royal in those days. I do not know whether or not any of those are left around Barkerville. I could tell at some length some of the things that I learned from some of the early pioneers who were still living while I was there, but I do not want to take up too much of the time of the committee tonight. However, I want to point out that in addition to the rather historic church which was built in 1869 there is still in existence one other building which I feel is worthy of preservation as a national monument in Canada. I refer to the old court house at Richfield which lies just above the present site of Barkerville. I paid a visit to that building last summer on my way home from the session. I must say that I was grieved to see this building slowly but surely destroyed as something of permanent value, although a number of years ago some work was done on that building by the British Columbia historical society in putting in new foundations. This is the court house where the first chief justice of British Columbia, namely the famous Chief Justice Begbey, held court. That is a building which I feel should be preserved. It is true that there is one of those stone cairns at the entrance to Barkerville marking the end of the Cariboo trail. But apart from that, very little indication of national interest in that site has occurred. I hope that, in co-operation with the interested people and agencies in British Columbia, during the period approaching the centennial year the national historical sites and monuments people and the minister will 

take some special interest in the retaining of Barkerville as one of the most historic and significant national sites which has gone to the making of Canada as we have it today.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Shall item 294 stand?


Some hon. Members:: Stand.


Mr. Rowe:: Ten o'clock.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Item 294 stands by agreement.
295.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $4,973,938.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: On item 295-


Edmund Davie Fulton: It is 10.30.


An hon. Member:: Go ahead.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I believe that I have the right item for the question, and I may say that it is a question. On looking at page 403 I notice that the vote for Riding Mountain park is increased this year. Last year it was $130,848 and this year it is $230,538. I am pleased to see that increase because-


Jean Lesage: That is vote 296 that you are talking about.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: It is item 296?


Jean Lesage: Yes.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Ask your question now.


Jean Lesage: No. Carry item 295 and ask your question on item 296.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Shall item 295 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
296.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $9,337,340.
Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I am glad to see this
increase-


Mr. Dufresne:: He was anxious to express his satisfaction.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: -because in recent years Riding Mountain national park has tended to be the Cinderella of parks, notwithstanding the fact that it is one of our more popular national parks. For years now it has maintained an attendance record that was second only to Banff national park. I think that is largely accounted for by the fact that it is a part of that excellent system of tourist attractions on Highway No. 10 that include the international peace garden as well as the Riding Mountain national park leading on into the fishing country up in the Flin Flon region. Now, if the minister could indicate some of the larger items that will

be covered by this expenditure I think it would be interesting to the committee.


Jean Lesage: It is mainly for equipment; the increase is for the purchase of equipment.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Is there any major construction such as, for example, the improvement of the tourist camp site?


Jean Lesage: The decrease in construction this year is due to the fact that last year a new administration building was erected in Riding Mountain national park. This year the increase is due to the acquisition of new equipment. I had a list here and it is a long list. The main item is for one mobile truck crane equipped with a half cubic yard back-hoe, $35,000. The total for equipment is $129,843.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I just have a short question. The bulk of this item, about $7-5 million, is for trunk roads. I wonder if the minister would tell us what is meant by trunk roads?


Jean Lesage: Trunk highways.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Or trunk highways, on which this $7-5 million is to be spent.


Jean Lesage: I did mention that in my statement on July 12, but I do not mind repeating it. The trunk highways are the highways in the parks which link one park to the other or which are main thoroughfares through the park. For instance, we consider as a trunk highway, highway No. 10 through Riding Mountain park.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: That is the main street of the Americas.


Jean Lesage: There is also the highway which goes through Prince Albert national park; the Banff-Windermere highway and the Banff-Jasper highway. As I said this afternoon, we are planning on an eight-year construction program on these main highways in the national parks. This does not take into account, of course, the trans-Canada highway which goes through Banff and Yoho parks and which is being built by public works.


Gordon Minto Churchill: In connection with this item, page 403 shows an expenditure of $361,710 for historic sites.


Jean Lesage: Yes.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Could the minister inform us what the sites are?


Jean Lesage: The details of those?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, unless it is a lengthy list.


Jean Lesage: There is a very long list but I can give the main items. There is the
Supply-Northern Affairs restoration of Signal Hill in St. John's, Newfoundland. This site is just being transferred to us by the city of St. John's and the government of Newfoundland. The cost is $25,000. There is the continuation of works at the fortress of Louisbourg, $25,000. There is the continuation of restoration and repair of the Halifax citadel, $120,000; repairs to the fortification and walls in Quebec city- this is an annual amount1-$25,000; the restoration of Fort Langley. While there is $15,000 in this vote, the total cost will be $125,000 for the federal government and the same amount for British Columbia. The Fort Langley restoration is to be ready in 1958 in time for the celebration of the centennial of that province.
There is the construction of a small building at Lower Fort Garry, $10,000. The erection of new memorials throughout Canada will cost $25,000. Then, there is a long list of amounts below $8,000. I knew when I reached Lower Fort Garry, $10,000, we would not have to go any farther.
(Translation):


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Chairman, the minister has just mentioned an amount of $25,000 for the Quebec fortifications and has said, I think, that this amount was voted annually. Can he explain why this is an annual vote?


Jean Lesage: Mr. Chairman, this amount of $25,000 has been voted annually, at least ever since I have become Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, for the maintenance and proper care of the walls and fortifications of Quebec city.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Are these the walls and fortifications which stand on the battlefield?


Jean Lesage: Not at all. This does not concern the battlefield, but rather the Citadel, the St. Louis and St. Jean gates, etc.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Very well.
(Text):


Mr. Malheson:: I have a request to make of the minister in connection with the highway development program in Prince Edward Island national park. I know the minister agrees with me that it is a very important development because when completed, if it is completed, it will link together what are now three separate portions of the park which are divided by inlets on the north shore of Prince Edward Island. I should like the minister to put on the record very briefly what this will amount to, and I should like his assurance that what is on the record will be carried through.

Supply-Northern Affairs


Jean Lesage: The estimates for this year are as follows: for what I have called up to now the Ocean View highway: There is seal coating with asphalt, $54,000, and this covers the Dalvay, Stanhope and Cavendish highway, 11-15 miles; there is an item here for the construction of a pile trestle bridge at Covehead inlet, 24 feet wheeling, 18 foot curb, 600 feet long, $368,000. There is the construction of a road from Stanhope to the trestle bridge which will cost $208,000.


Mr. Charlton:: I should like to ask the minister if any decision has been reached yet by the historic sites and monument board regarding Chiefswood, the birthplace of Pauline Johnson? I have had a considerable amount of correspondence with the board in regard to this matter as well as with the minister just recently. I see nothing in the estimates regarding it and I wonder if a decision has been reached? I understood a decision was going to be reached at the last meeting of the board. I had not heard from the minister since and I am just asking now if a decision was reached?


Jean Lesage: I am informed by my deputy ministers that this matter was discussed at the last meeting of the board. I have not received as yet for consideration the final recommendations of the board. I know they are in a division of the department, but I have not received them in their final form.


John Alpheus Charlton: I know that certain members of the band asked questions and were given some information that the recommendation was going to be accepted. How did they get that information?


Jean Lesage: I will have that information available as soon as I have the final report of the board. They make a report after every one of their meetings. I expect that in a week or 10 days I will receive it and my hon. friend may rest assured that I will let him know what the final recommendation has been and how it has been received and if I can approve of it.


Howard Charles Green: Within the last two or three weeks it has been decided that the trans-Canada highway will go through Rogers pass in British Columbia and most of that route will traverse Glacier national park and Mount Revelstoke national park. So that a good portion of the cost will have to be paid by the minister's department. I think this particular vote which we are now discussing is the one from which that money would have to come, and I wish-


Jean Lesage: I am afraid the hon. member is under a false impression. The whole of the money for the trans-Canada highway through


the national parks is provided in the estimates of the Department of Public Works.


Howard Charles Green: In what way is the minister's department involved?


Jean Lesage: The department provides the land.


Howard Charles Green: The Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources has nothing whatever to do with the construction of the highway?


Jean Lesage: Not with the construction; the only thing we do is to provide the land and approve the route.


Howard Charles Green: Why has the minister in the details on page 403 the following:
National parks trunk highways, $7,454,775.


Jean Lesage: I believe, Mr. Chairman, I explained a few moments ago what the trunk highways were, and I was careful to except the trans-Canada highways from the trunk highways.


William Earl Rowe: Tributary to it?


Jean Lesage: No, not necessarily tributary. The Banff to Windemere highway is a trunk highway and the Banff to Jasper is a trunk highway and they come under the jurisdiction of this department. Money is provided for such highways in these estimates. It is for the rebuilding of a part of these two highways and other similar highways. The construction of the trans-Canada highway through the parks is the complete responsibility of public works except that this department supplies the land and approves the route.


Howard Charles Green: Who pays for the maintenance?


Jean Lesage: Public works.


Howard Charles Green: That is true of the trans-Canada highway wherever it goes through a national park?


Jean Lesage: I am informed by my officials that they are still discussing the question with the officials of the Department of Public Works as to who is going to maintain the trans-Canada highway through the parks and they have not come to any conclusion yet.


Howard Charles Green: That is a very important subject because the maintenance of the highway through these particular parks will be quite expensive.


Jean Lesage: The maintenance?


Howard Charles Green: Yes.


Jean Lesage: Well, yes.


Howard Charles Green: Maintenance would include clearing snowslides and things like that.

Supply-Northern Affairs


Jean Lesage: Yes; there is quite a lot of snow. Yes, it would.


Howard Charles Green: You had better get a snow shovel.


Jean Lesage: This will have to be discussed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
297.	Grant to Jack Miner migratory bird foundation, $5,000.
Douglas Scott Harkness: This grant has been $5,000 for a number of years. In view of the amount of inflation which has gone on, if $5,000 was justified several years ago I would think that possibly there might be the addition of $1,000 or $2,000 to this grant in order to bring it up to something like the level it was when it was first granted. It is a small item, of course, but I understand that the Jack Miner foundation is having difficulty financing owing to the very fact that the cost of everything has gone up. Therefore, I think there is some justification for making a small increase in this grant.


Jean Lesage: This would have to be considered for next year, of course.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
298.	Grant in aid of the development of the international peace garden in Manitoba, $10,000.
Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Just a brief word, Mr. Chairman; I would be remiss in my duty if I did not make an annual report on the progress of the international peace garden. The grant for the international peace garden is $10,000, and I suppose the argument that was raised by the hon. member for Calgary North with reference to the grant in aid of the Jack Miner foundation would also apply to the international peace garden; in fact, it would apply to a greater extent because unfortunately recently, owing to a misunderstanding of the importance of this very worth-while project, the grant was discontinued for a short period and then restored at the reduced rate of $10,000. I say "reduced rate" because for several years the international peace garden was supported to the extent of $15,000 a year. Rather than meeting the problem of the inflationary conditions by an increase in the grant, it has been decreased.
I draw this matter to the attention of the minister because I am sure that, as a result of all the representations that have been made in recent years by members of the cabinet and by citizens across the country, he is fully aware of the importance of this development not only as a symbol of the universal longing for peace but also as a practical tourist attraction. The tourist industry in Canada has been lagging in recent years in comparison with the relative number
of Canadians visiting the United States. But, so far as the peace garden is concerned, the reverse is true, there is a larger number making a pilgrimage to this very important development. For example, last year cars from 48 states were registered in the garden. There were international visitors from countries as far away as Scotland, Switzerland, South India, South Rhodesia, and so on. More and more voluntary groups having an interest in international affairs are choosing this site for their gatherings. For example, an international band camp was held. Some of the outstanding musicians of this continent were brought in.
I do not need to enlarge further on the theme, Mr. Chairman, except to point out that this is a very worth-while development. I do hope that the government can see its way clear at least to restoring the grant to the former level. The development on the United States side of the boundary is moving ahead much more rapidly than on the Canadian side, and I am sure, in the interest of national prestige, national pride, almost everyone would like to see us keep up our end of this development.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
299.	National battlefields commission-to supplement the sum of $125,000 granted by an act respecting the national battlefields at Quebec (chap. 57, statutes of 1908, as amended) for the purposes and subject to the provisions of the said act, $21,331.
(Translation):
J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Chairman, I have no intention of delaying the estimates of the minister and I shall certainly not undertake to go over the history of the Quebec battlefields. I shall simply say that we were greatly pleased last year, when these same estimates were under consideration, to grant a supplementary amount of $25,000 which was apparently needed for the maintenance and administration of the Quebec battlefields commission.
However at this stage I take the liberty of making a few suggestions to the honourable minister.
I believe it would be most advisable-and I have no objection to it-to grant a supplementary amount to bring about the necessary improvements to the belt road around the battlefields. We note with regret that at some places the road is in very bad repair. It is bad publicity in view of the many thousands of tourists from everywhere who come to visit one of the most beautiful historic sites of the old capital.
6914	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs I would also ask the minister to avail himself of his position to recommend to the battlefields commission that they ask those who are entrusted with the supervision of the battlefields, that is members of the R.C.M.P., about the possibility of giving a little more attention to the lands under the jurisdiction of the commission. I know that those people fulfil their duties very well, I have no doubt about it; they may not be sufficiently numerous because we of Quebec often receive complaints to the effect that the battlefield grounds are a danger to morals. I believe there should be a much closer supervision at that place.
I also wish to congratulate and thank the honourable minister who undoubtedly authorized our national society, the St. Jean Baptiste society, to use those grounds on June 24 last for the great parade held at Quebec on our national day.
Mr. Chairman, I see that an extra sum of $21,331, which did not appear last year, has been inserted in this year's estimates. Would the hon. minister be kind enough to explain that supplementary amount?


Jean Lesage: One word only, Mr. Chairman. Obviously the hon. member for Quebec West (Mr. Dufresne) is growing old, since he is now requesting closer supervision in a park which, no doubt, he frequently visited in his younger days-


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I was just as staunch a defender of morals twenty years ago as I am now. I have been well brought up. In fact, you may ask the hon. member for Portneuf (Mr. Gauthier).


Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: I beg your
pardon?


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I was saying that my upbringing has been good.


Jean Lesage: The member for Quebec West complains about the condition of the belt road in the park. I am rather surprised since I have accompanied the Right Hon. Prime Minister of Australia (Mr. Menzies) last week on a visit to battlefields park. I drove him around the belt road and I did not find it in bad condition. It may be that I was driving a little slower than my hon. friend, since the speed limit there is 15 miles per hour. However, I will bring the remarks of the hon. member for Quebec West to the attention of the officials of my department.
As far as the amount of $21,331, that is item 299, is concerned, that money is needed 

to bring the salaries of the employees of the battlefields commission up to the level prevailing in Quebec and the vicinity.
Last winter we instituted an inquiry into the salaries paid the employees of the national battlefields park and we found out that these salaries were below those paid to workers holding similar jobs in the city and the district of Quebec. Following these findings we came to the conclusion that in order to bring the salaries of these employees to the level of those paid for similar occupations we needed for the fiscal year running from April 1, 1956 to March 31, 1957 an appropriation of $21,331.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Mr. Chairman, I am very glad the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources made that statement, for it simply proves the importance of the opposition. Last year-


George Carlyle Marler: You certainly need proof.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Pardon? Would the minister repeat?


George Carlyle Marler: I said you needed proof.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: We need proof? The size of the opposition is proof enough today of what we say. Last year, when we went into this item of $125,000, that is to say, when we increased the required contribution from $100,000 to $125,000, I pointed out to the minister that to my mind, most of the employees of the board were not getting the salaries that they would have received elsewhere for similar work. I understand that, following those remarks and representations on behalf of the workers, the minister was kind enough to make the investigation I just referred to and granted the workers the salaries to which they were entitled.
So, I want to express my thanks on behalf of the workers, particularly those of my county, a county which has long been Liberal, and where a good many of the workers have been given jobs by the Liberals-


Jean Lesage: And it is going to be Liberal again soon.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: I beg your pardon?


Jean Lesage: It is going to become Liberal again soon.


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Well, it might be presumptuous on the part of the minister to mention such things, and I would advise him to take care of the Montmagny-L'Islet county. As

far as Quebec West is concerned, I am going to look after it myself.
Once again, Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. minister for improving the lot of the workers and, on their behalf, I renew my thanks.
(Text):


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National battlefields commission-
662. To provide for special works at National Battlefields park, Quebec. $10,000.
William Earl Rowe: Eleven o'clock.


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Carried?


Jean Lesage: Item 662 also relates to the battlefields commission.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, it is well past ten o'clock.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Oh, carry 300 and 301, too. Item agreed to.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Edmund Davie Fulton: Item 300 carried.


Howard Charles Green: No, item 300 is not carried.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Well, I did my best for you.
Progress reported.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. Harris:: Mr. Speaker, we will continue with these estimates tomorrow and then take agriculture and transport.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Applewhaile):: It
being after ten o'clock this house stands adjourned until tomorrow at eleven o'clock in the forenoon.


[Stage Direction]
It being eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Questions

[Stage Direction]
The following answers, deposited with the Clerk of the house, are printed in the official report of debates pursuant to standing order 39:

Mr. Maiheson: 1.	When are tenders expected to be called for a new naval barracks at Charlottetown?
2.	On what date is actual construction expected to get underway?
Answer by: Mr. Hellyer, Parliamentary Assistant, for the Minister of National Defence:
1.	Approximately October 1, 1956.
2.	Approximately January 31, 1957.


SHIPPING FACILITIES, DALHOUSIE, N.B.
Mr. Van Horne: What action, if any, is being taken to implement and construct adequate facilities to accommodate shipping demands at the year round port Dalhousie, New Brunswick?
Answer by: Mr. Bourget, Parliamentary Assistant, for the Minister of Public Works: No decisions have been taken.


NATIONAL DEFENCE-PROPERTY EXCHANGES, HALIFAX
Mr. Balcom: In the exchange of several properties between the city of Halifax and the Department of National Defence in 1946, what was the agreed and fixed market price placed, at that time, on the property known as Bellevue, corner Spring Garden road and Queen street, Halifax?
Answer by:	Mr. Hellyer, Parliamentary
Assistant, for the Minister of National Defence: $10,000.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:


DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
95.	Representation abroad-construction, acquisition or improvement of buildings, works, land, equipment and furnishings, and to the extent that blocked funds are available for these expenditures, to provide for payment from these foreign currencies owned by Canada and provided only for governmental or other limited purposes, $1,987,207.
96.	To provide for official hospitality, $30,000.
97.	To provide for relief and repatriation of distressed Canadian citizens abroad and their dependents and for the reimbursement of the United Kingdom for relief expenditures incurred by its diplomatic and consular posts on Canadian account (part recoverable), $15,000.
98.	Canadian representation at international conferences, $200,000.
99.	Grant to the United Nations association in Canada, $11,000.
100.	Grant to the International committee of the Red Cross, $15,000.
101.	Grant to Atlantic Treaty Association of Canada, $2,500.
102.	To authorize and provide for the payment of fellowships and scholarships and travelling expenses to enable Canadians to study in France, The Netherlands and Italy, and to the extent that blocked funds are available for these expenditures, to provide for payment from these foreign currencies owned by Canada and provided only for governmental or other limited purposes, and for payment to the Royal Society of Canada of amounts not to exceed $10,000 in all to meet travelling and other administrative costs incurred by the society for those it may designate to act on its behalf in selecting persons to receive fellowships and scholarships, $125,000.
B-General-
103.	To provide for the Canadian government's assessment for membership in international (including commonwealth) organizations, as detailed in the estimates, including authority to pay the amounts specified in the currencies of the countries indicated, notwithstanding that the payments may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of December, 1955, which is, $2,977,569.
104.	To provide for a further contribution by the Canadian government towards the cost of constructing the North Atlantic Treaty Organization permanent headquarters in an amount of 57,800,000 French francs, notwithstanding that payment may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of December, 1955, which is, $165,077.
105.	To provide for the Canadian government's contribution to the United Nations expanded program for technical assistance to underdeveloped countries in an amount of $1,800,000 U.S., notwithstanding that payment may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of December, 1955, which is, $1,798,875.
106.	Contribution to the United Nations children's fund, $650,000.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization-
107.	To provide, subject to the approval of the governor in council and notwithstanding the Civil Service Act, for special administrative expenses, including payment of remuneration, in connection with the assignment by the Canadian government of Canadians to the international staff of the North Atlantic treaty organization (part recoverable from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), $35,484.
International civil aviation organization-
108.	To provide the international civil aviation organization with office accommodation at less than commercial rates, $200,543.
International joint commission-
109.	Salaries and expenses of the commission including, subject to the approval of the governor in council and notwithstanding the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act, as amended, payment of salary of the chairman of $17,000 per annum, $100,745.
110.	To provide for Canada's share of the expenses of studies, surveys and investigations of the international joint commission, $199,180.
Terminable services-
111.	Colombo plan, $34,400,000.
112.	To provide for the Canadian government's assessment for membership in the inter-governmental committee for European migration in an amount of $209,665 U.S., notwithstanding that payment may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of December, 1955, which is, $209,534.

Supply
113.	To provide for a grant by the Canadian government to the United Nations refugee fund, $125,000.
114.	Contribution to the United Nations relief and works agency for Palestine refugees in the Near East, $500,000.
115.	To provide for the cost of Canada's participation as a member of the international commissions for supervision and control in Indo-China including authority, notwithstanding the Civil Service Act, for the appointment and fixing of salary rates of commissioners, secretaries and staff by the governor in council; and to ratify the appointments made by the governor in council to the said commissions and the salaries relating thereto fixed by the governor in council prior to the current fiscal year, $564,500.
A-Department and missions abroad-
616.	Departmental administration-further amount required, $121,199.
B-General-
617.	To provide for the Canadian government's assessment for membership in international (including commonwealth) organizations, as detailed m the estimates, including authority to pay the amounts specified in the currencies of the countries indicated, notwithstanding that the payments may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of May, 1956-further amount required, $160,491.
International civil aviation organization-
618.	To provide for a payment to the international civil aviation organization in part reimbursement of compensation paid to its Canadian employees for Quebec income tax for the 1955 taxation year, $7,500.
Terminable services-
619.	To provide for a contribution towards the erection of a monument at Steinkjer, Norway, in honour of the Arctic explorer, Otto Sverdrup, $1,400.
[Stage Direction]
292.	Departmental administration, $543,934.
293.	Northern research co-ordination centre, including a grant of $10,000 to the Arctic institute of North America; and an amount of $15,000 for grants in aid of northern research subject to allocation by the treasury board, $75,158.
National parks and historic sites services-
295.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $4,973,938.
296.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $9,337,340.
297.	Grant to Jack Miner migratory bird foundation, $5,000.
298. Grant in aid of the development of the international peace garden in Manitoba, $10,000.
299.	National battlefields commission-to supplement the sum of $125,000 granted by an act respecting the national battlefields at Quebec (chap. 57, statutes of 1908, as amended) for the purposes and subject to the provisions of the said act, $21,331.
660.	Departmental administration-further amount required, $20,000.
National parks branch-
National parks and historic sites services-
661.	Construction or acquisition of buildings,
works, land and	equipment-further amount
required, $1,765,000.
National battlefields commission-
662.	To provide for special works at National Battlefields park, Quebec, $10,000.
[Stage Direction]
Friday, August 3, 1956