1958-05-19

Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, this day is the day set apart for celebration as the birthday of Her Gracious Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Last October 14 was the Queen's day, but this is the day on which Canadians have an opportunity of reaffirming their affection and loyalty to Her Majesty.
The Governor General, on behalf of the people of Canada, has sent a message to Her Majesty which reads as follows:
With my humble duty I send to Your Majesty on the day on which we in Canada are proud and happy to celebrate Your Majesty's birthday the loyal and devoted good wishes of your Canadian subjects.
As a reaffirmation and redeclaration of the loyalty of Her Majesty's members of the House of Commons I join with the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson), and with your leave, Mr. Speaker, in suggesting that we do now stand and sing "God Save the Queen".
Whereupon the members of the house rose and sang
God Save the Queen.



HOSPITAL INSURANCE ACT


Hon. J. W. Monieiih (Minister of National Health and Welfare) 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 Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act to authorize contributions being made as of the first day of July. 1958, to a participating province which has a plan in operation; and to make certain changes in connection with the administration of the act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport) 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 Department of Transport Act to provide for the continuation for a further period of two years of authority to make regulations for the control of transport of goods in bulk including, amongst other things, the appointment of one or more controllers and one or more deputy controllers to carry out the provisions of such regulations, and the payment of their remuneration.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I take great delight in asking the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration a question. I am sure because of her longtime interest in this subject she has given attention to the matter.
Have the minister's officials been actively recruiting immigrants in Europe, during recent months, who on arrival in Canada have been unable to obtain employment and as a consequence have to be maintained at the expense of the federal government?


Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, the officers in Europe have been receiving applications, of course, but I think the hon. member used a term which is not quite in keeping with what has been taking place. There has been no active recruiting; it has been more a matter of limited selection.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Has the minister any reply to the latter part of my question?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, the latter part of the question is more an assertion than a question, and to remark on it I might say that by far the most of those who have been receiving assistance have been Hungarian refugees who were brought into Canada and have been in need of assistance, but those are special cases.


Mr. Pickersgill:: May I ask a supplementary question. Will the hon. lady say how many persons are receiving assistance at the present time from the immigration department?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, I do not
have that information. I suggest that the question be placed on the order paper.

Inquiries of the Ministry POWER



NEW BRUNSWICK-NOVA SCOTIA-STATUS OF AGREEMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucester):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Can the minister advise the house whether power agreements under section 3 of Bill No. 244, an act to provide assistance in respect of electric power development in the Atlantic provinces, have been signed with the governments of the provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia? If so, when may we expect such agreements to be tabled?


Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to take that question as notice.



CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, I too desire to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. If you will permit me to say so, sir, admittedly I hesitate to do so having read a magazine article to the effect that the hon. lady uses her personality to get her own way.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Who doesn't?


Harold Edward Winch: All I can say is that I cannot compete with her either on the basis of personality or beauty. According to press reports the native Indians of British Columbia are requesting a royal commission to study all aspects of native Indian problems. Can the minister inform the house if consideration will be given to a complete review of all aspects of native Indian problems, the protection of their rights and their desire to become known as first rank Canadians? If so, will action be taken at this session?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, commenting personally may I say that I have always considered the Indians to be first rank Canadian citizens. Any representations which are made will receive the sympathetic consideration of the minister.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question

to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Can the minister inform the house if it is a fact that a United States senator introduced a confidential letter from a former Canadian prime minister before a U.S. Senate committee on Friday? If so, has the minister any indication of how that senator came into possession of a confidential letter from a Canadian prime minister?


Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, if the description of the happening is true I have no knowledge of it. I will accept the question as notice.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. A number of press reports indicated that at today's sitting of the House of Commons copies of the treaty or agreement between the United States and Canada covering the arrangements relative to the use of the air force were to be filed. If that statement is incorrect, perhaps the Prime Minister will so state and also tell us if and when they will be filed.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I hope the Secretary of State for External Affairs will be speaking in the debate today, and there will be a full answer to the question the hon. member has put.



BRITISH EMPIRE GAMES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister or perhaps to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In view of press reports that Canada's entry in the British empire games is very short of financial backing and it is uncertain if a representative team can be fielded, can the Prime Minister indicate what support the government will give to enable Canada to have a worthy representation at these games?


John George Diefenbaker: No consideration has been given to that matter yet, Mr. Speaker.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Friday, May 16, consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Lafreniere for an address to His Excellency

the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Pearson, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Argue.
(Translation):
Mr. Samuel Boulanger (Drummond-Arlha-baska):: Mr. Speaker, when I moved the adjournment of the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne, I was comparing percentages on a certain scale of values for agricultural products sold in 1950 as between western and eastern farms. I said that farmers whose sales amounted to $250 or less were distributed as follows: 72.1 per cent in Newfoundland; 15 per cent in Prince Edward Island; 43 per cent in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick; 21 per cent in Quebec; 12 per cent in Ontario and 7.8 per cent in the prairies.
It is sad to note, Mr. Speaker, that on 238,329 commercial farms in our six eastern provinces, 121,329 (about 51 per cent) had sold agricultural products valued at $2,500 or less. Out of this number, 41,896 farms, that is 16 per cent, had made sales amounting to between $250 and $1,200.
If we consider the net income by individual farms in the various provinces, we note that in Prince Edward Island, that income was estimated at $1,586; in Nova Scotia, $963; in New Brunswick, $1,217; in Quebec, $2,195; in Ontario, $3,074; and in the prairie provinces, at $3,227.
If we carry our analysis a little further, we note that the per capita production on the farm was estimated in 1953 at $162 in Quebec, at $304.60 in Ontario, and at $507.60 in the prairies. Such is the situation of our eastern farmers. And I am not the one who compiled these figures. They are taken from the report of the Gordon commission which enquired on the economic and agricultural prospects of Canada. In quoting them, I have no intention of arousing feelings of animosity between western and eastern farmers.
I merely want to show the government, the Conservative members as well as those of the C.C.F. party, that there is not only the wheat problem in our country but also the problem of the eastern farmers whose income is low, whether they live in northern Ontario or in the maritime provinces. They have to find sources of income outside of agriculture to support their family. Many of them work in factories, others work in the bush during the off-season. I may add that many of them
The Address-Mr. Boulanger in the province of Quebec work for the highway department if they are supporters of the Union Nationale, or are favoured in some other way.
It can be said that the eastern farmer works about twelve hours a day, the whole year round. Having lived on a farm in the west for over a year, I know that the western farmer also puts in a long day's work during the period from sowing to harvest time. I also know that many of them, during the offseason spend the winter in the south of the United States and others seek a well-deserved rest in town. Our eastern farmers do not have time to rest; they have not the time to take a vacation because most of our farmers and our settlers, as I said, spend that period in the bush, away from their family, working hard nearly all winter to come back with a few hundred dollars in the spring.
I am sure my political opponents will blame the Liberal party for this situation. It is always easy to clear oneself of blame when one does not want to assume one's own responsibilities, and that has been the case of the Conservative party for the past year. Yet in 1956, the same men, during the provincial election campaign, went about our farm districts claiming that the farmers of the province of Quebec were the most prosperous in Canada.
It should be recognized that the Liberal party has done a great deal to improve the farm situation in our country during the past 22 years, but that government also realized that there was still much to be done. That is why in 1955 it asked an inquiry into the progress achieved and on the prospects of our agricultural economy. At the same time, the Senate inquired into the use of our farm lands. The purpose of those undertakings was to cast light on the whole situation and allow our leaders to draw up a long term agricultural policy.
One other thing that struck me in this report was the scope to be assumed by the demand for farm products in the course of the next 25 years, following the increase in urban population.
Let me quote a few figures based on the years 1951-55. Taking 100 as an index, we see that the demand for the following agricultural products will increase as follows between 1965 and 1980:
	1965	1980
Red meat	
140	218Poultry products 	
136	214Eggs 	
143	231Dairy products 	
129	168Grain 	
122	140Fruit	
138	237Vegetables 	
134	193
The Address-Mr. Boulanger
How will the country satisfy this demand? The Gordon Commission report states that the total area under farming in Canada will increase by close to 2 million acres between now and 1980, which will make the total cultivated area 176 million acres. The report indicates moreover that it is not on that that we must rely to satisfy our needs. It is recognized that we should rather increase the yield by soil improvement, which means that we should increase the yield per acre, per unit of pasture and head of cattle rather than the yield per man-hour.
To achieve this result in the eastern provinces we must look to the improvement of farming methods and to a greater use of chemical fertilizer, especially on pasture land.
In the eastern part of this country we have a large area with a high productivity potential. But these lands must be properly drained and cleared of stones and treated with adequate quantities of chemical fertilizer in order to be profitable. No doubt there will always remain some submarginal farms. In this connection I will offer a few suggestions at the end of my remarks.
For the moment I wish to call the government's attention to the value of family farming to the general economy of this country. I could do no better here than quote the president of the American Farmers' Federation, who stated:
We must neglect nothing that will help to preserve the family character of agriculture, not only because this is a social safeguard in a democracy, but because the family farm unit is the most efficient agricultural production unit yet devised.
Mr. Speaker, having offered these general remarks, I would now like to offer some recommendations whose implementation I would like to see and which would be of great benefit to eastern farmers.
The first recommendation is drawn from the Gordon report. It consists in carrying out a program of geological surveys in the eastern and Atlantic provinces. Part of the mapping work in these areas has already been carried out, but we should nevertheless continue along these lines and speed up the work, while giving priority to those eastern areas which have not as yet been explored.
According to the report there is yet another project of national scope which could be carried out, and that is the classification of lands according to their possible uses, and the regrouping of small properties wherever it is possible. In some cases tree farming

could be carried out more advantageously than agriculture. This classification of soils could be carried out in conjunction with a farm assistance plan in order to help those farmers who would prefer leaving the land to carry out another type of work. In order to bring this plan to a successful conclusion, we will need the sincere and continuous cooperation of the provincial governments and of all interested parties. This plan should be implemented gradually and we should not look for extraordinary results before a certain number of years.
A second suggestion I wish to make to the government has to do with the establishment of an intermediate term and easier credit to allow our farmers, and especially our young people, to carry out a plan of production and systematic operation of their farm.
I would also recommend the granting of a $4 an hour premium on the use of bulldozers by farmers for draining and stone clearing. There are very productive lands in eastern Canada which need only draining and others just as good which need some levelling and stone clearing. It may be something new for some hon. members to hear about stone clearing on farms. This is just to show that conditions in our eastern provinces are very different from those prevailing on the prairies.
Another suggestion which deserves government attention concerns the advisability of better acquainting our farmers with the use of chemical fertilizers. Our farming experts and our experimental farms are doing a wonderful job in that field, but they do not reach the bulk of our farm population. Canada is one of the countries of the world where fertilizers are least in use. We use an average of 3.1 pounds of fertilizers per acre while Australia uses 25.7 pounds, New Zealand 13.8 pounds, the United States 11.6 pounds. I could add that The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Japan use more than 100 pounds. I repeat that Canada uses only 3.1 pounds.
With proper use of fertilizers, production could be doubled on most of our farms. Research work done on experimental farms has shown that $1 worth of fertilizer used on pasture lands could bring from $3 to $5 in milk production. It would surely be wiser to spend $5 or $6 million to encourage the purchase of fertilizers than to sacrifice hundreds of millions for the construction of a dam on the South Saskatchewan river to reclaim 455,000 acres of land.

We spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year to support agricultural prices because our lands do not bring enough revenue to our farmers. Let us increase our production to meet our future needs by the use of fertilizers and the problem will be solved while our farmers will get a higher revenue.
These are, Mr. Speaker, a few suggestions which the Liberal party sees fit to bring to the attention of the government in order to save our agriculture and particularly that of eastern Canada.
May I also make a few remarks on the textile industry, particularly that of the province of Quebec. Last year I made numerous representations to the Department of Trade and Commerce. I have even supported the requests of some municipalities of my riding that were seeking help from the government. I would like to read here a letter which a few of my colleagues in this house and myself have written to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming), in which we urged the government to help our textile industry. Let me read the last paragraphs of that request.
(Text):
Be it resolved to ask the Minister of Finance to act at once to prevent
1.	The importation of textiles from countries whose standards of living results in lower production costs, and
2.	The importation of goods from those signatories of GATT whose exporters are not adhering to the letter and spirit of this agreement.
(Translation):
We received a reply from the hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming), and I am going to read its final paragraph. The minister said in his letter:
(Text):
For my better understanding of precisely what it is you ask me to do, may I ask you and your colleagues:
1.	Precisely what are the steps that you ask me to take to prevent the importations?
2.	What are the "countries whose standards of living result in lower production costs"?
3.	What are "those signatories of GATT whose exporters are not adhering to the letter and spirit of this agreement"?
4.	In the case of these signatories, what are the goods of which you ask me to prevent the importation"?
(Translation):
Such was the reply we received from the Minister of Finance.
Recently I received from the town of St. Simon, in Drummond county, a resolution asking, among other things:
The Address-Mr. Boulanger
That the city council urge the federal government to revise the tariffs now applying to the textile industry and make necessary and urgently needed amendments thereto.
I forwarded that request to the minister with my comments. Just like last year, the minister asked me: "What do you want me to do?" To which I answered with the recommendations that I am now going to read quickly. They are somewhat similar to those made last week by the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Allard). Here they are:
1.	General increase in the tariifs in order to regain for our industry about 80 per cent of its market;
2.	A revision of the Customs and Tariff act in order to make it more flexible, more adaptable to changing conditions;
3.	Tighter control and supervision by our customs officers;
4.	Better appraisal of imported commodities in order to establish a reasonable production cost abroad and to avoid dumping;
5.	A government sponsored campaign encouraging Canadian consumers to buy Canadian goods first, and Canadian producers to better identify their products;
6.	Temporary reduction of the excise tax in order to give a renewed impetus to the textile industry.
7.	Long term solution: Establish import "quotas" and enforce a practical system of classification and identification of imported goods.
These are suggestions that can be studied and enforced. I believe that with some good will a solution could be found.
A year ago, the government and its supporters charged the Liberal party with being at the source of our troubles in the textile industry. I have here figures from the Cotton Institute of Canada which show that since the Conservative government has been in power, the situation has been deteriorating appreciably in the textile industry. I am just going to read you a few figures. I see that in the third quarter of 1956, we had 22,500 people employed in the cotton industry. During the same quarter of 1957, only 20,800 were so employed, which represents a decrease of 1,700 employees.
Take the fourth quarter of 1956: we had 22,400 employees, and during the last quarter of last year, when the Conservatives were in power, there were 19,800 employees, that is a decrease of 2,600 employees. Nevertheless, we heard during the last electoral campaign that the Conservative government was going to save the textile industry. Furthermore, if we had today's figures, we would probably see that the number of workers is 3,000 less, as compared to the figures of 1956, when the Liberals were in

The Address-Mr. Boulanger power. I am going to quote a few remarks made by this organization. It is said, in connection with imports for example, that the United States have supplied us with 219 million yards of textiles, i.e. 16 million more than the previous year. Imports from the United Kingdom remained at 10 million yards for each year but those from the other countries amounted to 63 million yards as compared to 56 million in the preceding year.
That is the policy of the Conservative government! Once more, it is proposed to settle the textile problem by nice words, but I say that it is not by words that the textile problem will be solved, but by deeds.
I could quote an article published in the Tribune of May 7, 1958. It says in part as follows:
Women's nylon stockings of foreign make sold in Sherbrooke under Canadian label will be exhibited in the Canadian Parliament by Mr. Maurice Allard during the next session. The new M.P. for Sherbrooke in the House of Commons proposes to use these items to prove the unfair competition of foreign manufacturers on the Canadian market.
And there is a photographic reproduction of a pair of stockings sold in Sherbrooke under the label Made in Canada, whereas another label showed their origin as England. Was the hon. representative for Sherbrooke not aware that last year, in 1957, the government had sent a delegation to England with a view to buying from that country? The hon. member was to report to this house with regard to such unfair imports, but he did not do so. For my part, that it is not by means of publicity in press, nor by well-turned phrases that the textile situation will be solved, but by deed and action.
If the hon. member for Sherbrooke is sincere, let him move a resolution. We shall consider it and take a vote.
Back home, in the Drummond riding especially, workers are jobless, and day after day the number of unemployed increases.
Therefore I shall take the liberty, on another occasion, of dealing again with this matter of textiles.
Mr. Speaker, those are the remarks I wanted to make on the floor of the house. I am convinced that if we get to work in a constructive frame of mind, we shall succeed in achieving progress.
(Text):


Sidney Earle Smith: Mr. Speaker, I desire

in the first place to congratulate the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I am sure you can understand, by reason of the fact that I entered this house for the first time only last November, that I have personal interest in the contributions made by these two hon. members. The excellence of their presentation and the quality of the substance of their addresses augur well, I know, for their success in this house.
To you, Your Honour, I offer my felicitations. To have been selected as the first commoner during the last session of parliament was a manifestation of the belief that you had the requisite qualities for the speakership, and to be elected a second time is certainly a manifestation of the conviction that you have wise judgment, impartiality, grace and indeed a sense of humour, and I offer my felicitations to the house for having so elected you.
I am very happy, Mr. Speaker, to have this opportunity to report to the house on the deliberations of the ministerial conference which was held under the auspices of NATO in Copenhagen from May 5 to May 7. That meeting was, I am convinced, a successful one. It was not intended at that meeting to arrive at any specific conclusions, but it offered to the foreign ministers of the 15 member nations of NATO an opportunity for consideration of the present international situation and an opportunity to take stock of developments within the alliance. I came away from Copenhagen, Mr. Speaker, with a conviction that the spirit of unity and collaboration within NATO had never been higher than it was at that meeting. It is highly desirable for the success of NATO that there should be developed a spirit of unity within the Atlantic community. There is a great necessity for the maintenance of that spirit of unity and collaboration.
I repeat, it must be the effort of every member of NATO to promote that objective of co-operation. Indeed, since the meeting of the heads of government in Paris in December last year there has been a marked upsurge in consultation, political and otherwise, within NATO. The member nations have consulted readily-and I emphasize the word "readily"-on many grave issues which face us all.
In the last few months the governments of NATO have considered such vital matters as

disarmament, the preparation of agreed views with respect to the many letters that have come from the U.S.S.R., and of course the preparation for a summit meeting or meetings. The degree of confidence which has been developed amongst the NATO allies, as the Prime Minister said the other day, has made it possible for three members of the alliance to act as trusted spokesmen in the conduct of negotiations on certain aspects of preparation for a summit meeting. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this remarkable achievement of such close co-operation as is now being carried out under NATO is a unique development in the history of mankind. Indeed, I use the words of the communique in this regard, "One of the most significant, promising events of our time is the spirit of union within NATO."
During our discussions in Copenhagen there were observations that indicated that there are weaknesses within NATO, and I would mention one particularly. That is in the field of information. It was acknowledged on all sides that NATO as an organization, indeed the member nations of NATO, have not been as successful as the U.S.S.R. in the field of information. Steps will be taken to provide better and improved machinery for the dissemination in factual terms of the views and the actions of NATO and in that way counter the propaganda of the U.S.S.R.
I had the opportunity to observe at the meeting of the foreign ministers, and I do believe and Canada does believe that there can be a greater role for the parliamentarians of the NATO countries. I drew to the attention of the foreign ministers the resolution of the NATO parliamentarians last autumn, sometimes designated as the Kefauver resolution, whereby it was suggested by the parliamentarians that there should be held in 1959 an Atlantic congress to which not only parliamentarians would be invited but also leading citizens in various nations of NATO. I am hopeful that out of plans that are now being studied and laid there will be such a conference to the end that we can get the story of NATO better known to our peoples of the various nations; that there will be an Atlantic conference held about the time of the celebration of the tenth anniversary of the founding of NATO.
On behalf of Canada I emphasized the importance to NATO and to its principal institutions of article II of the treaty. Article II as you know, Mr. Speaker, has to do with economic matters, and I was gratified to receive from many sides of the membership at that meeting the expression of similar views.
The Address-Hon. S. E. Smith We should invoke to a greater degree article II; we should put some flesh on the bones of that article. Undoubtedly there is an opportunity through NATO to promote economic prosperity, notably by-and I emphasize this term; we on this side of the house do not regard it as a naughty one-promoting the expansion of international trade and promoting aid to underdeveloped countries.
Consultation on methods and machinery for implementing the principles set out in article II will take place within the alliance. This does not imply, Mr. Speaker, that we envisage that the NATO council will be the executive organ for economic co-operation. It does seem to me that the best thing NATO could do in this regard would be to study article II and put forward principles, and by reason of or under those principles there could be consultations within the membership of the community and also consultations with international societies and organizations that would be better equipped to consider executive matters. If NATO could implement article II to a greater degree, then undoubtedly, in addition to its military strength, its prestige and influence would be greatly enhanced throughout the world.
I turn now, Mr. Speaker, to what were to us more vital issues on which consultation took place at the NATO meeting. These related, of course, generally to the international situation confronting the alliance, particularly to the trends of Soviet policy and the attitude the western countries could adopt toward the Soviet union. Exchanges of views in this regard brought about remarkable unanimity of approach on these fundamental issues. We did at the outset agree that some of the recent actions of the U.S.S.R. have raised serious doubts as to the real intention of its leaders regarding a summit meeting. The members of that ministerial meeting of NATO regretted that the Soviet union had aggravated instead of reduced international tensions by its veto in the security council of the proposal put forward by the United States of America relating to the reducing of the risk of a surprise attack over the Arctic area. We also were bound to admit and acknowledge that proposals put forward by the Russians in recent weeks relating to the holding of a meeting, proposals not only of matters of substance but of matters of procedure, had made the preparations for a summit meeting more difficult.
Nevertheless, despite the disappointments and doubts about the Soviet attitude, we

The Address-Hon. S. E. Smith resolved to continue our efforts to pave the way toward a summit meeting. I quote from the communique:
The NATO governments will not be discouraged nor give up their attachment to the principle of negotiation.
It was recognized, however, that while summit meetings are desirable if they offer any reasonable prospect of reaching settlement on fundamental questions, they are not the only way or indeed they may not be the best way of conducting negotiations for the reduction of international tension. A summit meeting could be helpful if it were properly prepared and if it were to take place in a favourable atmosphere.
At the meeting I suggested that the summit meeting, the one for which we have been working through the ambassadors of three members of NATO in Moscow in recent weeks, should be regarded as one of a series of meetings. I suggested, indeed, that it would not necessarily be the first. It could be regarded as the second meeting and we would think of the Geneva meeting in 1955 as the first in that series.
I desire to impress the point upon the house, if I can, that this approach would recognize that it may not be possible-indeed it will not be possible-to settle at one meeting at the summit all the problems which separate the Soviet bloc from the NATO countries. Undoubtedly there has developed in the public opinion of the European members of NATO, and indeed one can sense it in Canada and the United States, a feeling that if we could have a summit meeting we could settle once and for all-some of the suggestions go that far-the problems that separate us from the U.S.S.R.
If we follow the concept of a series of meetings then the next one, the second one as I like to call it, could consider a limited agenda with limited objectives. We could then honestly convey to the public in the various NATO nations that if a question which they naturally would have thought should have been on the agenda of that second meeting was not there it had been postponed to a later meeting. If we have limited objectives and reach a satisfactory reconciliation of the different views in respect of those matters, the smaller items, shall I say, then confidence and trust will be developed in some measure and on the basis of that confidence and trust a further meeting could be called to discuss even more serious questions. Because of the trust and confidence that would have been developed even to a partial degree there would be better prospects for agreement being reached at a subsequent meeting or meetings.


The other day the Leader of the Opposition suggested, and I recognize that he did so tentatively, that the best kind of a meeting at this time might be an informal one between the heads of the United States and the Soviet union for an exchange of views without an agenda. I am unable to share the optimism of the Leader of the Opposition in this regard. While a serious burden of responsibility falls upon the two most powerful nations in the world, nevertheless there are other interests involved on the western side; and that was pointed out the other day in the house by the Prime Minister. Those interests should be adequately represented at a summit meeting. I have in mind that it would be probably unfair to place upon the United States the whole onus or responsibility for conducting negotiations at the summit and to be responsible for the failure of a summit meeting if that were the case.
Also it does occur to me that it would be fruitful to have the heads of the two sides in question meet with an agenda before them. I am not being facetious when I say that I can well see Mr. Khrushchev and Mr. Eisenhower sitting down at a table without an agenda and saying, "What will we discuss now in the field of international tension"? The field of international tension in that context means a global field, and that would call for preparation in order that the participants in such a meeting would be prepared to put forward concrete and considered suggestions. It is my view that such a meeting might not only prove useless but that its failure would increase international tensions rather than reduce them.
At the Copenhagen meeting emphasis was placed on the question of disarmament.


Mr. Pearson:: Before my hon. friend leaves that part of his statement, would he be good enough to inform the house whether there was any change of views at the Copenhagen meeting, and if not what his own views are, with regard to the composition of this summit meeting?


Sidney Earle Smith: Mr
Speaker, I should like to touch on that later As I said a moment ago, considerable emphasis was placed on the question of disarmament which would, of course, be one of the main items for discussion in any negotiations with the Soviet government. The ministers reaffirmed their view that the proposals of August 29, 1957, in the disarmament commission, the same proposals later being presented to the General Assembly of the United Nations, would form

a reasonable basis for discussion of disarmament, but in reaffirming that view there was what one might well characterize as a note of flexibility.
Pending more general negotiations, however, with respect to disarmament we felt that it might be possible, despite the recent setbacks that have been brought about by the attitude and action of the U.S.S.R., to inaugurate expert technical discussions between representatives of the Soviet union and the western powers principally concerned, such discussions to. cover detailed measures of control over disarmament even though the precise disarmament proposals had not been identified. In discussing this facet of the problem of disarmament we had particularly in mind measures to prevent surprise attack and measures to detect nuclear explosions.
These conclusions were set out in the communique, and they do indicate a degree of flexibility. But in the communique there is also a note of warning to the U.S.S.R. that their recent actions and attitudes have engendered in the west some scepticism as to their real intentions. In view of the uncertainties which exist and the present unfortunate lack of confidence between the Soviet leaders and ourselves, it is conceivable that many of our differences could not be reconciled at the diplomatic table. But we come back to this point, that even if we cannot contemplate reconciliation or settlement with respect to some of these matters, surely this does not dictate that they should not be discussed at some diplomatic level. At the meeting I laid particular stress on behalf of Canada on the need for further consideration of measures for inspection and control. In my opinion such measures are fundamental to any consideration, in any degree, of measures for disarmament. I do believe that measures with respect to control and inspection are fundamental to any disarmament negotiations. Then if we could agree to act with respect to this core problem, confidence would be created and on the basis of that confidence discussions could be held with respect to particular measures for disarmament.
In so far as the west is concerned, and I know I speak for all the members of the house, control means confidence and confidence is lacking at the moment. I proposed on behalf of Canada, and the other foreign ministers agreed, that the council should consider the possibility of carrying out studies and experiments on the technical problems of inspection and control. We recall that first Mr. Bulganin and then Mr. Khrushchev, in reply to letters from Mr. Eisenhower suggesting that there should be experimentation
The Address-Hon. S. E. Smith undertaken for the development of adequate techniques of detection and control, answered in the negative. I did suggest that we might undertake in NATO a pilot scheme for this technical study, and that scheme might be carried out in Canada or in other parts of what one might call the NATO area. If the Russians will not participate in such a joint scheme, the fact that we have initiated it might prompt them to undertake similar .studies in their country. Later we might invite them to exchange information with us, and then we might participate in their scheme and they might participate in ours.
In this connection I am happy to report that there is some hope, as the result of a recent communication from Mr. Khrushchev to Mr. Eisenhower, that the Soviet union would be willing to participate in expert studies into the possible carrying out of an agreement to stop nuclear tests. I know we all hope this note of encouragement might be an indication that the Soviet union would be willing to agree to a similar discussion of the problems of disarmament. If some significant progress could be made in the studies and experimentation with respect to control and supervision of nuclear tests that would provide a notification of the imminence of an attack, then we could move on to some of the more substantive questions.
As I suggested a moment ago, we will have to achieve a better mood of confidence before we can proceed even in that regard, but if we started on the NATO side to undertake studies and experimentation with respect to control and supervision it would be an indication that we are very earnest about that matter, and would indicate to the world our resolution in that regard.
The foreign ministers' meeting at Copenhagen did not consider military matters, which will be considered at the meeting of the NATO council to be held in Paris next December. We did, however, Mr. Speaker, express our satisfaction with the results of the conference of defence ministers which was held in Paris last month. In this regard some of us, and Canada's representative was one of them, expressed the belief that there should be a continued study of the political aspects and implications of our policy and dur decisions in the defence field. This is particularly true if we are to avoid developing rigidities in our political thinking.
Surely the building up and the matching of nuclear weapons by the two sides need not be considered an irrevocable and inevitable process. Where would that inevitable and irrevocable process lead us? It might well lead us to that awful alternative, a catastrophic global war. It is therefore of

The Address-Hon. S. E. Smith paramount importance that we study the relation of our defence position to the position of political negotiations, and it is of paramount importance that we do not lose opportunities to negotiate when the time is ripe and when there is a clear indication of Soviet intentions.
It is difficult for anybody to forecast what the future may hold with respect to discussions with the Soviet union. I am trying to describe the meeting at Copenhagen, and I know we approached that process in a spirit of unity, co-operation and trust within the alliance to which I referred earlier in my remarks. We do wish to avoid provocation and to seek by every possible means to reach agreement with the Soviet leaders. We are not only prepared but we are anxious to negotiate with them at any level, diplomatic or otherwise. I reiterate, however, that if it is a summit meeting there must be much preparation for it.
I come now to the point raised by the Leader of the Opposition. Surely we should not endeavour to prevent the holding of negotiations across the table by reason of procedural matters. Surely if this becomes an important issue in our talks with the U.S.S.R. it should be possible to find a satisfactory formula-I do not know whether this will answer the question that was asked by the Leader of the Opposition-which would not be predicated on the recognition of some far-reaching principle of parity which the Russians have put forward in rather vague terms and which, if introduced into the United Nations, would destroy the effectiveness of that body. Certainly it would lead to a radical transformation of the main organizations of the United: Nations and impair their representative character.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I come to another important matter. I beg leave to table an exchange of notes between the United States and Canada. They were signed on May 12, one week ago. In this exchange of notes there is to be found the agreement between the government of Canada and the government of the United States concerning the organization and operation of the North American air defence command, which is known as NORAD. Copies of this exchange of notes, I may say for the information of hon. members, are available in the parliamentary distribution office.
In order that I may keep in step with the United States Secretary of State, who will be making a similar announcement this morning in Washington, I am going to carefully follow my notes. Members of the house, Mr. Speaker, will recall that on August 1, 1957, the two governments announced their agreement to the setting up of a system of

integrated operational control of the air defence forces of Canada and the United States. When I speak of Canada and the United States, I mean the country south of our border and also Alaska.
An integrated headquarters was formed shortly after August 1, 1957 and the command has been operating on an interim basis for about nine months. In the light of intensive studies made by expert authorities on the problems of continental air defence and of the experience gained in the past nine months, the Canadian and United States governments have in this exchange of notes registered and recorded formally their understanding of the need for integration of their air defence activities and their agreement on the principles, both military and political, on which the organization and operation of NORAD will be based and indeed have been based during the past nine months.
For the past two decades the co-operation of Canada and the United States in the field of continental defence has grown ever more intimate. Even prior to the formation of NORAD, as many hon. members of this house know, there was close co-operation between the air defence forces of the United States and Canada. That co-ordination arose out of the recognition that the air defence of the two countries had to be thought of as a single problem. Indeed, since 1954 an in-[DOT] tegrated system of air defence has been envisaged and preparations were made for it as early as that year. Recent technological developments had made it obvious to the two governments that co-ordination of national plans was no longer adequate. It is a truism that this globe has become smaller, and one of the main factors in that regard is the reduction in the time it takes to fly from one continent to another. That reduction is salutary and mankind applauds it. But we must never forget the implications of that truism for our defences, and we must construct defences against the possibility of a surprise nuclear attack. We must therefore have in existence in peacetime an organization which, in the face of surprise attack, could immediately take defensive action over our own territories in accordance with a single air defence plan which had already been approved by the two governments.
The integration, I would remind the house, is the practical application of the principle of interdependence within NATO. This integration will contribute to the effectiveness of the air defence of this continent. It will also increase the ability of Canada and the United States to meet the strategic objectives

established in NATO, after the setting up of the Canada-United States region under NATO. The effectiveness of such integration has been amply demonstrated in other NATO areas. I am thinking of Canadians who are now under the command of SACEUR, the supreme allied commander in Europe. I am thinking of Canadians who are serving under SACLANT, the supreme allied commander, Atlantic. There are other areas under NATO where there is an integrated command. I am thinking of the allied forces, central Europe, and the allied forces, Mediterranean, in which Canada is not represented.
Our joint defence of the continent cannot, of course, be thought of in isolation. This continental effort forms part of our contribution to NATO defences. The Canada-United States region which was established under NATO is an integral part or indeed an integrated part of NATO; and as I said a moment ago, the establishment of this integrated operational command known as NORAD will contribute to the strategic objectives set for the Canada-United States region in NATO and will assist our two governments to meet these objectives more effectively.


Mr. Martin (Essex East):: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Sidney Earle Smith: Yes.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Does this mean that the NORAD commander is now responsible to the NATO council.


Sidney Earle Smith: With the permission of the hon. member for Essex East, Mr. Speaker, I will speak to that matter later.
The arrangements for air defence of Canada and the United States and the allocation of forces to NORAD for that task will be reported-I was just coming to that matter -to NATO through the Canada-United States regional planning group. In further reply to the question which has just been addressed to me may I say this. The commander of NORAD will be directly responsible to that group. I shall deal with that matter later.
As the agreement tabled today indicates, the commander in chief of NORAD will be responsible to the chiefs of staff in Canada and the joint chiefs of staff in the United States; that is, he will make his recommendations on air defence to those two bodies. They in turn-and I emphasize this point- will seek the approval of the political authorities for the implementation of such of these recommendations as are acceptable to the chiefs of staff from a military point of view. Hence you get a direct line of responsibility, the commander in chief NORAD with
The Address-Hon. S. E. Smith the chiefs of staff in each country and then their responsibility to the political authorities in their respective nations. The commander in chief NORAD will operate within a single air defence plan which will be approved by the two governments. The appointment of the commander in chief NORAD and of his deputy will be approved by the two governments. Indeed, you wiU find the provision there that in the absence of the commander in chief the deputy commander in chief takes full command.
There is another document to which I would refer.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I regret to be obliged to inform the minister that his time has expired.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I rise on a point of order. Has not the minister unlimited time as the first speaker after an amendment?


Mr. Speaker:: Only with unanimous consent of the house.


Sidney Earle Smith: May I
have about five minutes?


Some hon. Members:: Go ahead.


Sidney Earle Smith: There is another document to which I would refer, Mr. Speaker, and that is the terms of reference. Detailed terms of reference for the commander in chief NORAD have been approved by the two governments. I could add this statement. These terms of reference flow out of and are therefore consistent with the notes that have been exchanged, but I must say that in the interests of national security these detailed terms of reference cannot be made public.
Thus the NORAD exchange of notes makes formal provision for civilian control of the activities of the command in the manner I have outlined. These provisions, may I say, underline the obvious. Despite what has been said in this house and outside it, it was never the intention to cast any doubt upon or qualify the primacy of civilian authority.
I may say in conclusion that the establishment of integrated air defence arrangements between Canada and the United States increases the importance of consultation, and hon. members will find in the note which has been tabled today reference to the necessity of political consultations between our two countries. I can assure this house that the determination exists not only in Ottawa but also in Washington to ensure that such consultations can be invoked as required. I would say also that the integration of these forces under the command of NORAD subject to political consultation will assist in the

The Address-Mr. Winch maintenance and development of the individual and collective security of our two countries, and will fulfil the obligations which Canada assumed as a member of the United Nations and as a member of NATO.


Lester Bowles Pearson: May I ask the hon. minister
a question before he sits down? Is it the intention of the government in respect of this very important intergovernmental agreement to follow the normal procedure of giving the house an opportunity, by the submission of a resolution, to express its views?


Sidney Earle Smith: In answer to that question I would say no. The government regards this as an amplification of and extension under the North Atlantic treaty. As reported to the house, the exchange of notes took place on May 12 last. However, I can assure the house there will be ample opportunity for a further discussion of this matter when the debate to which the Prime Minister referred last week takes place.


Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, we have just listened to a most interesting discourse by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. The subject upon which he spoke is of such importance to this house and to the people of Canada that it is impossible to comment upon it adequately at a time when we are discussing the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I agree wholeheartedly that the importance of this matter is such that in the immediate future the Prime Minister should make available an opportunity for a discussion of international affairs, with particular reference to the matter which has been raised by the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
All I wish to say on this subject at the moment is that there seems to have been a strange change in the official viewpoint, because I know from the information I now hold in my hand, namely the Hansard report of January 4 of this year, that the Minister of National Defence made it clear when he informed this house of the arrangements existing with the United States, as reported in the second paragraph on page 2861, that the concept of the North American defence command is very definitely part of the whole NATO attempt to prevent war developing. I find it difficult at this moment, having heard the remarks of the Secretary of State for External Affairs, to reconcile completely the position taken by the Minister of National Defence in January with what is contained in the present agreement, according to reports in the press.


Mr. Pearkes:: No change whatever.


Harold Edward Winch: I find this difficult especially in view of the minister's statement last

January that no action whatever would be taken without the consent of the government of Canada. Apparently, there has been some change in the government's thinking during the current negotiations, and that is why I say we may have to wait for a better opportunity than this to go into the whole matter.
What does strike me as strange and, perhaps, as something which should not occur, is that we should have been told a few moments ago that the question was discussed, and a decision reached, in May, whereas as long ago as January the statement was made that Canada had already been committed by the minister, or by the government. I think, Mr. Speaker, that there is a great deal of difference between the two positions, and I know a number of hon. members will be glad, when the opportunity arises, to examine the ministers' statements more carefully and, I will even say, to consider the principles which were evidenced last January as compared with those contained in the statement to which we have just listened.
I will say nothing beyond that at the moment, except to tell the Prime Minister again that we had better have an opportunity in the immediate future to discuss this entire question of international affairs and, in particular, the right of parliament to have some say when it comes to the principle of military alliances with other countries, irrespective of which countries they may be.


An hon. Member:: He says we won't have it.


Harold Edward Winch: Who said that?


An hon. Member:: The minister.


Harold Edward Winch: I must have missed that, Mr. Speaker, but if such a statement was made it certainly breaks down the meaning of democratic principles in our country. The question of a military alliance, and whether or not parliament should have a say on these matters, is a most serious one for this country, and the government will certainly hear more about it. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, if you would analyse what has been happening in the world in recent weeks and months you will agree, I am sure, that it is of paramount importance that parliament should have an opportunity to discuss and approve such arrangements, especially when they may place the Dominion of Canada in a position between two powerful nations such as the United States and the U.S.S.R., where it might become a new Belgium whether we like it or not.
I have spoken on this subject at greater length than I had intended. Now I wish to

refer to the speech from the throne and to the attitude taken by members of this group. I am certain we all listened to the speech with a great deal of interest; it is the longest I ever heard in my five years here and my 20 years in British Columbia. One of the main outcomes of the speech will, I hope, be a recognition by the Prime Minister and his cabinet that promises are not fulfilled, nor are problems met, merely by the early introduction of emergency legislation. It is very welcome as far as it goes, but it is of the utmost importance to the people of Canada that emergency legislation in these fields be extended by the introduction of more comprehensive legislation at an early date, even though it may be delayed to some extent.
May I very briefly say, as has been stated by other members of this group, that we welcome the change in the Unemployment Insurance Act, but that it is imperative that the entire act be overhauled so as to effectively provide for the unemployed in all seasons and at all levels. All of us who are members of this House of Commons, irrespective of party, if we are honest in our opinions and our principles must realize that we cannot possibly rest content while we have an Unemployment Insurance Act covering only just over 60 per cent of the unemployed persons in Canada, and which in times of stress covers only one season without recognizing the fact that unemployment, whether it be great or small, can occur at any time and even many times in the year to the same person, according to his occupation.
I very much want to stress my opinion that the introduction of the emergency legislation is no solution to the unemployment problem, and must be followed by a complete overhauling of the act at an early date.
I am of the same opinion with respect to the emergency bill in respect to national housing which has been passed by this house and has received royal assent. I am sure the complete National Housing Act requires further study so as to give a greater impetus to home construction, and specifically with respect to more detailed policies and regulations to provide the opportunity for lower income groups in this country to reach the worth-while position of home ownership.
Last week during the discussion on the National Housing Act I had the opportunity to draw to the attention of this house certain despicable practices which I believed were being carried on in Canada to the disadvantage of good citizens who needed help in the field of home construction by way of first and second mortgages but who were not
The Address-Mr. Winch covered by the National Housing Act. I want to add just a few words on that subject to draw to the attention of the government-perhaps I should say particularly to the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Public Works-in addition to what I said the other day, that something in the nature of legislation is imperative to bring a halt to exorbitant interest rates and the mortgage bonus system.
Just a few days ago I gave this house concrete evidence of what to my knowledge was taking place in British Columbia. Although I have not personally seen it there must have been publicity with respect to the points I raised, because I received in the mail this morning not only confirmation of the position I took but further evidence as to the rooking of people in need, although they were possessed of good property backing, by those who like to use the capitalistic system to try to become millionaires in a hurry. The evidence I gave last week was from British Columbia but today I have a nation-wide statement by a company in Quebec informing people how they can take advantage of those people in need.
If you wish, Mr. Speaker, I will file this paper with the House of Commons; it is something which was sent from Montreal to people in British Columbia who were thought to have money to invest. The publication is from the Credit Insured Mortgage Company, Dominion Square Building, Montreal and right on the front it says:
Earn 12 per cent interest per annum on first mortgages. Earn 22 per cent per annum on second mortgages.
They state that interested parties are insured in order to make sure they will get that interest, and a prospectus is included with respect to what this company has to offer for sale. Just let me read one; it is headed "Insured Mortgages"-


Mr. Speaker:: I am not sure the hon.
member has identified what he proposes to read.


Harold Edward Winch: I have said, sir, that it is a
publication from the Credit Insured Mortgage Company of Dominion Square Building in Montreal.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it a letter or a circular,
or what is it?


Harold Edward Winch: It is a circular which was
sent to people who perhaps had a bit of money to invest, and I received it from one such person in Victoria, British Columbia. As I said, sir, I will be glad to file these

The Address-Mr. Winch papers with the House of Commons if you so desire. If I may read from just one of these pages, it says:
Second mortgages for sale at 45 per cent discount.
I would like to quote from the third paragraph:
The following mortgages are on new homes and can be purchased at a discount of 45 per cent. These are all new homes and are naturally in excellent condition.
I just want to bring this to the attention of the house in order to reiterate what other members in this group said last week during the previous discussion with respect to the need for this government to consider the situation with a view to bringing in legislation to protect the people of our country who have a certain need in the field of housing but who are not in a position, for various reasons, to be covered under the act or the regulations of the federal government or its lending institutions. To me it is a despicable situation. By the way, I would add that offers of mortgages of this nature come from almost every province in the Dominion of Canada. I say, sir, some action is required by a government that has a humanitarian instinct, and I understand from the last campaign that the Conservatives do have a humanitarian instinct, to take care of a situation of this nature.
Now, sir, I was most interested in hearing the speech from the throne, to have substantiated what in the campaign before March 31 was known as the vision of the Prime Minister. We heard a great deal during the campaign and we heard something in the speech from the throne about that vision, and to some extent it was a northern vision. A great deal of money is to be spent by the federal government on the Prime Minister's vision of the north. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that I have no objection to his vision of the north; but I would like the Prime Minister, who in the last analysis is responsible for the speech from the throne, not to neglect the vision of the west.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Or the east.


Harold Edward Winch: And not, because his eyes are northward, to neglect a certain minimum requirement of the west that can and will pay great dividends. I sincerely hope that the government and its various departments, when they consider the spending of hundreds of millions of dollars on development railroads and roads in the north, will at the same time consider whether or not they have played fair with British Columbia in our development railroads, especially the Pacific Great Eastern and the work that has been undertaken on it. 1 hope they will keep in 
mind, sir, that a great deal of the revenue from British Columbia-and it is pretty high in the national coffers-comes from areas that are very difficult of access by steamship, roads or planes. We tell the government that we will back them right down the line in northern development but at the same time -and I direct this to the Minister of Public Works who knows British Columbia so well -we ask them to give the most earnest consideration to the unanimous resolution that was passed by the British Columbia legislature at its recent session asking the federal government to accept increasing responsibilities as far as steamship, road and air access is concerned to a great many of our communities on the coastline of British Columbia.
I think, Mr. Speaker, the program of development that has been announced in general is acceptable to us all, though we shall have to wait for the details to arrive at a conclusion. We hope there will be a westward vision by this government where resources are known, as they are in British Columbia. Action was taken at the last session on behalf of the maritimes, and the speech from the throne this session contemplates action for the north. British Columbia is an exception. Since that is so, we hope there will be an early pronouncement on the government's position as regards active participation in developments on the Columbia river. Policies have been announced but nothing has been said about financial participation. I will not say any more than that at this time on the Columbia river.
I think we must emphasize also that in the campaign speeches of the Prime Minister and his colleagues and in the speech from the throne mention was made of secondary industries. It was just a general statement. I think, Mr. Speaker, we can say now very effectively that because of the economic situation in Canada, because of our unemployment situation, because of the invasion of what might be termed normal Canadian markets, where we are being undercut now as never before, speedy action is required by the government to back up the sentiment expressed in the speech from the throne relative to the establishment of secondary industry.
In our own province of British Columbia this past year a great many of our basic industries have gone out of business. We have seen towns that have been established for many years become almost ghost towns as far as industry is concerned. In Fernie coal mining has been ended, and it was a very fine city. In Britannia a similar situation has developed, which gives an indication that speedy plans are required for the

establishment of secondary industries on a long-range basis so that towns and cities are not decimated because of the failure of one basic industry. With that we must take into consideration certain aspects of foreign trade. Sir, I see it is one o'clock.


Mr. Macdonnell:: Mr. Speaker, might I suggest that you take up the offer of the hon. member who has spoken to deposit the document from which he read so it will be available to all.


Mr. Speaker:: Yes. Will the hon. member table the document from which he read?


Harold Edward Winch: All documents?


Mr. Speaker:: The document from which he read.


Harold Edward Winch: Yes, sir.
At one o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, at the time of adjournment I was drawing the attention of the Prime Minister and the government to the absolute necessity of carrying into effect the statement in the speech from the throne regarding action to establish secondary industries in Canada. I pointed out that immediate action was required. I mentioned an example in the province of British Columbia involving two cities of which we are proud, namely Fernie and Britannia. I am not going to continue with that matter at the present time, as another opportunity will undoubtedly arise later in this session.
However, with respect to the matter of secondary industries, we have to consider the position of Canada generally and that of the provinces in particular. Our country is generally dependent on export trade and the province of British Columbia particularly so. For over a year now British Columbia has been very severely hit by the loss of our traditional markets for our base metals, our pulp and general timber products.
This brings to mind something which I think it is very necessary to draw to the attention of the government at this time. Speaking particularly now of my own province of British Columbia, may I say that in the past few months our predicament as far as employment is concerned has come about to some extent-I say only to some extent- because we have been undercut in our traditional markets for base metals and timber products. This has been done, and I repeat only to some extent, by a new economic 57071-3-13*
The Address-Mr. Winch policy of the U.S.S.R. In the past year we have been undercut by that country on base metals and in the case of aluminum particularly to the extent of approximately 2 cents a pound. We have also been undercut on our timber exports. Without particularizing I will merely say that we now see the U.S.S.R. entering into a new phase of world diplomacy, a phase involving economic or trade manoeuvring, a policy that can have very serious results as far as Canada is concerned as an exporting country, although in the long run it may have beneficial aspects otherwise.
In the past year a number of Canadian businessmen visited the U.S.S.R. and according to the information I have received they state that Russia's logging industry is as efficient as that on the west coast of Canada, where we have prided ourselves as being very efficient, and that the sawmill end of the industry is possibly even more efficient. From what we have heard from these businessmen, and this is what I want to emphasize, Russia is spending approximately ten times as much as Canada on research per tree cut and per thousand board feet processed.
I do not have the time to go into all the implications of this new economic, trade and diplomatic policy, but as a citizen of Canada and a representative of the people of the country I do say that I feel personally it is necessary for the government to face up to the realities of the present trade situation. The government should face up to the reality of our loss of British Columbia markets for our base metals, particularly aluminum, and our timber products, and should recognize that we have definitely reached a time when, although basically the responsibility should rest on industry with regard to research, efficiency and other matters, the federal government should, in the interests of maintaining employment and the trading economy of the nation, speedily announce greatly increased allotments in the field of research as far as industrial operations are concerned.
I want to emphasize in this regard that I think the government will be derelict in its responsibilities if it does not take a realistic approach to the matter and during the present session enunciate major policies and allocate large amounts of money to assist our provinces and industries in the field of research in order to enable us, operating under a capitalist system, to maintain employment through the medium of the export of our products.
There is only one other phase of the speech from the throne to which I should like to draw the attention of the government and

The Address-Mr. Winch the house. I believe that certain incidents of the past few days and, indeed, throughout the past year make it almost mandatory on the government to make its position clear with regard to Canadian control of our own policies and our own economy. To put the matter in blunt language, I think the government must now make it explicitly and implicitly clear that it is not going to be prone to deference to the United States. Deference to our powerful neighbour to the south must not give way to subservience either in the international field or with regard to our own economic policies.
I think it is important to our country that there be policy statements and, if required, legislation so it may be made clear to the people of Canada in particular and of the United States that Canada controls its own destiny, its own international and economic policies. It must be made clear to the people of Canada particularly that there is no longer going to be subservience to United States companies that may own or control subsidiary companies in Canada from the point of view of their directing whether or not we can produce and sell to other countries.
I refer, of course, in particular to the reported incident in which Canada was not permitted to sell automobiles to China because of a United States law. I say, sir, that this is our country and no matter where companies are owned which are operating in our country, on our natural resources and on the wealth poduced by our people, it must be made clear, by legislation if necessary, that we in Canada sell where we desire to sell.
As a corollary to that I want to add my support to the words so eloquently expressed by the hon. member for Kootenay West concerning the recognition of China. I feel very strongly on that subject. I said in a campaign speech before March 31, and I repeat on the floor of this house, that I am afraid Canada is still maintaining a position which is known agriculturally under a cer-so much from hon. members of the government over a long period of time concerning their love, loyalty and admiration for the United Kingdom that I suggest to them that when it comes to recognition of China, perhaps they should have long ago followed the tain definition. I am convinced that some cloudy day for Canada, but a bright day for the United States, the United States will announce recognition of China and already have a settled basis for trade. We have heard lead of the United Kingdom. I feel that we in Canada should not drag behind the United States, but should follow the lead of the United Kingdom and recognize China on an

ambassadorial basis, and enter immediately into negotiations to our mutual benefit in the trade situation.
I have spoken about a number of matters during this debate. I recognize that my time is coming to a close. I have spoken in the main in generalities, but I hope I have been able to enunciate the principles which I personally, and I think I can safely say our group collectively, feel are of importance at this time. We hope to have an opportunity in the not too distant future to discuss these broad, general principles in detail.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, may I say that although we are a small group in this corner we have the same feelings of loyalty and understanding to our country as do the members of any other party. There are three parties in this house, two of them holding the same fundamental principles. We believe in the necessity for a fundamental change; but believing in democracy we will, as representatives in this house, do our utmost at all times to assist in constructive measures that will be of benefit to our country, to the people in general, to our provinces and constituencies.
I want to take this opportunity of publicly, in the House of Commons, thanking the supporters of Vancouver East, because, in my ninth election campaign, they thought I would make a good representative here. I wish to assure them that I shall at all times put forward constructive criticism and constructive measures.


Mr. Frank McGee (York-Scarborough):: My
first words, of course, Mr. Speaker, must be to concur in everything that has been said about you, and in particular to congratulate you, sir, upon achieving such favourable comment after such a hectic time during what, I suppose, is now going to be called the short parliament. My congratulations also must be extended to the Deputy Speaker, a worthy son succeeding a very worthy father. I have nothing except unabashed admiration for the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address on stepping into a situation as they did so early in the session and acquitting themselves in such distinguished fashion.
If I may, I should like to add a word to the new members who joined us on March 31. A few short months ago I sat in their position, wondering when I was going to get the opportunity to speak; but let me assure them that even a four months' session does not do anything to lessen the terror with which one faces this situation. I can further assure them that Disraeli was correct when he said of the British house that it was the most chilling and nerve-destroying audience in the world.

(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I should like to begin this speech by tendering a most cordial welcome to the new French-speaking members and I shall add that I hope one day to be able to share their traditional courage and well-known ability which enable them to master another language.
I avail myself of this opportunity to offer my warmest congratulations to the Right Hon. and Mrs. Louis St. Laurent who are today celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary in peace and serenity, far from the turmoil of politics.
(Text):
If I may be placed for a moment in the category of one making a maiden speech, Mr. Speaker, I should like to say something about the vast riding of York-Scarborough which I have the privilege of representing in this house. The first thing that must be said about this riding concerns an important father of confederation who, I am sure, is whirling in his grave somewhere in Toronto. I refer, of course, to George Brown, that great advocate of representation by population. In York-Scarborough today there are approximately
200,000	people. By 1962, at which time it will be possible to bring about redistribution, according to a conservative estimate there will be between 325,000 and 350,000 people in that constituency. It will be apparent immediately that York-Scarborough is not adequately represented in this house-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Hear, hear.


Frank Charles McGee: -present company excluded.
I have made inquiries privately amongst the law officers and other agencies in a position to advise me, and I am told that I am at the mercy of the house in any attempt to achieve some relief in terms of trying- and I underline the word "trying"-to represent adequately that many people. The physical proportions of the riding of York-Scarborough are simply described by a line drawn through Yonge street and No. 11 highway, which roughly bisects the city of Toronto and sweeps around eastward to the lake. Within the boundaries of this area lies most of the open land available for building to take up the outward growth of the city.
I think it is fair to say that of every two new houses built in the metropolitan Toronto area one will be built in York-Scarborough.
Not too many years ago the riding of York-Scarborough was a pleasant countryside on the perimeter of Toronto. Starting with the war and gathering momentum following the war an invasion of massive proportions took place. An example of the numbers involved I can give to you in this fashion. Between the election in 1953 and the election in 1957
The Address-Mr. McGee
100,000	people moved into that riding; and of course with the inspired policies of this government this pace has increased. Between the election of last June and the election in March there were 9,000 more voters on the voters' lists.
Following this massive invasion of people- mostly young people with young families moving into their own homes for the first time- came an accompanying movement of industry following the labour force and personnel to the suburban areas, resulting in such dynamic areas as the golden mile, to say nothing of Leaside and North York. But what is most important about the riding of York-Scarborough is the people who live within its boundaries. They are good citizens conscientious in the discharge of their civic duties at the municipal, provincial and federal level.
As an example of good citizenship in action may I point out that during the last campaign their were no fewer than 15 joint meetings to which all candidates of all parties were invited for general debate, equal time being allowed and a question period following. In addition there were 150 neighbourhood meetings to which I was invited. That is an example of a people interested, concerned and willing to participate in the functioning of democracy in this country. I have not the figures at hand, but it is my understanding that the percentage of people who voted in that riding is as high as any in the Dominion of Canada.
There has been some discussion about the results of this election, and some reasons have been advanced as to why the result was as it was. The leader of the C.C.F. party, the hon. member for Assiniboia, summed it all up in simple words. He said the only reason the Conservatives formed the government was that many people were saying, "Should we not give the government a chance?" or "Let us give John a chance"; that it was just as simple as that.
I have a few comments which will indicate that it was not as simple as that by any means. In my opinion the reason stems first from the fact that the Conservative party had the dynamic and dramatic leadership of the Prime Minister. In the second place this government, which was a minority government, faced a most difficult economic situation and a rather more difficult political situation.	The verdict of the people, as I
recognize it, was that it had done an excellent job, not just that it deserved another chance but that it had to have it.
The fourth reason for the result which obtained is, I suggest, that in their own way each of the other parties in contesting this

The Address-Mr. McGee election made presentations and submissions to the people of Canada most of which added up to an insult to the intelligence of the Canadian voter. I refer to examples of candidates, some of whom were returned and others who were not, stumping the country and screaming that Tory times are hard times. One of them even went into an historical treatise to establish this preposterous nonsense, and it was interpreted as such by most of the electorate. In Toronto we had such extreme statements on the front pages of our newspapers as one saying that Tory policies were stupid and dishonest. We had suggestions that the government was antiAmerican, as well as many other wild statements which could not be supported. Certainly in York-Scarborough the voters gave their answer to such suggestions and accorded me a majority which I understand is larger than any previous one in history.
As to the debate thus far and the amendment involving economic planning may I say in spite of what the hon. member for Essex East stated:
. . . this government has not given any evidence of a program designed to meet this national problem of unemployment in Canada at this time.
And the Leader of the Opposition's statement:
The word "recession" is not mentioned. It is a bad word, apparently, which must not be used.
In spite of statements such as those, Mr. Speaker, I submit to you that this government has given Canada a new position in world affairs. I suggest that Canada leads all countries in the world in terms of anti-recession legislation. Policies which were orginated by this government are now being discussed in the United States at great length. Statements appeared during the election emanating from my opponent in my riding and from his leaders throughout the country that this was not so. If I may very quickly review the matter in detail I should like to do so. It seems to me that government action on an anti-recession basis should evolve in two ways; first, government anti-recession action should put more money into the hands of the people. Certainly this is fundamental economic theory. It should further, if possible, put that money into the hands of people who need that money and, of course it follows, who will spend it.
In that regard I should like to list briefly the things that were done. They include the old age pension increase, the old age assistance increase, payments to disabled persons extended, the blind pension increased, veterans allowances and benefits, disability pension benefits; money put into the hands of people

who needed that money and who would spend it, putting more money in circulation and certainly creating more purchasing power.
Beyond that, the obvious method of putting more money back into the pockets of people in this country was by tax reductions, $146 million worth. Again what I liked best about this method-and certainly it was reflected in the reaction of the voters in my riding-was that they started substantially at the bottom, giving relief where it was most needed, in the lower income brackets. Certainly as far as increased tax deduction for children was concerned, this was greeted with much enthusiasm in my riding, which has more young children than any three normal ridings in this country. Other money was put into circulation to create purchasing power and economic activity through cash advances on farmstored grain and financial assistance to the provinces.
In addition to taking action to inject more money into the bloodstream of the economy, the government took further action by accelerating the public works program and moving forward starting dates on government-sponsored projects in order to create more jobs. Even more important as far as my own riding is concerned, and as far as I personally am concerned, was the action taken in the last parliament and continued in this parliament by the Minister of Public Works to expand the house building program. Those
9,000	voters I mentioned who moved into York-Scarborough between last June and March of this year moved largely into homes built under legislation brought in by this government last year. My Liberal opponent experienced difficulty in sustaining his point that this government was doing nothing, when around us on every side, in every area of the riding, was a rate of home building double or treble the rate established in the winter months a year before.
No policy for the recession? No anti-recession activities? I refer to the speech from the throne, and draw the attention of hon. members to the amendment to the Unemployment Insurance Act and the relief attendant thereto; to the increased rate of house building which I have mentioned; to the substantial public investment and to the expansion of public works in the north, all of which are part and parcel of the steps the government has taken to deal with this situation.
I should like for one moment to look at the situation in the United States in more detail, and to compare it with our own. A debate has been going on for something like seven months south of the border on whether or not taxes should be cut. The administration has been asking, "If we cut taxes will people save the money or spend it?" and so on. We in Canada began cutting taxes well

back in last year. I suppose it is the privilege of a backbencher to make guesses like anybody else in this country, and I suggest we may yet be cutting taxes some more.
In the United States the debate goes on concerning whether or not government spending should be increased. Well, Mr. Speaker, our government began its program in this regard some time ago. We started last October with unemployment insurance compensation, housing projects and so on; and on a comparable basis we have done five times as much as the United States in housing loans. The economies of the United States and Canada are so tied together that I believe there will never be a situation where one country is in the state of recession while the other is in a state of inflation. We may move upward and downward at varying rates, but substantially we will be in the same phase. I would encourage the government of the United States to take an example from the leadership which I mentioned a few moments ago and accelerate its program as we are accelerating ours in order to bring about a continental economic situation which is so vital.
I should like now to say something about the national pastime of suggesting what the federal government should do. Across my desk as, I know, across the desks of most hon. members flows an avalanche of material from every quarter-industry, labour, and every known organization-giving suggestions and ideas as to what the federal government should do. I have an idea that perhaps the responsibility for the economic future of this country does not lie exclusively within the federal realm, and I hope that when the Minister of Labour convenes his conference of labour, management and industry, out of that meeting will come a progressive and aggressive move on the part of labour and on the part of industry to pitch in and help us dig ourselves out of this recession.
I would certainly look to labour, and the housing industry particularly, which has benefited tremendously from the expansion in this area of our economy, to come forward with a program which, I am sure, will be looked on with favour by this government, to bring about a solution to our winter unemployment problem.
We have had a lot of experience in fighting recessions in this country; we have a recession every winter. I should like to see a plan, long term and short term, involving public works-public works which before this government took office did not exist-coordinated with the building industry and with labour to bring about a sort of public works
The Address-Mr. McGee anti-recession measure each winter, a move which would certainly answer a social need.
Technological methods of solving the difficulties of building during the winter have advanced tremendously in the past few years. In my own riding there is a development plan to accommodate 30,000 people. Certain impediments exist which prevent this work being started. I would urge the government and the Minister of Public Works to take what action may be necessary to remove these impediments in order that next winter, the following winter and the year after that construction may go ahead on this project.
Mr. Speaker, I mentioned earlier that during the recent election campaign charges of anti-Americanism were levelled against the government. In his speech the Leader of the Opposition mentioned at the outset something about telling our best customers things they were not too happy to hear. I used to be a buyer in my civilian occupation, and in that capacity I used to buy considerable amounts from various sources. On many occasions it became necessary for me to go to a good customer and move some of the contracts planned to be placed with that manufacturer to another in order to protect myself as a buyer and protect my company from the situation which might arise from having too many eggs in one basket. In fact the suggestion made in my riding during the election was that we should have followed such a policy, but not told the Americans that this was the intention.
I have always believed in my own dealings -and I think they should apply also to government dealings on an international plane- that such things should be done openly and not behind people's backs, and if one is facing a new situation with regard to the balance of trade it is better, in my view, to say so frankly.
With regard to this charge of anti-Americanism I should like to refer the house to an editorial which appeared yesterday in the New York Times. Referring to a suggestion in some quarters of an anti-American nationalism in Canada, the editorial says;
This is a distortion. Canadian "nationalism." so-called, is prideful, honest and healthy. No right-minded citizen of this country could deplore it. It will bring grievances to the surface, and that is all to the good. That is as it should be between close friends. Probably we need, here in the United States, a greater flexibility in some of our policies. Probably Canada needs a better understanding of what we are trying to do.
This I suggest is the answer, or part of it, to such criticisms.
Before I sit down, Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to outline my specific ambition in this House of Commons. It is simply this; that

The Address-Mr. Robichaud after I depart, through choice or otherwise, it may be said of me that I was a good member. I do not think there is any more worthy ambition for anyone coming into this house. The only promise I have made in two election campaigns, and the promise I now make to you, sir, and to this house, is that I will do my very best. I do not think anyone can or should promise more.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Mr. Speaker, I would like to join with those who have preceded me in this debate by offering to you my sincere congratulations on having been selected for a second term as speaker of this house and to act as the first member of the commons. Those of us who were here during the last parliament have benefited from your fairness and good judgment, and I want to assure you at this early stage of the current session that you will continue to receive from the members of the official opposition the utmost co-operation and respect in your endeavours to protect the rights and privileges of all members, irrespective of their party affiliation.
You received this co-operation from us during the last parliament and I want to assure you that the members of the party to which I belong were shocked to witness the most unpleasant and embarrassing position into which you were forced-not by the opposition members but by the Prime Minister himself-during the dying moments of Canada's twenty-third parliament.


An hon. Member:: What about the twentysecond parliament?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: It is to be hoped for the protection and safeguarding of the rights, traditions and principles of parliament that similar incidents will not occur during Canada's twenty-fourth parliament.


Mr. Palleil:: You have a very short memory.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Before resuming my remarks on the address in reply to the speech from the throne I would also like to congratulate the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address, which hon. members acquitted themselves in a way worthy of parliamentarians and to the glory and honour of their respective constituencies.
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I would like to join the hon. member for York-Scarborough (Mr. McGee) in tendering my most sincere congratulations to Mr. and Mrs. Louis St. Laurent who today, surrounded by their family, are celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary. May the Lord grant them many more years of happi-

ness in which to enjoy the peace of family and home, sheltered from the worries and responsibilities of political life.
(Text):
From now on, Mr. Speaker, during the few minutes at my disposal my remarks will be restricted to or at least very closely connected with, the program enunciated in the speech from the thone. The Prime Minister, as is outlined in the speech from the throne, is asking parliament to direct its attention to these things which are considered necessary and of immediate importance to the people of Canada.
We members of this house, irrespective of party affiliation and whether sitting with the government or the opposition, have a responsibility to protect the rights of the people and at the same time assure a high level of employment and prosperity in our country. There are certain measures therefore which we believe are necessary and of immediate importance in order to benefit the people of Canada.
We have learned from the speech from the throne that all the countries of the commonwealth have accepted the Canadian proposal that a commonwealth trade and economic conference be held in Montreal in September of this year. We certainly welcome such an announcement, but unfortunately we have good reasons to be rather sceptical about the result of any such conference. The people of Canada have not yet forgotten the Mont Tremblant conference which was termed "a great flop" when the British had prepared very thoroughly for that meeting while our Canadian representatives went to the conference as though they had forgotten about their homework. Will the policy of the government at this coming conference be governed by a straight diversion of 15 per cent of our trade from the United States to Britain, or will it be based on more solid ground such a higher and expanding level of international trade with all countries, as we enunciated in the amendment moved by our leader, the hon. member for Algoma East?
When employment for all should be the main concern of every member of this house, when unemployment figures are from 75 per cent to 80 per cent higher today than in May of last year, we are told in the speech from the throne that this parliament will be asked to enact a new bill of rights to safeguard the rights of all persons in Canada in respect of all subjects within the jurisdiction of parliament. We realize that we have in such a bill a dream, a vision highly cherished by the Prime Minister himself, but we must also admit that we Canadians have enjoyed since the early days of our constitution a maintenance and preservation of

freedom probably unequalled in any other free country of the world.
I would therefore suggest to the Prime Minister and to the other members of the present government that precedence be given to more urgent matters, matters which concern the immediate welfare and general economy of the Canadian people. The constitution of Canada established in the British North America Act safeguards the rights of all Canadian citizens irrespective of racial origin; and all Canadians are proud of this act which has given us, as I have just said, a freedom probably unequalled in any other free country.
Speaking of a bill of rights, I might mention that listening this morning to the statement by the Secretary of State for External Affairs I felt that what we now need is a bill of rights for parliament, when such a military alliance as the one announced by that minister this morning should be considered by parliament and should not rest upon the shoulders of the present government without consulting with parliament as a whole.
There is another aspect of the speech from the throne which I would like to mention, and that has to do with a matter which concerns all of us in this house at the present time; that is, sustained employment for all together with accelerated development of our natural resources. The government has decided on what it calls a major program of useful public works projects and the encouragement of the development and processing of our natural resources. However, as has been said before by members of the opposition who preceded me in this debate, there is very little new in this so-called huge public works program launched by the government, the major portion of which was outlined in detail in the estimates for the fiscal year 1958-1959 tabled on Tuesday last. The works projects totalling $280 million during the first quarter of 1958 and $1,185 million for the full calendar year, a large part of which is for the government's so-called natural development policy, will certainly not meet the objective of the government of removing the dark cloud of unemployment which is presently spreading over Canada from coast to coast, and which may be more apparent in the Atlantic provinces than in any other section of the country. It is, moreover, a recognized fact that the largest share of these public works projects included in the present estimates are but a continuation or completion of projects started by the previous government.
We from the Atlantic provinces are not against such projects of major importance as
The Address-Mr. Robichaud the South Saskatchewan dam and the Pine Point railway in the far north. We understand that the politically-minded Prime Minister could not resist implementing certain of his promises to that effect, but this does not prove to us and to the country in general that such projects are economically sound and urgently needed at this particular time of recession. The program of building new roads in the northern territories to develop the wealth of mineral resources could have some economic justification; but just the same all hon. members, and particularly the members of the present government, should take a second look at some of the announcements made by the Prime Minister, such as the one made in Prince Albert to the effect that he had in mind a road 212 miles long from Prince Albert to Flin Flon and also a 550-mile road from Lac La Ronge to Uranium City on lake Athabaska.
We are not against future development of this country from north to south through a policy of access roads, making available the vast resources of the northern section of Canada, but we all understand also that new roads are urgently needed right now in some of the other provinces in areas already well populated, and where they could benefit already established and operating industries. We know what new roads would mean to the tourist industry in the Atlantic provinces and the additional revenue it would bring to our population.
We would therefore ask the Prime Minister before it is too late to reconsider his northern vision and give due consideration not only to a western vision, as was mentioned this morning by the hon. member for Vancouver East, but also to an eastern vision to include the other provinces of Canada.
We are not against the so-called specific $75 million development at Frobisher bay on Baffin island. We recognize that Canada is a growing country with great possibilities and prospects for future development; but at the same time it is our duty as members of the opposition to suggest to this government the right kind of planning in conjunction with a tax policy which will improve the present wavering economy of the country.
We are aware of the vast mineral resources of the Arctic region. We know that the whole of the Northwest Territories, with its 1,300,000 square miles, offers new ground for important economic developments in the years to come. However, we must admit that right now, in the month of May, 1958, hundreds of thousands of Canadian citizens, in fact most probably over 500,000 of them, are seeking work which they urgently need. We recall those words of the Prime Minister,

The Address-Mr. Robichaud only mention of fisheries was made in the following very few words:
Unremitting efforts are being made to sell Canadian agricultural and fisheries products in the markets of the world-[DOT]
There is no doubt in my mind that the fishing industry today is experiencing its own particular difficulties. Our Atlantic coast fishermen are being paid today for their fish prices which do not keep pace with the national economy. Prices for fish are in many instances even lower than they were 8 or 10 years ago. What are the main reasons for this unfavourable situation? Is it disorderly marketing by our processors and dealers combined with too much emphasis by governments on production and conservation alone?
The fishing industry is facing problems today which should be attacked vigorously if the industry is to survive and prosper. Governments, both federal and in the provinces concerned, should give, in co-operation with the industry, more attention to marketing and at the same time establish a sound program of sales promotion, advertising and education. There is no reason whatsoever why in some areas of the Atlantic provinces our fishermen should be paid less than 3 cents per pound for their fresh cod delivered at landing points.
It is not my intention at this time to make elaborate remarks on the fishing industry. My time is limited by the rule of debate and I will have other occasions to discuss this matter in much more detail. The fishing industry, however, is one of major importance on the east and west coasts of our country and deserves the full attention of the government. I want to warn the government that the fishing industry has some definite reservations on the question of a firmer stand on trade with the United States, and one must not forget that one-half of Canada's fisheries products, to a value of $90 million annually, are consumed in the United States. The government will also be asked to give more serious attention to the declining Atlantic salt fish industry which is seriously affected by the loss of important international markets together with higher costs of production.
Notwithstanding the statement made by the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. MacLean) in Halifax a few weeks ago to the effect that the industry should not be concerned with the recent curtailment of import quotas on fresh and frozen fillets by the United States government, we of the opposition feel that the possible consequences to the fishing industry of the government's stand on trade matters with the United States should be carefully weighed before proceeding further

in this direction. We are aware of the efforts made on previous occasions by the United States fishing industry to curtail fish imports. We know what the acceptance by the United States government of the United States tariff commission recommendations would mean to our fishing industry and there is no need for us to emphasize further that the diversion trade policy of the government is creating disquietude and fear among our own fish exporters.
We do not want further curbs on imports of fishery products by United States authorities, and again we are asking the government to exercise definite reservations in its attitude towards our United States neighbours, in order to protect an industry which is so vital to the economy of the Atlantic provinces.
There are many other problems facing the fishing industry today which I should like to bring to the attention of this house, but I shall reserve my remarks for a later date when I may have an opportunity of dealing exclusively with fisheries problems.
Since the opening of the present session, the house has approved amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act, extending seasonal benefits to June 28, for this year only. This, we understood, was but a temporary, emergency measure to take partial care of the exceptionally large number of unemployed at a period when usually employment should be at least normal. If unemployment insurance has been introduced to protect labour during a period of unemployment in this country, the act should be amended to cover farm employees who certainly deserve protection.
In conclusion, 1 express the hope that the government will see its way clear to introduce, during the present session, amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act which would include benefits for employees on our Canadian farms.


Mr. Harold Hicks (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, as a freshman, I should like to take this opportunity of congratulating you upon the high position to which you have been elevated. I should like also to extend congratulations to the Deputy Speaker and the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. At this time I should like to refer back 22 years to a time when Harry J. Barber, of Chilliwack, was the last Progressive Conservative member to represent the Fraser valley district in this house. I had a letter from him yesterday and he is just as much interested today as he was then in the doings of this great parliament.
I propose to locate for you, Mr. Speaker, the Fraser Valley constituency, and then I

should like to take a few moments to outline some of the problems that we have in the Fraser valley. Before doing this, however, I should like to say that this is the centennial year for British Columbia. Those of you who have visited the province during the last month or two might wonder what it was that you saw walking around the streets of our cities and towns with large beards, mustaches, sideburns and so on. These people represent what human beings looked like some one hundred ago. In addition to that, our ladies love to go out dressed in the long skirts with the hoops, the large hats, and even in Chilliwack, the largest town in our district, it is quite the proper thing for every lady on Friday to go out dressed in such costumes. I trust, too, that whenever any district in British Columbia asks for help in celebrating this centennial year, this government will see fit to do what it can to help.
The Fraser Valley constituency which I represent extends from about Cisco Lodge in the northeast corner, up the Fraser valley canyon on both sides of the river for about 150 miles, and then west to Aldergrove on the south side of the Fraser river, and to the Pitt river which runs into the Fraser on the north side. During the last election there were some 40,000 voters in the area. This is a very important tourist area and includes some very scenic routes, particularly the one down the Fraser valley canyon with the rugged mountains showing on each side. In some areas the highway circles around the mountain tops quite high from the bottom of the Fraser valley canyon. I have known several instances of our prairie neighbours, who are used to driving on the level, really getting the jitters when they are driving around some of these mountain peaks away up in the heavens.
This Fraser canyon has in it Hell's Gate, at which point there are salmon ladders to allow the salmon to go up the Fraser river to the spawning grounds. When the water rises three or four feet during flood time at Hell's Gate it has little effect on the water level farther down where the Fraser river spreads out to a considerable width. The Harrison Hot Springs spa is also one of the tourist attractions in the Fraser river valley. Here, of course, is the Agassiz experimental farm, which is one of the original experimental farms started in 1888. It is in the shade of Mount Cheam, one of the beautiful mountains of the area. At this time of the year, as the snow melts, one can see the form of an angel outlined in the snow on the side of Mount Cheam, and that is known as the guardian angel of the Fraser valley.
The Address-Mr. Hicks
In this area there is a great deal of commercial fishing between the Pattullo bridge, which is in New Westminster, and the Mission City bridge. There has been some concern amongst local fishermen, who have been living on small farms and fishing during the season, because the season has been curtailed lately. Last year closure was put on in this area from September 15, and the fishermen felt this was a hardship. There is also some mining in this area, particularly in the Hope area on the south side of the Fraser. There is some small mining done on the north shore. From Lytton down the Fraser valley to the extreme western end, there is commercial logging and lumbering. There are some quite large mills operating in the Hope, Mission, Chilliwack, Haney and other areas, cutting lumber for the local and export trade. There are also many smaller mills in the area. These are important business concerns and certainly add a great deal to the employment opportunities and resources of the area.
Agriculture, however, is our main resource in the Fraser valley, and is the thing about which I am mostly concerned. It includes such crops as peas, corn and the small fruits like strawberries and raspberries for canning and freezing. Also of great importance from an agricultural standpoint is the poultry business, including not only the turkey breeding work but also the raising of poultry for meat and egg production. Growers in my constituency are thankful for the assistance given the turkey growers last fall when the United States turkeys were being dumped into the area. The poultry industry in this area almost equals in value the dairy industry. These two branches of agriculture in the Fraser Valley constituency are almost identical with the same crops from the edge of the Fraser Valley constituency to the coast. This area is in the New Westminster riding including Langley, Cloverdale, Ladner and so on. The poultry and dairy industries combined provide over 50 per cent of the cash value of the farms in the province of British Columbia. The large Fraser valley milk producers association, a co-operative that operates mostly in the Fraser valley, sold $25,580,597 worth of products last year. That will give you some idea of the importance of this great co-operative organization.
I should now like to take a few minutes to mention some of the problems of the constituency with which I have been, shall I say, bombarded since March 31. You might be surprised to learn that this whole area which 1 have mentioned, even right down to the Ladner area which goes right to the coast, is extremely short of domestic water. Where the rainfall is so heavy and where the Fraser river runs through the centre of it,

The Address-Mr. Hicks one would be inclined to think that the domestic water supply should be quite appropriate for the need. However, such is not the case. Almost every one of these areas is concerned about the domestic water supply, probably not so much for today but rather because they foresee what is coming in the years ahead, particularly as people are moving in in larger and larger numbers all the time.
Some considerable work has been done in engineering and in making inquiries of all kinds in connection with trapping water from tributaries which run into the Vedder river southeast of Chilliwack. As this water comes down off the mountains from glaciers up on top, it is wonderful water, with no contamination whatever. If it could be put into large pipes and run right down through the centre of the Fraser valley and sold to each of the municipalities as it goes by, it would help a great deal not only in the Chilliwack area but in Sumas prairie, which is a dike farming area with very wonderful land, and also in Aldergrove and in Matsqui municipality and further on down to the coast outside of the Fraser Valley constituency which I represent. The Elk Creek water works of Chilliwack are the people who supply Chilliwack with its water at the present time and they are having trouble in getting an adequate supply. In this same area is a large army camp of the Canadian engineers. Water must be supplied to it.
There are two tributaries running into the Vedder river. Incidentally the Vedder river is not suitable for damming because it goes on the rampage at flood time, so much so that engineers assert that it could not be dammed and handled properly. But there are, in fact, three tributaries running into it, with almost ready made places where dams could easily be put in. I know of no other one thing in my constituency or even in the Fraser valley as a whole that would give more satisfaction, more happiness or more pleasure to all the people therein than an adequate supply of fresh clean water. It could be used for domestic purposes in all the homes and it could also be used at certain seasons of the year for irrigation purposes on farm land.
Next I should like to mention the fact that I was invited to a council meeting in Haney not long before I left home. The Haney reeve is chairman of the mosquito control area there. They wondered whether more funds could not be secured from the federal government in order to assist, particularly in this centennial year, in controlling mosquitoes. Of course this matter has to do with all municipalities in the Fraser valley. I


understand the amount last year was $1,500. They should like to see that amount doubled.
Let me mention some of the problems of some of the other municipalities. Incidentally may I say that in some of my campaign talks I mentioned the fact that I would, if elected, try to keep in touch as much as possible with the municipal officers in the particular riding. By doing that one can keep in touch with the individuals as well. Just recently the teamsters strike was concluded in British Columbia and this meant a great deal to the situation that had arisen in the Hope area which exists mostly on the tourist trade and lumbering. Nothing with regard to lumbering could be done there until the teamsters strike was settled.
Then as to Chilliwack, I mentioned the army camp there. They are looking for larger grants to their municipality, not forgetting and expressing thanks for what has been supplied previously. According to the information given to me, in 1955 there was a $13,159 grant to the municipality of Chilliwack; in 1956 it was $12,537. When I left they had not had word as to what the 1957 grant would be, but they hoped it would amount to $20,000. The trans-Canada highway runs through this municipality and they would hope that work on this project could be started immediately. On the north side of the river in Kent municipality they are desirous of having the highway completed as a civil defence project, if for no other reason.
The Mission municipality, which also would benefit by this water supply that I mentioned some time ago, have a project which they should like to see developed, that is 100 acres being diked along the river bank and filled in, as apparently some company is endeavouring to purchase this site for industrial purposes. This, of course, would be a wonderful thing, something similar to what is being done on Annasis island at the present time.
Matsqui municipality has a large airport which will be better known to hon. members as Abbotsford airport. This airport extends over some 1,200 acres, and the people feel that the assessment value of $3.50 per acre placed on it by the federal government is too low. They would like to see it increased.
All municipalities in my area are, of course, looking forward to assistance and help from the government toward their education programs. Apparently the provincial government is financially unable to supply all the requirements, and the municipalities are therefore looking to the federal government for some assistance in this regard.

Another matter which is important to the constituency which I represent and to the area further down between the Fraser valley and the coast is the feed situation as it affects poultry men and livestock growers in that area. I believe that those interested have no quarrel with the Canadian wheat board regulations which set the price for milling wheat, but it does not seem fair to the poultry and livestock men in British Columbia that wheat can be purchased by one farmer from another, or by feeders directly from farmers on the prairies at between 50 cents to 65 cents a bushel for the lower grades while the price a producer has to pay directly the grain crosses the mountains is three times that sum, up to $50 a ton, which is the way feed is sold in British Columbia. Poultry and livestock men in British Columbia have to compete with the prairie producers of poultry products as well as with imports from the state of Washington. It is admitted, of course, that there is a freight subsidy on this feed coming into British Columbia, but it would still be a wonderful thing for the province if something could be done.
Another problem, and one which is, I understand, being looked after at the present time at least as far as strawberry production is concerned, is raised by the dumping of berries into British Columbia from the state of Washington at very low prices. There will be something like 3,000 tons of raspberries for export from the Fraser valley this year, but there will be imports of strawberries also on account of the frost which a few years ago killed a lot of the plants.
These are some of the major problems we face in the Fraser valley.


Mr. Alan Macnaughlon (Mount Royal):: Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a great pleasure to join with other hon. members of this house and congratulate you upon your election as speaker of the twenty-fourth parliament. I know that as a scholar and a gentleman you will maintain the rights and privileges of the minority groups in this chamber. In the tradition of this house I should like also to congratulate the mover and seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
I think it might serve some purpose if in these fast changing times when each day the morning newspaper screams new headlines at us I were to take a little time to discuss the really remarkable change and development which has taken place in our political system and in our thinking since the time of confederation. There is no need for me to stress the economic strides made by this country; the fact that we have become the
19, 1958
The Address-Mr. Macnaughton fourth trading nation in the world is sufficient evidence of this growth. I should prefer to limit these few words to a discussion of Canada and the commonwealth, and to a new appraisal of the commonwealth. I should like to refer to the uniqueness of the Canadian position both geographically and historically and to the consequent opportunities in foreign policy that this gives us generally.
It seems to me that the Canadian attitude toward the commonwealth has undergone very great changes in the past 50 years, and I think it may be said that from confederation in 1867 down to 1914 the principal struggle was how to convert responsible government and confederation into real working internal and external sovereignty for all effective purposes. That question was largely solved by the realities of the first world war. We entered into a second phase of Canadian political development in the celebrated imperial conferences which were held in 1926 and 1931. Hon. members will remember the Balfour declaration of 1926-"free and autonomous nations, no one subordinate to the other"- and the 1931 Imperial conference which resulted in the Statute of Westminster.
I think it is fair to say that the nineteen twenties and nineteen thirties were marked by a growing body of Canadian opinion more detached from commonwealth sentiment than before. This was probably due to an anxiety to express our new found independence in the fullest possible way. However, during the period between 1939 and 1945, the period of world war II, I think we learned the full meaning of sovereignty with all its attendant responsibilities; I think we came to realize that the mother country would, in time of crisis, depend to a considerable degree upon Canada in many important respects.
We seem now to have marched into a new era of commonwealth interests and understanding; we have come to realize that the commonwealth is a unique and attractive political experience and we are happy to share in it as one of its senior members. There are many good reasons for this. It is important to find a bridge between the whites and the non-whites of the free world. The commonwealth serves this purpose admirably. It is important, I think, to find an English speaking counterpoise to the weight of the United States. The commonwealth does this in a loose but certainly an effective fashion. It is also important to try and discover links between those countries which are active in the free world and those countries which allege a sort of neutrality between east and west. The commonwealth provides us with this opportunity with no loss of friendship
2C8

The Address-Mr. Macnaughton or contact because of the different roads along which member states move on the highway of world order.
We are now experimenting with new opportunities for economic relationships with the commonwealth, particularly with the United Kingdom. These may or may not succeed. The conference held in Mont Trembiant last year and the proposed economic conference to be held in Montreal this September will at least give us the chance for a continuing re-appraisal of Canada and the commonwealth, and help us to see whether there are questions of an economic or political character important to Canada which should not be overlooked.
I think the success of Her Majesty the Queen's visit last year testified to the interest of Canadians in monarchy as an institution. Many hon. members will recall that the fathers of confederation at one time were considering using the term "Kingdom of Canada" but that this term was changed at the insistence of Lord Derby who feared, and I quote, that "the name would wound the sensibilities of the Yankees".
I do however, maintain that the universal acceptance by Canadians of Her Majesty the Queen as Queen of Canada is much more than an emotional outburst. We are not a new group of people isolated in a given geographical territory in North America; we are the inheritors and in fact the guardians of two great historical movements-the British and the French. To my mind the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) summarized the situation in very well chosen words when, in a newspaper article he wrote in part:
It is an inspiring thing to be a citizen of a new nation: helping to make the traditions and create the things that others will write about in a couple of hundred years. But it is a great thing also for a new country to have the roots of its nationhood buried deep in ancient freedoms and attested institutions; to inherit a long and good political tradition. As a state whose sovereign is in the line of succession from Edward the Confessor in the eleventh century we in Canada have that tradition. It emphasizes that our national story is an unbroken record, from the Magna Carta of 1215, to the assembling of parliament in Ottawa. . . . All this makes for stability and ordered progress, and it does, I think, give Canada a distinctive position in this hemisphere.
You know, the phrase "Queen of Canada" was an artificially simulated phrase a generation ago, but today men of judgment use it in its due sense and its right place in the Canadian scheme of things.
So I say that Canada is fortunate in having a unique international position. While geography would seem to confine us to the North American continent, we are in fact and in spirit members of different groups and associations. In the first place we do belong

to the North American continent with all its active contacts with our great neighbour to the south. Sharing as we do a common continent with fundamentally similar cultures, our relations with the United States must always have a special quality of immediacy in political and economic matters simply because our great neighbour is leader of the free world on the one hand and a decisive partner in the management of the affairs of North America on the other. And yet nothing is more salutary in our relations with the United States than the firmness with which we speak our piece when our interests are involved in United States policies and methods.
I do not think it is any secret that Canada's voice is listened to in Washington and exerts a certain amount of influence there. For ourselves and for our American friends this firmness is an important moderating influence in the day to day development of United States foreign policy wherever it touches upon our common problems. In the second place, Canada as a partner in NATO is closely connected with a large and very important group of western European nations. In the third place, Canada is a senior and respected member of the commonwealth family of nations and we have earned our place at the table. During the present century we have fought in three wars with our sister nations and we have co-operated with them in the endeavour to maintain and promote peace.
So I say that the commonwealth-the newest worldwide grouping of independent states alone in the world today-bridges the gulf between the old empires of the west and the new nationalisms of the Afro-Asian peoples. It unites in a community of effort the white peoples and those, whom for the want of a better term, we call non-whites. In the commonwealth we have Indians and Pakistani; we have Australians and Canadians; we have Britons and the citizens of Ghana. These and other races and faiths find an instrument for maintaining collective contact on a scale not always possible solely by bilateral associations. In this multi-national family there exists for the first time since Roman days the unifying principle of political association which transcends races, creeds and colours. For the commonwealth is in itself an entity; not a legal entity but something much more important than that; the commonwealth is a social and political idea and underlying it may be a moral notion expressed by the morality of its public law, by notions of justice, fair play and by agreement on a minimum standard of decent behaviour by those who hold power.

Thus we find that Canada although geographically a member of the North American, group of nations, also belongs through NATO to the western European group of nations and, through her commonwealth membership, to a group of ten independent states of whom four are Asian and one native African. I think it follows therefore that Canada occupies a responsible place on today's international stage. We have no domestic problems arising from colour and creed. We have, however, great experience in the art of compromise and we should be in a position to help other nations as a result of our past experience.
In short, we are ideally situated to undertake the heavy but rewarding goal of peacemaker and our achievements in this regard are already quite impressive. Certainly I think all members will agree that the recent award of the Nobel peace prize to the Leader of the Official Opposition is proof of our country's contribution to world peace and that it has been no small thing.
An outstanding example of our success in this regard was associated with the sad situation which developed in the Suez area some 18 months ago. Hon. members will recall that a deadlock developed between the United Kingdom, France and Israel on the one side and the United States on the other. I am sure hon. members will also recall that the then secretary of state for external affairs offered a formula to break the deadlock. The first part of that formula was that a United Nations emergency force should be sent to the area to end the fighting. This was done and a measure of peace restored.
The infiltration from the Gaza strip into Israel has practically ceased and that is one practical benefit besides the assurance of more or less freedom of shipping for the state of Israel.
These are practical results from the action taken, but there was a second part to that formula which involved an over-all solution of the major problems particularly concerned in the Suez area. This was supported in principle by all powers directly concerned but, so far as I am aware, there has yet been no conference to search for an over-all solution and if we ever get to a summit conference, about which we hear so much these days, I do hope and trust that the whole Middle East problem will be placed high on the agenda of such conference.
I would like at this time to digress in a manner of speaking-but only in a manner of speaking-to say that as a Canadian I am extremely proud of my country's world mindedness and I feel that in our day, when
The Address-Mr. Macnaughton the need to buttress democracy everywhere is great, we ought to pay tribute to a young nation which is democracy's leading outpost in the Middle East. I refer to Israel which is even now entering upon its second decade. We know from our own experience that the first decade in every new land is one of great historic moment; it is the period during which foundations for the future are laid; it is the time for the establishing of its place in the concert of nations and it is the time when the day to day tasks of building a country are most demanding. For our part, having had a great deal to do with the founding of the state of Israel we are morally obligated to support the new state, along with the other nations in the United Nations who agreed to its establishment.
Members of this house will recall that this year Israel is celebrating its tenth anniversary. The land of Israel is a small postage-stamp-like country of only 8,000 square miles in area and has been described as a "laboratory for human relations" and an "adventure of the human spirit". For in Israel we see the memory of ancient greatness merging with aspirations for the future and the influences of religious tradition mingling with the most advanced social and cultural thought. It is astounding what this dynamic and idealistic people have done during their first 10 years of statehood. Consider the problem we would face in this country if Canada's population had doubled in 10 years. That is exactly what has taken place in Israel. Over one million immigrants, or refugees if you wish, have gone to the new state from 79 different countries throughout the world. Consider the tightening of belts, the austerity, the sacrifice involved in settling these people, the co-operation and understanding needed in bringing about a welding of cultural streams.
Fortunately, though hailing from a diversity of countries and peoples of many tongues, they do possess in common a past history going back to bible days, an optimistic belief in the future which enabled them to reach this day, and a common sacred tongue, Hebrew, which is fast becoming secularized. Hon. members will recall that throughout the centuries, since the destruction of the original Jewish state, Hebrew had been used only for purposes of prayer and study. Now it is brought into the home, the street, the market place and into diplomatic usage. Finally, I reiterate that though coming from the four corners of the earth and from every land and clime, the Jewish people cherish in common a set of ideals, of religious beliefs and a
210	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Macnaughton common philosophy of life, which have enabled a new miracle to come to pass, the emergence of a new nation out of the first critical decade.
It has been my good fortune to have visited Israel fairly recently, and when I think of the new campus of the Hebrew university now in operation in the city of Jerusalem, greatly expanded in student body and in faculty, it is easy to see it becoming a cultural beacon of the Middle East.
For 40 centuries the Negev desert has lain waste in the sun. Through prodigious efforts it is only a matter of time before the desert gives way to a fruitful district. These are just two examples illustrating the tremendous urge of this dynamic people.
As a member of the Canadian committee for Israel's tenth anniversary celebration, I am happy indeed to bring these facts to your attention. I would offer congratulations to the state of Israel on a decade of outstanding achievement. I am sure I express the sentiments of all Canadians that the years to come may find the state flourishing and prosperous. I join men of goodwill everywhere to offer the heartfelt prayer that peace may come to the Middle East and to the world.
Palestine is the holy land of three great faiths. In a very real way these faiths offer men a vision of a better life. I seem to see in the re-establishment of Israel the fulfilment of an ancient prophetic hope. In Israel's growth may we perceive the symbol of mankind's strivings toward that better world.
We have been in the Middle East and I would now like to come back to Canada. I would like to discuss Canadian-United States relations in a very brief way. Earlier in my remarks I said something about the close relationship that we have with the United States, that industrial giant to the south. Here we are, two peoples, two states with fundamentally similar cultures, sharing a common continent. It is inevitable in my way of thinking that changing conditions will bring about basic changes in the relationship between Canada and the United States.
May I recall to your mind the early years? Both Canadians and Americans made great efforts to explore and to carve out sovereign areas on the North American continent. Finally, the disputes over boundaries such as the Maine, the Oregon and the Alaska boundary disputes, and the disputes over resources such as the North Atlantic fisheries dispute, have receded into history.
During the last 50 years Americans and Canadians have moved forward together in respect of sharing, exploiting and to some degree in management in common of the


Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Joliefie-L'Assomplion-Montcalm):: Mr. Speaker, at the outset I wish to congratulate you on your re-election to the speakership of the house. I congratulate also the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) who has been elected chairman of committees,
212	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Pigeon as well as the hon. member tor Spadina (Mr. Rea) who has been elected deputy chairman. My congratulations go also to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne (Mr. Nielsen).
Mr. Speaker, allow me to pay heartfelt tribute to the right hon. Prime Minister of Canada (Mr. Diefenbalter) who is, in truth, head of a great political party, that of national unity. This has been affirmed and demonstrated by the Canadian people themselves, as is evidenced by the fact that at this time every province in this country is well represented in our party. At the time they were in power, my hon. friends in the opposition used to claim that they were the party of national unity, in spite of the fact that only a few provinces were represented in their ranks.
All Canadian provinces, "a man usque ad mare", have sent a large contingent of Conservative members to the House of Commons because they recognized in the right hon. Prime Minister a symbol of national unity, a unity which will be realized through the conservation of the distinctive characteristics of the component parts.
The member for Prince Albert has paid tribute to Canadian womanhood by entrusting the lady representative of the constituency of Hamilton West (Mrs. Fairclough) with an important portfolio. This is an encouragement to Canadian women to take part in the life of the nation. My best wishes also go to all her colleagues in the cabinet.
Mr. Speaker, is there any need for me to recall that I represent one of the largest constituencies in this country, in point of area, and one of the richest in the fields of agriculture, forestry, manufacturing or tourist travel?
The honest and hard-working people of my constituency are counting on government help to solve its numerous problems. I thank the English-speaking people of Rawdon and Terrebonne Heights who have put their confidence in me.
I also thank the French-speaking people who form the majority in my constituency and who have given me their support. Is that not the symbol of Canadian unity?
In the constituency of Joliette-L'Assomp-tion-Montcalm there are two institutions of higher learning which are over a century old, the seminary of Joliette, staffed by the Clercs de Saint-Viateur and the college at L'Assomption, staffed by secular priests. Both those institutions have given the Canadian nation a large number of brilliant men.
At the end of this month Assumption college, my Alma Mater, will commemorate the 125th anniversary of its foundation. I should


Mr. Jean-Paul Racine (Beauce):: Mr. Speaker, it is not an ordinary event in the life of a young member like me, to have to speak before so important a meeting and in


a place where so many great men of past generations have made speeches.
I take advantage of this opportunity to congratulate you on your appointment as Deputy Speaker.
I also wish to congratulate the Speaker of the house. At the outset of my remarks I would like to beg his indulgence and to assure him of my most sincere desire to respect the rules of the house, which it is his duty to apply. During the last session, I was a regular reader of the official account of the proceedings going on here and I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that from afar, I was applauding your impartiality and the quality of your judgment.
I would not want to come to the heart of the matter I intend to speak about before sincerely congratulating the hon. members for Quebec-Montmorency and Yukon (Messrs. Lafreniere and Nielsen) for the eloquent speeches they made in moving the address. They are two new members who have revealed themselves in their first appearance in the house. I appreciate the quality and the form of their speech, even though I cannot altogether approve the arguments they made in favour of their party.
Mr. Speaker, how could we help but point out today the great gap felt as a result of the departure of the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent from Canadian politics? How could one fail to take advantage of this great opportunity to tell this house the admiration the great majority of the electors of my constituency, as well as the electors of all Canada, had for the former leader of the Liberal party? He will remain in our memories and in our hearts as the living example of gentlemanliness, of frankness and of loyalty.
And, of course, I want to say a word of appreciation and loyalty to the one who succeeded the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent at the head of the party, the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition, who deserves much from the whole world for his work in favour of peace. By his last election campaign throughout Canada, in spite of the Conservative tide which literally swept the country, he earned the admiration and esteem of the majority of his fellow-citizens, no matter what their political views. His dignified way of discussing public affairs, his sense of truth and his infectious good humour, as well as his greatness in defeat, have been for all his supporters a new reason to appreciate him.
The last election campaign in my constituency of Beauce was a source of wonderment to me. By visiting each of the parishes of my constituency, undoubtedly one of the

finest of this country, I realized how deeply my electors are attached to our democratic institutions. I was able to put my finger on the most acute problems which beset them at times, and I had the opportunity to admire their courage in the face of hardship, their sense of duty and their attachment to their land, their institutions and their traditions. This electoral campaign, in a word, has caused me to love my Beauce county a little more because I have come to know it better.
La Beauce, indeed, is a riding the name of which is quite familiar to all the hon. members who sit in this house. It is the heart of an area generally known as the maple area. Surrounded by Dorchester, Frontenac and Lotbiniere ridings, it has a population of about 60,000. Its main sources of income are agriculture, industry and lumbering.
It is quite obvious to you, Mr. Speaker, that in a maiden speech and because of the short time I have at my disposal, I will not attempt to deal thoroughly with all the problems with which my constituents are faced at this time. I will in any event have the opportunity, I hope, to return to more specific subjects when we will be dealing with the estimates for the various departments. I will be content now to express the aspirations and the requests of people who, while claiming no specially favourable treatment, believe they are entitled to their just share of the benefits accruing from the laws of this country.
In the agricultural field, the situation in my constituency is such as to reflect the economic depression which extends at this time over the whole of this country. I was going to say that the situation in my constituency was possibly worse than elsewhere, in so far as one of the related industries, that is the maple syrup industry, did not receive from the government all the attention it deserved. At the last session, on the occasion of his maiden speech in this house and, subsequently, on the debate on the support price legislation, the former member for Dorchester in this house had asked the government, and more particularly the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness) to bring maple syrup under the terms of the new legislation. My constituents and more particularly the maple sugar producers were bitterly disappointed to note that neither the Minister of Agriculture nor the government had seen fit to listen to these recommendations. True, during the last election campaign in my constituency, the
The Address-Mr. Racine official candidate of the party in power stated on several occasions that maple sugar and maple syrup had been explicitly mentioned in the new legislation. I realize that at the time his chief concern was to obtain more votes and kinder feelings for the party in power. But now that the elections are over and that we are concerned with the interests of our people, may I be allowed to reiterate to the Minister of Agriculture the request that maple products be explicitly mentioned in the new legislation and that a support price of 30 cents per pound be provided as soon as possible so that our farmers may market their 1958 production at a reasonable price.
May I be allowed also to repeat for myself another suggestion already made in this house during the last session and to ask the government to make a substantial amount available to the maple syrup industry so that an efficient and methodical sales campaign may be carried out. In this way this tasty product will be known from one end of the country to the other and a market will be permanently established for a product whose excellence is beyond question.
A few years ago the maple sugar producers enjoyed a 33J per cent subsidy from the federal government for the purchase of aluminum buckets. The provincial government of Quebec also paid a third of the cost of these buckets, the producer paying the difference. I was very sorry to see that the government saw fit to abandon this practice which was of great advantage for our producers and I would urge the Minister of Agriculture to make this grant available once more to our sugar producers.
At this point, Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a word on the lumbering industry which is one of the most important in my constituency. We were all pleased to hear of the report of the investigation into the pulpwood combine. If I am not mistaken, this investigation was opened in 1955 at the request of several Liberal members. The report now reveals that those members were right in requesting such an investigation and we realize today that the farmers and settlers had reason to complain. It is now up to the federal government to take the necessary steps to put an end to these abuses and we hope that those steps will have the effect expected of them by our farmers and settlers who, alas, are too often the victims of exploitation by the paper companies of our province.
The woodcutting industry provides work to thousands of people in my constituency. However, because of the geographic situation

The Address-Mr. Racine of the constituency of Beauce and its proximity with the state of Maine, it so happens that the great majority of bush workers have to go to the United States to earn their living. And this leads me to speak of a subject close to my heart. I refer to unemployment insurance for our Beauce workers who are denied unemployment insurance because they work beyond our border. Other hon. members representing constituencies neighbouring on the constituency of Beauce have often explained to the house the point of view of the bush workers working on the American side of the border and deplored the fact that those Canadian citizens, who are taxpayers like all others and spend their money in Canada, are denied the advantages of unemployment insurance because of the lack of an agreement between the Canadian government and some American states.
I have made a little investigation of my own regarding some American employers and I have reason to believe that with a little cooperation on the part of the Department of Labour and of American employers, as well as on the part of local unemployment insurance offices, it would be possible to be fair to this class of my fellow-citizens who are made to suffer at this time by this lack of understanding between the Canadian government and the states concerned. The suggestions which I want to put on record are not my own, having been made before to the head office of the Unemployment Insurance Commission, but they were not acted upon for reasons which I cannot understand.
Here are the suggestions I should like to make concerning all bushworkers, teamsters, etc., in short concerning all Canadians working in the lumber industry in the states of Maine and New Hampshire and who are not entitled to unemployment insurance benefits because there is no agreement with those two American states:
1-	That the company or contractor importing Canadian labour withhold 2 per cent of the gross weekly salary and turn it over to a central office in each of the states concerned. The amount thus held back should appear on a voucher, a draft of which I shall give later.
2-	This form should be completed immediately either after dismissal, voluntary departure from work or the suspension of forestry operations.
3-	Since most employees earn more than $50 a week-none of them would stay on the

job unless his net earnings amounted to that-this would make an average tax of $4 a month. The American camp is normally active nine months a year, which would make a tax of $36 a year. (That tax would run concurrently with unemployment stamps paid in Canada).
4-	To qualify for unemployment benefits, employees should be governed by the same law as is in force in Canada now, that is being unemployed and available for work, and having contributed to the funds referred to.
5-	Thousands of dollars are earned each year by Canadian lumberjacks in forestry operations in the United States, and an average of 90 per cent of that money is spent in Canada. Each year over 6,000 of our men go to camps in Maine, and if we count those of other districts like Megantic, Compton, Montmagny, Sherbrooke, Dorchester, and so on, it can be said that over 10,000 men could profit by that arrangement and draw benefits during the off-season. At this point, Mr. Speaker, I wish to put on the record a table of the benefits which could be paid, on the basis of the gross weekly income. As it would take some time to read and to explain the table, I would ask, Mr. Speaker, for permission to insert it directly in Hansard without reading it.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Could the hon. member give us the source of the table he is referring to?


Jean-Paul Racine: Mr. Speaker, I computed that table myself taking into account unemployment insurance, the gross wages of lumber workers, the weekly rate they should receive when benefits are payable, and earnings permissible for the same week.
(Text):


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it the will of this house that the table to which the hon. member refers be printed in Hansard, or is it the wish of hon. members that the table be read now?


Mr. Churchill:: How extensive is the table to which the hon. member has referred?


Mr. Chevrier:: It is a table which the hon. member has himself prepared from government statistics. I think he should be allowed to put it on record in Hansard as is the usual custom.


Gordon Minto Churchill: How long is it, one page, three pages or six?


Jean-Paul Racine: Only half a page.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.

(Translation):


Jean-Paul Racine: 6-Table of the benefits which could be paid on the following basis:
Gross	Weekly	Permissible	Earnings	Rate	Earnings	Married	Single	Married	Single$75 and over $30	$26	$13	$11$70 to $75	29	25	13	10$65 to $70	28	24	12	9$60 to $65	27	22	12	7$55 to $60	26	20	11	6$50 to $55	25	19	10	6$45 to $50	24	18	9	5$40 to $45	23	17	8	4$35 to $40	22	16	7	47-	Since the employer cannot keep on the job a man who does not earn $36 per week, there is no reason for contributions corresponding to lower earnings than $35 a week.8-	The benefit year could run from May 1st to April 30 each year with a benefit period of 36 weeks only for each claim made between the 1st of May and the 30th of April of the following year, no contribution made more than two years previously would be taken into account in computing the rate.9-	If the applicant qualified with Canadian stamps, such stamps should be taken into account before he could receive the American contribution.10-	If the employee should quit his job on account of illness or injury, no benefit would be payable to him as long as this situation lasted, that is so long as that illness or injury would prevent his return to work.11-	To meet the expenses of the states concerned, either for checking, for the central office, and so on, J or i of 1 per cent of the tax thus collected could be paid to the states concerned.12-	There are hundreds of thousands of dollars in the hands of the states concerned made up of that 2 per cent tax paid by Canadian bush workers who have to wait until they have reached the age of 65 before they can get anything from the Social Security Program as it is commonly called in the United States, or who must go to the United States to live, by getting a visa or by applying for American citizenship.13-	The majority of bush workers I have questioned about it are in favour of such a plan, if it is ever implemented.14-	For that special tax, I would suggest that the following form be filled in four copies and distributed as follows:
1-One copy to the employee.
The Address-Mr. Racine
2-	One copy to the central office in the United States.
3-	One copy to the district office of the Unemployment Insurance Commission in Canada.
4-	One copy to the company or the contractor.
This document would contain the name and address of both the employee and the contractor, the Social Security number of the employee together with his gross salary, the amount of the 2 per cent tax, the number of days he has worked as well as the amount of tax and the full reason for the cessation of work or the departure of the employee concerned.
The copies distributed here in Canada would be equivalent to our present forms UIC 443 or 43H.
The speech from the throne mentioned the extension of the period fpr some benefits. The government must be congratulated on that effort. But I must tell the house that, under present circumstances, this extension of the benefit period will mean nothing for a great number of my fellow citizens who work in American lumber camps since they did not get the necessary stamps to be entitled to benefit from this new amendment to the act. I would therefore ask the house to take into special consideration the situation of the bush workers of many constituencies of eastern Quebec, particularly the counties of Beauce, Montmagny, l'lslet, Compton, Frontenac, Megantic etc.
A question which has been much to the fore in newspapers for almost a year is the problem of unemployment. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, much has been written in Canada with a view to establishing the responsibility of the Liberal or Conservative party in this field. Far be it from me to assess these responsibilities. The only thing I am interested in at this time is the material comfort and the welfare of the people in my riding, that is of those who are ultimately responsible for the honour conferred upon me by making me the representative of the county of Beauce.
In our part of the country, like elsewhere, unemployment has done and is still doing a lot of harm. The fact is not to be denied and my first steps in public life led me to see for myself at close quarters all the hardship caused by unemployment in my riding.
During the last federal election, the Conservative party advocated means to alleviate unemployment and stop the slowing down of
218	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Racine our economy. I am not an expert in the matter, and would not like to pose as such, but the fact remains that, in my riding of Beauce, unemployment has reached such proportions that some action, whatever it be, is urgently called for.
There has been much talk about public works; I am all in favour of that, not in ten years hence but as soon as possible. In the town of St. Georges, for instance, plans and designs are ready for the construction of a federal building capable of accommodating the post office, the R.C.M.P., the unemployment commission and other services.
What are we waiting for to undertake such works and give some employment to those unemployed heads of families of my constituency who are wondering anxiously what tomorrow will bring?
I therefore beg the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) to consider this problem at once and fulfil the solemn promises made to the voters of my constituency during the last federal election. Several municipalities and towns of my constituency, such as Ste. Marie, St. Joseph, Valley Junction and others, could well benefit from a public building and would be in great need of it. Why not have those municipalities and towns benefit from the advantages that the public works program could bring to my fellow citizens of Beauce?
As a perfect counter for unemployment in my constituency, there was the problem of the Chaudiere river which each year causes damages running into thousands of dollars. I know full well that I will be told that this is a matter for the Quebec government and that the federal government is in no way concerned. Nevertheless I am surprised, Mr. Speaker, to note that two governments which managed to get along so well during an election campaign, now indulge in buck passing when the time for action has come. Since the Conservative party and the Quebec Union Nationale get along so well together, I would be very happy indeed if they showed their friendship once more, and saw to it that the people of Beauceville who live on the river's edge get the assistance to which they are entitled. We would most heartily applaud any concrete action taken by the two governments in order to remedy a situation which turns into disaster and which could well bring about loss of life.
Since the federal government is looking for ways to solve an unemployment situation which has become a cause of hardship in this country, I would suggest to them to settle once and for all that matter of the Chaudiere river, and to stop hiding behind provincial autonomy in order to avoid facing up to their responsibilities.


Another measure which could be of assistance to our jobless families, specially our large families, would of course be the increase in the rates of family allowances.
It will be recalled that, at the time of the passing of this most beneficial social legislation, the cost of living index was much lower than it is at the present time. Canadians in general and the electors of my constituency in particular would greatly appreciate the raising of the benefits from this social legislation at least in the same proportions as the old age pensions were raised in the course of the last session of parliament.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to end here my first speech in this house. I will not do so however without saying one last word on the problem which I consider as important as all other problems of a material nature, such as for instance unemployment, the economy of the country, trade, etc. etc. I refer to the great problem of national unity in Canada.
I would be the last to raise racial or religious issues against anyone in this house. During the few years when I shall have the privilege of living here among the representatives of our great Canadian family, I would wish to live in complete understanding, knowing that national unity must be exemplified in the parliament of the nation. However, understanding, co-operation and harmony do not mean subservience and still less inferiority.
In our great country made up of two great races and enriched with two cultures, it is good to know that from one ocean to the other, Canadians are at home everywhere and are everywhere the members of the same great family. Who would not be proud of this opportunity to live here and share the same feelings and ideals in spite of languages, racial origins or religions which could perhaps divide us? It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that a good way to achieve national unity, which was so much advocated in the past by the Liberal party, would be to give us a truly distinctive national flag, as the emblem of our country that has now become an adult nation of which we, Canadians, are so proud.
In concluding, I am glad to thank my electors of Beauce riding who entrusted me with their confidence, and I can assure them that I will devote every effort to their interests and those of my country, Canada.
(Text):


Mr. John MacLean (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, this is a moment which I am not likely to soon forget, rising for the first time to take part in a debate in the

House of Commons. I am very proud to have the honour to represent the constituency of Winnipeg North Centre.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John Douglas Campbell MacLean: My
constituency is one which I am sure is well known to the senior members of the house and perhaps, in many ways, is just as well known to the new members. My constituency has been previously represented by very able parliamentarians. Winnipeg North Centre was first established as a constituency in 1924 and the founder and first leader of the C.C.F. party the late J. S. Woodsworth, represented this constituency from 1924 to 1943. Mr. Stanley Knowles, who in the last parliament was deputy leader of the C.C.F., represented Winnipeg North Centre from 1943 until March 31 of this year.
This is the first time that Winnipeg North Centre has been represented by a Conservative member.
Leaving March 31 and the election campaign far behind, for I am sure it is still quite fresh in the minds of hon. members, I should like to take a moment to say something about my two predecessors. Apart from party policy and party ideals, speaking only of the late Mr. Woodsworth and Mr. Knowles as individuals, I say in all sincerity that I consider it an honour and a privilege to follow them as the representative of Winnipeg North Centre. It is only my hope that through an accumulation of experience in this house I shall become as gifted a parliamentarian as were both those gentlemen. I am of the firm belief that, as a very wise man once said, there is a time to speak and a time not to speak. Be that as it may, I wish to say that the voice of Winnipeg North Centre will be heard in the parliament of this country as long as I am the member for this constituency and as long as there is anyone who deserves and requires a voice in this chamber.
Before continuing I should like at this time to add to the remarks of those who have spoken before my congratulations to yourself as the Speaker of the house, to the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafre-niere) and to the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen). In all those remarks I concur most heartily. I should also like to state as a new member one of my first impressions. It has to do with the protective staff. I have never seen a security force as competent and courteous as is this force. I am not aware of how they are trained or selected but the chief has a force of which he should be very proud. I am sure all hon. members join with me in expressing our appreciation of them.
The Address-Mr. J. MacLean
Winnipeg North Centre is composed of a broad and representative cross-section of urban people of all ethnic groups and conditions. However, we have not many occasions to use the French language and I should like at this time to associate myself with the principle that we cannot do too much to create and foster unity between the great French-speaking and English-speaking sections of our population. In this regard I should like to say:
(Translation):
On behalf of my electors of the Winnipeg North Centre riding, I welcome members who represent French-speaking Canadians.
(Text):
It would have been fanciful for me in the years gone by to have even considered that I would be a member of parliament today. At that time I did not think I should have the privilege of serving under the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker). Our Prime Minister is respected and revered in every home in our country for his concepts of humanity, integrity and dignity. The Canadian people realize that the Prime Minister has kept their confidence in the past and will continue to keep it in the future. We have here in the house visible proof that all Canadians have faith in the Prime Minister, in the cabinet and in the government.
Again, I had not anticipated having the privilege of listening to the oratory of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) or hearing the views and policies of the house leader of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation. However, I have listened very closely to the various speeches made since the beginning of the session and I feel it very necessary at this time to make reference to what I have heard in relation to the debate on the speech from the throne.
The broader aspects of the speech from the throne have been quite fully and intelligently discussed by various previous speakers. It is my opinion that the speech from the throne gives us much hope for effective measures to cope with the important problems of the future. It appears to me that our government has assumed the initiative in matters vital to the well-being of Canada. Both the members of the official opposition and the C.C.F. party have stated that the speech from the throne is most inadequate because of the omissions in it. The hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) said, as reported at page 45 of Hansard:
The Conservative party took office after making many promises to the people of Canada. We have now had the speech from the throne indicating that a very small part of that load of promises will be implemented during this session.

The Address-Mr. J. MacLean
It does appear that my hon. friend and the members of the opposition are not aware that the speech from the throne contains the largest program of legislation ever placed before parliament at a single session. Let me read from the Ottawa Journal of Saturday, May 17, 1958, a column written by M. J. Coldwell, national leader of the C.C.F. party. He said:
The government's program outlined in the speech from the throne is a remarkable document. Never before has so stupendous a legislative outline been placed before parliament at a single session, if it is to receive the examination and consideration it deserves, parliament will be fully occupied for many months.
Again, let me read from the editorial page of the Ottawa Journal of May 13, 1958:
A time-honoured jibe at speeches from the throne is that they conceal more than they reveal. No such reproach, surely, will be directed at the speech which opened our new parliament yesterday; so chock-full is it of promised action, much of anything concealed and to come later must mean a house in session until the snows of next winter have melted into spring.
The Journal once said of Mr. Diefenbaker that among his many remarkable characteristics was an implacable determination to carry out his promises. That indeed is what is told by this speech. Everything the Prime Minister promised in the election campaign, almost everything in fact that he as much as insinuated, is there, laid out in black and white on the parliamentary line.
The editorial ends.
Parliament, it can be said truly, has its work cut out for it, and this added: Whatever we may suffer from under John Diefenbaker's leadership it is not going to be the affliction of inaction.
If there be omissions from the speech from the throne it is only because of the impossibility to include any greater outline of legislation at this session. We are acting, the government is acting in order to direct the attention of the house to those things which we believe are of the utmost necessity to Canadians everywhere.
If I may, I should like to make a few remarks on the amendment to the amendment proposed by the C.C.F. party. The amendment reads, after the preamble:
-firstly, planned economic policies to ensure an ever-rising standard of living for the people of Canada; and.
secondly, an expanding level of international trade that will be promoted by vigorous measures to develop and expand trade with all countries.
Then, may I direct the attention of the house to the objectives of the C.C.F. party, as stated in Regina in 1933, and as previously mentioned by the hon. member for Assiniboia. We see that the most important part of the amendment has to do with complete economic planning. For such a planned economic policy the C.C.F. party would institute a full employment policy in this country. Just what exactly the policies would be are not known

at this time. However, it must be agreed that there is necessary in a completely planned economy certain dictatorial decrees, and in a completely planned economy to institute full employment those decrees would have to be implemented. I say to the C.C.F. party that such a completely planned economy could never exist in Canada today. From an ideological viewpoint a completely planned economy is, of course, the only certain solution to depressions, recessions and inflation.
But leaving this high ideological plane and proceeding to a more practical point of view which I am sure you will agree is of the utmost necessity in governing a country, it is seen that this will not be practical in any respects at all. I say this because the basic, simple reason it will not work is that the personal freedom of the individual is involved. The people of Canada still wish to choose their employment. They still wish to choose their way of living and they still wish to decide the way in which they wish to live. This has always been and will continue to be my belief. However, in support of my statements I should like to read a portion of an editorial in the Union Farmer of May 1958, written by J. F. C. Wright who is a noted observer of the Canadian political scene. I am sure that many members have read this editorial but I wish to read part of it to the house for the purpose of placing it on record. The editorial speaks of the Prime Minister and Mr. Wright, continuing with a reference to him, says:
He is not going to plan for a planned economy which would be the one way that he could put all his promises and other related ones not yet made, into co-ordinated effect. This he will not do for the simple reason that it is not his temperament to do so and, furthermore, a planned economy is not what the Canadian people want. The people want the over-all results of it without the personal involvement and inconvenience. Planned economy is inevitable here as elsewhere if the human race manages to escape annihilation as a result of an all-out war with fissionable material. But you and I are not ready to face the prospect of a planned economy because it would interfere with our individual lives and the way we think we like to live them. I might say, for instance, sure I believe in planned economy for everyone else except myself and family. X know that well-planned economy is the only certain solution to booms, busts, unemployment, depression, recession and inflation.
But how many fringe farmers with uneconomic units would be willing to turn over their acreage for long-term land conservation purposes to the government in return for being rehabilitated in order to function in some other productive activity?
How many industrial workers and labour unionists want to be told that they must, because of planned economy and resultant governmental decree, be transported forthwith to another job in another area? Or would they want the right to strike outlawed and so the establishment of wage levels beyond which the wage earners may make no further demands?

Would business and professional men relish comparable regulation concerning profits, fees and conditions of work?
As for the less visible but powerful minority of corporation executives and millionaires who sit at the controls of giant industry and finance, here no comment is necessary.
There may be an interim way to bridge the gap between free enterprise of a hundred years ago and disappearance of free markets and physical frontiers, plus the cumulative government intervention of our day. This might be by government inducement and persuasion rather than by dictatorial decree requisite in a complete planned economy.
That is all I wish to say at this time, on the amendment to the amendment. I should now like to direct my attention to the two government bills which have been passed at this session, namely the bill to extend seasonal benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act and the bill to grant additional money for house building under the National Housing Act. My constituency, like most constituencies, has great needs. In order to help it to continue in the way of progress it has given a mandate to this humble member who now requests sympathetic attention on the part of the members of the cabinet in order that I may acquit myself of this heavy task which I intend to carry out to the end in the interests of my electors.
My constituency is peopled almost entirely by working people, most of whom have large families. They are seeking through their own labour to discharge their responsibilities. However honest and generous they may be, our working people must not nevertheless consider themselves as forming an inferior class. It is as honourable a class as any other class of society. Our working men are legitimately proud of what they are. The working man is entitled to the gratitude of the government. To his ability, competence and love of work we owe almost everything that the eye can see. The honest and conscientious worker, and these traits are typical of the working class in Winnipeg North Centre, is the builder of the nation and it is our duty to recognize that fact. But those who know the greatheartedness of our workers are aware that all they seek is gainful employment.
For these reasons I am very pleased that the government saw fit to bring in legislation immediately to increase the program of public works and housing so that a considerably greater number of men and women in this country will be able to find employment. The workers of Winnipeg North Centre are also gratified that the government undertook an extension of seasonal unemployment insurance benefits for, although work is more important than unemployment insurance, it is only right that Canadian workers do not
The Address-Mr. J. MacLean suffer hardships because of unemployment that occurs through no fault of their own.
I know that the government is concerned at the present time about the unemployment problem and Canadian labour. The two measures passed in the house are evidence of the government's concern. I have great confidence that the government will do everything possible to reduce unemployment and I am well aware that the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) is conscientiously endeavouring, on behalf of the people of Winnipeg North Centre and the Canadian people generally, to bring about a remedy for this situation.
I should like also at this time to express the approval of the people of Winnipeg North Centre of the government's desire to establish a small business section to study the problems of small business and to advise on measures necessary to meet them. There are many problems confronting small business at this time. The small businessmen of Winnipeg North Centre welcome the government's action on this matter.
Before concluding there are three recommendations I should like to make to the government for its attention and consideration. Part of the constituency of Winnipeg North Centre, and the only part that lies outside Winnipeg proper, is the village of Brooklands. This village, as is probably the case in all small rural municipalities, needs immediate direct financial assistance. Perhaps its situation is worse than that of many other municipalities in that it borders on the city of Winnipeg and has to provide comparable living conditions with those that exist in Winnipeg.
I realize that the government is also concerned about direct assistance to municipalities in Canada. However, I direct its attention to Brooklands in particular. Here it is necessary that schools, roads, sidewalks and other local improvements be provided immediately if the village is to survive and exist in its present form. These small municipalities have a serious problem today and are entitled to the same consideration that is given to the larger towns and cities. I ask the government at this time to give consideration to the distribution of at least a portion of the reserve fund for municipalities. I cannot stress too greatly how important it is that the village of Brooklands receive some direct attention on the part of the government.
The next matter I should like to refer to the government deals with the physically handicapped people of Canada. As you are well aware, Canadians who are physically handicapped are at once in a prejudiced position with regard to employment. Employers

The Address-Mr. J. MacLean are not anxious to hire these people. The usual reason given is that they are the cause of accidents. This is certainly not the case. It has been shown to the contrary that a physically handicapped person is less likely to cause accidents while employed than a person who is not handicapped. Again, if an employer does hire a physically handicapped person he usually expects to employ him at a lower wage than the rest of his employees. The reasons given by employers are inefficiency and low production. This again has been shown not to be true. A physically handicapped person's efficiency and rate of production in his proper employment are as high, if not higher, than a normal person.
To remedy the situation I would ask that the government consider on behalf of all the physically handicapped people of Canada the setting up of a separate employment department for them in every office of the national employment service across the country. I would further ask that physically handicapped people be placed in charge of such departments and further that these people placed in charge would not only attempt to place physically handicapped people in employment but would also attempt to procure employment for them by regular consultation with prospective employers.
My last point before concluding deals with the promotion of physical development programs and athletics in Canada, and also on an international basis. I draw to the attention of the house the fact that the British empire games are being held in Wales in July of this year. A team representing the Canadian nation is to participate in these games. At the moment the Canadian team is experiencing great difficulty in obtaining the necessary finances to represent Canada at these games. I bring this matter before the house at this time, not only because I feel it is imperative that this team receive adequate support but to direct the attention of this whole house to the situation that exists in Canada today with regard to supplying the facilities and training required by our youth in promoting good, clean, wholesome athletics to improve their physical and moral standards.
I like to think that I speak with some authority, having been active in all fields of sport and particularly hockey, ever since I have been able to walk. In the matter of support for athletics in Canada and the participation of Canadian teams in international competition, it has always been my belief that the federal government should undertake to support such a national and international program. I should like to point out the seriousness of this problem by taking

the liberty of referring to some remarks made by Bill Westwick, a noted sports columnist, in his column in the Ottawa Journal on May 17 of this year. Mr. Westwick begins:
Canadian Press sports editor Jack Sullivan yesterday quoted Major Jack Davies as 'completely disgusted' with the response received by the British Empire Games' Association for funds to send Canada's team to Wales in July. Since there's just six weeks left before the team leaves, there seems ample reason for concern by Montreal chairman of the BEG association over the financial plight of Canada's entry which is supposed to number 100 athletes.
It makes you wonder about our Canadian setup in amateur and international sports when the response to an empire meet is so poor that Davies uses the term 'completely disgusted'. Something very wrong here, and not likely to be corrected until some rather drastic steps are taken. They won't be drastic so far as many other countries are concerned. But the unvarnished facts are these strictly amateur sports, which should be a great benefit to the nation, can't operate in step with the rest of the world without some revision of thinking.
From time to time you hear vague remarks about Canada sometime playing host to the Olympic games. Well it could be, but if our attitude doesn't change fairly quickly most of us will have beards as long as a javelin before it ever happens.
He goes on, and here he is referring to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Monteith):
Even the minister will hardly suggest that the programs so urgently presented in the form of a brief by the Canadian sports advisory council would not tend to help curb the declining moral standards of our youth as well as benefit them physically. At least they wouldn't contribute to them. At the same time it would be bound to help the country's position in international sports such as the Olympics, which isn't what many feel it should be . . .
We'll grant it will require some study, but many people undoubtedly would feel more satisfied if it were tackled. They'd likely feel more satisfied too if some of the money which the Canada Council intends to hand over to the C.B.C. for cultural programs were earmarked for something along this line.
He goes on to speak of culture and a track meet and says:
You looked around at these teenagers and thought of the Massey report which nowhere included athletics as being part of Canada's culture. And then the word of the British empire games committee which has to beg its way to send a team to an empire meet, and still fail to the extent that at this stage the chairman is reported to be 'completely disgusted'.
We're not disputing the wisdom of the government's attitude towards this 'growing temptation' among individuals to expect the state to take over all society's needs. But it shouldn't be surprising to find the 'sports fan' Major Davies is counting on to help defray the Empire games expenses doing a little wondering too.
I do not want to take up too much of the time of the house on this matter, but it appears to me that this is a problem that

deserves recognition by all members of the house. We have been very proud of our athletes in the past, and particularly just recently of the Whitby Dunlops who won the international ice hockey championship. They proved to the world that Canada has some of the finest athletes. However, ice hockey is one matter; track and field, other sports and physical development are still other matters. I know, speaking from experience and on behalf of sports fans and sports-minded people of the city of Winnipeg, that facilities for physical training and an all-year-round athletic program are sadly lacking in that province. It has always been my contention that given the proper influence of the spiritual, educational, social and athletic aspects of our society, the youth of Canada cannot help but make us proud of them in the future. I again urge the attention of all members of this house, and in particular the members of the government, to the immediate problem of the British empire games and to the long-range problem of the physical development of our Canadian youth.
This session promises to be an interesting one with many subjects to discuss and problems to solve. I join with all members in expressing the hope that we may promptly and efficiently discharge our responsibilities to those who elected us and that we shall always uphold the great traditions of our Canadian parliament.


Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo):: Mr. Speaker, as the debate on the speech from the throne affords the earliest opportunity for private members to give voice to the problems and the complaints of their constituents, I feel it is my duty to take advantage of this opportunity and bring to the attention of this house and to the government some matters which are of vital concern not only to the people of my riding but to all the people of my province, matters which are of such an urgent nature as to demand immediate attention.
Before coming to those matters may I extend to you, sir, and to the Deputy Speaker my sincere congratulations on being unanimously elected to preside over the deliberations of this chamber. I should like also, at this time, to associate myself with all those who have complimented the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply on the excellent manner in which they made their presentation.
The first matter to which I wish to refer is the action of Canadian National Telegraphs in removing the wireless telegraph sets from their offices in Newfoundland and replacing them with radiotelephones. For the benefit of new members, I should explain that wireless
The Address-Mr. Carter telegraphy is a particularly convenient means of communication in Newfoundland, especially in my own riding where there are many small, isolated settlements, many of which are located on islands far from the land which makes the use of submarine cables prohibitive. There are other communities separated by terrain which is so difficult as to make land lines impracticable and where, in any case, the lack of roads would make maintenance impossible. I should add, too, that because the mail has to be transported over water and there are some long delays between mails, sometimes ranging from one week to three weeks, the people who live in these areas, particularly the business and professional men, are far more dependent upon telegraphic communication than people who live in other parts of Canada.
This is particularly true in the case of an accident or in times of emergency. The Canadian National Telegraphs justified their action in replacing wireless telegraph sets with radio telephones on the ground that qualified Morse operators are difficult to obtain and also that the change-over will result in improved service with a lower operating cost. As far as the first argument is concerned, I believe it is fair to say that the scarcity of Morse operators in Newfoundland is due, to a large extent, to the policy which has been pursued by the Canadian National Telegraphs since confederation. Indeed, three years ago I warned that this would be the inevitable result unless Canadian National Telegraphs policy was changed. My warning is recorded at pages 95 and 96 of Hansard of January 11, 1955, but it fell on deaf ears.
Prior to confederation there was never any difficulty in securing qualified Morse operators because every operator trained members of his own family in order that they could take over in case of illness or emergency. In addition, in almost every community there is some person suffering from some physical handicap which prevents him or her from engaging in hard manual labour. In the old days these people looked to the operation of a telegraph office as something within the limits of their physical capacity and consequently one of the few means by which they might be enabled to earn a livelihood. In our isolated communities the change in status and working conditions of postmaster telegraphers, together with loss of privileges and benefits which resulted from the taking over of telegraph offices after confederation and which are described in detail in Hansard to which I have already referred, discouraged these people from looking to telegraphy as a means of livelihood. It also discouraged operators from training their sons

NORAD-Canada-U. S. Agreement and daughters in Morse telegraphy. I am convinced that the shortage of Morse operators could be very quickly and easily overcome if pre-confederation privileges and benefits were restored.
The reduction in operational costs is going to be achieved largely at the expense of the remuneration of the postmaster-telegrapher whose princely salary averages about $135 per month for his combined services to the Post Office Department and to the Canadian National Telegraphs. I have in my file letters which indicate that as a result of this changeover the reduction in salary of these people will be substantial. One telegrapher tells me that his salary will be reduced by $500 per year. Another states that his salary will drop from $133 per month to $63 per month.
During the past nine years I have complained repeatedly against the unjust treatment accorded to that group but all to no avail. I have discussed this problem in detail on several occasions and in addition to the one just quoted detailed references can be found at page 2235 of Hansard of April 20, 1951 and at page 442 of Hansard of January 23, 1956.
The matter of salary reduction primarily is one for the attention of the Postmaster General (Mr. Hamilton) whose department rents the services of these postmaster-telegraphers to Canadian National Telegraphs. But since this is a human problem affecting the lives and the livelihoods of people who are completely helpless to influence in any way the forces by which their fate is being determined I hope that the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) himself, who so often has expressed solicitude for all the helpless and downtrodden, will take a personal interest and see to it that everything will be done to ensure fair and just treatment to these people.
Mr. Speaker, may I call it six o'clock.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, may I have permission to revert to motions in order to ask leave of the house to have printed as an appendix to Hansard the intergovernmental agreement tabled by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Smith) in his speech.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member is asking that the document tabled by the Secretary of State for External Affairs be printed as an appendix to Hansard. Is it the will of

the house that this document be printed as an appendix to Hansard"!


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[For text of document referred to above, see appendix, pages 241-42.]
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Lafreniere for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Pearson, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Argue.
Chesley William Carter: Mr. Speaker, before the recess I was voicing the complaints of a number of my constituents arising out of the decision by the Canadian National Telegraph Company to replace Morse wireless sets by radio telephones in order to effect savings in operating costs. I pointed out that this saving was to be obtained largely at the expense of the postmaster telegraphers whose salaries would be drastically reduced as the result of the changeover.
I should make it clear that these postmaster-telegraphers have full time jobs; they are not part time people who interrupt their ordinary work to sell a postage stamp or take a telephone call. Canadian National Telegraphs require these operators to be at hand throughout the day from nine in the morning to six in the evening, in consequence of which they are, of course, precluded from engaging in any other gainful occupation. In many centres, too, the instruments are housed in a public building at some distance from the operators' places of residence and this prevents operators from doing ordinary odd jobs around the home.
These factors should be taken into consideration along with the salary reduction to which I have just referred. The savings envisaged as a result of the changeover from one type of equipment to the other will, I believe, prove to be an illusion. There cannot be any great difference in cost between a Morse wireless set and a radio telephone, but there is a tremendous difference in the standard of service provided. The chief objection to the radio telephone is the lack of privacy; messages transmitted in this manner

can be picked up by every household radio within range. Thus messages of the utmost privacy are made known to the public at large. Canadian National Telegraphs contend that this defect has been overcome by the use of speech inverters which scramble the words and make them unintelligible when picked up on household radios. However, these inverters break down, and when this happens messages are transmitted in the ordinary way. I am informed that one of these machines failed to function about a week after it had been installed, and that in this case messages were transmitted in clear for all the public to hear. This situation lasted for several weeks until the maintenance men could return and make the necessary repairs or replacement.
Even when the inverter is functioning properly there is still some lack of privacy because the phones are not installed in soundproof booths and the messages can easily be overheard by anyone standing in the lobby of the telegraph office. I am told that an absolutely soundproof booth is a very essential item, and since such booths must be supplied if the standard of privacy is to be maintained it seems that the cost of a radio telephone plus an effective soundproof booth will together amount to a great deal more than the cost of the wireless set which is to be replaced.
The great advantage of the wireless telegraph set is that it ensures absolute privacy both with respect to people who may be standing in the lobby and also regarding interception by radio. The people of Newfoundland enjoyed this standard of privacy prior to confederation and they have every right to expect it to be maintained. I urge the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) and his colleagues in the government to work out some arrangement with Canadian National Telegraphs whereby the use of these wireless sets would be restored.
A second matter which greatly concerns my constituents is the need for improved bait supply and distribution services. The present service was initiated by the Newfoundland government about 20 years ago and a great many changes have taken place since those days. Many of the largest supply depots are no longer conveniently located and thousands of dollars are lost to Newfoundland fishermen every year through lack of a proper bait supply. The whole service needs to be completely reorganized and modernized. I intend to deal with this matter in greater detail when the estimates of the Department of Fisheries come before us for consideration, but I mention it now to 57071-3-15
The Address-Mr. Carter emphasize the urgency of this question and the necessity for immediate action with regard to this problem.
Having called the attention of the government to these most pressing matters, I turn to some of the items included in the speech from the throne. Two of the proposals, namely the extension of seasonal benefits in respect of unemployment and the increased spending of public funds for housing have already been implemented as emergency measures with the greatest co-operation from this side of the house. I will refrain from making comment on the setting up of a standing committee on veterans affairs and a select committee on broadcasting because there will be another opportunity to do so when the resolutions concerning these committees are brought before the house. I am sure hon. members are awaiting with interest details of the national development program, the public works program and the public investment program which constitute the government's plan to relieve the unemployment situation and reverse the serious downtrend in the economy which this country is experiencing at this time.
At the present time, as far as the opposition is concerned, these proposals are names and nothing more. As we have not yet been told what these programs consist of, and since the departmental estimates recently tabled shed no light in this respect, it will not be possible to make specific comments until detailed information about them is forthcoming from the government. We all know that communications are essential to the development of our resources, and in a general way we can agree that the building of highroads and railways is necessary to the development of our northland.
However, I think it is fair to point out that the existence of railways and highways will not in any way guarantee that development will take place. There is a striking example of this in my own riding where we have a fresh fish plant which was established through the investment of United States capital and which has now been closed down for nearly two years. The Newfoundland government acquired ownership of this plant through a first mortgage and has been trying to sell it for over a year. In June of this year the plant will be put up for public auction and I urge the Department of Trade and Commerce and the Department of External Affairs to explore the possibilities of interesting Norwegian and other Scandinavian capital in this venture. I presume there are no immediate obstacles in the matter of exchange controls which cannot be overcome.

The Address-Mr. Carter
Norway is a country which is in many ways very similar to Newfoundland; its fishing industry is well organized and forms a very important part of its economy. Norway also has companies whose personnel are highly skilled and experienced in the operation of fresh fish processing plants. I am told that in Norway the fish industry is not subsidized and that the prices paid to fishermen compare favourably with what our Newfoundland fishermen receive.
I hope the government will act immediately on my suggestion and will have its trade commissioners explore the possibilities in this respect. There is no doubt whatever about the availability of resources; all that is required is investment capital and here is an opportunity to acquire a new, modern and first-class plant for much less than the original investment. If Norwegian or other Scandinavian capital can be interested in Newfoundland fisheries I believe it would be to the benefit of all concerned. At the same time it would be a step toward the strengthening of economic ties and the development of economic co-operation between the countries of NATO.
The flow of investment capital is to a large extent determined by world market conditions and these, of course, are completely outside the control of this government. No amount of capital spent on roads and railways can bring investment capital into Canada if market conditions are not favourable. Government encouragement of investment capital consists almost entirely of the building up of the confidence of the investor through wise fiscal and trade policies. Under Liberal administration this confidence abounded to such an extent that the problem was not to induce it to come into Canada but to keep it within the limits of the available manpower and resources in order to minimize the possibility of resulting inflationary pressures.
Since the present administration took over the absence of any well-defined fiscal and trade policy has tended to diminish the confidence of the investor and to that extent the flow of investment capital has been discouraged. This in turn has aggravated the unemployment problem by making the slowdown in our economy much worse than it would otherwise have been.
Trade is vital to Canada. With our huge productive capacity Canada must trade to survive; the only alternative is unemployment and a reduced standard of living. For this reason I support the amendment proposed on Tuesday last by my leader and the arguments which he advanced at that time.

The people of my province will be very disappointed that the speech from the throne makes no mention whatever of legislation to implement the recommendations of the royal commission with respect to term 29 of the terms of union; nor did it make mention of a floor price on fish which the Prime Minister promised when electioneering in our province, although there is a specific reference to a floor price under agricultural products. When the Prime Minister spoke in this debate last Tuesday he referred to the speech from the throne in these terms as recorded at page 32 of Hansard:
In this speech we did not have His Excellency deal with generalities. We had His Excellency ask parliament to direct its attention to those things which we believe are necessary and are of immediate importance for the benefit of the people of Canada.
I can assure him that the recommendations of the royal commission with respect to term 29 are very necessary and are of immediate importance to the people of Newfoundland. We trust that the omission of any reference to that body does not mean that their report was not expected in time for action to be taken at this session.
Before concluding I would like to make some observations about the vision of Canada which has inspired our Prime Minister and about which he spoke so often and with such great passion and eloquence during the recent election campaign.


Mr. Fraser:: With results.


Chesley William Carter: I suppose we have all had visions at one time or another. I am reminded of some of my own visions of Canada which I brought with me when I was elected to this chamber in 1949 and which I tried to communicate to this house. They are recorded at page 2237 of Hansard of April 20, 1951 and again at page 2821 of Hansard for March 10, 1953.


Mr. Baskin:: Why did the government not do something about them?


An hon. Member:: It was not liberal enough.


Chesley William Carter: It has been said that without vision the people perish; it is equally true that if the vision is a wrong one or is inadequate the people will also perish. We mush never forget that we are not the only people who have a vision. The men of the Kremlin have a vision too, and their vision includes Canada because theirs is a vision embracing the whole world.


An hon. Member:: Whom are you quoting now?


Chesley William Carter: I make up my own speeches. Not only do those people have a vision, they are pursuing it vigorously and relentlessly.

Our vision must be global, too, and not restricted to Canada alone. No man can live unto himself alone and neither can any nation. The whole world today is our neighbour and any lesser vision than that never can be adequate. The communist vision is based on organized materialism and if we are to survive, ours must be based on something superior because the materialism of the right is no answer at all and no match at all for the militant materialism of the left. Materialism can make men slaves but it can never set men free. Our vision must be based on something higher than material prosperity and technological achievement, something more solid than individual or sectional selfishness and greed; otherwise it is likely to turn out to be a mirage.
The strength of a nation lies in the character of its people. A nation's greatness is not determined by its technological progress, its material prosperity or its standard of living, but by the idea by which she lives and the quality of her living. There can be no substitute for integrity either in public or in private life.
Canada today has a unique opportunity to evolve a new pattern of democracy based on total honesty; honesty between electors and elected, between government and governed, between parties and between nations. In two world wars millions of people, including the flower of Canadian manhood, gave their lives for a vision, a vision of a hate-free, greed-free, fear-free world; a peaceful world; a new world order based on a new type of democracy. The world today is crying out for leadership in translating that vision into reality. The challenge to us today, and particularly to young Canada, is not so much to die for our country as to live for it so as to develop a new quality of national life that will empower Canada to speak with authority to the world because she has found the answer at home.
Canada today is called upon to lead, and if she does not lead who is she going to follow?


Mr. J. F. Browne (Vancouver-Kingsway):: Mr. Speaker, as I rise to speak in this house for the first time, on behalf of the people of Vancouver-Kingsway may I first offer my congratulations to you, sir, on your election to the high office which you now hold and also to the other officers of this house. May I suggest that if the rest of the deliberations of this house are resolved in as wise a manner as our first act we shall have no cause for regret in the future.
I should also, of course, like to add my congratulations to the many which have already extended to the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafreniere) and
57071-3-15i
19. 1958	227
The Address-Mr. J. F. Browne to the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) on the very outstanding way in which they moved and seconded the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
To those of you who are unfamiliar with the riding of Vancouver-Kingsway I may say, that it lies entirely within the bounds of the city of Vancouver. It is a labour riding but differs from some of the other labour ridings in the respect that there is no industry within the bounds of the riding itself. Consequently, our interests are perhaps more general than some of the other ridings and we are dependent upon the basic industries and the secondary industries of British Columbia as a whole for our employment. It is, of course, in that wonderful province of British Columbia where we are celebrating our centennial and while it is a wonderful place to visit at any time, may I take this opportunity to extend a most cordial welcome to all hon. members to come out and visit us during this exceptional year when so many outstanding events are taking place. Might I suggest that if there is any information or any way that I can be of help to any who would care to make that trip, please feel free to call upon me and I assure you that I shall provide any information or assistance that I can.
Now may I get back to the matters at hand. It gives me the greatest pleasure on behalf of the people of Vancouver-Kingsway to congratulate the government on the clear and specific manner in which they have set forth their proposals to deal with the problems facing Canada today. As we have already heard from many of the previous speakers, this is the most extensive and comprehensive program that has ever been laid before a single session of parliament.
We have already passed some measures. To run over them briefly, the speech from the throne deals with those things which are needed immediately and which are of an emergent nature. It deals with things such as our public works program which go on a little bit into the future and it deals with those things which go further into the future in the developing of our north and which are already under way. Then it makes provision for the future in the development of the Arctic. Speaking of the clamour we have heard from the other side of the house in regard to unemployment, may I say that if the previous administration of which they were a part had followed such far-sighted policies as are outlined in the speech from the throne which we are examining now there would not be the need to clamour about unemployment in Canada and indeed they might still be riding in a private car instead of in an upper berth.

The Address-Mr. J. F. Browne
The first measure we had before us to deal with the emergency facing us had to do with the extension of the Unemployment Insurance Act, to extend the seasonal benefits for a period of six weeks. Many members rose to speak on it, but no one was in disagreement with it although we heard many discourses on the basic principles of socialism and many other theories. Still they were all in favour of the measure which was designed and is certainly going to help many people in Canada who would otherwise have suffered hardship provided we had followed the same plans as the previous administration and left those people to shift for themselves.
The second measure, of course, is one that deals with many problems in the country today. It had to do with the making available of $350 million more under the National Housing Act for the purpose of building more houses. Certainly there is no one in this house who can deny that this is going to have a favourable effect on the unemployment situation, as well as having the advantage of enabling a great many more Canadians to be able to own their own homes. While I am not going to go into all of the figures, because many of them are already on the record, the small loans plan which was set up last year under the Conservative administration had the effect of reducing the down payments that were necessary on houses and helping to get them down to the lower income group. It also, of course, has an effect on unemployment because it will create work for those who are producing the materials which will be used in the construction of houses as well as, as has already been pointed out, the furniture and various other things that will be used in connection with them. These are two of the immediate measures which have been taken.
To get on with some of the other things, perhaps we should next have a look at public works. Public works are another item about which we have heard a great deal from the other side of the house. We are told that the government's program is not an emergency one at all and that the projects would have been undertaken even if a Liberal administration had been returned to power. If I may be permitted to do so I should like to relate a rather amusing incident that happened during the election campaign. I believe it will throw a great deal of light on the difference between the Liberal program and Conservative policy in this regard.
The incident happened at one of those meetings where all the parties were represented. The Liberal candidate had just finished addressing the people. He had suggested to them that if they would only return a Liberal administration a great national health

program would be implemented. He said that all hospital and medical bills would be paid and everything would be wonderful. A gentleman at the rear of the audience rose and said, "Was that not in the Liberal platform in 1919?" The Liberal candidate replied, "Yes, it was but we could not rush into it. We had to build the hospitals first."
I suggest to you that some of these public works may have been undertaken under a Liberal administration but only over the period of the next 20 years and not right away as proposed by the present government.
The next matter I should like to deal with has to do with the development of our north and involves the program which was so overwhelmingly endorsed by the people of Canada on March 31. Therefore to some extent whatever debating we do on the subject now in the house can only be a repetition of the election campaign at which time the people of Canada considered this very subject and endorsed the government's program in such an overwhelming manner. Therefore I think it is quite obvious to everyone present that it must be endorsed by the members of this house.
To go over some of the projects that have been put forward, there is the proposal to build a railroad to Great Slave lake, something in which I am particularly interested on behalf of the people of British Columbia.
I wish to call the attention of the government to the fact that I should like to see provision made for the railroad to commence from a point where it will connect with the Pacific Great Eastern railway of British Columbia, thus making it possible to ship the resources of the northland when they are developed directly to the coast as well as to the province of Alberta. We do not want to do Alberta out of the benefit altogether but we most certainly want to see the line linked with the railway in British Columbia because it is most important to the country as a whole that this should be done.
There is also the plan to build roads in the northland and of course this will have a major effect on the development of resources in the Yukon and the Northwest Territories and increasing their population to a great extent. Looking farther into the future, we have the proposal to provide funds for research in the Arctic area with a view to opening up the mineral resources of that area.
As I said at the beginning of my remarks, the matters of concern to the people of the constituency of Vancouver-Kingsway are of a very general nature. Therefore it is not going to be possible to deal with each one of them at this time because I realize there

are a great many members in the house who, like myself, are here for the first time and are anxious to present the views of their constituents. But I do wish to deal to some extent with the fishing industry which is a major segment of the economy not only of British Columbia but of Canada as a whole. Many pressing problems have arisen in this regard and there are two or three things I should like to ask the government to implement on behalf of my constituency. I am sure the government will be pleased to know that, while no doubt there are a great many things that need to be done in Canada's 265 constituencies, the proposals I intend to make will not cost any money so that the government can rest easy in that regard.
For a number of years the fishing industry has been faced with the problem of foreign nationals fishing off the coast of British Columbia. The problem has been the cause of ever-increasing concern because in some years these people, in comparison with the British Columbia fishermen, have been catching over 50 per cent of the fish taken from the waters there. But the great danger that is arising now is brought about by the fact that proper conservation measures have not been taken in the waters of the Alaskan area and therefore there is very great danger that the number of United States fishermen fishing in the waters off the British Columbia coast is going to increase.
Of course, as hon. members know, at the Geneva conference on the law of the sea the Canadian government proposed the extension of sovereignty to 12 miles from the coast rather than 3 miles as at present. The people of British Columbia were very disappointed when this proposal was rejected by the conference even though a majority of the nations voting were in favour of it. I believe that 35 nations voted in favour and 30 against but a two-thirds majority was required for the proposal to pass.
However, I should like to suggest to the government that there are many other means of implementing the proposal and that perhaps we do not need to wait for official sanction because at the moment we are actually in the position of having no international law with regard to the sea. With the many lawyers in the house perhaps I as a layman am in a rather dangerous position in discussing the subject of international law, let alone any other kind of law, but I should like to refer to one declaration which has been made by the United States. President Truman, by presidential proclamation on September 28, 1945, stated that the United States government, in view of the pressing need for the conservation and protection of
19. 1958	229
The Address-Mr. J. F. Browne fisheries resources, proclaimed the right to establish conservation zones in areas of the high seas contiguous to the coasts of the United States.
Personally I can see no reason why we should not implement a 12-mile zone at the present time because the decision by the international court in the United Kingdom versus Norway case in 1951 upset the previous notion that the 3-mile limit was something that was definitely established under international law. Many other nations have declared a 12-mile limit and, as I have said before, I see no reason why we cannot do the same.
Failing that, there certainly is no reason why we cannot proclaim what is known as the headland theory. Under that theory a line is drawn down the coast between the outlying points and where there are islands the outermost point is taken and the three miles is measured from there rather than following all the indentations of the coast. I think that the headland theory would solve the greater portion of the problems facing the fishing industry in that regard and that as a temporary measure perhaps that would be satisfactory to the industry and to the people of British Columbia.
The next major problem facing the fishing industry arises from the fact that over a number of years new nets and new methods have been developed that are more efficient than was the case before, but while the number of fish is not increasing the number of fishermen are. Therefore I think it is now clear that there are too many fishermen fishing for too few fish. Perhaps even as sport fishermen we may have come across that situation sometimes ourselves.
In order to solve this situation to some extent the government has adopted conservation measures. The result of these measures has been an ever narrowing time when the fishermen are allowed to fish. The time has been considerably restricted during the last few years, sometimes being only two or three days a week. I think that throughout the country people perhaps tend to believe that the fishermen's union of British Columbia is a strike-prone organization, but I think we can see some of the reasons for that when we realize that it is becoming more difficult for the fishermen of British Columbia to make a living. I would, therefore, urge the government to give some consideration, in fact early and serious consideration, to some method of restricting the number of licences, thus restricting the total number of fishermen who may be allowed to fish. I realize that this is a very difficult problem to solve. It is not going to be easy to decide whb will be issued a fishing licence and who will be refused.
230	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. McMillan I would point out, however, that this problem has been faced in many other industries. For instance, in the real estate business in British Columbia there is a limitation on the number of people who may be engaged in that business, and only those who are engaged on a full-time basis are permitted to conduct business. Part-time workers are not allowed. I feel that might be one very good principle to apply with respect to fishermen. Perhaps another method of attack would be to place a limitation on the number of licences in existence so that the fishing grounds will not become more overcrowded. New applicants would have to go on a waiting list until such time as there was room for them.
As I said before, I do not want to take up too much of the time of the house. Since I am not one of those who wishes to go on and on, I am going to close by saying once again on behalf of the people of British Columbia that we heartily endorse the program laid before us by this administration, and we greatly appreciate that these things which were promised during the election campaign are now going to be implemented with all possible dispatch.


Mr. W. H. McMillan (Welland):: Mr. Speaker, at this time I should like to congratulate you on your reappointment to your high office. Even though you called me to order during the last session in the interests of decorum in this house, I must say that you acted very impartially and with ability all during the last session. I should like to congratulate the Deputy Speaker and the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Rea), both of whom I am sure will give you expert assistance during this 24th parliament. I want to mention the two hon. members who moved and seconded the speech from the throne. I thought they both did well. I know they will not expect me to agree with all they said, but they expressed their views very well, and taking those views along with the views of all the other members of the house, the people of Canada should receive good government.
I feel that the most immediate and important matter that should come to the attention of this government is that of unemployment. This has not been a problem in my particular area in recent years, particularly at this time of the year. However, even now with high unemployment rolls, one hears about further layoffs,-I heard of that last weekend when I was home-and the closing of plants for a month or two. One hears also about men with seniority of 20 years or more receiving notices of layoffs. This is almost'unprecedented in my part of the country at this particular time. It is
[Mr. Browne (Vancouver-Kingsway) .1

true that there has been a pickup in the employment of seasonal workers, but even here the pickup has been less than expected and less than has occurred in former years. The point is that we have a large number of permanent workers idle for periods of up to one year, and few of them have the vision of a job, let alone the vision of a greater Canada that is yet to be.
I know of nothing that breaks the morale of men more quickly than does idleness and the lack of a sense of security that steady employment provides. Many of these people are doubling up in their homes, while others are losing their homes because they cannot keep up their monthly payments. In the days of security of employment many of these people bought cars, television sets and other electrical appliances so necessary in a modern home, on a monthly basis. Seizures of these articles are being made in my part of the country today and equities are being forfeited. Every job has many applicants and I cannot recall similar conditions in some of our industrial areas except in the thirties.
We would have breadlines and soup kitchens today, just as we had in the thirties, except for one thing. The former Liberal government instituted unemployment insurance benefits. We know that this fund is now being rapidly depleted. It is difficult to obtain a true picture of the unemployment situation in Canada. The last figures I saw, as of March 15, showed that the number out of work and looking for jobs stood at 590,000, up some 38,000 over the number in February. I am aware that seasonal jobs may have taken up a number, but there have been recent lay-offs and I am sure that the number of unemployed must still be very high. I saw one report which indicated that our percentage of unemployed was greater than that of the United States or that of most other countries of the western world. I read this in the New York Times, and I think the report in the New York Times said that Peru, Bolivia and Venezuela had greater unemployment than Canada.
The Conservative government will soon have been in office for a year. The unemployment in my area at least rivals that of the hungry thirties and, so far as I am aware, the government has done nothing and started nothing in the Niagara district to put one man to work. Perhaps this is a misstatement and I owe an apology to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees), because he did put quite a large number of men to work on the Welland canal during the election campaign. I see the minister is not here tonight. I thought, as an employer, he treated his employees very well indeed. As an example, I saw 16 men removing snow and ice from one

of the bridges crossing the Welland ship canal. One man had a pick and was breaking up the snow and ice. The other 15 men had two shovels between them to toss it into the canal. This heyday for the local labour has now ended. Those whose loyalty was held to be the least in question were soon living either on unemployment insurance benefits or the best way they could. They did not all swallow the bait or probably I would not be here now.
The minister seems to be a kindly sort of man, and I regret that he seemed to become less solicitous for the unemployed after March 31 than he was before. It is really too bad that a minister would build up such a good reputation with his employees and then have it dissipated so soon. There is a great need for an overpass or an underpass across the Welland canal in the city of Welland, at Port Colborne and on the Queen Elizabeth Way at Homer.
During the election campaign the Minister of Transport was in Welland and, according to the local press, he told the people of Welland that if they would elect the Conservative candidate and send him here to Ottawa, he would tell him what the government's intention was with regard to the crossing over the Welland ship canal. Now that the election is over I do not think the minister should hold the people of Welland in suspense any longer unless, of course, he intends to keep it dangling before their eyes for the next election. He said that Conservative members of parliament attended to their constituencies better than did Liberal members. I would ask him to give me all the help he can in providing these crossings for the people in the Niagara district and not to prevent me from representing my constituency as well as I can.
The Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) assured us here in the house the other day that he would give every opportunity to examine all moneys appropriated under Governor General's warrants. No doubt this is true and no doubt that they can show that all expenditures that were made were legal; but the examination of these expenditures now by the house has little meaning when the money has already been expended. Having in mind the fact that the money was appropriated under Governor General's warrant, and the impossibility of the opposition's taking exception to these expenditures until after they had been made, I think the government should have shown greater responsibility than they showed in the handling of public funds.
I do not think that funds should have been provided by the representative of Her Majesty
The Address-Mr. McMillan to keep a large number of casual workmen on the Welland ship canal in order to provide a favourable government vote in that area. After the election was called the only document a man needed to obtain a place on this government political force was a note from the local Conservative chairman. The last truly loyal ones of these government employed election forces were laid off by April 30. The excuse given to them was the government had run out of appropriation moneys for the month and that they had no further money with which to hire them. I am sorry that these men were laid off because I would have been glad to help to vote money to keep them on as I understand there is greater need for men on the canal now than there was prior to March 31.
In this country in order to have full employment we must have an expanding economy. We have more men coming into the labour market all the time. In March I understand that the number that came into the labour market was about 38,000. To me, what is more ominous than the number of unemployed is the fact that the number of people working is no longer expanding but in fact is dropping. In January, for the first time in many years, the number of people working was 22,000 below that of one year ago. In February 48,000 fewer people had work than in February of 1957; and in March the figure was 58,000. If my district is any criterion I would say the same thing would be true for April and May and most likely for June. In the light of these figures, it is difficult for me to share the optimism of the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) and the Minister of Finance. They both pointed to the decline in the national employment service job applications. This may be so, but there are many men who do not think it is worth while to apply because there are so many thousands ahead of them waiting for jobs. I know several of those people.
When I was home on Sunday a number of the unemployed came to see me. They said that approximately 4,000 people were still unemployed in the Welland area, approximately the same number as were unemployed last March. They maintained that only a small percentage would be helped by the recent bill to extend seasonal benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act, and that there was little prospect of much building in that area. They could see little prospect of any of these people moving to jobs in the north country, and they asked me to emphasize the necessary government public works projects in the Niagara district.
I should like to see the government starting as soon as possible on the rehabilitation of

The Address-Mr. S. Fleming the old Welland canal lands. The municipalities have all agreed, and I think this work should soon get under way. It would help the unemployment situation both in Welland and in the county of Lincoln where the number of unemployed is also large. I also think the proposed crossings on the Welland ship canal might also get under way. Traffic conditions are particularly bad in Welland. In the boom years of 1956 and 1957, when bridges were up there, there was interference with road traffic for as much as six hours out of 24 hours.
I might say that I am greatly interested in the proposed tolls on the St. Lawrence seaway and the Welland ship canal. I proposed to the government last year the necessity of having an economic survey made before the final tolls were decided upon. I had in mind that in this way we might arrive at a conclusion less likely to injure our Canadian economy than if we were to leave the matter to a tolls committee who would naturally be interested in considering what the traffic might bear. I hope to cover this question of tolls at a later date this session.


Mr. Stuart Fleming (Okanagan-Revelsioke):: May I also, Mr. Speaker, extend to you congratulations on your election to the post to which you have brought such great gifts and which you have held and hold with such great distinction. May I also offer congratulations to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. If they in their case felt any trepidation, as I certainly now feel, how much greater was their reason. Yet they showed no sign of it and they acquitted themselves in a manner that impressed us all.
With your indulgence and I suppose that of the house, Mr. Speaker, I should like to embark upon a brief geographical description of the riding that I represent. It is perhaps justified by the fact that the riding is a relatively new one, having been formed about half a dozen years ago from the southeast portion of Kamloops riding and the northern section of the old Yale riding, and is now called Okanagan-Revelstoke. I feel that there may be greater justification for a geographical description on an even wider scale, for on my arrival at the capital two weeks ago I had occasion to cash a traveller's cheque. I took it to a bank in the city. On entering the building I went to the first wicket at which I felt they might have any interest whatever in the modest financial transaction I wished to effect. The young lady looked at my traveller's cheque and said, "Oh, British Columbia; take it to that wicket over there". I did, and my traveller's cheque


was promptly and courteously cashed. As I stepped away from the wicket I looked up, and there was a sign overhead which said: "Foreign Exchange". I prefer not to believe that this is confirmation of a suspicion sometimes held by those of us who live west of the Rockies.
The riding I represent encompasses in its southern half the wide valleys and the rolling hills of the north Okanagan region. Moving northward it skirts the eastern section of the Shuswap lake district, then east into the Selkirk range of the Rocky mountains. It is a country of great diversity of topographical detail and there is a great diversity of interest among its people. Between those resident in the southern parts and those who reside in the most eastern section there is no great community of interest so far as the ways in which they earn their living are concerned. Activity in the southern area is largely agricultural since the region embraces sections of the fruit industry of the Okanagan valley, the dairy industry, a certain amount of beef cattle raising on the high ranges, and then beyond, and in the hills, lumber. In that section also are the rich vegetable growing areas-tomatoes and other field crops.
In this particular section of the riding there has, during the last five years, been an evident decline in the income of the people and an evident decline in the acreage under cultivation. The industry has not enjoyed the level of prosperity which it once knew and there are specific and obvious reasons why this should be the case. In the vegetable industry, with respect to tomatoes, asparagus and other specific crops; in the tree fruit industry, particularly with respect to soft fruits, the growers of that region have been subject to competition which is not, we feel, fair competition, competition which has come from south of the border and in particular from the state of California. Importations into the region have entered the Canadian market at prices which make it impossible for our industry to compete.
There are many reasons for this. The California vegetable and fruit growers have a far earlier season; their crops come into production and are harvested weeks ahead of ours and during that early period they have access to top prices and secure for the majority of their crop an income entirely adequate to their requirements. But when they are cleaning off their product and selling it at what we regard as distress prices our own crop is only just coming into the market. However, those distress prices have tended to establish the price levels at which we sell in the Okanagan region. Those prices

bear no relationship whatever to our cost of production, and consequently our industry has suffered, with the result that in many phases of our operations acreage has shrunk and hardship has been experienced.
We feel that the industry both in tree fruit and in vegetables, so far as fresh products are concerned, is entitled to a measure of protection, and it has been a cause of considerable satisfaction to many branches of agriculture in this region that the government has taken cognizance of the situation as it exists. The Agricultural Prices Support Act has already provided a measure of assistance and, in addition, the government has received delegations from the industry in recent weeks and given a sympathetic hearing to further representations from the industry. We in that region feel that subsidization is not the ultimate answer, and that it will not provide ultimate solution to our problem, but we believe our growers are entitled to equal opportunity to compete on equal terms in their own market.
The vegetable and soft fruit production of the region is not adequate to meet the total demand of the Canadian market, and thus there will always be a requirement for some importation, but it is also true, we feel, that cur commodity should have first access to the Canadian market at prices which are related to our cost of production. That is what we have sought and what the Canadian horticultural council still seeks, namely the adoption of the principle of minimum fair market value, value for duty as it is perhaps better known.
I realize, as perhaps we all do, that the implementation of such value for duty is not necessarily an easy thing owing to the obligation we have under tariff and trade agreements entered into with the United States in former years. The general agreement on tariffs and trade does not permit the indiscriminate application of value for duty, but we do feel there is an opportunity and a need for the application of this principle in meeting the problems of the tree fruit and vegetable industries of the Okanagan region. In this respect we feel that there is no cause among the Americans for retaliatory measures, because the industries do not ask either for an embargo or for increased tariff, but only for protection during that period when the Canadian products are being marketed. Once the Canadian product is marketed, then the Canadian market would be open without restriction to the fresh products of other producers. I realize that the same principle cannot apply in the case of processed products, but in the case of fresh fruit and vegetables we feel it might be applied without 57071-3-16
The Address-Mr. S. Fleming any justification for retaliation on the part of United States suppliers.
This is one of the chief problems of the region and, of course, it is a problem which has not been ignored; we know it has been the concern both of the government and of the leaders of the industry itself. Solutions are being sought, but until more adequate solutions are found than exist at present there will continue to be a degree of hardship in my riding.
The second major industry, which is located not only in the southern half of the riding but also in the northeastern section, is the lumber industry and the forest products industry generally. Much of the production from this region of the riding has gone into the export market, particularly into the United States market, and we realize that until such time as the United States economy is able to absorb Canadian lumber to the extent it was doing some time ago there is not too much that can be done by the Canadian government to restore that market. We do, however, appreciate the benefit which has accrued from the housing policies of the government and I know, also, there will be appreciation throughout the lumber industry in my riding of the benefits that will result from the measures endorsed by this house last week.
Our industry looks forward with some anticipation to the trade and economic conference which is being held in Montreal later this year because it is realized that the greatest hope for security in the industry is the expansion of our world markets, particularly for the products of our forests. We realize that the government is aware of the situation and we do appreciate what is being undertaken but there is at this moment a continuing need for every effort possible to be made to find outlets for the production of this interior region.
Within the boundaries of the riding, that is to say the northeast section I have mentioned in the Selkirk range, there are two national parks, one completely located within the boundaries of the riding and the second located in part within the boundaries. Furthermore through the Rogers pass in this region will pass the trans-Canada highway, I trust in the final stages of its completion. We can expect in a matter of a relatively short time that the highway will be completed through the mountains and that new regions which have not been readily accessible to our tourist traffic will become open to a much greater extent than ever before. This is particularly true of the two regions now classified as national parks. Mount Revelstoke national park has a mountain with a summit

The Address-Mr. S. Fleming of somewhat higher than 6,000 feet and this park has been developed to a considerable extent and is visited by great numbers of people and has been so visited for many years. However, the volume of traffic likely to enter the park and visit the mountain in the foreseeable and imminent future will be greater than its present facilities can accommodate.
Glacier national park, one of the oldest national parks in Canada, lies between Revel-stoke and Golden and is very often, I am afraid, confused with the Glacier national park in the United States. That confusion is at least true in respect to people in the western parts of our country. It is at present a wilderness park to a large extent, visited by many members of the Canadian Alpine club and other mountaineering groups but accessible only by rail and not as well known as its attractions would undoubtedly merit if it were more readily accessible. There are within that park mountains of 7,000 and 8,000 feet and higher and also the Nakimu caves which are an attraction from which the public will not be easily kept away once access to the park is made easier. At the present time, however, they are in no condition for public use, in fact they are dangerous.
In other words there is a need for consideration of the very extensive development of these two national parks during the next three years because when traffic reaches them in the numbers in Which it will reach them, accommodation must be provided to take care of the requirements and at the present time while accommodation is adequate for the time being, it needs to be expanded considerably.
This northeast region of the riding is bisected by the Columbia river. There is a very great consciousness throughout the interior of British Columbia and particularly in the Okanagan-Revelstoke region and the surrounding ridings of the latent possibilities in the development of the resources of that river. We realize there are many complexities in the negotiations which must be completed before such development can take place but we do urge the government to give every consideration to expediting those negotiations so far as it is able to do so.
We know that the future development of secondary industry throughout the southern interior of British Columbia will depend to some considerable extent upon the power resources of the Columbia. Until those resources are fully realized the potential of the region which we inhabit cannot be fully explored and that is why it is of such great significance to us.
[Mr. Fleming (Okanagan-Revelstoke).1
I am aware that the government has, during the months it has been in office, given this matter serious consideration. I can only urge on the government that this interest be maintained.
If I may now turn to a more general question-something which is not at all peculiar to the riding I represent-I would like to state that I am particularly interested in the confirmation contained in the speech from the throne that there will be established a small business section within the administrative machinery of government. As one whose business life has been associated with small business during the years in which I have been earning my own living and the majority of whose friends are engaged in small business of one kind or another, I believe this piece of legislation alone will answer a requirement, a need, a desire of many thousands of Canadian citizens. For there cannot, I think, be anything which will reach out and ultimately affect more people and their families than the application of legislation which will give small business its true place in the future development of our nation.
The small businessman has contributed a great deal to the development of Canada as a nation but in recent years the tendency has been to admire the accomplishments of giant corporations and great merchandising empires and to overlook or even completely forget the contribution made by our small businessmen over the years. I am not one of those people who believe that the day of the small businessman is over; as a matter of fact I am completely convinced that he stands at the threshold of the greatest development in the history of small business in this country.
These, Mr. Speaker, are a few of the points which came to my mind when considering the speech from the throne. There are many other questions and many other problems which confront the people I represent but I feel in regard to the legislation now in prospect that the essential requirements and the genuine needs of all Canadians-not just those in my own riding but in every riding across the country-will be well served during the life of this parliament.


Mr. Alexis Caron (Hull):: Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to congratulate you upon resuming your post as Speaker of this house. Of the many Speakers I have known you, sir, rate very high and your work during the last session was highly regarded by the opposition.
We hope the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefen-baker) will not place you on the hot seat

as he did at the closing of the last parliament. You may rest assured that the members of the Liberal party will abide by your rules and decisions in this house.
(Translation):
May I also be allowed to congratulate the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche) for the honour which has been tendered him on his appointment to the cabinet. I remember that last year during the debate on the address, I took the Prime Minister to task for not appointing a sufficient number of French-Canadian ministers. I suggested there were such members who could well have been appointed at the time and I mentioned more particularly the name of the member for Labelle. I am quite convinced, of course, that the Prime Minister did not take this course in order to please me; nevertheless, I congratulate the member for Labelle.
I would also like to congratulate, in his absence-but he can read it in the official record of this house, at any rate-the member for Lotbiniere (Mr. O'Hurley). I believe that the hon. minister, since he was first elected to the house, proved that he deserved a higher appointment than that of parliamentary assistant. He has shown perfect knowledge of the two official languages of this country and demonstrated that he can handle them with marvelous fluency. I am convinced that the experience he has gained as a parliamentary assistant will stand him in good stead when it comes to fulfilling his responsibilities as a cabinet minister.
I would also like to congratulate the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) in his absence, for the honour which has come his way on his appointment as Deputy Speaker. When the member for Longueuil first came to this house-oh! there he is now, and I am happy to be able to say so to him directly-he was preceded by the reputation of his father. This is an extremely difficult situation to be in, when the father was great before the son. However, he has demonstrated that it was not because of his father, but because of himself and of his fine qualities that he has been chosen to be our Deputy Speaker. I congratulate him and I wish him every success.
(Text):
I am pleased to offer my congratulations to the Prime Minister on the great victory which he won on March 31. He wanted an over-all majority; he has it. I hope he will not use it arbitrarily as does his good friend the premier of Quebec. Speaking of the premier of Quebec, may I say that the influence of his machine, known as the immoral election 57071-3-16J
The Address-Mr. Caron machine, has been felt all over the province of Quebec but not sufficiently to assure the success of the Conservative party,-


Mr. Ricard:: The hon. member does not know what he. is talking about when he refers to Quebec.


Alexis Pierre Caron: I know that you and your colleagues used the Duplessis machine, and that is why you are here.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: The hon. member is talking through his hat.


Alexis Pierre Caron: If the machine had not been used in Quebec the hon. member would not be here. The member representing St. Hya-cinthe-Bagot would have been a Liberal, as he was before.
I do not think that it was sufficient to assure the great success of the Conservative party. I do not want to take away from the merit of the Prime Minister but in Quebec the electoral methods of Huey Long and of A1 Capone were in use in many constituencies, as in St. Hyacinthe-Bagot and more especially in St. Ann, where people were sequestered, 11 of them, and where a ballot box-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I am sure that the hon. member who is speaking does not want to go beyond the confines of this very important motion, but I am afraid he will have difficulty in relating what he is now saying to the amendment and the subamendment to the address in reply to the speech from the throne.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Speaker, I want to abide by your ruling but I thought I could follow those who are praising the success of the Conservative party all over the country and I thought there were things which could be said even in the House of Commons.
I want to say that all the ministers and all the members of the union nationale party were in the fight, even in my constituency, where the minister of public works, who never comes into our county except during an election time, spent 15 days in the county promising everything that was asked, and as he came with an open purse, money was flying all over, and on election day $20 bills were flying.


Mr. Graffley:: Do you remember Taschereau?


Alexis Pierre Caron: You are too young to remember that.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: I did not say anything. That is another insinuation. The hon. member is talking through his hat.


Alexis Pierre Caron: When I have a question put to me I answer it. I had the pleasure of sitting with Mr. Taschereau in Quebec and I do not think we could find in a hundred years a man

The Address-Mr. Caron to compare with him. He used honest tactics, unlike the ones you used in the province of Quebec during the last election. I would be glad to sit with a man like Alexandre Xaschereau, who was one of the greatest Canadians we have ever had.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: People from Quebec are smarter than you are.


Alexis Pierre Caron: I do not refuse to answer anybody who wishes to speak, but I want to know at least where they are and what they say. They should at least rise in their places and put the question and then I will answer.


Mr. Denis:: Put your question.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: That is the best contribution you have made in this parliament.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. It begins to sound more like a chorus than a solo. I suggest that hon. members allow the hon. member for Hull to pursue his course uninterrupted. (Translation):


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Speaker, in deference to your wishes, I shall immediately come back to important matters referring to the speech from the throne and federal policy.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Alexis Pierre Caron: I am happy to have pleased some hon. members on the treasury benches. That will not often be the case.
One of the most important matters the Conservative party has tried to minimize in this parliament and during the election was this well-known unemployment issue. Say what you will-sing it if you wish in any key-the fact remains as an hon. member stated this afternoon-that we have a winter depression and seasonal unemployment every year-but it is not each time that we have unemployment as acute as last year, and as there is even today.
I shall not look for examples in the other ridings of the province; I shall simply examine the situation in mine. As a rule in May work begins to pick up. Usually, around November and December pulp and paper companies lay off a certain number of men that they take on again in April and May. This year, instead of rehiring their employees, the Canadian International Paper laid off, only a few weeks ago, some 255 employees who had worked most of the winter, thus adding to the number of those already laid off in November and December.
It can be said therefore that the unemployment crisis is a very delicate one to settle, since being threatened by an economic crisis we are at the same time facing a danger of inflation.
I would not say that the matter is exceedingly easy for the government to solve, but

I say that, however difficult it might be, the government must make a serious effort to remedy the situation.
First I believe that a major part of our unemployment has been caused by the well known statement of the right hon. Prime Minister who said: "We are going to take 15 per cent of our present trade with the United States and divert it to the United Kingdom." This was, I feel, an utterly childish statement, coming from a statesman. If he had thought five minutes before uttering those words, he would have never said them, and I know that he is already sorry for his statement. I know that even if the United States have made no official representations to Canada following that change of policy, some people have been alarmed unofficially and only a few weeks after that statement, we already felt the consequences of trade difficulties existing between Canada and the United States.
In the paper industry particularly, paper is being bought, for instance, from Scandinavian manufacturers. Owing to the low salaries paid in those countries, paper can be produced at a lower price and the United States can buy it at about the same price as Canadian made paper, although shipping costs are higher.
By thus eliminating part of the American paper purchases in Canada, not only the paper industry but also the forest industry are affected. Thousands of our people are earning their living in the forest industry and thousands of our farmers, during the winter months, try to supplement their revenue by working in the forest.
This state of affairs is due to a great extent to that unwise and blundering statement and I contend that we must now try the impossible to correct that situation. In spite of the statements made, I still believe that we have yet in the United States a very important market which we can recover. To achieve that purpose, however, the present cabinet ministers will have to travel and become salesmen. Oh! it is a wonderful thing to become a cabinet minister, but if one does not travel, one does not find the necessary markets. Salesmen, at this time, have to go from door to door to sell their goods. So our ministers should have to go from country to country because we need new markets. If we do not find some, the present unemployment situation will continue and will become intolerable.
The people are dissatisfied, they are stirred up. Something must be done. Some may say that there is danger of inflation. That is possibly true. Is that why the government did not mention any tax reductions such as had been proposed by the chief of the

Liberal party? I believe that it is not necessarily through public works that the unemployment situation can be solved. Of course I am all for public works but we all know that before they can be carried out, preparations have to be made, reports have to be obtained from engineers, plans have to be studied, in short, everything has to be organized and that takes many months. There has been talk of public works since the beginning of the last election campaign but what public works have been initiated? There is talk of public works which are required in the far north, of railways for the far north. How can construction of highways in the Northwest Territories be of any assistance to the great number of unemployed people who are mainly in the eastern part of the country? We would have to transfer people and take them away from their families. Jobless or not, these people have feelings and they prefer staying among their own people. Some way has to be found to help our section of the country, and the best way is the one proposed by my leader: tax reductions.
I well recall that the right hon. Prime Minister, who himself was in the midst of an election campaign, tried to ridicule the proposal of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson). Well, I see in a New York newspaper that Mr. Harriman ...
(Text):
Governor Averell Harriman of New York today blamed the Eisenhower administration for the recession and said it must act immediately . . .
(Translation):
He then goes on as follows:
(Text):
An emergency tax cut.
Federal reserve board purchase of "several billion dollars of government bonds ... to increase the availability of credit and further lower interest rates."
"A large and diversified program of public works." (Translation):
But that comes only in third place- (Text):
In my opinion it would be reckless to do little and sensible and safer to take strong measures" Governor Harriman said.
(Translation):
And later, in the same paper, the Rockefeller Foundation officials were saying: (Text):
Tax reform urged by Rockefeller fund. Sweeping reform of the federal tax system to encourage individual incentive and promote the nations economic growth has been proposed by the Rockefeller brothers fund . . . Seventeen leading economists and businessmen urged an immediate tax cut to help expand employment and overcome the current recession . . . And the panel empha-
The Address-Mr. Caron
sized that an anti-recession tax cut should be consistent with the more important "long-term goals of tax reform."
(Translation):
That is precisely what the leader of the Liberal party was suggesting and, at that time, he was laughed at. Well, I share the opinion of those American experts who are also feeling the effects of a certain depression, perhaps lesser than ours, in view of their enormous population. But, to my mind, we should first lower taxes and then carry out public works.
I am indeed happy to note that the speech from the throne refers to all kinds of public works. And then here:
(Text):
... to provide assistance to provincial governments for certain agreed types of projects. In particular, a large expansion in the construction and equipment of our system of airports and airways will be proposed and an increase in our work on harbours and rivers and public buildings . . . the construction of a railway to Great Slave lake . . . the construction of important roads needed for development in the Yukon and Northwest Territories.
(Translation):	;
And so it is all the way. Well, I should be inclined to ask the government to do something which could help our local people, namely the building of a new bridge, since at the last election, the Conservative candidate had promised that if the Conservative party came back to power, the government would build one immediately to replace the old Alexandra bridge and ease the traffic on both sides of the river When the government prepares its plans for public works to be carried out throughout the country, I would ask it not to forget that bridge which is necessary and for which both cities have been asking since 1935, from all governments. Since the present government is of the opinion that public works must be undertaken to alleviate the unemployment problem, I would ask it not to forget this particular project which is needed in the Hull-Ottawa area, the interprovincial bridge.
I just heard a voice. Would the hon member be so kind as to get up and put his question?


Mr. Martel:: Why did the hon. member not ask for this bridge before today?


Alexis Pierre Caron: That is an intelligent question; it shows the state of mind of the hon. member. I did ask for that bridge but the request was turned down. It had been proposed that the bridge be built by the three governments: the Ontario government, the Quebec government and the federal government. The Ottawa government said yes and so did the Toronto government. But Mr. Duplessis said no.

The Address-Mr. Caron


Some hon. Members:: Any other question?


Alexis Pierre Caron: As long as it is not a question like that one, but an important question.
Well, it is in the field of public works. True, the government can undertake some public works but it can hardly carry out all the public works necessary in this country. That I will admit. Here is what could be done. If the government were to create a fund whereby it could lend money to the municipalities at a very low interest rate it would be a good thing. All our municipalities need money to carry out undertakings which are urgently needed. As a result of the development that has taken place these last few years there is a great deal to do but our municipal governments are almost unable to do anything since they have not the means to find the necessary money. When they do it often happens that the interest rate is prohibitive, which is of no advantage to them. If the government does want to act, let it make several hundred million dollars available to the municipalities at a low interest rate. The municipalities could then carry out these undertakings immediately, a fact which would go some way at least to solve the present unemployment situation.
If I remember correctly, our chief, the leader of the Liberal party, had a plan to help municipalities carry out these various works. This the present government could do. You know, a policy, whether initiated by the Liberal party or by another source, is not under a copyright. Everybody has a right to use it. So, I urge upon the Prime Minister, the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) and their colleagues, the reading of the program formulated at the last Liberal convention and I suggest that they might take inspiration from it for works to be carried out for some time to come.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Alexis Pierre Caron: There is also a reference in the speech from the throne to financial relations with the provinces. Well, I hope the Prime Minister will very soon convene the premiers of the provinces into conference at Ottawa, because I know our provinces are facing great difficulties.
I have noted in the papers lately that the premier of Ontario is already beginning to ask for more money.
The recession is being felt by the municipalities, but it is also being felt by the provinces, and the federal government is certainly in the best position to help everyone because fields of taxation are limited. Municipalities can tax real property, provincial governments have access to direct taxation only, whereas, according to the British North


America Act, the central government has access to all fields of taxation in our country. Well, since the central government is in the best position to collect the money necessary for its purposes and since, if need be-as is recognized by economists-it may resort to deficit budgeting in periods of recession, I urge the central government to open its purse and help municipalities and provinces to undertake public works of their own.
I note there is also mention of television. This subject of television has given rise to all sorts of comments throughout the country. Some favour state television only, others private television only, while others still favour a combination of both state and private television services. I must say, to the credit of state television, that it has made giant strides.
The C.B.C. offers well-balanced programs that are often better than anything coming from the United States. I am proud to give the corporation due credit. But this does not preclude the right to authorize private enterprise to set up a television network in other parts of the country. I noticed that an hon. member pointed out this afternoon that there was a population of several hundred thousand who do not have any television programs. Well, if the C.B.C. is unable to extend its network, private enterprise should be authorized to establish its own network. However, like others who mentioned the matter, I think the government should maintain the C.B.C. with an absolute control of programs, whether they are broadcast by private or public stations, because we must not let our programs deteriorate and follow the pace of some American broadcasts that are unfortunately reaching us. I am therefore pleased to ask the government kindly to see to it that some supervision of programs, even private ones, is exerted.
There is also talk of hospital insurance. In this connection, I could only pay tribute to the former minister of national health and welfare, the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin). If there is anybody in this house who deserves congratulations for the work done in this field it is certainly that hon. member.
However, there is one thing which has been worrying me for some time, if I may say so. As a result of the implementation of hospitalization plans, such as the Blue Cross, which pay only when the patient is admitted to hospital, we have a new problem, and that is the lack of space in our hospitals. Some way should be found for our sick people who can be treated at home, to receive there the same treatment they receive in a hospital.

(Text):


Harold Edward Winch: Stop a moment.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Excuse me, sometimes I forget myself. I meant that these plans have created new problems. Under the Blue Cross plan and other plans of hospital insurance a person has to be hospitalized in order to obtain the benefits. This creates a new problem, a lack of room in the hospitals in Canada. We have to build and build hospitals. I feel that arrangements should be made so that those illnesses which can be treated at home under the doctor's care should be treated there and yet the person should be able to receive the same benefits.


Harold Edward Winch: I did not mean stop speaking French, but to stop speaking quite so quickly. I was trying to follow.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Thank you.
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I will try to contain myself. I think it must be the interruptions I had a while ago which have caused me to carry on at this rate.
(Text):


Harold Edward Winch: I am sorry if I threw you off the beam.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Oh, I am not off the beam.
I am reading the speech from the throne to see if I can find anything.
(Translation):
The speech from the throne also mentions small businesses. It is true that in a depression period, small businesses have a harder time than large financial concerns. Well, I believe that here again I must suggest to the government the plan proposed by the leader of the Liberal party during the last campaign, which provided for a reduction of taxes on profits from 20 to 10 per cent on the first $10,000. This would immediately help small businessmen to get out of the difficulties in which they now find themselves.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I see that time flies away inexorably, and I want to conclude with an appeal on behalf of our youth. Youth today is probably the element of our population which suffers the most since, in cases of financial difficulty, they do not always find the means to get the money to complete their studies. I may be told that education is a provincial responsibility. Yes, the constitution provides that education, or public instruction, is a provincial responsibility. But there is one thing, for example, that seems to be forgotten in certain quarters. It is that the first right belongs to the child since nature has given him the right to the advantages of education and since children should not be made to suffer throughout their life because of gov-
The Address-Mr. Caron ernment systems. In a certain field, it is agreed that provincial governments have rights that must be respected but when the federal government goes to the trouble of offering money to help our colleges and universities, I contend that the provincial government has no right to refuse it as if that money were coming from an enemy government. I hold that the provincial government must accept that money as it accepts the funds of the Rockefeller Foundation and of manufacturers organizations which recently have spent $400,000, in the province of Quebec, towards education. I do not believe that the federal government is an enemy of the province of Quebec nor of any other province.
There are millions of dormant dollars waiting for the province of Quebec to accept them. Recently, Mgr. Lussier complained that the universities were on the verge of bankruptcy and yet millions of dollars are there waiting for them. They are not allowed to touch that money because some dictator prevents them from doing so.
Well, we should accept the program of my chief, the leader of the opposition, who during the last campaign, promised that if the Liberal party was returned to power, 10,000 scholarships would be granted to help people who cannot afford to complete their studies. You know that it costs from $1,200 to $1,300 to follow a university course if one does not live in a university city. Well, when a man has five, six or seven children, how do you expect him, with a salary of three, four or five thousand dollars, to devote $1,200* to $1,300 to the studies of a single member of his family and neglect the others. It is utterly impossible. No head of a family would want to take such a risk.
Well, the federal government which has means at its disposal, must find the money it needs to help those people to keep on studying so that Canadians may benefit from values which are here in a dormant state and ready to be developed. I therefore urge the present government to take over that part of the Liberal program and to do whatever is asked of it to help the Canadian people to develop normally as they have a right to do.
I had in mind Mr. Speaker, to deal with the parliamentary system itself, but I believe that I will not have the time to do so. I am only going to make a brief reference to it.
Last year, after the June election, we had in this house a minority Conservative group holding power, and an opposition group with a slight majority. I then asked myself how parliament could operate that way and if it was not time for us to think about review-

The Address-Mr. Caron ing our parliamentary system. Elections held twice in a year cost tremendous sums oi money, and paralyse trade and industry, paralyse everything in fact. Therefore, it seems to me that we could consider having a look at the United States system where elections are held at regular dates and where, when a government is in minority the worst that can happen is that a rejected piece of legislation is put aside for one year while things continue to go on without the country suffering any hardship. The United States are fairly well administered, I believe, and because our system dates back to the. Magna Carta it is no reason why we should keep it till the end of the world. It seems to me that a parliamentary committee should be instituted to study that question so as to avoid the obligation of having an election at any time when the vagaries of an election have divided equally the votes of the electorate between the government in power and the opposition.
I maintain that elections held at a fixed date, and a rule disallowing non-confidence motions, but letting the government go on with its legislation would be of a nature to improve our system. I only mention the matter, because I know I shall lack time to discuss it more fully to-night.
Now, I shall conclude my remarks by saying that I entirely agree with our leader when he says that...
(Text):
We respectfully represent to Your Excellency that a high level of employment and prosperity in Canada requires a high and expanding level of international trade, and that this will be promoted
more effectively by vigorous measures for the expansion of trade with all countries than by efforts to divert from one country to another.
(Translation):
I fully admit that we must pass urgent measures to settle the difficulties besetting us at this time.
That is why I will vote heartily for the amendment. Even * if we adopt the address though we do not approve its principle, we none the less accept part of the responsibility because we want to help the government overcome its difficulties. We are here to criticize, of course, but in a constructive way and I believe that, if I have not done so in the first part of my speech, I have tried to do so in the last part. Is that good?


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: It is!


Alexis Pierre Caron: Having the approval of the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe - Bagot (Mr. Ricard), I will go back home satisfied with the work I have done.
Since it is ten o'clock, Mr. Speaker, may we call it a day?
(Text):
On motion of Mr. Caron the debate was adjourned.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Lionel Chevrier: I might ask the acting leader of the house what the business is to be for tomorrow.


Gordon Minto Churchill: We shall proceed with the throne speech debate tomorrow.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.

NORAD-Canada-XJ.S. Agreement


[Stage Direction]
May 12, 1958.
Sir,
I have the honour to refer to discussions which have taken place between the Canadian and the United States authorities concerning the necessity for integration of operational control of Canadian and United States air defences and, in particular, to the study and recommendations of the Canada-United States military study group. These studies led to the joint announcement of August 1, 1957, by the Minister of National Defence of Canada and the Secretary of Defence of the United States, indicating that our two governments had agreed to the setting up of a system of integrated operational control for the air defences in the continental United States, Canada and Alaska under an integrated command responsible to the chiefs of staff of both countries. Pursuant to the announcement of August 1, 1957, an integrated headquarters known as the North American Air Defence Command (NORAD) has been established on an interim basis at Colorado Springs, Colorado.
For some years prior to the establishment of NORAD, it had been recognized that the air defence of Canada and the United States must be considered as a single problem. However, arrangements which existed between Canada and the United States provided only for the co-ordination of separate Canadian and United States air defence plans, but did not provide for the authoritative control of all air defence weapons which must be employed against an attacker.
The advent of nuclear weapons, the great improvements in the means of effecting their delivery, and the requirements of the air defence control systems demand rapid decisions to keep pace with the speed and tempo of technological developments. To counter the threat and to achieve maximum effectiveness of the air defence system, defensive operations must commence as early as possible and enemy forces must be kept constantly engaged. Arrangements for the co-ordination of national plans requiring consultation between national commanders before implementation had become inadequate in the face of a possible sudden attack, with little or no warning. It was essential, therefore, to have in existence in peacetime an
organization, including the weapons, facilities and command structure which could operate at the outset of hostilities in accordance with a single air defence plan approved in advance by national authorities.
Studies made by representatives of our two governments led to the conclusion that the problem of the air defence of our two countries could best be met by delegating to an integrated headquarters, the task of exercising operational control over combat units of the national forces made available for the air defence of the two countries. Furthermore, the principle of an integrated headquarters exercising operational control over assigned forces has been well established in various parts of the North Atlantic treaty area. The Canada-United States region is an integral part of the NATO area. In support of the strategic objectives established in NATO for the Canada-United States region and in accordance with the provisions of the North Atlantic treaty, our two governments have, by establishing the North American Air Defence Command recognized the desirability of integrating headquarters exercising operational control over assigned air defence forces. The agreed integration is intended to assist the two governments to develop and maintain their individual and collective capacity to resist air attack on their territories in North America in mutual self-defence.
The two governments consider that the establishment of integrated air defence arrangements of the nature described increases the importance of the fullest possible consultation between the two governments on all matters affecting the joint defence of North America, and that defence co-operation between them can be worked out on a mutually satisfactory basis only if such consultation is regularly and consistently undertaken.
In view of the foregoing considerations and on the basis of the experience gained in the operation on an interim basis of the North American air defence command, my government proposes that the following principles should govern the future organization and operations of the North American air defence command.
(1)	The commander-in-chief NORAD (CIN-CNORAD) will be responsible to the chiefs of staff committee of Canada and the joint chiefs of staff of the United States, who in turn are responsible to their respective governments. He will operate within a concept of air defence approved by the appropriate
[Stage Direction]
NORAD-Canada-U.S. Agreement authorities of our two governments, who will bear in mind their objectives in the defence of the Canada-United States region of the NATO area.
(2)	The North American air defence command will include such combat units and individuals as are specifically allocated to it by the two governments. The jurisdiction of the commander-in-chief, NORAD, over those units and individuals is limited to operational control as hereinafter defined.
(3)	"Operational control" is the power to direct, co-ordinate, and control the operational activities of forces assigned, attached or otherwise made available. No permanent changes of station would be made without approval of the higher national authority concerned. Temporary reinforcement from one area to another, including the crossing of the international boundary, to meet operational requirements will be within the authority of commanders having operational control. The basic command organization for the air defence forces of the two countries, including administration, discipline, internal organization and unit training, shall be exercised by national commanders responsible to their national authorities.
(4)	The appointment of CINCNORAD and his deputy must be approved by the Canadian and United States governments. They will not be from the same country, and CINCNORAD staff shall be an integrated joint staff composed of officers of both countries. During the absence of CINCNORAD, command will pass to the deputy commander.
(5)	The North Atlantic treaty organization will continue to be kept informed through the Canada-United States regional planning group of arrangements for the air defence of North America.
(6)	The plans and procedures to be followed by NORAD in wartime shall be formulated and approved in peace-time by appropriate national authorities and shall be capable of rapid implementation in an emergency. Any plans or procedures recommended by NORAD which bear on the responsibilities of civilian departments or agencies of the two governments shall be referred for decision by the appropriate military authorities to those agencies and departments and may be the subject of inter-governmental co-ordination.
(7)	Terms of reference for CINCNORAD and his deputy will be consistent with the foregoing principles. Changes in these terms of reference may be made by agreement between the Canadian chiefs of staff committee and the United States joint chiefs of staff, with approval of higher authority as appropriate, provided that these changes are in consonance with the principles set out in this note.
[Stage Direction]
(8)	The question of the financing of expenditures connected with the operation of the integrated headquarters of the North American Air Defence Command will be settled by mutual agreement between appropriate agencies of the two governments.
(9)	The North American Air Defence Command shall be maintained in operation for a period of ten years or such shorter period as shall be agreed by both countries in the light of their mutual defence interests, and their objectives under the terms of the North Atlantic treaty. The terms of this agreement may be reviewed upon request of either country at any time.
(10)	The agreement between parties to the North Atlantic treaty regarding the status of their forces signed in London on June 19, 1951, shall apply.
(11)	The release to the public of information by CINCNORAD on matters of interest to Canada and the United States of America will in all cases be the subject of prior consultation and agreement between appropriate agencies of the two governments.
If the United States government concurs in the principles set out above, I propose that this note and your reply should constitute an agreement between our two governments effective from the date of your reply.
Accept, sir, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration.
"N. A. ROBERTSON" Ambassador of Canada.
The Honourable John Foster Dulles,
Secretary of State of the United States, Washington, D.C.

[Stage Direction]
May 12, 1958.
Excellency,
I have the honour to refer to Your Excellency's note No. 263 of May 12, 1958 proposing on behalf of the Canadian government certain principles to govern the future organization and operation of the North American Air Defence Command (NORAD).
I am pleased to inform you that my government concurs in the principles set forth in your note. My government further agrees with your proposal that your note and this reply shall constitute an agreement between the two governments, effective today.
Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration.
"CHRISTIAN A. HERTER" for the Secretary of State.
His Excellency Norman Robertson,
Ambassador of Canada.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, May 20, 1958