1958-05-23

BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT


Mr. D. M. Fisher (Pori Arthur) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-13, to amend the British North America Acts, 1867 to 1952, with respect to the readjustment of representation in the House of Commons.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to introduce into subsection 1 of section 51 of the act the words "independent of the parliament of Canada" so that the readjustment of representation in the House of Commons will be done in future by an independent body rather than by a committee of the House of Commons.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



COMPANIES ACT


Douglas Mason Fisher: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-14, to amend the Companies Act (annual returns).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to require companies in default in filing their annual returns to give information to the Secretary of State, and to provide for the Secretary of State annually to present a list to parliament of the companies that are in default.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



CANADA ELECTIONS ACT


Douglas Mason Fisher: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-15, to amend the Canada Elections Act (voting at advance polls).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the suggested amendment to the act is to
extend advance polling privileges to all electors who believe they will for any reason be absent from their polling divisions on the ordinary polling day.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



CANADIAN PACIFIC STEAMSHIPS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour or alternatively to the Minister of Transport. In view of the increasing seriousness of the strike in the steamship services on the west coast, which I understand is paralysing that service, what steps is the government taking with regard to the seamen's strike, which is also isolating Vancouver island from the mainland with very serious results?


Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, I have been given notice by the hon. member for Skeena of his intention to ask a similar question and probably I can answer both hon. members at the same time.
I wanted to say, Mr. Speaker, that the representative of the Department of Labour on the west coast has already approached both parties and offered his services for further negotiations between the two parties with a view to settlement of the strike. We have asked our chief conciliation officer on the west coast to continue his efforts to bring the parties together back into negotiation.


Mr. Erhart Regier (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: I would like to ask a supplementary question of the Minister of Transport. Has the minister or the Prime Minister received representations from Victoria as to the possible sale or transfer of registry of C.P.R. ships and, if so, has he any announcement to make in this regard?


Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for his courtesy in advising me of his intention to ask this question. I do not recall having received any representations of this kind and neither my own department nor the Canadian maritime commission has any knowledge of any proposal for discontinuation of the C.P.R. Vancouver island steamship services.

Inquiries of the Ministry ARTS. LETTERS AND SCIENCES



INQUIRY AS TO FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO UNIVERSITIES AND STUDENTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition):: May I ask the Prime Minister whether he is in a position to confirm press reports that the government in the near future-these were the words attributed to the Prime Minister

will implement the proposal made in March last by the Secretary of State for External Affairs for federal financial assistance to university students through scholarships, bursaries and fellowships, and also for an increase in the per capita grants to universities from $1 to $1.50?


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, that is a matter of government policy which will be made known in due course.



LIVESTOCK


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. O. Latour (Argenfeuil-Deux-Moniagnes):: I would like to address a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Has the attention of the minister been drawn to the article which appeared in the newspaper Le Droit on May 21 dealing with the outbreak of a mysterious disease, which it is reported has already claimed the lives of six cows since last Wednesday and has affected a number of other cows? If so, could the minister tell the house whether his department has investigated the matter?


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, the press clipping from Le Droit was handed to me this morning, but this disease had come to the attention of the department previously and the health of animals branch prepared a memorandum on it for me on May 20, which I think perhaps I should read to the house. It reads as follows:
Following reports that a number of cattle were exhibiting symptoms of rabies in the Thurso area, departmental veterinarians visited the area and conducted an investigation.
Preliminary reports indicate approximately 900 animals-mostly cattle and a few horses-were vaccinated against rabies. Approximately two weeks following vaccination a number of the cattle began to show partial clinical evidence indicative of rabies.
Specimens collected and examined at the department's animal diseases research institute have so far indicated that the causative agent or virus of rabies is not existent in the affected animals so that the clinical evidence being exhibited by the sick animals is a reaction to the vaccination, and not in fact an attack of rabies resulting from
[Mr. Hees.l
infection. Reports to date indicate that the transmission of rabies from the affected cattle is not possible.
The vaccinations were carried on by a veterinarian in private practice and the department is in no way involved, except that close observation is being kept on the sick animals and laboratory studies on the affected animals are being conducted.
Preliminary reports of the investigation indicate that the private practitioner used vaccine intended and labelled for use in dogs rather than the vaccine designated for use in cattle.
I received a further report this morning that approximately 45 deaths and 40 sick animals have been reported.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask a question of the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
In view of the interesting Canadian businessmen's report on their tour of the Soviet union, and in view of the statement of Mr. Edgar T. Alberts, organizer of that tour, to the effect that the co-operation of the Russians was outstanding and that if any of our group failed to see something in which they were interested it was only because they failed to ask, would the minister inform the house if the government's policy provides for similar co-operation and courtesies being extended to visiting scientific and industrial leaders from the Soviet union?


Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: I am grateful to the hon. member for acquainting me with this question before we met here this morning. I assume he is aware that there have been a number of visits to Canada in recent months by scientists and industrialists from the Soviet union. I am thinking, for example, of visits by Soviet delegations in the fields of lumbering, fisheries, agriculture, geology and crystallography, to mention a few. I can assure the hon. member that every co-operation and courtesy have been extended to these visitors. This policy will be continued in the case of all bona fide visitors or delegations from the Soviet union.



POTATOES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucester):: May I
direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. In view of the depressed situation in the potato industry, and in view of

Inquiries of the Ministry
the fact that at this late date over 2,000 car- Mr. Speaker: I was thinking the same lots of potatoes are still unsold in Prince thoughts myself as the hon. member proceeded Edward Island and large quantities remain with his question. It relates to something unsold in New Brunswick, can the minister which transpired two years ago, and it does advise the house if immediate action can be not appear to have the urgency that would expected by the agricultural stabilization require it to be answered off the cuff in the board to award deficiency payments to take house. It would be a more effective procedure, care of this most unfortunate situation?	I suggest, to put it on the order paper.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, the price for potatoes during the last few months [DOT] has been relatively good. At one time it was up to $9 a barrel on the New York exchange, and a very considerable quantity of potatoes has been sold during the last few months at quite good prices. The price has dropped recently, and in order to meet that situation I have reinstituted the starch diversion program in New Brunswick. That is in operation at the present time, and I think the people in New Brunswick, if the hon. member would inquire there, are reasonably well satisfied with the situation.
With regard to Prince Edward Island, there was a delegation in to see me two days ago, and we are now considering what might be done in order to look after what may or may not prove to be a surplus of potatoes in Prince Edward Island. They are not yet certain whether or not there will be a surplus.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Is the minister aware that on July 16, 1955, the then minister of national health and welfare informed the house that the Charles Best Institute in Toronto was giving consideration to research into certain aspects of natural health resources in Canada, and that direction had also been given to the research committee of the department?
Can the minister inform the house if this research was proceeded with, and if so, whether the findings will be made available. If not, is his department giving consideration to this aspect of a potentially great new Canadian industry?


Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, may I suggest that a question of this type should be placed on the order paper.


Harold Edward Winch: It is of national importance.


Mr. Fleming (Eglinton):: So are the questions
on the order paper.



AUTOMOBILES-RESTRICTION ON EXPORTS TO CHINA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Can the minister say whether the inquiry which the government was to make into the United States law requiring Canadian subsidiaries of American companies to obtain a licence to export automobiles has yet been made, and whether the shipment of a thousand automobiles to China by the Ford Motor Company has been prevented? Can the minister assure the house that in future Canadian firms will need to comply only with Canadian law?


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minisier of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, the subject matter is under investigation. I have no report to make at this moment.


Hazen Robert Argue: Since this happened some months ago, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister could tell us when the report will be complete and when it will likely be made?


Gordon Minto Churchill: In due course.


Hazen Robert Argue: That is not like your election statements.



REQUEST FOR TABLING AND DISTRIBUTION OF INVESTMENT STUDY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. J. Mcllraifh (Oiiawa West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce if he would table the study entitled "Private and Public Investment in Canada-Outlook 1958" and whether copies have been made available to hon. members. I understand the publication was released about the middle of March.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I shall look into the matter, Mr. Speaker.



U.K. MISSION TO CANADA    REQUEST FOR REPORT ON PROGRESS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: 
Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, there is considerable difference between the two missions. The Canadian mission which went to the United Kingdom was a government-sponsored mission. The British trade mission which is in Canada at the present time has come over under the sponsorship of the dollar export council and has no government sponsorship. I would like to inform the house at some convenient date of the activities of the mission. They have just about completed their tour of Canada and will be returning home very shortly.



CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question I should like to direct to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, although perhaps it may more properly be addressed to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. We will determine that in a moment. Has the minister received a report concerning the unfortunate and disastrous fire at what I understand was a school for Indians at Anahim Lake which took place yesterday and, if not, will an investigation take place?


Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the hon. member, we have received an interim report. This fire took place in a nursing station attached to the Anahim day school. At the time of the outbreak between 5 and 5.15 last evening, Pacific time, there were 13 children in this little hospital who ranged in age from 1 to 9 years. Only one of these children was saved and the nurse in charge of the station was herself severely burned and is suffering from shock.
The provincial police are already on the scene, and I understand that the fire marshal is on his way there to conduct an investigation.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. Nasserden (Roslhern):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Could the minister tell us if
(Mr. Chevrier.]

any study is being made to bring farm labour under the Unemployment Insurance Act, and when we may expect a report on the decisions reached in that regard?


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, a very active survey is being made of the situation, but I cannot at the moment suggest the exact date when we expect to have a report in this matter.



REQUEST FOR STATEMENT ON BENEFIT PAYMENT FIGURES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Bonavista-Twillingate):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of Labour is now in a position to answer the question I asked him yesterday as to the number of persons who were in receipt of insurance payments, both regular and seasonal, at the nearest convenient date to the middle of April?


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the question that was asked yesterday by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate I am informed by the officials of the unemployment insurance commission that they have never been able to arrive at an accurate figure for the number of persons who were actually receiving benefits on a given date. The reason for this is that some persons are paid each week, others are paid by mail every two weeks and others in outlying districts are paid at even longer intervals.
I am also informed that it will be possible to arrive at a correct figure when a system of electronic tabulation is installed, but until this is done no accurate figure is available. The only figure I have which even approximates the request of the hon.. member is the figure for active claims, which includes all those claims under active consideration. However, not all of these receive benefits, since some are disqualified, others get benefits for short-term periods such as two or three days, and so on.
The two dates for active claimants nearest to the middle of April which I have been able to obtain are for March 31 and April 30, and they are as follows: March 31, regular, 624,588; seasonal, 235,051, or a total of 859,639. On April 30 the regular were 495,382, and the seasonal 226,870, or a total of 722,252.


John Whitney Pickersgill: A supplementary question, sir. May I ask the minister whether the 226,000 estimate he gave in the house during the debate on the bill recently represented more than the number of persons receiving benefits? It would appear from the explanation he has given now that that.

was the case. If I may ask a second question, would the minister give us at the earliest possible date the number of active claimants in receipt of seasonal benefits at the present time?


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, the figures I gave, which the hon. member seems to feel are not accurate, were given to me by the officials of the unemployment insurance commission. I can only accept them; I feel they are correct, and I hope the hon. member feels the same way about those figures. As to the second part of his question, I shall try to get that information for the hon. member.


John Whitney Pickersgill: On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, I did not suggest, and I hope the minister does not think I was suggesting, that I was questioning the accuracy of his figures. I was not questioning the accuracy of the figures. What I was seeking to do, sir, was-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I do not believe the hon. member is raising a question of privilege in the remarks he is making. We are dealing with questions and answers now.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, with the greatest possible respect, could I point out that it was suggested that I reflected upon the accuracy of the minister, and I was seeking to explain that I had not and that I had no such thought in mind. I thought there was some misunderstanding about the category of person.


Some hon. Members:: Order.



CANADIAN NATIONAL STEAMSHIPS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Will the minister comment on the suggestion made yesterday by the president of the Canadian Labour Congress that the Canadian National Steamships West Indies fleet be subsidized to enable it to carry on its Canadian service, rather than have it sold?


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for advising me of his intention to ask this question. All possibilities for keeping the ships operating were thoroughly considered before the decision to sell the ships was reached by Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships, Limited.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Douglas Mason Fisher: I should
like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. In view of the government's decision to sell our deep sea fleet and the relation of that fleet to defence, can the minister inform the house whether consideration is being given to disposing of the ships of the Royal Canadian Navy?


Mr. Speaker:: I am sure the hon. member does not intend a question of that kind to be answered, and I suggest to him that such a question is scarcely proper to put.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Transport tabled the annual reports of the Canadian National Railways. May I ask him when he intends to move in the house for the establishment of the committee on railways and shipping to deal with these various reports?


George Harris Hees: Some time within the next few weeks, Mr. Speaker.



STATEMENT BY MR. SPEAKER ON RULES OF PROCEDURE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Speaker:: Before proceeding with the orders of the day, if the house would permit me one word I should like to refer hon. members to two citations relating to oral questions about public policy. There are many borderline questions, and there were some this morning. For the guidance of the house perhaps I might refer to Bourinot's fourth edition, at page 314, where he expresses this view of the practice:
While explanations of the intentions of the government or of a minister may be asked, their opinion on a matter of policy or of law is not a proper subject of inquiry.
It is perhaps a rather fine distinction between intention and opinion, but it is one that can be drawn and is one that should be kept in the minds of hon. members when they ask questions.
I should like to refer to Beauchesne and also to May, sixteenth edition, page 356. Beauchesne's second edition, citation 339, repeated in the fourth and latest edition as citation 178, reads:
Questions addressed to ministers should relate to the public affairs with which they are officially connected, to proceedings pending in parliament, or to any matter of administration for which the minister is responsible. Within these lines an explanation can be sought regarding the intentions of the government, but not an expression of opinion upon matters of policy.
406	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry
May I refer also to another rule of the house. I was not in the chair yesterday when a reference was made to the Governor General. Although I am sure that the hon. member who made the reference intended no disrespect of the Governor General, perhaps what was said would be susceptible of that interpretation. For the guidance of hon. members of the house may I refer to standing order No. 35:
No member shall speak disrespectfully of Her Majesty, nor of any of the royal family, nor of His Excellency or the person administering the government of Canada: nor use offensive words against either house, or against any member thereof.
May I refer also to a comment on the practice which is found in May's sixteenth edition at page 457:
Unless the discussion is based upon a substantive motion, drawn in proper terms, reflections must not be cast in debate upon the conduct of the sovereign, the heir to the throne, or other members of the royal family, the governor general of a dominion, the Speaker, the chairman of ways and means, members of either house of parliament, or judges of the superior courts-
-and so on.
Since there are many new members in the house, I thought it desirable to refer to the rules and the practice, so that in the future members would be careful in making references of that kind.


Harold Edward Winch: May
I say, with the utmost respect, that I am certain the hon. member intended no reflection on the Governor General, but his stand was caused by opposition to photographs taken by the government which resulted in disrespect to royalty.


Mr. Speaker:: As the hon. member will
recall, I said I felt sure the member who made this statement intended no reflection on the Governor General; the reflection was on other persons entirely. However, his statement which I read in Hansard this morning is capable of another interpretation, and that is the reason I felt it desirable to mention it.



NORTHERN AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hazen Robert Argue: I have a question for the minister of northern affairs arising out of the new interest that is being taken in northern development at this time. Can the minister say whether or not he is planning a trip to Siberia to study Soviet techniques in northern and Arctic development?


Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, as part of our policy of opening up the north we are looking at every possibility for trying to keep down costs. One of those things at which we have been looking is the possibility of learning from other countries that have northern areas. This has been in our minds and it has been discussed. If and when it becomes a matter of government policy I shall be glad to make the announcement in the house.



SHIPPING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Douglas Mason Fisher: I hope this question is in order, Mr. Speaker; I believe it is. I should like to ask the Minister of Transport, in view of the fact that the shipping season is imminent and the delay in the inquiry concerning the Baffin, whether he can inform the house what instructions have been given to prevent a recurrence of the disaster at Black Rock?


George Harris Hees: I wish to thank the hon. member for giving me notice of his intention to ask this question. A formal investigation was held on February 18, 1958, into the circumstances attending the grounding of the C.G.S. Baffin on July 4, 1957. At the close of the hearings the court adjourned until Monday, April 21. However, before that date His Honour Judge Vincent Pottier, the commissioner, suffered a severe heart attack and the final sittings of the court of investigation were accordingly postponed. It is understood that Judge Pottier may be in a position to call the court together again within the next two or three weeks.
As to the latter part of the hon. member's question, this concerns my colleague the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys.


Hon. Paul Comiois (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: The question was, what interim instructions have been given to prevent a recurrence of the disaster?
The ship's officers and the hydrographers now operate on the same bridge, so no confusion can result. Additional equipment has been installed so that navigating information is now more readily available to everyone concerned with the operation of the ship. Instructions have been issued which clearly define the responsibility of the ship's officers and the technical officers.



REFERENCE TO INQUIRY INTO ALLOCATION OF BOX CARS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: May I ask
the Minister of Trade and Commerce if he can tell us when Mr. Bracken, who was appointed by order in council, will be in a position to terminate his inquiry into the box car situation?


Gordon Minto Churchill: I hope, Mr. Speaker, it will be some time in June.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Thursday, May 22, 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.
Mr. H. M. Batten (Humber-St. George's):: Mr. Speaker, when the house adjourned last evening at 10 o'clock I was making some comments concerning markets for Newfoundland fish. I am informed that during the year 1956 the total exported by the Newfoundland Association of Fish Exporters Limited, more popularly known as NAFEL, was about 783,173 hundredweight. Of this amount 14 per cent was exported to Europe, 25 per cent to the British Caribbean, 20 per cent to other Caribbean areas, 1 per cent to South America and 40 per cent to the Canadian mainland and to the United States.
I believe every effort should be made not only to retain these markets but to expand them, even if it is necessary to increase the support prices for fish above the levels existing at the moment in order that the fishermen may be able to get a fair return for their labour, and so that at the same time it may be possible for Newfoundland to meet the maximum price which these markets are able to pay. There may even be some wisdom in providing extra support for fishery products of high quality.
May I move on to a few comments regarding the bait service in Newfoundland, and I am going to make this rather brief. The bait service which was initiated in the early thirties was a great help to the Newfoundland fishermen, but over the years since then the structure of the Newfoundland fisheries has changed in a marked degree and the bait service as it exists at the moment is no longer adequate to look after the needs of the fishermen, particularly in certain areas which up
The Address-Mr. Batten to this point have not been served by the bait service. It is not adequate in the sense that without bait being supplied, our fishermen are not able to begin to work earlier in the year or to carry on the industry late in the fall.
I am not going to make extended remarks on the problem, but it is a very serious one for us in Newfoundland. I know the Minister of Fisheries has the problem under study, and I hope it will not be too long before the minister will be able to present to the house a report on his study and a summary of his proposals.
Before leaving my comments on the fishing industry I should like to make one comment regarding unemployment insurance for fishermen. To our fishermen this has been a great boon, for I think it will help to retain good fishermen in the industry who will be able to make a good living and at the same time make a fine contribution to the industry itself. But my problem at the moment is one of unemployment insurance and school attendance.
I do not propose at the moment to enter into a discussion of education, but in passing I should like to say that I have been very pleased to note the number of hon. members who in their speeches in this debate have made some reference to education. I certainly agree that there is a problem that some time in the near future the country is going to have to face, not in the sense of getting into any race with Russia, not in the sense of having our educational system weighted on the science side at the expense of the social sciences and humanities, but in the sense of providing Canadians with better educational opportunities.
However, I am getting away from the problem I want to discuss, a problem which is a much simpler one than that. Over the last few months a problem has arisen involving a number of young men, and to be fair I must say it is not a large number, who owing to the number of stamps they acquired during the last fishing season were able to qualify for unemployment insurance. These men live in an area where normally they are able to obtain winter employment in the logging business. During the last few months this type of employment has not been so regularly available as it had been before. These young men were at home with nothing to do and decided that they would attend the local school for a few weeks to improve themselves as much as they could from attendance at that institution. The moment they attended the local school they were disqualified and not permitted to draw their unemployment insurance, on the assumption that they were not available for work.

The Address-Mr. Batten
I do not think that anybody who attends school on a temporary basis can be considered as out of the labour market, and I would rather feel that young people who decide they are going to use their free time to attend the local school should not be penalized by being disqualified for unemployment insurance. In fact I would go considerably further and say that any young person who has been previously employed in an insurable occupation and who decides to go to high school or even to university should not lose the credit he has built up. I will agree that for the time being a university student, having committed himself for a year, may be temporarily not available for work, but at the same time he is preparing himself for better work in the years that lie ahead.
I bring this problem to the attention of the Minister of Labour, and I hope he will give some attention to it.
May I now move on to one or two other points, and I see I shall have to make my remarks concerning them rather brief. On the west coast of Newfoundland Canadian National Telegraphs have not been able to provide the outlying districts with communication services that are adequate to meet the need. Time was when this section of Newfoundland was well served by a communications system. Over the years part of it has been dropped and up to this point the system has not been rebuilt, with the result that many parts of the west coast of Newfoundland do not have the privilege of the telegraphic communication they really deserve. Canadian National Telegraphs will say, and have said to me, that when the cost of improving the system is compared with the return it becomes almost a financial impossibility. I agree that in setting up a system of this kind for the west coast of Newfoundland or for any other part of Canada, for that matter, the financial side of the problem must be considered. But on the other hand there is the question of service to people who need it, service that is not too much for any body of people to request in this modern age.
I would hope that we are not too far away from the time when some consideration will be given to the problem. It may well be that if Canadian National Telegraphs is not in a position to institute a service that is able to look after the need of the people, service to these outlying areas could be taken over and operated by the Department of Transport.
A year or so ago a radio station was established at Newcastle, New Brunswick. This radio station was given the same frequency as that of the radio station at Corner Brook in Newfoundland. At the moment the radio
station at Corner Brook cannot be well received in certain parts of the west coast of Newfoundland which for years have been used to the service of this station. The fact that they are not able to receive its programs arises because the local station is being interfered with by the station at Newcastle, New Brunswick, which as I said before is on the same frequency.
I should like to point out that while I make the statement that the station at Newcastle is interfering with the station at Corner Brook, I must recognize the fact that interference is not taking place within the protected area of the station at Newcastle or within the protected area of the station at Corner Brook. But it appears to me that when a station has been given the same frequency as another station and an area which has been accustomed to radio programs from the local station over quite a number of years finds that reception is interfered with, some consideration should be given to the matter.
I have been in touch with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the Department of Transport and there is no doubt that these two stations are quite within their legal limits, but here is a section of the Newfoundland coast that is being denied a service which it had for a number of years. I would recommend to the Minister of Transport and the Minister of National Revenue, who speaks for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in parliament, that one of two solutions be adopted; either that the strength of the station CBY at Corner Brook be increased or that the frequency of one of the two stations be changed.
While on the subject I might say that we who live in the Corner Brook area, the second city of Newfoundland, even at this late date are without the services and the pleasures which come from television reception. I mentioned this matter last session to the Minister of National Revenue, and I hope we are not too far away from the time when the microwave line now being constructed across Newfoundland will be completed and a television station established in Corner Brook so those people living in that area-and I number those who would receive television service at about 35,000-.will be able to receive the benefits of television service now enjoyed by such a large proportion of the Canadian population.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a word or two about the trans-Canada highway. It has always been my belief, and it is still my belief, that the trans-Canada highway should have been built across the country entirely by the federal government. If this had been done I believe there would have

The Address-Mr. Belzile
been more equality in the cost of this project, and I particularly refer to the cost to Newfoundland.
The trans-Canada highway, as it was supposed to have been built in my province, would have been built in three stages. There was the first stage of just the rough grading, using material along the right of way the second stage being the strengthening of the subgrade to withstand an axle weight of 18,000 pounds. The material to strengthen the subgrade of a good highway is not very plentiful in Newfoundland and is rather expensive, but this strengthening of the subgrade is a very important part of road construction in a province which has a wide range of moisture and temperature. Furthermore, in the third stage, the paving, we do not have large quantities of the proper aggregate for that sort of work, and many of the materials for paving have to be imported into the province and stored there.
I point out that the project is becoming a very expensive one for my province, not only in the sense that Newfoundland is not an easy province in which to build a highway, but it is expensive also in terms of the amount of road which has to be built by a small population. The total length of the trans-Canada highway is about 4,500 miles. The total length of that highway in Newfoundland is 610 miles, which means that while the population of Newfoundland is only 3.7 per cent of the population of all the provinces which are now under the agreement, yet the proportion of the road which they have to build is 13.3 per cent, roughly three times as much.
We could compare the cost of the trans-Canada highway in Newfoundland with the cost in other provinces, for example in Alberta and in Ontario, where the number of miles per 10,000 of population is 2.8. In Manitoba the number of miles per 10,000 population is 3.7. In Saskatchewan the figure is 4.8 miles, in Nova Scotia 4.8, in British Columbia 5.7, in New Brunswick 7.1, in Prince Edward Island 7.3, while in Newfoundland the number of miles per 10,000 of population is 15.8.
I suggest that this project is becoming a most expensive one for a province with a small population and a low tax potential. I would hope that before too long we may be able to hear some discussion on the trans-Canada highway and receive from the government the information that it will be possible to adopt a new approach to a very important problem in Newfoundland, a problem which may be equally important to all the Atlantic provinces.
(Translation):


Mr. Alfred Belzile (Maiapedia-Malane):: Mr. Speaker, this is the first time I have the signal honour of rising to speak in this house. I am therefore very pleased to be able to take part in the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
At the outset, I would like to ask divine Providence to give me the strength, wisdom and knowledge necessary for the proper discharge of the mandate with which I have been entrusted for the greater glory of God and the general interests of my constituency, my province and my country.
I am pleased to extend cordial greetings to my colleagues on both sides of the house. Before coming to the heart of my subject, I would also like to congratulate you, as is proper, on your re-election to the important post you occupy at this time.
I should also like to thank the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) most sincerely for having recently entrusted two portfolios to Quebec members and to congratulate the two new ministers, the hon. members for Lot-biniere (Mr. O'Hurley) and Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche) who will be in charge of those departments.
I would feel remiss in my duty were I to ignore the honour which the Prime Minister has conferred on all women by appointing a lady minister to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.
Mr. Speaker, on March 31 last, the electors of the constituency of Matapedia-Matane returned me by a considerable majority as their member here. I would like to avail myself of this opportunity to thank them from the bottom of my heart for this high mark of confidence and to assure them of my entire and constant co-operation.
My constituency had been represented since 1935-that is for 23 years-by a Liberal member and, during the last five years of my predecessor's mandate, not once was the voice of Matapedia-Matane heard in this chamber. For five years the name of Matapedia-Matane was not even mentioned in this house. That explains why the constituency of Matapedia-Matane has been neglected by the central government.
Before proceeding any further, Mr. Speaker, I should like, if I may, to describe briefly for the information of hon. members, the geographic situation, the people and the economic conditions of my constituency.
Geographically, the constituency of Matapedia-Matane is at the very gate of the Gaspe peninsula. It comprises the provincial constituency of Matapedia and 18 parishes of the constituency of Matane, including a total of 40 relatively young communities, several

The Address-Mr. Belzile of them not even 50 years old. The climate is fairly rugged, quite cold in winter, ordinarily warm in summer but, unfortunately, the vegetation period is too short. The population of the constituency, numbering approximately 60,000 people, is practically all French speaking. However, we live in close harmony with the few English speaking Canadian families and the few families of Scottish origin.
The people live on agriculture, the lumber industry, the tourist trade and fishing. Gaspe peninsula and the Matapedia valley are a tourist wonderland and the people are affable and hospitable. I take this opportunity of extending to my colleagues, to their relatives and friends, an invitation to visit the Gaspe peninsula and, particularly the constituency of Matapedia-Matane this summer.
And now I take great pleasure in congratulating the government, and in particular the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness), for the passing of Bill No. 237, the Agricultural Stabilization Act adopted last January 25.	'
There are two features of this act whose good effects I am very glad to point out, as they concern particularly the farmers and settlers of my constituency. I refer to the support price on butter and the recognition of pulpwood as an agricultural product.
With regard to this last item, I would ask the government to exercise, as soon as possible, the rights conferred to it under section 11 of Bill No. 237. In fact, it is important that the government decide at once the number of cords of wood of a farmer or settler to which the support price would apply, so that the farm prices stabilization board may establish it and see that this legislation is applied as soon as possible.
I should like now to refer to the speech from the throne. I am pleased to note that, in the paragraph concerning unemployment insurance, it is proposed to bring interesting amendments to the legislation. I shall abstain from reading the whole paragraph and, with your permission, I shall read only the last sentence:
Further amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act will be proposed at a later stage in the session.
I was pleased to find this mentioned in the speech from the throne. I would like, therefore, to offer a few suggestions. That legislation has already been amended so as to include fishermen. On the basis of this amendment, I would suggest that all farmers and settlers operating a farm of a cultivated area of less than 50 acres be eligible for unemployment insurance benefits for a period to be determined.

Mr. Speaker, I do not pretend to encyclopaedic knowledge but, as a farmer's son and as a practical farmer myself for close to thirty years, I feel that I have gained some experience as well as some theoretical and especially some practical knowledge in this field. If I urge the government to extend this protection to settlers and young farmers, it is because I realize that people who have enough enterprise, patriotism, courage and determination to settle in a young community on a new land deserve the consideration and encouragement of their leaders.
We are in a period of transition, Mr. Speaker.
There was a time when a settler or young farmer could be sure to find work in the lumber camps in winter, and could then spend the summer, the active farming season, improving his land. But times have changed. This is an age of mechanization and, with the advent of the large caterpillar tractors and trucks, logging companies operate mostly in the summertime, and the young farmer who used to count on the money earned in the bush camps during the winter to improve his farm and equipment, is now forced to earn that money in summer-time and also to rely on unemployment insurance benefits to get over the meager winter and to look after his family.
Under the same heading, Mr. Speaker, there is another aspect of that legislation which is harmful to the farmers of all countries. At the present time, farm workers are uneligible for insurance, whether they work at the construction or repair of farm buildings, or cut wood on farm wood lots. This is unfair not only to the farmer, but to the worker as well who, by taking on a seasonal job on the farm, is deprived of unemployment insurance benefits during the off-season.
Many of my electors wrote me about this, and I would like to be permitted to quote from one of the letters I have received. Recently a farmer in my riding wrote to an unemployment insurance office in the district, asking if insurance was available to a farm hand in his employ. On May 8 last, the office concerned, that is the one in Rimouski, wrote to him as follows:
Sir,
Re your letter of May 5, 1958.
People hired by a farmer on work connected with agriculture such as seeding, harvesting, wood cutting, and so on, are not insurable and no contribution is required.
In that case, Mr. Speaker, an amendment to the Unemployment Insurance Act would be a boon to the farmers who would have no trouble finding farm labour if these

The Address-Mr. Belzile
people, knowing that their job is insurable, could count on receiving the benefits during the off-season.
Another federal government agency which could be improved is the farm loan board. In my humble opinion, the $10,000 ceiling on loans is too low. How is it that the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation can grant loans of $8,000 to $9,000 on houses that do not cost more than $10,000 or $11,000? Farm houses of equal or even greater value, are not rare and, moreover, the farm includes other buildings and some 75 to 100 acres of cultivated land.
Some would even say that there is an anomaly between the loans granted by the two agencies and the value of a property guaranteeing the loan. I therefore suggest to the government that the maximum loan granted to a farmer be raised from $10,000 to $15,000, provided the farmer offers adequate collateral.
I also take pleasure in congratulating the government for the legislation enacted during the 23rd parliament to improve our system of social security in Canada. And, since it seems obvious that it is the central government's responsibility to help the young generation in the field of education, in my humble opinion we already have on our statute books legislation specially suited to that purpose, and I refer to the Family Allowances Act.
In the first place, they should be raised proportionately to the present cost of living as compared with the cost of living at the time they were first introduced. Secondly, they should be paid until children who are still attending school reach their 18th year.
Before concluding these remarks, may I be allowed to point out to hon. members that the area commonly called the Matapedia and Gaspe valley is part of Canada, that the people of this vast and recent section of the country pay taxes to the federal government and contribute to the building up of our homeland, and therefore are entitled to consideration on the part of the federal government.
It is an area that was very much neglected by the former administration which now, fortunately, is sitting on the other side of the house.
In the field of public works, I strongly support the proposal of my colleague, the hon. member for Gaspe (Mr. English), who wants to provide for the extension of the Mont Joli-Matane railroad to Ste. Anne des Monts.
The harbour of the town of Matane is a wonderful site for a winter port. If that harbour were developed, and a ferry service put in to ensure regular communication between Matane on the south shore and Baie
Comeau or Seven Islands on the north shore, it would be of great economic assistance to the area and would make it much easier for farmers on the south shore to market their produce in the large manufacturing towns on the north shore. In addition, it would provide local employment to large numbers of workers in and around Matane.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier in my remarks, the growing season is rather short in the Matapedia valley and Gaspe. Specialized farming, such as fruit farming, truck farming et cetera, is out of the question. On the whole, it is an area of general or mixed farming. Our basic farm products are butter and related products. Our farmers' cash income is derived from dairy products, mainly butter, cattle, butcher hogs and poultry.
Most communities being far removed from large cities, we have to ship our products to the larger markets.
I wonder whether there is not here a case of utter economic nonsense. While farmers in the Matapedia valley and in Matane riding are only 30 miles away, across the St. Lawrence, from large north shore centres like Forestviile, Labrieville, Baie Comeau, Haute-rive, Seven Islands and Shefferville, where not a single vegetable can be grown, people in those large centres have to order their food products from the large markets of Quebec and Montreal. This illogical situation exists because the producer has to pay too high a price for the transport of his produce to the large markets in Quebec and Montreal, over and above costs of handling, and then has to ship it back down the St. Lawrence, or by air for consumption on our doorstep, that is, 30 miles away from home on the north shore. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I favour this project to organize, for the benefit of people on the south shore, some service to promote the sale of our home products on markets that are practically on our threshold and which are logically ours.
I also would like to draw the attention of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) on an essential service which affects the people in my riding. I refer to telephone service. During the winter months, our local climate is severe. A number of farmers and settlers live several miles away from their common business centre and, moreover, several parishes have no resident physician. In case of urgent illness and hospitalization, a telephone service would greatly help alleviate suffering and even save some lives.
There has been legislation adopted for the protection of animals but I repeat that in certain circumstances, in some of our parish concessions, many human lives are not adequately protected.
412	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Grafftey
I feel sure that during this session and subsequent ones, I will have an opportunity to return in more detail to the ideas which I have just put forward.
Before resuming my seat, Mr. Speaker, I wish to make an urgent appeal to all my colleagues from the province of Quebec, even to those who sit in the opposition. I would like them to join with the other members of the Canadian provinces in a common effort, and following the example of the Prime Minister, in whose person are exemplified good understanding, harmony and unity, to bring to the service of our country a spirit of co-operation.
Mr. Speaker, once again, I say that the time of racial and religious prejudices has gone. I would ask every hon. member of this house, whatever his race or his religion to unite in a common effort and, in a fine gesture of national unity, to work for the full development of this country of ours, Canada.


Mr. Heward Grafftey (Brome-Missisquoi):: Mr. Speaker, I take advantage of this opportunity to congratulate you upon your reelection to the position of Speaker of the house. It is indeed reassuring to know that under your distinguished direction, the rules of the house will always be most scrupulously observed. I also congratulate the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) on having been chosen Deputy Speaker of the house. My congratulations extend also to all hon. members, whether they be on the government side or in the opposition, for their election to this house.
Moreover, I extend heartfelt congratulations to the mover and to the seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
(Text):
Perhaps one of the first things that strikes a new and young member in this house, Mr. Speaker, is the great feeling of good will and friendliness which transcends all political parties. No doubt the Leader of the Opposition feels that the demands of bipartisanship do not require so many of us taking our seats alongside his party but, at any rate, perhaps this is a good thing, too.
We may derive much pleasure from the knowledge and the fact that we have a great Canadian statesman leading our country and our government. I speak in all sincerity when I say that the character of the Leader of the Opposition can be underlined with just such a spirit of statesmanship. Under their leadership, under their influence and ofttimes, Mr. Speaker, under the dictates of bi-partisanship we can be sure that our country will go forward in a spirit of unity.


Maiden speeches undoubtedly are supposed to be filled with a great degree of humility, Mr. Speaker. Well, I can readily assure you that if nervousness is at all akin to humility the demands of this latter characteristic will be fulfilled in a most exemplary fashion. At any rate, no matter what my speech is, it is the first one pronounced on behalf of my district for many years. I am told that backbenchers in the former Liberal administration were not encouraged too much by Mr. Howe to get to their feet and make speeches.


Hazen Robert Argue: You are new around here; you will have the same treatment, only more so.


William Heward Grafftey: This is fun while it lasts. (Translation):
Most hon. members have a feeling that their own electoral district is, as it were, a miniature Canada. The constituency of Brome-Missisquoi is no exception. It includes Canadians whose ancestors were of French, English, Polish, Japanese, Italian and other origins. They work in plants or on the farm. Others operate businesses, large or small. However, Mr. Speaker, the most important point is that there are, in my riding, citizens of the two great races that contribute to a truly Canadian culture and which, moreover, give our great and young country, Canada, its strength and glory.
Since I have been in politics, I have always done my best to preserve the spirit of patriotism which inspired Cartier and Macdonald. This I have always done with determination and sincerity.
(Text):
Canada, Mr. Speaker, was built on the spirit of Cartier and Macdonald. Today this spirit recognizes that not only Canadians whose traditions go back to England and France form our great country, but that Canadians whose heritages go back to many lands all over the world form the glory and force of Canada. The people of Brome-Missisquoi recognize this, and I speak in this chamber with great emotion and sincerity when I say that, practically for the first time in the history of Canada, a young man has been elected to this house, with English as his mother tongue, by an electorate largely made up of French speaking Canadians.
On March 31 last confederation became a realization. Real national unity is now a fact, and I can inform all members of the opposi-

tion that the divide and rule game is over both in Brome-Missisquoi and in the province of Quebec. The people of my area and my province will no longer tolerate sectional appeals. In past years far too many men in public life have come into the province of Quebec with one program for Canada and yet another for our province; but under the leadership of the Prime Minister the Progressive Conservative party presented one united program for all Canadians from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
I was most interested in the remarks made by one of the members from Alberta and one of the members from Ontario. The same spirit of pan-Canadianism which brought our party into force and into being in the province of Ontario had exactly the same effect in my province. Our party came into Quebec with dignity and force.
I should like to thank the people of Brome-Missisquoi for the support they gave me on March 31 last. In backing the present government my people rejoiced in the fact that taxes were lowered while at last the rights of the old people have been fully recognized. They rejoice in the fact that the eastern farmers will finally have a voice on the federal level. I believe most hon. members recognize that during past years the revenue of the eastern farmer has gone down while his expenses have gone up.
The textile industry has noted with much pleasure that immediate action is pending in order to halt unfair dumping practices. The government proposal to create an agency for small business is more than welcomed by the small businessman in the district, the businessman who has suffered under past credit restrictions. Federal action with regard to a national hospital and health plan will benefit my people more than I can say. In my tours about Brome-Missisquoi I noted a feeling amongst the people that they are being saddled with hospital bills that just could not be met. My people feel, Mr. Speaker, that legislation of this kind to enable citizens to pay hospital bills cannot come any to soon.
Government action with regard to housing is helping more Canadians buy their own homes. I submit that any legislation which recognizes the integrity of the family unit, as this does, is more than welcome in my area just as it is welcome in many areas throughout the country. I sincerely hope that under
The Address-Mr. Grafftey this new legislation that we recently passed, money for building new homes will find its way into rural areas. During past years my constituents have had some difficulty in securing loans from Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I feel certain that in the very near future these loans will be readily available.
Labour welcomes recent unemployment insurance legislation, and at the same time appreciates the fact the workingman is being given increased representation on government boards. I believe that my area is not unlike many similar areas in its attitude toward government departments such as the departments of public works and defence production. My electors feel that whenever it is administratively possible and practicable, decentralized buying and contract-letting policies should be carried out. So long as the citizen's tax dollar is being most economically handled, we should stress a program of local work for local people. In other words, fairly justifiable objections are heard when large city firms enter rural ridings to undertake contracts or to carry out works which rural people feel they could do at a cheaper rate themselves.
Personally I welcome the announced intention of the justice department concerning the old ticket of leave regulations. Penal reforms' are so necesary in Canada, and I believe that any dollar spent on increased psychiatric, probation or parole services by the Department of Justice is worth a thousand dollars spent on any high-wall prison. I welcome also the reference to that department's effort to define the word "obscenity". I look forward, as I am sure many hon. members look forward, to the day when the young people of our country can be protected from the yellow scandal sheets which are being passed about from coast to coast.
I sincerely hope my hon. friends of the C.C.F. note that all the above-mentioned legislation recognizes the welfare of all Canadians. It is legislation which recognizes that we are individuals with diverse aspirations. We lay no claim to a monopoly on concern for our fellowmen; yet, unlike contemporary socialist doctrine, our legislative ambitions do not intend to dragoon Canadians in the name of uniformity.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: By keeping them unemployed.
414	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Grafftey


William Heward Grafftey: Quite a few facetious remarks have been made about a vision. I can say this, Mr. Speaker; that my generation, the people of Brome-Missisquoi, as well as quite a few people in Canada, saw this vision. Under the dynamic leadership of the Prime Minister and our party, the people saw a vision which declared, and still declares, that the 20th century truly belongs to Canada. The Progressive Conservative party saw a vision which, coupled with principles would progress with the times and conserve the rights of the people, the rights of the provinces and, Mr. Speaker, the rights of parliament.
It is rather fortunate for me, Mr. Speaker, that no Social Credit candidates have been elected to this house. I hope I will not be accused of picking on them when they are not here, but I must say that I have never really understood their philosophy. Perhaps that is a criticism of myself.


Mr. Woolliams:: Nobody in Alberta has, either.


William Heward Grafftey: Since I have never really understood their philosophy, debate becomes difficult if not impossible. Let me be fair. Lack of numbers in this chamber does not constitute a valid criterion. I well remember being somewhat confused before last June 10 when quite a number of Liberal members, wildly pursuing a middle of the road course, became all things to all men. Their philosophy of infinite and undefined latitudinarianism- with apologies to Hansard-apparently confused many Canadians. This middle of the road philosophy pursued to its logical end rendered inoperative, by its mere objectivity, leadership and the power of decision. The boys in the ivory tower forgot the people. I can assure this house that under the leadership of the Prime Minister this government will never lose touch with the people and their needs. This is as it should be, for the voice of the people is our strength.
In closing may I simply state that in my opinion the election results of March 31 symbolize the awakening of a new Cana-dianism. Progressive Conservative leadership crystallized this sentiment. It has always been my belief that our greatest contribution to international order should be based on an understanding and policy of enlightened nationalism which, in turn, accentuates the true meaning of international interdependence. Such interdependence underlies the


basic facts of modern international existence. The very statesmanship that our party, and all other parties, has exerted in solidifying the bonds of our own confederation offers us a glorious chance to push forward our influence in the world of 1958.
Canada's qualitative, if not quantitative contribution will always have the wholehearted bipartisan backing of this chamber. Thus, while a new Canadianism will speak in a frank and friendly way to the United States and to the United Kingdom, the quality of our contribution to world order lies in our ability to interpret the old world to the new and the new to the old, while explaining our own stand in clear and unmistakable terms. I say in all humility, let it be Canada-I think it can and will be Canada-who will show mankind- how to live in a world with the hydrogen bomb.
Mr. Speaker and hon. members, I thank you most sincerely for the attention you have given to the initial efforts of a new boy in this house. I look forward to working with you all for Canada in the years ahead.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, first I should like to add my congratulations to those of others who have spoken upon your reappointment. I should like to extend congratulations also to the Deputy Speaker. Personally I am very happy with the choice of Speaker. The job he did in the last parliament when there was a minority government was a credit to him and I think was largely responsible for the kind words that have been said about him and the support he received for his renomination. Because of the imbalance of membership in the House of Commons now I think he is going to have a continuing problem. Not only is he going to have to be the referee but also the spokesman for and supporter of the minority groups in the house, a position I am sure he is quite capable of filling.
With the present imbalance of membership in the House of Commons I think now would be an exceptionally good time for us to take a look at the need to have a permanent Speaker. I know there are many problems involved, but other countries have surmounted them and they are not problems that cannot be surmounted. One qualification the present Speaker has that would be an advantage if the office were made permanent is his ability, I am told, to speak flawless French. I think

it is most necessary that we keep politics out of the choosing of a permanent Speaker. The office is that of a referee who cannot take sides; therefore I think we would have to consider several methods of electing the man we would choose as permanent Speaker of the House of Commons.
I suggest that there are several ways this could be done. Some of them have been discussed before, but as government members have advocated this move on a number of occasions in the past I think they are now in a position to carry it out. I would suggest that one method would be to set up an independent constituency consisting of the members of parliament who constitute the House of Commons. They could then elect the Speaker immediately preceding dissolution, when they would actually be endorsing the Speaker they had had. This would eliminate some of the faults that would be inherent if they chose him immediately after an election. Again, we could follow the system used in Great Britain, where by agreement among the political parties the Speaker is given an acclamation in a particular riding. However, in Canada we have a multi-party system, and on many occasions we have seen independent candidates nominated. I do not believe we could assure the Speaker that he would always be unopposed and therefore receive an acclamation.
I think there is a great deal to be said in favour of making a permanent appointment, but the idea also has some faults. With a permanent appointment we might find the same faults that I think many of us felt were a problem with regard to the gentleman we were told this morning we were not supposed to refer to. I refer to the fact that his appointment was not strictly in accordance with the procedure that had been followed in the past. I think if it were done on that basis problems might develop because of those who had appointed the particular gentleman. I believe the house should consider and discuss the question of the appointment of a permanent Speaker for the House of Commons.
In the present parliament there are probably more young people than the House of Commons has seen for years. In my opinion this is a very good thing for Canada. It shows that young people are taking an interest in politics, and having listened to their speeches we are quite well aware that most of them are very capable. I think it is time,
The Address-Mr. Peters certainly after the debate on the speech from the throne is over, to start enforcing the rule against the reading of speeches, because by that time most of the new members will have made their maiden speeches. Certainly those I have heard speak so far are quite capable of making their own speeches without reading them. I believe they should do so; say what they want to say, represent the people who sent them here, and not read speeches that sound really nice but have been put down on paper by someone else with no interest in the particular riding and the ideas the new member may have. I do not think parliament was meant to be a place for the reading of speeches, and I believe the rule should be enforced so that members will speak of what they know concerning conditions in their own ridings, and do so to the best of their ability.
There is another development which may be a good one. I have noticed in the newspapers that no parliamentary assistants have been reappointed this year. Inasmuch as we have been able to get along without them for a few months I think it may be quite possible that we can do without them entirely. I say this because the government has so many followers that if it rewards all those who are justly deserving we will have so many parliamentary assistants and secretaries to parliamentary assistants that the administration wjll be top heavy. Inasmuch as the government has not appointed any so far and we have got along fine, I believe it might be advisable not to bother appointing any parliamentary assistants for this session and see how things go. I realize that there must be some training in order to rise to the ministerial level, but possibly that could be spread around among two or three people for each department.
I have been amused this session by the introduction into the debate a great number of times of the name of Maurice Duplessis. I come from Ontario, and I am neither for nor against this. I have certain ideas I have mentioned a number of . times in connection with particular matters in which I am interested but what amuses me is the fact that I believe it is generally assumed that Maurice Duplessis supports those people who have been elected from Quebec. For a long time we heard the Conservatives crying about the fact that this machine in Quebec was working for the election of the Liberals, and now we hear the Liberals crying just as hard that the machine is working for the election of the Conservatives. If this gentleman wants to get into politic; federally I suggest he should campaign

The Address-Mr. Peters federally and bring his machine with him, because it may produce some very unusual results.


John Whitney Pickersgill: We have the advance guard.


William Arnold Peters: I am not particularly impressed by one group saying, now that the tide has turned, that Maurice Duplessis is a terrible man and that the results he will produce will be bad, when I have heard the same thing from the other side. Coming from Ontario perhaps I might say that his influence cannot be very good no matter which side it is on.
As a member from northern Ontario I have been most interested in the extensive remarks made by a number of speakers with regard to the vision of the Prime Minister. In northern Ontario we have often seen visions but they are not mirages. These are known as the aurora borealis, more commonly known as the northern lights. In my part of the country they pass so close that many times you can hear them, and we are very impressed by them. Canadian scientists are interested in developing some of the potential of the northern lights.
For years the people of northern Ontario have been interested in the development of that region, and we are now passing into a new phase where if we do not do something the development that started 50 or 60 years ago is going to come to naught. About 60 or 65 years ago the pioneers came to northern Ontario and opened up the northland. My father was one of those pioneers who at that time and as a very young boy came into northern Ontario. These people came in and bought the land where only a few years before the first white men had arrived in a country which had some of the most beautiful white pine in Canada. They arrived in this area, cut trees, cleared the land, created the farms, until now in Timiskaming we have one of the nicest farming areas in Ontario. They developed the farms and produced an exceptional quantity and quality of produce and now we find out of 1,600 such farms containing taxable farm land, only 400 of them support families engaged in agriculture. Yes, they did their share; they undertook the development of northern Ontario and they pioneered, but what have the governments done to assist them in the meantime?
A number of years ago the government of Ontario had one of these big development visions that we hear so much about. They put in a railway for the development of northern Ontario, and they called it Ontario's development road. This railway stretches from North Bay right through to James bay, Moose Factory being the northern terminal. It was put through not necessarily to make a profit but to help the people of northern

Ontario by providing an opportunity for bringing in supplies and taking out produce. As the years went by this railway, which unlike many railways has supplied a service to the people has become more interested in showing a nice profit at the end of the year.
I am afraid that when the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen)-for whom I have a great deal of sympathy, and I think anyone would have sympathy with a person who had three elections in the space of eight or nine months-finds that all this development is not going to happen simply because of a vision, and that the development of the Yukon will not take place immediately, he will be very disillusioned. We were told all that in northern Ontario, and I am afraid he will find the same situation that we found.
There was another road through northern Ontario which was going to be a development road; I refer to the Canadian National railway line put through from Quebec to the west, passing through the town of Cochrane. This line is owned by the Canadian people; they paid for it, and they were supposed to have bought this railway from a lot of bankrupt companies a long time ago. I am no economist; I do not pretend to be one, nor do I want to be one, but I read in the paper yesterday that the C.N.R. has a deficit of $29,600,000. The article goes on to say that it is true they made a profit of $7J million, but the debt interest amounted to something like $37 million.
Are the people of Canada not sufficiently adult to know or to realize that if we have bought this railroad we want to own it. For goodness sake let us pay for it and get rid of this debt. I see no reason why we should be told this railway is losing money when we did not bother to make payment for that railway so that it now shows a charge to the railway of a debt interest of $37 million.


Mr. Palleli:: You had better read a book on economics.


William Arnold Peters: I think it is time we did something about paying for this railroad-we thought we had bought it-and we should not turn for our tax structure to the C.P.R. but rather to the railroad we own ourselves and should know therefore how it is being operated. We should discuss tariffs and other matters which are connected with railways and the development of our country. I do not think we are going- to be able to do all this as long as we have this large sum of money sitting there on which we are paying interest. I agree that we bought it, and bought it at a fantastic price. Now let us take the money from one pocket and pay off this debt so we can accumulate all our debts in the one

place and we do not have to show a large amount of interest on every balance sheet.
The town of Cochrane is a very important town so far as this railway is concerned. It is the junction of the Canadian National northern branch and the Ontario Northland Railway, and is completely dependent on the C.N.R. It was built for that purpose; it functions as a junction point and as a district office for that railway. Now we find that the people are no longer interested in maintaining Cochrane as a railway town, but for some queer reason-and I suspect perhaps Mr. Duplessis comes back into the issue here- they want to move the railroad divisional point and shops down to Senneterre. Senne-terre has no buildings which are suitable for railway shops, it has no jack or grinder, but that is where they are going to move the shops.
At one o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at 2.30 p.m.
William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, before the adjournment I was mentioning the fact that the shops of the Canadian National Railways in Cochrane were being moved to Senneterre in the province of Quebec. As I pointed out, this town has been completely dependent for its livelihood on the railroad and on railroad operations. Cochrane is a town of about 3,000 people supported by the workers who were told only a few weeks ago that they would have to move. The other day I asked the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) a question about it, and he referred it to the officials of the C.N.R. What has been said by their officials has been said many times by the Canadian National Railways, and it goes something like this: all the problams that we face, whether labour problems or anything else, are tied to automation; we cannot hold up progress; we cannot do what you ask, because automation has made it more economical to do something else.
Well, we are financing the Canadian National Railways and I think we should decide what we are going to do about its operations. When this line was put into northern Ontario it was a development line intended to help open up the north. This development is still necessary, because it has never been completed. It is my opinion that since we are helping to finance this line we should at least maintain those towns which were built up for the purpose of northern development. One of the company's officials wrote to me a day or two ago about this move to Senneterre.
The Address-Mr. Peters
I have visited the shops in Cochrane and have verified for myself several things which were pointed out to me there. It was pointed out that these shops were already partly converted to diesel operations; that they had 18 stalls for engines, and a well-equipped engine shed, the west end of which had already been converted. For five years the shop has serviced all the diesels and equipment operating in that division and the division in Quebec. It is servicing now 20 units a month and with very little additional expenditure these facilities could service 40 engines, more than are required in that area. To complete the modernization of the roundhouse would cost a very small sum of money, but it is estimated it would cost about $1 million to build a new shop in Senneterre. This would represent $1 million more to be added to the loss which Canadian National is now incurring, in addition to these people being asked to move into a town which has no housing, no suitable schools and no facilities in general for their reception. They are being asked to leave a place in which they have lived for many years, the reason given being that a new line has been built north into Chibougamau. I think anyone who has studied the financial papers during the last year will appreciate that if there is no change in the base price for copper that line will not be of much value to anybody. If copper prices fall much further the tracks will be rusting before much time has passed.
That is not true of Cochrane. Cochrane could serve both east and west. In addition, if further railway facilities should be required one of the most modern diesel shops in all Canada, operated by the Ontario Northland railway, is situated in the town, and if the C.N.R. requires additional facilities there is no reason why they should not make use of these.
I am also informed that the railway service given to this area west of Hearst is, to say the least, lousy. The company operates one small car, and part of that car is a baggage car. I suggest that if the officials of Canadian National do not wish to operate this railway as a railway it should sell the line to the O.N.R. which would at least give service even if it did sacrifice development for profit.
I think this question of railroads is of the utmost importance to the people of northern Ontario and I agree with the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) that it is also of the utmost importance to the rest of Canada. But merely to put in these development lines is not enough; we must be prepared to do something for the people who develop the areas into which we put the railroads. Simply to run a track through there is not good

The Address-Mr. Peters enough. These people built up those areas and gave their life's blood to do it, and then they find that support is suddenly taken from under them.
We who come from northern Ontario, and particularly from Timiskaming where we have the largest gold mine in North America, were very interested in the item in the speech from the throne which related to the emergency gold mining assistance program. Hon. members who sit on the Conservative benches today are probably more familiar than any other group of people with the needs and requirements of the gold mining industry. In the past many able spokesmen for the gold mining industry have sat on the Conservative benches of the House of Commons, and I am quite sure that they are giving consideration to this matter at the present time.
I think they would agree with me when I say that the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act is not in itself, nor ever has been, an answer to the problem which faces the gold mine operators and the communities dependent on these operations. What we need is a more realistic price for the product we are marketing. I hold no brief for the mining industry. This industry has in the past abused its workers, refused in many cases to give consideration to the communities which have grown up around it, and behaved in dictatorial fashion in its relations with its labour force-a fact which I have personally experienced in the picket lines on a number of occasions. Nevertheless, it is true that costs in the industry have increased and it is also true that the price of gold has remained stable. For these reasons I make a plea that the government should at least continue to operate the emergency gold mining assistance measure.
Some time ago the gold mining communities across Canada prepared a brief which they presented to the government. I think each hon. member has received a copy of this submission. It was started by the town of Timmins and some of the other municipalities, and intended to make a case, not for the gold mining industry or for the workers engaged in it but rather for the communities and municipalities dependent on that industry, because those communities have reached the position where they can no longer look ahead with confidence but must count themselves lucky if they are able to keep the ground they have already gained. They pointed out in this brief that one of the most important and immediate things to be done if the communities dependent on gold mining are to continue to grow is to eliminate the word "emergency" from this act. It is true that when the prices of everything first began

to rise an emergency developed in the gold mining industry. The subsidy provided under the act could at that time be described legitimately as meeting an emergency. But the situation which the subsidy was designed to meet does not appear to be coming to an end, and we think the least that could be done now would be to take the word "emergency" out of the title so that the communities to which I refer might have something they can look forward to year after year.
We all agree that this act is no solution to the question. We think the Canadian people should press very hard for an increase in the price of gold. This may mean, if we are unable to have any change made in the international monetary system, that the Canadian people themselves should buy gold at a higher price than they are now doing. I could go into all the faults of the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act; I could point out that we find gold mines low grading their mines so that they are making more money out of the subsidy than out of their mining operations, continually hoping that one day the price of gold will rise and they will be able to take advantage of the increased price. I could point out all the problems that are developing in the industry, but I think they are fairly well known to the Canadian people. They know that this industry has been one of the major reasons why northern Ontario developed, and that some consideration must be given to it. In the developments which are planned for the future we are going to find in our northland increased wealth of all kinds.
If we are not willing to do something for the people in northern Ontario why should the people in areas that have not yet been scratched hope that conditions are going to be better for them? Northern Ontario has reached a stage in its existence at which secondary industries must be encouraged to locate there if it is going to continue to develop from the point it has now reached. In order to accomplish this the assistance of the provincial and federal governments will be required. The brief to which I have referred was prepared by William Lougheed Associates, consulting economists of Toronto, in April 1958. At page 93 the following statement appears:
What is required is something more than hard work, optimistic talk, and detailed planning. That something consists essentially of potential markets, for without them productive potential means nothing . . . But if the northland is to rescue the goldmining communities, they will have to survive until northern promise comes to fruition. As in the case of underwriting gold, then, the subsidizing of economic diversification is essentially a play for time.

Diversification can come about only if the governments are willing to encourage secondary industries to locate in northern Ontario. I believe that the economic attaches visiting Canada from other countries must be looking for communities similar to those in northern Ontario. Surely there is a department of government which can get in touch with these communities and supply them with the contacts that are necessary for bringing in secondary industries. If the railroads and the highways are still for the purpose of development then they can be subsidized. Some of the profit from the railways serving that area could be used to establish and attract secondary industries. The municipalities have indicated their willingness to do something to meet the problem and I only suggest that the federal government should fulfil some of its promises by establishing secondary industries in this area which has already witnessed a degree of development before opening new areas.
I have in my hand a compilation of information concerning communities in northern Ontario and I propose to take my home community of New Liskeard as just one example. It is indicated in this booklet that New Liskeard is located in the district of Timiskaming and is serviced by the Ontario Northland railway, Walter Little transport, highway No. 11, and has an airport at Earlton, 20 miles distant. It has a population of approximately 4,600 and it is noted with regard to housing that present construction meets demands. It has a labour force of 3,000 within a 25-mile radius and it is indicated that industrial sites are available with areas zoned for industry. The potential market for consumer goods is also set out in this publication. Similar information is available for many other communities in northern Ontario. I urge the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) to arrange to put these communities which are in need of secondary industry in touch with the appropriate people who could meet that need. The potential consumer market of 500,000 people is not great in relation to that of southern Ontario but this district could support many small plants employing between 40 and 50 men. The district has both the necessary raw materials and the facilities and is eager to put them at the disposal of secondary industries.
One of the problems in the development of the north is the matter of highway transport. A great deal has been said concerning necessary safety measures on the railways.
I investigated some of these statements and rode in a number of train engine cabs and noticed the differences in diesel engines.
57071-3-274
The Address-Mr. Peters The unions concerned have indicated that safety is a problem. The Canadian people were told by the railways that if the engineer died a dead man control would go on under certain circumstances. In the course of investigating an engine in Cochrane I observed that the dead man control in one particular type of engine was in the form of a long bar around the seat of the cab. No matter where the engineer might fall if he were taken ill or if he were to die his body would strike the bar and the dead man control would not go on and the train would continue for some distance. I asked the engineer how far the train would go under those circumstances and he said that unless something else happened to stop it the engine carried enough oil that it could travel from Cochrane to Montreal. It is obvious that a dead man control is not much of a safety factor.
The hon. member for Timmins (Mr. Martin) and I rode in the cab of an engine on the Canadian National Railways main line at North Bay. In the cab in question we discovered you could press the dead man control down and it would remain depressed until you gave it a kick and brought it up again.
I did not conduct an extensive investigation but it brought some interesting facts to light.
If there is a safety question on the railways there is an even greater and more important one with regard to highway transport. The highway in northern Ontario is an alternative route to the west. It is the only trans-Canada highway and it is a matter to which I hope consideration will be given. After we get No. 17 highway through I hope the government will still see fit to call No. 11 a second trans-Canada highway. Some consideration should be given by the Department of Transport to trucks travelling through that area. Some drivers travel for 50 or 60 hours at a time without relief. In a condition of fatigue a driver is a menace regardless of how skilled he is.
Another matter that should be brought into the open is that of the railways owning and competing with themselves in highway transport. You and I are asked to subsidize these companies. I believe it is necessary to have at least two people in the cab of an engine on a train at all times and it is equally essential that there be two people in the cab of a transport truck. They should not be permitted to work without relief for excessive periods of time because you and I are going to meet these trucks on the highway and personally I would just as soon meet a truck driver who is wide awake than one who has one eye closed when he is in charge of his vehicle. These matters should be discussed and regulations brought in to control them. At this time
420	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. McGrath one system of transportation in the north is competing with itself. The same problems are involved in both forms of transport but we have control over one and not the other.
Although my time has nearly expired I wish to mention the trans-Canada pipeline. Doubtless we will be afforded an opportunity of discussing this on another occasion. I believe that many hon. members who participate in the debates of this house in the next few months, if they are honest, are going to press strongly for the bringing of this pipeline under government control. There are inadequate regulations governing the operation of that pipeline. Some of the workmen are being compelled to work on Sunday. We who are active in labour know that labourers have not been required to work on Sunday for many years. In addition to that some are working between 70 and 80 hours each week. Because this situation exists in my area I suspect a similar situation exists in other districts. It is time some consideration were given to the question of public ownership of the trans-Canada pipeline. This should be done because we are going to have another pipeline in a short while if for no other reason.


Mr. J. A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, my first words in this debate are to associate myself with the words of congratulations from the other speakers to you, sir, on your re-appointment to the chair, to the Deputy Speaker and to the other officers of this House of Commons, and to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
In speaking on the motion of the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech from the throne I would like to ask the indulgence of this house to recapitulate briefly the accomplishments of the Progressive Conservative government since June 10, particularly as they apply to my province of Newfoundland and to my constituency.
It has been said, in Newfoundland, particularly during the election campaign and prior to that campaign, that the Progressive Conservative government has done a great deal for Newfoundland to correct some of the inadequacies and the shortcomings that befell my province upon our entry into confederation in 1949. The record is plain for all to see. For example, since June 10, the long-awaited, badly needed St. John's harbour development has become a reality. This multi-million dollar development to the old historic port of St. John's, the most easterly harbour in Canada, will do much for my city toward lowering the cost of freight handling


and thereby contribute greatly to a general reduction in what is now one of the highest cost of living in Canada. This development it is true, will also result in the creation of many jobs for the people in my constituency and it comes as a welcome sign, particularly with the pending reduction of the United States armed forces in eastern Newfoundland.
Secondly, what I consider to be one of the more important achievements of the Progressive Conservative government, as it applies to my province and indeed to Canada, is the realistic approach to the housing problems of this country. It has been said earlier in this debate that nothing contributes so much to the local economy of an area as a general boom in house-building. This government, realizing the relative importance of low-cost housing to Canadians, and realizing the jobs that will be created from housing developments generally, have tackled this problem generously and realistically. The result of that realistic approach to housing will mean that in this coming year in the city of St. John's house-building will be more than double what it was last year.
I am particularly pleased, as I am sure other Newfoundland members in this House of Commons are, to see in the estimates for the coming fiscal year provision for a modern car ferry to operate between the mining town of Bell island in my constituency and the local mainland. This long overdue car ferry was denied the people of Newfoundland for eight long years, until it became practically a political football. It was handed back from the provincial government to the federal government to the provincial government, and nobody wanted to tackle this problem. But now the people of Bell island, who contribute so much to the economy of Newfoundland and indeed to eastern Canada, with one of the largest deposits of iron ore in North America, are to have at long last an adequate car ferry to provide adequate and proper communication between Bell Island and the local mainland.
There is also in the estimates for this year -and no doubt hon. members opposite will also appreciate the relative importance of those expenditures-provision for the erection of new dock facilities and new warehouse facilities for Bell island, which has a population, I might add, of some 12,000 souls, thereby enabling the people of Bell island to have their supplies, their provisions and their goods shipped direct, thereby again reducing a far too high cost of living. This is the realistic way in which the Progressive Conservative government approaches the long unsolved problems of the Atlantic provinces generally. Of course, the increases in old

age pensions and social security benefits generally are by no means unwelcome in Newfoundland because I am sure hon. members will realize that the people of Newfoundland were blinded by the promise of social security benefits and old age pensions until it practically reached the stage where this was the sum total of being a Canadian. But, as I have found out, there is much more to belonging to this great nation than old age security and family allowances.
I also think it is ironic that those increases should come from a Conservative government. We are all familiar with the old cry that was spread east and west and north and south in Newfoundland-and I believe on the mainland of Canada-that if you vote for the Tories you lose your old age pension and your baby bonus.


Lester Bowles Pearson: It may happen yet.


James Aloysius McGrath: Far from losing them, the people of Canada have received increases and the promise of bigger increases.


An hon. Member:: In family allowances?


James Aloysius McGrath: I am sure that members from Newfoundland will also rejoice, particularly the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo (Mr. Carter), in the announcement of the addition of four new coastal boats to supplement the coastal service in Newfoundland.
As you know, this coastal service is practically the only means of communication for a great number of our people living in the isolated areas along our six thousand miles of coastline. I believe the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo should feel particularly proud because a reading of Hansard for past years will show the numerous pleas he made to the government that he supported for additions and replacements to the present coastal service, particularly as it applies to his area of Placentia bay. However, like all the other practical pleas it apparently fell on deaf ears and it took a Conservative government to grant the prayer of the Liberal member for Burin-Burgeo.
Of course, not the least of the benefits which have accrued to the people of the Atlantic provinces is the Atlantic provinces adjustment grants from which the province of Newfoundland will receive an additional $7.5 million for the next four years. It was ironic, sir, that these additional grants paid to the government of Newfoundland enabled our premier, during the recent election campaign, to announce tremendous new roadbuilding projects, long and badly needed hospital projects, rural electrification and a lot of other things. However, they were presented in such a way as to distort the picture entirely. They were presented to the
The Address-Mr. McGrath people as if they were coming from the Liberal government of Newfoundland and not the Canadian government.
This injustice in Newfoundland has been going on since 1949. I should like, sir, if you and hon. members of this house would bear with me, to quote briefly from one of several editorials appearing in St. John's newspapers. This particular editorial is dated The Evening Telegram January 24, 1958, and reads:
The Liberal party administered the government for the first eight years of our affiliation in the confederacy. For four years Newfoundland supplied the administration with seven supporters. For the other four our votes supported them with five. They are now boasting that they will have seven again.
The reference is to the election of March 31.
The Conservative administration is supported by two representatives from Newfoundland. The other five are in opposition. But we are getting far more sympathetic attention now than we got from the Liberals. Not that the government at Ottawa is favouring us because we voted so overwhelmingly for the opposition, but because it has been the declared Conservative policy to devote a greater proportion of the revenue to provincial needs, and especially to the needs of the Atlantic provinces. All this is quite contrary to Liberal policy.
What about the future, sir?


Mr. Carter:: That is the $64 question.


James Aloysius McGrath: I am sure the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo has read the speech from the throne. If he did, he will notice reference is made to the introduction of legislation, which has already been before this house, to amend the National Housing Act by increasing by $350 million the amount to come out of the consolidated revenue fund for housebuilding. I am sure hon. members from Newfoundland realize the importance of this legislation to our province. I am sure hon. members also noticed in the throne speech the announcement of the intention of this government to co-operate with provinces and municipalities in slum clearance projects and urban redevelopment. Hon. members from Newfoundland must realize the relative importance of this to our province.
The announced plan of this government to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act to extend for a further six weeks during the current fiscal year the seasonal benefits will help this government correct the unemployment caused by the policies of the previous administration. The speech from the throne is filled with many benefits to Canadians in all parts of Canada.
This government, which has long been accused of being an arm of big business, has announced a measure to establish an organization to assist small business. What will the opposition say to that? During the past year the people of Newfoundland, which is

The Address-Mr. McGrath the newest province in Canada, have just begun to feel the relative importance of being Canadian. They are just beginning to find out what confederation is all about, thanks to the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) and this government. I should like to offer my congratulations to the hon. member for Grand Falls-White Bay-Labrador (Mr. Granger). I believe he adequately presented to this house the problems of his constituency. I should like also to offer my congratulations to the hon. member for Humber-St. George's (Mr. Batten) on his contribution to this debate.
However, the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill)-what can one say about that speech? I am sure that the hon. member, for Bonavista-Twillingate could confine his instructions in Canadian history to the people of Bonavista-Twillingate because they are just now beginning to learn Canadian history. I am sure hon. members of this house have a thorough background of the history of their country. I should like to say that the speech by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate in no way typifies the speech that should be given by one of the senior representatives of my province. It was a speech filled with nothing, and he took 40 minutes to say it. No reference was made to the speech from the throne.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It was also filled with nothing.


James Aloysius McGrath: Apparently the hon. member has not read it. No reference was made by him to the province which he represents, in the opposition.


Mr. Cardiff:: The hon. member does not live there; he does not know.


James Aloysius McGrath: Perhaps there is more truth in that than meets the eye. Strangely enough, he did have quite a lot to say, if I remember correctly, about the Madison avenue tactics of this party in the last election campaign. I thought it rather strange that my colleague from Newfoundland should dwell at great length on the saturation campaign conducted, I presume, by this party during the last election campaign. I cannot let these words go unchallenged because we in Newfoundland have been subjected for eight or nine long years to the very thing of which this hon. member accuses us. We have heard much in the house, of Huey Longs, political machines and the cult of the personality. There is no man more qualified to speak on this than the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate.
But I would advise the hon. member to devote a little more of his speeches in the future to offering constructive criticism and not just empty words. I would also advise the hon. member to remember that the good

people of Bonavista-Twillingate elected him upon the instructions of the premier of Newfoundland. I would ask him to bear in mind that we have in Newfoundland the most powerful political machine in Canada and possibly even in North America, and the hon. member knows that as long as this machine is intact his seat is secure. But I advise him to prepare for the day when this machine will be annihilated.
Finally, I should like to add that one of the most often heard criticisms of my party in Newfoundland-we hear it in election campaigns, at banquets, at every opportunity the Liberals can get-is to say that the Tories in Newfoundland are nothing but anticonfederates. Why, I heard a minister of the crown from my province a few days ago mention at a banquet that those Conservatives in Newfoundland, those culprits who opposed confederation, are now looking to the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) in Ottawa as the new Messiah and to Ottawa as the new Mecca. I subscribe to that 100 per cent. In answer to that often used and now worn out criticism I would quote from the debates of 1867 when Thomas D'Arcy McGee, that renowned and colourful ancestor of my seatmate, spoke in the debates on confederation. His words went something like this: Confederation has grown from a tiny seedling into a beautiful tree and for my part those people can take credit for it if they will as long as they leave for me but a little of the shelter and the shade.
(Translation):


Mr. J. P. Deschateleis (Maisonneuve-Rose-moni):: Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate you, as well as Mr. Deputy Speaker and my other colleagues who, up to now, have been the object of general praise. I shall not insist any further realizing that, by this time, they must feel they have reached the saturation point of commendation.
Following the election of June 10 last year, the Liberal party of the day handed over its powers to our friends opposite, after having served the Canadian people for 22 years with efficiency and integrity. For a country living under a democratic system, I think it is a unique occurrence that a political party should, for all this time, have gone as brilliantly through the war and post-war periods while keeping for all these 22 years, the unfailing trust of the Canadian people. From 1935 to 1957, a whole generation of Canadians has grown up, developed harmoniously and prospered under a Liberal administration.
During the same period, the Liberal government brought about a far-reaching reform in all sections of Canadian economy. For

22 years, the Canadian worker has found employment easily, and before June 10 last, a great many workers in this country had forgotten what unemployment was.
As of 1945, family allowances were introduced under a Liberal administration, in order that parents might give a better life and a better education to their children. Moreover, successive legislation in the social field was introduced by a Liberal government, so that the Canadian people, in all circumstances of life, might enjoy a standard of living higher than in any other country.
In 1956, we laid the foundation of the hospital-insurance act, which a few months hence, will become a reality in some of the provinces. I take this opportunity to commend, as he justly deserves, the hon. member for Essex-East (Mr. Martin) who has been the tireless promoter of that legislation.
It is therefore with a very legitimate pride, Mr. Speaker, that a Liberal can look at the past, and I add that he can also look to the future with great confidence. If, after 22 years, a majority of the Canadian people saw fit to give the other great national party an opportunity to assert itself, my hon. friends opposite must not forget that this involves great responsibilities for them since, right now or in one, two, three or four years, the Canadian people will be in a position to make a comparison which might not be favourable to our Conservative friends, a comparison of the record of the Liberal party with the as yet unfulfilled promises of the Conservative party.
No, Mr. Speaker, June 10, 1957 and March 31, 1958, do not mean the end of an era; they mark a phase, a pause, a stop on the road followed by the Liberal party since 1896. Since that time, to serve the Canadian people, we have given that party four leaders, two of them English-speaking and two French-speaking. Never has a political party given, as the Liberal party has done by this alternation, greater evidence of its desire to achieve, in this Canadian land, sound national unity.
Mr. Speaker, since the election of March 31 last, many Canadian newspapers have underlined, and rightly so, something which perhaps was not sufficiently publicized. I do not believe that the Conservative government showed to the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition after his election at the head of the Liberal party, the same courtesy which the Liberal party showed to the Conservative leader by giving him six months to get acquainted with his new functions. Just two
The Address-Mr. Deschatelets weeks after the leader of the Liberal party had been chosen, a national election was called. His merit is all the greater because of the frantic struggle he fought throughout the country, under the extremely difficult conditions which had been imposed upon him. Under his aegis, with his contagious enthusiasm, with the moral support of two million and a half voters who put their confidence in us, we resume our march forward, trusting and convinced that only the Liberal party's doctrine can restore in this country the atmosphere of confidence which is vital to Canadian prosperity.
(Text):
Mr. Speaker, as many of my English-speaking colleagues have expressed themselves in French in the course of their remarks I feel that I should do my share and I would now like to make a few remarks in English. Since I represent a riding made up mostly of working people my remarks and my suggestions are especially addressed to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) and I hope he will find them workable.
Let us not kid ourselves. We are living in hard times and we will continue to live in Conservative hardship under a Tory government. Let us face the facts. We have in this country today more unemployment than we have ever had since the last depression, and I do not think it is either proper or just that we as members of parliament should be presented from time to time with such incomplete records and figures on the unemployment situation by the Minister of Labour. How is it that in many other fields of administration it is possible to supply members of this house with precise figures and yet when we tackle such an important problem as unemployment we have presented to us two different sets of figures? It is my impression that the minister himself does not know what is the real score.
I understand that the Minister of Labour receives monthly figures compiled by the unemployment insurance commission and also by the bureau of statistics. The minister disregards the figures offered to his own department under the pretext that they contain certain percentages with respect to people who apply for jobs when they already have them. So he relies on figures supplied by the bureau of statistics.
It is about time he knew we are not satisfied with the figures given to us and I believe this is the opinion of most members of this house. The Minister of Labour has at his disposal well-trained personnel and I would think that it would be in the interests of

The Address-Mr. Deschatelets labour as well as the interests of the members of this house if his experts could, without delay, work towards finding a possible formula in order that from time to time- either each month or every two months-we could be presented with figures which would give an accurate account of what is going on so far as unemployment is concerned. We would then be in a position to follow very closely the fluctuations of employment and this would no doubt help us to take the proper measures at the proper time.
I know the Minister of Labour is a wise fellow and he could say to me, "Well, why did not your party, when it was in power, take the proper measures in order to establish an appropriate system?" Mr. Speaker, that would be a good question calling for a good answer, but when we were in power we had no chronic unemployment as we have today, and that is the reason why there was no need for such a system.
(Translation):
And now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to relate immediately the matter of unemployment to that of public works.
The speech from the throne mentions the implementation-the early implementation, I trust-of various public works many of which were already forecast in our 1949 estimates. I have studied the estimates, with particular reference to such new undertakings as are provided for, but I am sorry to say I could find very little of any interest to the province of Quebec, and more particularly to the city of Montreal. I will put forward at this point a suggestion I already made in 1956 and 1957. It concerns the building of a bridge in the eastern part of Montreal. In 1956 and 1957 I had forwarded to the then minister of transport a resolution adopted by the Businessmen's Association of East Montreal. I might say that it was to the credit of the then minister of transport that he had given favourable consideration to that request, just as he gave favourable consideration to every other request designed to express a need of the people.


An hon. Member:: And the bridge is not up yet.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: I might say to my hon. friend who has just made that remark that the erection of a bridge in eastern Montreal was to be undertaken as soon as possible, just after the beginning of work on the Nuns' Island bridge.
I would therefore ask the government, in order to stimulate employment and to fill that need, to look into the possibility of
[Mr. Deschatelets.!
undertaking construction of that bridge in the eastern part of Montreal. It would be of benefit not only to Montreal but to adjoining municipalities and would provide employment for a great many people.
Mr. Speaker, when we entered this house on opening day, I admit I was quite impressed by the number of Conservative members from the province of Quebec. This statement is greeted by applause from my hon. friends but I must point out to them that if I was quite impressed by their number I was not necessarily impressed by their quality.


Mr. Tremblay:: You have neither the one nor the other.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: I asked myself several questions and the first one was this: how many of those Conservative members had been delegated to the Conservative convention that chose the present Prime Minister as leader of the Conservative party? I also asked myself why they walked out of the convention hall when their leader was chosen. I dare the hon. members to answer those questions and, they must believe me, I ask them in perfectly good faith and not for the purpose of embarrassing them, because I am convinced that their answer will clear away the disagreeable impression their walkout created on Canadian television.
Mr. Speaker, on seeing those hon. members who for years have light-heartedly paid allegiance to two political leaders whose ideas, mentality and turn of mind were poles apart, I told myself that we have before us indeed extraordinary electoral characters.
Well, Mr. Speaker, in order to discuss several matters on their merits, I do hope that those hon. members will take part in the debate and give us at last the explanations we have been expecting for so many years.
I now come to one of those questions.
Mr. Speaker, ever since I have been sitting in this house, that is since 1953, we have been invited, at each session, to vote a certain amount of money to bring desperately needed assistance to populations who are struggling for their material and moral survival. Now, one thing that has always impressed me very much during those sessions was the fact that nobody ever raised a contradictory voice in this connection; all parties were in favour of voting, year after year, those sums of money for under-developed countries, espe-cialy those of East Asia. Besides, our attitude at that time was supported and encouraged by Canadian religious leaders of all denomina-

tions. But when an election was in the offing-and I refer in particular to the one of June 10 last-my hon. friends opposite always claimed that we had voted sums of money for those under-developed countries in order to arouse public opinion in the province of Quebec.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: And I well remember a slogan which was used against us, perhaps the most pernicious and demagogic ever contrived-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: -which reads as follows: "The Liberals give to foreigners and Duplessis gives to his province."
I have recalled those facts so that the population of this country may be aware of the political atmosphere that prevailed during the last election throughout the province of Quebec. My colleagues of the constituency of Papineau (Mr. Meunier), of St. Mary and of Dollard (Mr. Rouleau) have already touched upon the subject. And now that the Conservative party has considerably increased Canada's assistance to under-developed countries-you may take my word for it that I am not blaming it at all, since I was given the opportunity to see for myself, on the spot, the atrocious plight of those countries- I believe that we are entitled to know the truth and, once and for all, whom we have to deal with. What we should like to know of our Conservative members from Quebec is whether they pay their "allegiance" to the Prime Minister of Canada or to the premier of the province of Quebec.
There are other questions too, that we will put to them, both during this and subsequent sessions. We should like to know, for instance, what is their position with regard to equalization payments to the provinces, hospital insurance and federal help to the construction of the Trans-Canada highway. Those are all questions which we should like to discuss, at last, together here with our hon. friends the Conservative members from the province of Quebec.
Reference has been made to the election practices resorted to in the last campaign. I do not wish to speak at any length at this time on this matter. However, a few days after March 31, I undertook to introduce in this house-if not at the present session, at least at some future time-an amendment to the Canada Elections Act. I believe that we should not remain indifferent to what has happened. I feel that it is our duty, if we want to see the mechanics of democracy 57071-3-28
The Address-Mr. Deschatelets working as they should in this country, to organize our elections in such a way that the will of the people can be expressed unequivocally. It is therefore my intention- and I have already begun to study the matter -to place before the house amendments to the act designed to require of every voter that he produce an identity card when presenting himself at the polls.
Before concluding, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a word of one of the fundamental points of difference between the two great political parties in this country. I will attempt to demonstrate that, throughout our history, since 1896, the Liberal party is the only one of the two main parties which, in the field of foreign and domestic affairs, has acted constructively to promote the autonomy of this country. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Liberal party is the only party which has promoted a sound autonomy for Canada. I will now proceed to prove what I have just alleged.
To begin with, what are we to understand when we hear about Canadian autonomy? It means to perform acts, take decisions, adopt attitudes with no regard for anything save the enlightened and best interest of this country. In the area of foreign affairs we of the Liberal party have had any number of opportunities to perform acts directly inspired by our consciousness of this country's autonomy. However, in this connection, there was no more significant nor more spectacular instance of this consciousness than the attitude we took during the Suez crisis. Hon. members will remember that in December 1956 we were called into urgent session to define our stand on this important matter. The position of the Liberal party was very clear, unequivocal, and in my estimation we set the most important precedent in favour of Canadian autonomy. Moreover, if we now examine the attitude taken at that time by the Conservative party, that attitude too was very clear, but I shall tell you in what way. The Conservative party-and I remember this as if it had just happened to-day-after a succession of wild speeches moved a vote of nonconfidence. That position adopted by the Conservative party never gave better evidence of its lack of political maturity, for it meant a complete and total negation of the concept of Canadian autonomy. In business-


Mr. Dorion:: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. member permit me a question? Who was the first of our Canadian prime ministers who demanded that Canada be represented as such at international conferences? Would his name not be that of the Right Hon. Sir Robert Borden?

The Address-Mr. J. H. Horner


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, if what my hon. friend said was correct-and it is not- but if it were true, I would say that the Conservative party as it is now does not deserve to follow in the footsteps of the statesman whose name was just mentioned by the hon. member.


Noël Dorion: Will the hon. member allow me a further question? What was the name of the Canadian prime minister who demanded that the Treaty of Versailles be ratified by the Canadian parliament, if not Sir Robert Borden?


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, as regard the autonomy of Canada I am stating facts. If the allegations of my hon. friend were so well founded and in accordance with the facts, he would certainly have mentioned it in the speech he made a few days ago.
I shall carry on my remarks, and if what I say is not true I call upon my hon. friend to correct me. In domestic and trade matters, the Liberal party always promoted and favoured the autonomy of Canada. Today, as in the past, we favour the extension of our trade with all countries of the world. We have no preference and, as soon as we see that a market can be favourable to Canadian business, we are ready to open discussions. In this way we practise, in matters of business, a sound autonomy.
On the other hand, the Conservative party cannot say as much for itself. When the Prime Minister came back from London and clearly expressed his wish and intention to divert 15 per cent of Canadian imports from the United States in favour of the United Kingdom, he was adopting an attitude which is quite the opposite of a sound Canadian autonomy, because he could not then, and never could, prove that it was in the interests of Canada that this diversion be carried out.
Today, Mr. Speaker, the vast majority of Canadians favour Canada's autonomy in line with our constitution and, if the institute of public opinion or the Gallup Poll inquired among the Canadian people, I am sure that our hon. friends opposite would find that on this question of Canada's autonomy the pulse of public opinion beats in unison with the doctrine of the Liberal party.
(Text):


Mr. J. H. Horner (Acadia):: Mr. Speaker, like those who have spoken before me I would like to congratulate you upon your appointment to the post of deputy chairman of committees, and extend my best wishes


and congratulations to the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of this house. I wish also to congratulate the mover and the seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne for their very able presentations.
It gives me a great deal of pleasure and I feel it is a privilege to represent the constituency of Acadia in this house because this constituency has never been represented in parliament on the side of the government and has never before been represented by a Conservative. Bearing this in mind I trust the hon. ministers will not be too greatly perturbed at me for trying to better conditions in Acadia.
Acadia is a large constituency approximately 200 miles square located in the east central part of Alberta. In the northwestern part we have a mixed farming area and in the vicinity of the town of Stettler a large oil development. Throughout the whole constituency there are vast reserves of natural gas. In the southern part there are some very good farming and ranching areas. The constituency is bounded on the south and southwest by the Red Deer river and I might at this time point out that along this river, stretching from Drumheller through the town of Buffalo a distance of 150 miles, we have no bridge. This fact brings great hardship to the people on both sides of the river in the spring and fall when the ferries are not running.
Another unique problem in this constituency is that it is entirely rural. It consists mainly of farming and ranching areas and although the farmers and ranchers may not be the best in Canada they are some of the best people in the country and I am honoured to represent them in this house.
On first hearing the speech from the throne I was surprised and pleased to learn of the work and action intended by this government. Since the opening of parliament I have listened with a great deal of patience to the opposition criticizing the government for no action to aid the economic situation in this country, and with the next breath saying that the speech from the throne is the longest and contains the most legislation that they have ever heard. The speech from the throne outlines a great deal of work that will benefit my constituency. The bill of rights is something that will benefit all Canadians. The extension of the unemployment assistance, which has already come to pass, will be of great aid to the unemployed, since it will give them an additional six weeks to find employment.
The house-building industry has already received additional aid which will benefit the country and create more employment. At

this time I might point out that the authorities of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation should be advised to be more careful when it comes to making loans in what they describe as partially restricted areas, because in some of the smaller towns in Canada a loan for house construction means as much for the welfare of the citizens as it does in the larger cities.
I was pleased to note that, according to the speech from the throne, work will be started on the South Saskatchewan river dam. Probably a great number of members from Saskatchewan will be surprised to learn that this should interest me. This action proves to me that there is still hope for the Red Deer river diversion scheme in Alberta. While it is a fact that the South Saskatchewan river dam will no doubt limit the size of the Red Deer river project, yet it shows me that when we have a government in Alberta that is willing to go ahead and develop this part of Alberta we might receive some consideration from this government.
I was pleased to note in the speech from the throne that there is work to be done in deepening the harbours of Port Arthur and Fort William. This will no doubt lower the cost of grain movement and thereby benefit the farmers of western Canada.
An amendment to the act having to do with cash advances is included in the speech from the throne. That legislation was very much disputed in this house. While the Conservative party was in opposition it advocated cash advances. The Liberals said at that time that it could not be done. After this government came into office last year cash advances were put into effect and now, after learning from the experience gained since the enacting of the measure, we see where we can amend it so it will be even more beneficial to the farmers in the west.
I am vitally interested in the amendment proposed to the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. The constituency of Acadia has always received some assistance under this act, but there have always been some injustices. In the past few years very little wheat has been grown in parts of my constituency and because of this farmers have been declared ineligible. While we have this surplus wheat problem I think the farmers who are not growing wheat should be praised and not punished. The Prairie Farm Assistance Act is a type of insurance against drought, hail and other hazards. We all know, that such hazards as hail and drought do not travel in a straight line or confine themselves to blocks in townships. The act should be amended to make it more suitable for the type of conditions it is to cover.
57071-3-28J
The Address-Mr. J. H. Horner
The Canadian Farm Loan Act is another act that I am particularly interested in because in parts of my constituency, particularly one part called the special area, there has not been one loan advanced under the Canadian Farm Loan Act. The farmers and ranchers of this area are just as stable and just as good a security risk as farmers and ranchers in any other part of Canada. Money lent to farmers should be lent on grazing land as well as on land for cultivation. That is particularly true now that we have a surplus wheat problem.
In the constituency of Acadia there are approximately 25,000 voters. The largest town is the town of Stettler with a population of approximately 3,500. I am pointing this out to show the house that the constituency is made up entirely of small businesses. We in Acadia are glad to see that this government is going to bring down some legislation which will perhaps aid small businesses. A board will be set up to study the problems of small businesses and to act as a liaison between the government and small businesses.
I should like to say a little about the railroad. In my constituency there are quite a few railroad men employed on the several divisional points. I should like to suggest to the house that we make strong representation to Donald Gordon to make some changes in the Canadian National Railways pensions. Under the existing pension plan no time is allowed in the service record for time lost while the men are on call. Under part II of the pension plan men who are receiving and have received compensation are not allowed that time in their service record. I think this is very unjust. Let me mention one case in particular where we had a head-on collision just outside the town of Hanna. The engineer was badly burned by steam. He was laid off and received compensation for eight months but he is not allowed that time in his service record. It was proven that the accident was no fault of his. I think it is an injustice. The whole plan should be revised and the basic pension raised.
I should like to say a few things about taxes. The hon. member for Niagara Falls (Mr. Houck) said on Tuesday, as reported at page 257 of Hansard:
No temporary cut in federal income taxes would put more money in circulation, because most people would not spend it.
I disagree to some extent with this hon. member because if taxes are cut or if money is put into the hands of the western farmers by other means such as the two-prices system for wheat-I do not want to go into that now but I think the farmers are justified in asking for it-it has been my experience as a farmer and rancher in Alberta amongst

The Address-Mr. Tucker western farmers that they will certainly spend the money they have in their pockets.
The hon. member for Restigouche-Mada-waska (Mr. Van Horne) mentioned in his speech the other day the conditions at Brussels and he thought that certain aspects of our life were left out or poorly represented at the Canadian pavilion and that there was no line-up. I would suggest that we pattern the exhibit after the Calgary stampede and have cowboys of the west represented there and perhaps then there would be a line-up at the Canadian pavilion.
I do not want to go into past politics or election campaigning as some hon. members have made a practice of doing, or rehashing the March 31 election. I think the speech from the throne contains the policies and an outline of the works that the people wanted. It was for this reason they so strongly endorsed this government on March 31. I have tried to link up some of the things in the speech from the throne with the constituency of Acadia but I realize, that apart from representing Acadia I must also work for Canada as a whole because as Canada benefits so will Acadia.


Mr. J. R. Tucker (Trinity-Conception):: Mr. Speaker, I, too, should like to add my humble but nevertheless sincere congratulations to those which have been expressed to you on your re-election as Speaker of this house. From what I have seen and learned since coming to the house, you are extremely capable of carrying out your many and varied duties in a manner that would reflect distinction upon you and honour to this house. I sincerely hope that all members on all sides will realize how important your position is and co-operate with you in every possible way. Personally, I have been impressed with your ready smile and your greetings which I have received whenever I met you outside of this house.
I should like also to join with hon. members who have offered congratulations to the Deputy Speaker, and I trust that his duties will be a labour of love. I should like, too, to offer congratulations to the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Rea) upon his appointment as deputy chairman of the committee of the whole. Last, but by no means least and all the more sincerely, I offer congratulations to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. If one can judge by the speeches of these young members, I feel sure that they will prove worthy members of the ridings they now represent. It has often been said that in order to get a good name one must pass from the known to the unknown from which no traveller returns. If

these words are correct, we might consider the hon. members whom I have mentioned to be walking ghosts. We are all, I am sure, glad to know that those to whom I have offered congratulations are very much alive, especially the Speaker, as hon. members will learn if they do not abide by his rulings.
Your position, Mr. Speaker, is a very important one as those of us who sat here on Monday, May 12, for the first time found out. We were informed by the Speaker of the Senate that His Excellency the Governor General did not see fit to declare the causes of his summoning the present parliament of Canada until this house had chosen its Speaker. We had to return to the House of Commons and appoint our Speaker. I say, without fear of contradiction, that our appointment was a very popular one and we hope that the troubles of the Speaker will be but little ones.
I come from the most easterly province of the dominion, England's oldest colony and Canada's newest province. St. John's, where I had the honour of serving as councillor for nine years, was an old city, when Boston, Massachusetts, was nothing but a swamp and New York was inhabited by indians. Giving up our identity as England's oldest colony was, therefore, the greatest decision that Newfoundlanders ever made. The following poem. Mr. Speaker, may help to explain our feelings:
Newfoundland was proud to be England's oldest colony.
Loving her dear mother land, by her side she takes her hand
Devon, Scotch and Irish stock, sturdy as the sea-girt rock
Leave their homes and leave their boats, don their khaki-coloured coats
Newfoundland has fought and bled, far and wide her fame has sped
Newfoundland was proud to be England's oldest colony.
Nine fair sisters in one home, with the north pole on its dome:
Facing both the east and west with a friendly slate abreast.
Smile upon the lonely one, they have done as she has done;
Fought and bled in freedom's cause, won like her the world's applause
Did she join her home to theirs, Yes! her head in pride she rears
Newfoundland was proud to be England's oldest
colony.
But the offer was most sincere and the offer was always there;
Newfoundland has changed her mind, and in time she too may find
Burdens shared are light to bear, triumphs shared are double dear,
She has gladly joined the sheaf bounded by the maple leaf;
Knowing well she still may boast answering in her sister's toast;
But Newfoundland was proud to be England's oldest colony.

At the present time Newfoundland is anxiously awaiting the report of the royal commission on term 29 of our entry into confederation with the nine provinces of Canada. The district I have the honour to represent contains some of the oldest occupied parts of the new world. Its shores were the scene of some of the oldest commercial activity in North America. It was in Cupids in Conception bay that John Guy of Bristol started a colony at the same time the first English settlement on the mainland was started at Jamestown, Virginia. British firms established branches at a very early date in Trinity. Although these original businesses have disappeared, the main industry which attracted commercial adventurers to this remote area continues to flourish in Trinity and Conception bays.
My district is made up of approximately 180 communities with a population of 57,000 inhabitants. There are many settlements in my riding with lovely names. Here are a few which might be of interest to this house: Little Heart's Ease, Heart's Delight, Heart's Desire, Heart's Content, where the S.S. Great Eastern landed the first transatlantic cable. We also have the following places: British Harbour, Ireland's Eye, Whiterock, Flatrock, Caplin Cove, Burnt Point, Lead Cove, Chapel Arm, Bay-de-Verde, Freshwater, Blow-me-Down, Blackhead, Dough Fig Point, Hatchet Cove and Come-by-Chance. The riding begins at Spillar's Cove just a mile south of cape Bonavista, where John Cabot discovered the new world, and takes in Trinity and Conception bays, ending at Georgetown near Brigus, the home of the late Captain Bob Bartlett, the famous arctic explorer.
Some of the most modern fish plants in eastern Canada are within the confines of my riding. There is a large fresh fish plant at Harbour Grace, which is owned by NorthEastern Fisheries Ltd. At Dildo there is a large whaling and fresh fish operation, and here an extension to the wharf is badly needed. At Catalina in the northerly part of my riding is probably the greatest concentration of fresh fish plants in eastern Canada. This is the headquarters of the huge Fishermen's Union Trading Company which has a great supply business and salt fish processing plant at Port Union, which is also the headquarters of the Union Electric Light and Power Company and the home of the newspaper, the Fisherman's Advocate. From the harbour of Catalina is exported approximately one-quarter of all Newfoundland salt codfish.
In the same harbour there is also a large modern fresh fish plant belonging to Fishery Products Limited. This plant, which is one
The Address-Mr. Tucker of the largest frozen fish plants in Newfoundland, has just been completed. Also in Catalina harbour in the northwest arm is a large federal experimental salt fish drier located in the premises of S. W. Mifflin Limited. This plant, the most modern of its kind, is proving that light salted shore fish can be cured artificially and economically. I am pleased to say that during recent years the Liberal government, by means of an enlightened dredging program, improved the harbour of Catalina making it more feasible to carry on business. A coastal wharf is also being built and is situated in the most sheltered part of the harbour. I am also very happy to say that Little Catalina, a large settlement devoted almost wholly to the production of salt fish, will soon have a breakwater which will greatly facilitate the fishermen in their vocation. At Elliston, approximately ten miles north of Catalina, is located another fish plant. There are a number of other places in the riding where public works would prove of great economic benefit and I shall deal with those as time goes on and with the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green).
Clarenville on Trinity bay is a rail centre and a distribution point for supplies. Clarenville became world famous in 1935 as the place where General Balbo, the famous Italian aviator, landed his fleet of 20 ships on his famous trans-Atlantic flight of planes across the Atlantic. The hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier), a former minister of transport, started the first telephone cable across the Atlantic which was landed at Clarenville.
One of the first air strips in Newfoundland was built at Harbour Grace and was used considerably following the Lindbergh flight by fliers attempting to cross the Atlantic. It was from there that Old Glory flew to her doom and Amelia Earhart made her first crossing. This air strip could be used as an auxiliary airport.
At Bay de Verde is a large and important fishing settlement and the breakwater now under construction will be of great value to the fishermen. I am glad that steps are being taken to complete this breakwater so necessary for the fishermen in that area.
While from the point of view of general income of the people the fisheries are not as relatively important today as in the years past, the development of the pulp and paper industry, mines and the United States bases, as well as the acceleration of public works has created an economic value which has in sum total greatly outstripped the production value of the fisheries. On the other hand, no single industry or activity directly affects so many of the people as do the fisheries. In
430	HOUSE OF COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Tucker Newfoundland there are approximately 16,000 fishermen who live in more than 1,000 fishing communities along our 6,000 miles of coastline.
The major fishery activities are the frozen fish industry which depends entirely on the United States market for its distribution and the salt codfish industry which is almost entirely dependent on foreign currency markets; For centuries this was the only industry in Newfoundland and the people established their homes in small settlements along the coast where salting is the only feasible method for the preservation of the fish. Many of these places were built up, became quite important and achieved fair-sized populations because of that industry. Recently there has been a great decline in the value of that branch of trade which is adversely affecting a large number of our fishing population. The difficulties come from (a) the extreme competition of foreign salt fish producing countries which are taking a much larger share of the world's demand and (b) the difficulties of getting foreign exchange and import licenses in some of our principal markets.
In its foreign trade policy Canada should ldok at the urgent need of this industry and the numbers of people serviced by it in Newfoundland and conduct negotiations for exporting facilities to some of these countries as well as for the release of currency. Departments of government too often look at the sum totals of figures, that is, import and export values as between various countries, and not closely enough at the relative importance of certain industries in the support of large numbers of people who suffer badly if those industries are allowed to decline through lack of international trade facilities.
A particular problem now exists in that industry because of the complete closure of the Brazilian market because dollars are not available. The Department of Trade and Commerce should take a very close look at this problem and try to devise means whereby reciprocal trade can reopen that market for Newfoundland.
Third, there was a general trend away from Newfoundland fisheries by the people because of the difficulties of sale and the surpluses that often existed resulting in uneconomic prices. The application of unemployment insurance to fishermen started during the Liberal administration is having the effect of bringing a great many back to the industry, and it is particularly needed now because of the substantial lessening of the number of men in the woods operations of the pulp and paper companies. This makes it all the more necessary for a very active policy to be inaugurated in the marketing of

salt fish; otherwise there may be an unmarketable production which would set up a very great problem, not only for fishermen and the industry but for public administration as well.
Fourth, it is a general thought that the salt fish industry is outdated and does not merit aggressive promotional plans by the government and industry. This is all wrong. The world's consumption of salt fish has been increasing year by year and it is recognized as one of the major internationally traded products in the world. Some of the competing countries have been modernizing their production methods and building up their fishing fleets to the extent of operating floating factories and largely under the impetus of government planning and assistance. Very little of that has been in effect in the Newfoundland industry, notwithstanding the fact that the location for fishing is one of the best in the world.
The Department of Trade and Commerce has offices and permanent officials in most of the countries which consume Newfoundland products and it is very necessary for the economy of our province that these officials adopt a very aggressive policy in dealing with the government departments and the traders of these countries with respect to the handling of Newfoundland salted fish. It is a traditional trade and it is very important to note the slipping away which has been prevalent in past years. It is vital that this trend should be arrested and a strong promotional policy introduced. I am glad to relate, however, that since 1930 our fresh fish industry has greatly developed. In 1938 we exported about 500,000 pounds, while last year we exported more than 52 million pounds of fresh fish.
The federal governments have done much to assist our fishermen but much more assistance is required. When visiting my riding I have heard complaints about the lack of bait depots and docks. I understand the Department of Fisheries have in mind a^new bait program and I should imagine that consideration has already been given to the problem of bait supplies.
I would particularly like to have the erection of a bait depot considered in both South Port and Hants Harbour in Trinity bay. I should also like to see more wharves and breakwaters constructed in settlements where fishing is the main industry, not only in my riding but in all the ridings of Newfoundland and Labrador. Newfoundland fisheries rank among the richest and most important in the world and are undoubtedly one of our economic mainstays. We have in our fish industry a Klondike just as great as that of any gold claim in California or

even in the Yukon. It was Lord Bacon who said that the fisheries of Newfoundland are richer than the mines of Mexico and Peru.
Every year there are caught millions of dollars worth of codfish, herring, salmon, lobsters, squid, caplin, turbot, halibut, white-fish, seals and many other fish. With respect to our chief product, the codfish, we are losing some of our best markets owing to a lack of systematic way of marketing and curing the fish. For some years we have experienced competition in the fish markets of the world; every country is endeavouring to place their best products on the market. Only a few days ago Jamaica raised objection to our marketing and the codfish of Norway and Iceland are becoming of great importance, being subject to standard culls and superior curing and inspection.
There is no question that the codfish of Newfoundland is superior in every way but if our government does not institute a better way of curing and marketing of our fish and more uniform containers for our fish we will soon have to take second place. Our codfish is not up to the required standards set by our customers and no incentive has been offered our fishermen. They have not been encouraged or impressed with the importance of our fish being handled as a food product should be handled.
I regret to relate that we have much unemployment in Newfoundland. We have at the present time about 40,000 persons unemployed and approximately 18,000 drawing unemployment insurance. Less than half the unemployed still have unemployment insurance benefits and more people are unemployed without insurance today than the total number of unemployed a year ago. This condition is causing great hardship. Unemployment is a problem not easy to solve in my province; as indeed it is difficult to solve in any other part of our great dominion. We in the opposition hope a solution will soon be found, since unemployment affects all our constituents, indeed, all Canadians.
I would also like to mention the urgency of docking facilities for schooners and small craft. There are at least three communities where a slipway or dock could be built and used to good advantage by many fishermen and coastal traders in the riding of Trinity-Conception. Firstly at Catalina, which is fast becoming one of the most important fish centres of the island; secondly at Clarenville, which has a small shipyard and where a slipway could be very cheaply and easily constructed and would assist in producing employment and keeping the shipyard employees occupied which in turn would be of great benefit to the owners of fishing vessels and coastal schooners in the area; and thirdly
The Address-Mr. Morton at Harbour Grace, where there was at one time a slipway now out of operation.
In my opinion a slipway or floating dock should be placed at Harbour Grace as soon as possible to assist the fishermen who are returning to that occupation. In many of the above mentioned places there are skilled carpenters and shipbuilders who could provide valuable workmanship.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I bring you greetings from my riding and I would like to very sincerely thank the electors of Trinity-Conception for the honour they have conferred upon me and the confidence they have placed in me by electing me their representative in this House of Commons. I shall try at all times to be worthy of that honour and confidence by working for my riding in particular and my country in general.


Mr. M. D. Morton (Davenport):: Mr. Speaker, I would first of all like to offer my congratulations to you upon your re-election to the post which you held with such great dignity and fairness in the last parliament. I also wish to congratulate the Deputy Speaker (Mr. Sevigny) and the Deputy Chairman (Mr. Rea) upon their election to posts of trust and responsibility and to commend the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) for their contributions to the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
At this time I would also like to pay tribute to the late John R. MacNicol who represented Davenport riding from 1930 until 1949. He served his riding well and many people still recall the many kindnesses and services which he rendered, not only to the people within his riding but throughout Canada.
I was somewhat sorry to hear that the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont (Mr. Deschatelets) was suffering from some hardships under the Conservative administration. I knew there were some hon. members on the other side of the house who would find difficulty in adjusting themselves to the fact that they are not indispensable and also to the realization that someone else can govern, not only as well as they but probably better. However, I can assure the hon. member that he and others need not be too much concerned, because I am sure this party will well look after those who are in the minority.
The riding I represent in the western part of Toronto has, like other ridings in the city of Toronto, become the home of many people of many racial origins who live side by side with our own Canadian people, and the melding of the many cultures which

The Address-Mr. Morton is taking place in this riding, as in other ridings across Canada, will produce the Canadian culture of the future. However, in this melding process we are faced with certain problems of integration of which I will speak at a later time.
Davenport riding, like other ridings, has its local problems. We share with other constituencies anxiety for those who are unemployed and who have difficulty in finding employment at this time. I should like in particular to bring to the attention of this house the difficulty experienced by one group of people who are finding it increasingly hard to readjust themselves and to obtain employment. I refer to those men and women who have entered upon middle age and who through no fault of their own have become displaced from their normal employment and cannot obtain new employment because of the working of what seems to be arbitrary pension schemes whose operations debar them from taking part in new fields of employment. I suggest that this situation is unfair to these people and results in a great waste of manpower in Canada. I realize that the solution to this problem does not fall within the jurisdiction of this house, but I would appeal to those insurance companies who sponsor such pension schemes to devise some form of transferable benefits so that these people may not be debarred from moving from one position to another. I urge, also, that the Canadian government should take the lead in adopting schemes which do not prevent people of middle age finding employment in new jobs.
Speaking of pensions, I should like to remind this house that in my riding many people are looking forward with great anticipation to the results of the present studies with regard to extending old age pension benefits.
In common with other areas, our riding has its housing problems. There are no vacant lots. Many of the people who formerly lived in the area have moved into the suburbs, while new Canadians and younger people have moved in. In an attempt to pay for their homes the newcomers have turned many single dwellings into multiple dwellings, which has caused overcrowding and even, in some instances, poor home conditions. It has also increased the problems which face our schools, and I would urge the government to conduct a more effective study of this question in co-operation with local authorities.
The new east-west subway on Bloor street will, when completed, pass through my riding. I know that representations are being made to the federal government for financial

assistance. This may, perhaps, be termed a local expenditure which does not qualify for federal assistance, but I must point out to the government that it is a manifestation of our national growth and deserves consideration. If direct aid cannot be given, the cost of this and other municipal projects should be borne in mind when increased grants are made to provincial governments.
I should like to turn to another subject about which I am greatly concerned, and to add my voice to those of many hon. members who have already spoken with regard to education. We can no longer escape the fact that education is a matter of national concern. We speak proudly of our great material resources, and we announce great plans for the development of those resources. We allot vast sums of money to open up our northland, we shout about the future of Canada, but we are silent on any bold scheme to develop the human resources which are so necessary in connection with all our great plans for the future.
We are spending billions of dollars annually in order to be prepared to defend our democracy from attack; we spent millions of dollars and thousands of lives in two world wars to protect this democracy, yet on the subject of education, which is a very necessary ingredient of our democracy, we seem to be afraid to risk our political lives and face the national problems of education which have to be solved. Many people avoid the problem on constitutional grounds.
As to the cost of education, I quote from the information bulletin put out by the Canadian Teachers' Federation research division in February, 1958, entitled "Educational Finance in Canada". Table 12 on page 21 estimated, after setting out the contributions of all levels of government toward all education in Canada, that in 1957 the total cost of education was $998.9 million of which the local school boards paid $416.8 million, provincial governments $437.1 million, the federal government $70 million and nongovernment institutions $65 million. The per capita cost of education is estimated to be $60, and the cost per member of the labour staff, $167. On page 28 of the same report the table shows the distribution of the net expenditures of all governments in 1955. Eleven point three per cent of those expenditures were devoted to education as compared with 38.6 per cent to defence and 14.3 per cent to social welfare. The table shows that expenditure on education is only a small proportion of the expenditures of all levels of governments; it is only one-third of the expenditure devoted to defence.

Mr. Speaker, I contend we have not done all we can within the framework of our constitution to meet this problem. In times of emergency the federal government has given assistance to education in the fields of agricultural, technical and vocational training. We have extended aid to our universities; we have provided scholarships on a dominion-provincial contributory basis and through the Canada Council. I agree that both federal and provincial governments must operate under the powers laid down by the terms of the British North America Act, yet I believe there is an over-riding responsibility upon the senior government to assess whether the component parts are meeting the changing needs of our country, otherwise, as a nation we will travel in parallel channels to oblivion. The time has come to re-assess whether the component parts of our government are meeting the needs of education.
While many members of the senior government bodies at the federal and provincial levels who are harassed by other problems appear on the surface to be quite complacent and self-satisfied that our educational problems, especially in respect to financing, are under control, many at the grass roots level are valiantly trying to stir up some action for financial assistance. A local politician was once asked by a frustrated trustee why it was that it was so much easier for a township to obtain money for roads than for education and he was told that when people ride over bumpy roads they get stirred up to protest and demand action. In education there are no bumps to stir them up. Perhaps the launching of the sputniks by Russia is the first real bump we have had in this field. It did at least stir up considerable interest in our shortcomings in the field of education.
But even before this prominent people were sounding warnings. I should like to quote Mr. James S. Duncan, a Canadian industrialist, who on December 10, 1956 presented the following conclusion of the exploratory committee of the industrial foundation on education in these words:
Canada is facing an educational crisis and because education is the foundation upon which our national strength and well-being are built, something must be done about it and done quickly. Fortunately the problem is not an insoluble one-in the simplest of terms-it is one of money, vast quantities of money; of buildings to house a rapidly expanding requirement for more schools, more teachers, colleges, more and larger universities, more technical colleges and particularly more qualified teachers. Of all these, the last is the most important.
I also wish to quote Joseph McCulley, warden of Hart House, University of Toronto, who when speaking at a directors' luncheon
The Address-Mr. Morton at the Canadian National Exhibition in August 1956, and as reported in the Globe and Mail of August 28 of that year, said:
Education should be a matter of national concern. The Ontario department of education has made herculean efforts to face the problem of crowded universities and other worries. But even all the efforts which have already been made are minimal compared with what must be done in the next ten years. If Canadian growth and development is not stopped in midstream we must face the fabulous cost of the education job that must be done. There is no justification for a Canadian educational system which deprives any child of the best possible education because of the accident of birth in one part of this country. The provincial governments and the federal government must face this problem.
To point out the need of financial assistance to students I refer to the findings of the teacher recruitment and service council for Ontario secondary schools as contained at page 6 of their brief presented to the industrial foundation on education in February 1957. As the result of a survey they found a large number of capable and ambitious students were unable to go to university because of lack of finances. Replies received from 236 schools in Ontario indicated there were 3,171 grade XIII pupils planning to attend university in 1957. In addition there were 2,146 grade XIII pupils with the capacity and ambition to attend university in 1957 but who were not planning to do so because of lack of funds. There were an additional 1,150 grade XIII pupils competent to attend university but who were not planning to do so,
The recent Canadian conference on education held in Ottawa in February of this year also discussed and pointed out the great needs of education. In its resolutions it indicated the need for the provision of funds for an adequate student aid program, the need for increased research and passed a resolution to the effect that representation be made to the appropriate authorities to the end that annual federal grants to universities be made on a more realistic and equitable basis to take into account the increasing proportion of student enrolment to the total population and the rising cost per student. They also urged that there be further aid forthcoming from the federal government either directly to the provinces or in some other way in order to assist them to finance the cost of education.
On the basis of the need and the importance of the above representation I strongly urge the government and this house to consider the necessity of exploring some means in co-operation with the provinces as to what further assistance may be given to education under the terms of our constitution without disturbing the local responsibilities for the administration of education and to provide equal

The Address-Mr. Nowlan opportunities for all those who have ability regardless of their financial position or geographical location.
Education in Canada today is like a jigsaw puzzle which needs to be placed together so that we can see a full and comprehensive picture of the problem. I urge the government of Canada to give leadership in bringing together all necessary parts to provide the comprehensive picture and provide Canadians the opportunities of fulfilling our appointment with destiny.
The people from coast to coast have caught the vision of the opportunities of building a greater nation. We cannot now waste time listening to those who brood in retrospect of what might have happened. We must now concentrate on what must happen if we are to fulfil our destiny and develop our God-given talents and resources in this country which provides unbounded opportunities for people who love freedom to work and live together as Canadians, united from coast to coast. I believe our party, under the leadership of the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Diefen-baker), can contribute much in the fulfilment of that destiny.


Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part for the first time in this debate I wish to tender the congratulations which have been uttered by so many hon. members and which continue to be so well deserved to the hon. members who moved and seconded the address in reply to the speech from the throne, to Mr. Speaker, to yourself, as Deputy Speaker, and to those other officers who have been taking part in the proceedings of this house.
Within a few minutes this afternoon we will be having the first division of this session of parliament. In the case of over 100 hon. members it will be the first division in which they have participated and I am sure it will be an event of great significance to them, an occasion they will always remember. I believe it is fitting that they look upon the occasion of the first division in this way,
I know that many people coming into this house, those in the galleries and sometimes hon. members sitting on the floor may sometimes feel that this debate becomes somewhat monotonous. They hear hon. members discussing various and divers matters affecting everything from their own constituencies to events and subjects of international importance and they perhaps conclude that it does not serve any useful purpose. However, I am sure that those who are present this afternoon and those who will be participating in this first division will realize that this is one of the two great hilltops over which we pass 
during a parliamentary session, those hilltops being the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne and the budget debate.
The origin of the throne speech debate, of course, goes back to those historic times when rulers were apt to demand of parliament the things they desired by means of an address or a speech and sometimes over the years with great fear and trembling and at considerable risk the members of parliament finally evolved the mechanism of having an expression of thanks in the form of a speech, also including in that speech any matter they thought was worthy of comment, before the house settled down to deal with the matters which the sovereign had ordered them to take up. That is the historical background of the division which is coming up this afternoon, the first of the divisions which will occur in this debate, and although listening to speeches on the address in reply to the speech from the throne tends to become somewhat boring it is nevertheless a tradition we should revere and treasure because it is out of such traditions that many of our freedoms and particularly our parliamentary system have flown.
This debate will continue for some days. It is more than a matter of courtesy that a minister of the crown should arise on this occasion to answer the criticisms and deal with some of the suggestions which presumably have been made during the course of the debate.
I am frank to say, as you undoubtedly have noticed, that I have not been in this house as much as I would like to have been during the course of this debate because of the meetings of the various boards and committees on which one has to serve from time to time. But I have last night and this morning attempted to scan, rather hastily it is true, and to read over all of the speeches which have been made during this debate, particularly by those hon. members on the other side of the house. I must say that the diet which has been put before us has not been one which has been too robust. It savours a little bit of thin gruel and it has not been one to which one could make any considered reply.
Now, I can have some sympathy, of course, with the opposition. I, too, as well as some of us on this side of the house, have sat over there after going through one, two, three disastrous defeats and I know it is not the easiest thing in the world to come back and take too dogmatic a part in a debate of this nature immediately following an election such as we had on March 31. I do not think we would be too immodest, Mr. MAY 23, 1958
Speaker, if I did say that possibly we, although we were in that position, perhaps spoke with more pointed criticism and perhaps more forcefully than has been done on this occasion. That, of course, was not owing to the fact that we possessed any more ability than hon. gentlemen opposite but was simply owing to the fact that we had much more to criticize than they have had to criticize during this debate so far.
There is another factor, of course, which must add to one's appreciation of the position in which hon. gentlemen find themselves. So much has happened in the political sense that it is almost impossible to realize that it was less than a year ago when hon. gentlemen opposite were still sitting in the ivory towers of their embattlements here in Ottawa. The leaders were sitting here with a host of private troops complacently wondering whether the opposition might increase their strength to 50, 60 or 70, or perhaps might even lose and come back with fewer numbers than they had before. That was the attitude up until June 10 when the atomic bomb burst and on March 31 it was the hydrogen bomb.


Lester Bowles Pearson: It was not a clean bomb.


George Clyde Nowlan: And the fall-out we see over there in that corner.
However, what have we heard during this debate; what has been discussed? As I said, there have been a variety of matters. Some of our friends from Quebec have indulged in the usual witticisms that we have heard before. They even suggested that the members on this side of the house, and not only on this side of the house, Mr. Speaker-I hope we will realize there will be a historic event taking place this afternoon. When the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Pallett) stands up to vote for the first time this afternoon he will be leading the largest group of any party that has ever sat on the left-hand side of the Speaker since 1930.


George Harris Hees: What a rump!


George Clyde Nowlan: We have heard it suggested that some of our friends who are here from Quebec are here because of the influence of the provincial government of Quebec. All I can say, is that if Mr. Duplessis is responsible in any degree at all for the election of the members from the province of Quebec, then he must be very, very proud of the calibre of men that he has sent here because certainly we are, and we appreciate very much to have them from that province.
I am not too bothered or too worried about such statements. I have been in this house for quite a while. I was president of the party for some time during those days when
The Address-Mr. Nowlan we did have disastrous defeats. I remember in 1949 we heard a great deal about the Drew-Duplessis axis. It somehow did not function. In 1953 we heard about the Drew-Duplessis axis. It did not function. Then, in 1957, our friends opposite who were then on this side of the house were discussing some iniquitous deal which was worked out between the leader of the opposition at that time and the premier of Ontario. It was going to represent something which was detrimental to Canada, and that did not function. The truth of the matter, of course, is that our friends opposite when they were in power did believe in the idea of dividing and ruling and did not maintain that degree of national unity which this country deserved. It was on that basis that they attempted to keep themselves in power for a substantially long while.
Now on this side of the house and on the other side we have the representative of the two great historic races which founded and built this country in the days gone by, and we also have the representatives of various races of new Canadians, all sitting here and taking their places as members of the House of Commons and representing their various constituencies.
It has been suggested from time to time- I have read it in the papers-that it is too bad that there is an overwhelming majority on one side of the house and a weak opposition on the other-I mean weak numerically. I must say if hon. members opposite are looking for data to that effect they can find quite a bit of it in the speeches of some of us in days gone by when we were speaking from that side of the house. Whatever may be the merits of the question as to a strong opposition or a weak opposition, I do think that as against that the fact that we have this tremendous group, representative of those races, coming here determined to serve this country and to work in the interest of national unity means that a greater contribution toward unity has arisen out of this than out of any other action which has been taken in the past or any other contribution really that this parliament can make to unity in the future. We are not the party of the Union Nationale, Mr. Speaker, but we are the party of national unity, and we intend to develop it and foster it.
We have also heard a great deal, of course, about unemployment. It has been talked of in various degrees by hon. members opposite but not in the doom and gloom accents that we heard during the election when we were told that there was a national disaster facing this country, when some hon. members opposite, and more who are not here-I remember
436	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Nowlan one former cabinet minister, the then member for Coast-Capilano, speaking all over the country and saying he was convinced that the number of unemployed at that time was in excess of a million and might easily reach a million and a half before March. All sorts of exaggerated and radical statements such as that were made. Now that the heat of the election is over I am sure that hon. gentlemen opposite, good Canadians as they are, appreciate the word which came out during the last two days showing a decided drop in unemployment figures in this country.
I am not minimizing it. Unemployment to the man who is unemployed and to his family can be a tragedy and there are many of those in this country today, more than we would like to see. It is true the tragic element of it has been mitigated to some extent in many instances by the extension of unemployment benefits, by the increased social welfare payments, and so on and so forth. But certainly the situation is improving rapidly and it is not one which approaches in any way the suggestion of a national disaster.
What were the figures we saw the other day? On April 18,-and these are the last official figures we have; undoubtedly the situation has improved a great deal since then which is a month or more ago-there were
516.000	men and women unemployed in this country; that is a lot of people. However, the labour force of this country had increased by 221,000 during the year, a substantial portion of which had arisen out of the immigration which took place last year. If the labour force this year were the same as last year, if it had not been for this tremendous increase, we should have had only 295,000 unemployed. I am not trying to argue syl-logistically. I realize that someone will say figures can be used in various ways.
These are the basic facts. There would have been 295,000 unemployed on the basis of last year's labour force. On the same date last year our friends in the Liberal government had 306,000 unemployed; that was on April 18. What did we hear about that? We heard that the country was in the throes of the greatest era of prosperity that had ever been known. We were told "You never had it so good."


George James McIlraith: That was right.


George Clyde Nowlan: If that was right, you certainly succeeded in covering up the figures until the election came along. There were
306.000	unemployed on April 18 last year. If the labour force were the same today, we would have 295,000 unemployed.


Lester Bowles Pearson: How about immigration the year before?


George Clyde Nowlan: Immigration last year, as my hon. friend knows, was greatly in excess of anything this country has experienced in the past years. Of course, there are two other factors that come into play. There is the accelerated birth rate arising out of the war years which started to take effect this year as against last year.


George James McIlraith: All the hon. member is
arguing is that if you had no population, you would have no unemployment.


George Clyde Nowlan: That may be; I am quite sure that if the Liberals had remained in power long enough we would have had a maximum of unemployment and no population at all. There is no question about that.
Those are the figures. As I said, taking it at its worst, there were 516,000 unemployed on April 18. This figure has undoubtedly been substantially reduced by now. This is not the first time we have had unemployment in this country. I was interested in knowing what our friends said about these figures in 1954-55, figures which were roughly comparable to the figures today. I looked up Hansard and I found that the Right Hon. Mr. Howe spoke about this matter and, as recorded at page 2104 of Hansard for February 15, 1954, said:
As a result unemployment climbed to a level higher than had prevailed in any previous postwar year. Immediately the alarmists among us began to clamour for measures to offset a pending depression. The government did take action to extend unemployment insurance benefits, but no major anti-recessionary program was put into operation.
The Right Hon. Mr. St. Laurent, speaking earlier at page 1407 of Hansard for January 25, 1954, said:
Nothing is being done now except the increased endeavours of the various employment agencies throughout the country to find employment for those who have registered with them.
We have increased the unemployment insurance benefits, and we have done many other things to provide employment. Our friends opposite, some of those who are here this afternoon, cheered very loudly and pounded their desks most lustily when the Right Hon. Mr. Howe and the Right Hon. Mr. St. Laurent made those statements in the house. I wonder if their sympathy for the unemployed, different from what it was a few years ago, may be in part attributable to the fact that they too, at least in part, find themselves somewhat unemployed. There is, at least, a change in their attitude between the time when they sat over here and today, and that is perhaps something worth commenting upon.
They say, of course, that the government has done nothing. I am not going to deal with

the matter of housing. The Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) in piloting the bill through the house the other day referred to that at considerable length. He pointed out the many Steps that this government has taken and the substantial amount of money which we have made available, and are making available for housing. This, of course, is of direct assistance to the unemployed in this country. Perhaps one or two figures bear repetition. In the first four months of 1957, when our friends were in power, the housing starts totalled 12,800-plus. The housing starts for the first four months of this year were 25,300-plus. We are told that this government has done nothing, but it has more than doubled the record of the last government. These figures apply only to the towns and municipalities with a population of over 5,000. We have not got the figures, or at least the figures are not available for municipalities less than that.
However, that is not the entire story. As you well know, Mr. Speaker, provision has been made for the building of houses by the lower income groups. Provision has been made for lower down payments to encourage the building of houses and enable people in these income brackets to own their own homes. In addition to that it is expected that during the next few years this country will have an increase in population of 7 million to 8 million. It is necesary to carry on the tremendous housing projects, reorganization of our cities and removal of slum areas to take care of this increase. This government, under the aegis of the minister who has been in charge of this work, has initiated studies in Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal and Halifax which will lead to slum clearance in those cities. I am very glad to say that in some of them, particularly in the city of Halifax in which I have a more than academic interest, there is work going on today in connection with a vast slum clearing project which will be of tremendous importance to the city and to that province in the future.
Now, they say our public works program is routine. The hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier) said there was very little contained in the public works program which was not routine and a great deal of embellishment had been given this program by the government which was not justified. I noticed on the financial page of the Gazette this morning the financial editor, Mr. John Meyer, had this to say about the public works program of this government:
The list of make-work projects in the throne speech was impressive and has already given the country a confidence in an early recovery which was not apparent prior to the opening of parliament.
The Address-Mr. Nowlan
I think a statement like that, coming from the financial editor of one of the leading newspapers of this country, is at least of equivalent weight to that of the hon. member for Laurier in dealing with the value of the public works program of this country.
What is being done in public works? I am not going to enumerate all those things now. There is, of course, a need for public works to help unemployment. I am not suggesting for one moment, neither has the government ever suggested, we intend or could provide enough public works to provide employment for everyone in this country. Business and industry all have to play their part in this connection. What is needed is confidence, courage, leadership and the co-operation of all; then unemployment can be defeated. I have not any doubt that leadership is being given by this government and that courage is being restored to the people of this country.
They talk about depression and recession, all those words which they said one dare not use. I have here the figures for personal savings; the people are putting their money in the banks. I have figures for only the first two months of this year because those were the latest which one could get from the bureau of statistics. In January of last year savings deposits amounted to $6,039 million, while in January of this year they amounted to $6,322 million. In February of 1957, deposits had risen to $6,096 million. In February of this year it was $6,400 million, an increase of $78 million. Does that sound as if our economy was in the throes of a recession? Doth that sound as if times were so bad?
Take retail sales which are considered to be an index of business activity. In the month of January last year retail sales amounted to $1,030 million. In the month of January this year, with all the attendant troubles of which we are told and which we recognize, retail sales were $1,091 million, an increase of over $60 million. In February of last year retail sales were $999 million plus and in February of this year $1,016 million. In fact, retail sales today, so current newspaper reports say, are at the highest level ever known in Canada's history. The same is true of expenditures of various kinds.
We are told that the government had failed in the marketing of Canada's wheat. When this government came into power less than a year ago we inherited a carryover of 730 million bushels of wheat, the largest carryover in Canada's history. Our exports had declined by 47 million bushels to 262 million

The Address-Mr. Nowlan by the end of that crop year and this government certainly cannot be held responsible for that because that year ended in July, 1957. Despite the very aggressive sales campaign carried on by the United States and whether or not we agree that it will result in good for Canada as Mr. Benson tries to argue, we had sold substantially more wheat by January of this year than we had sold up to that time last year, and the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill) is confident that by the end of the crop year on July 31 this year we will have sold over 300 million bushels of wheat. That is some achievement in view of the competition, increased cost and the prices with which we have to contend all over the world.
There is talk about a depression and the fact that car sales are down. Yesterday afternoon I happened to have in my office an executive officer of one of the big three car manufacturers in Canada. He told me that his company had sold more cars in April of this year and was selling more now than it had ever sold before in their history in this country. As far as the other companies are concerned, sales generally have picked up despite the fact that in the United States, so we are told, car sales are 35 per cent below what they were last year.
As I have said, car loadings are up, automobile sales are up, personal savings are up, retail sales are up. Every yardstick ordinarily used by economists indicates continuing expansion and development in this country.
In that connection I think it is interesting to look at a report in the Montreal Gazette of a statement made by Mr. Robert Green. I am not sure whether or not he is a relative of the Minister of Public Works but I doubt it because he does not live in this country. He is one of the vice-presidents of the Prudential Insurance Company of America, a company with some financial experience and knowledge, I would think. This is what Mr. Green had to say about the relative economic positions of Canada and the United States, and you would almost think it was the Minister of Public Works speaking. It is not a direct quotation but a report of his remarks which appeared on the financial page of the Montreal Gazette yesterday. It reads:
Robert M. Green, vice-president in charge of Canadian operations for Prudential Insurance Company of America, believes that Canada has turned the economic corner and is on its way out of the recession. He says this conviction is formed from the results of the surveys conducted by Prudential's economists in both Canada and the United States. Of greater significance, however, is Mr. Green's belief that Canada will lead, not follow, the United States towards recovery,
IMr, Nowlan.j
I think a statement such as that made by a man of his eminence, experience and position should go a long way to answering the criticisms we have heard in the house during the last few days of this debate. We are told that there should be tax reductions. Economists differ on that matter but I am going to point out that we have had tax reductions. During the session last fall we reduced taxes by $187 million which is no small amount and so what we are being urged to do we have already done. During the election campaign I did not hear any of the speeches of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) but I read some of them and I was somewhat intrigued by his advocacy of a reduction in taxation of $400 million as something which would achieve wonders. Yet we have been told in the House of Commons that a reduction of $187 million in taxes was nothing at all. However, $187 million is almost half of $400 million and my mathematics indicate that twice nothing is still nothing. Therefore if our reduction was nothing the $400 million was certainly nothing when it was advocated on the election platform. In any event, we have reduced taxes.
There is talk about aid to municipalities. How many scores of millions of dollars were made available by this government to the provinces and then turned over to municipalities? I know in my own little province of Nova Scotia over $3 million of the $10 million the province got was made directly available to the municipalities, and I am sure the same thing applies to all the other provinces.
One could go on and develop this matter further but I think I have said enough to indicate that this government has been giving leadership to Canada in the difficult days through which we are passing, leadership which I believe is appreciated and recognized by the Canadian people. I believe that with the faith and courage the Canadian people have always shown and working together this country will go on to carry out highway programs, northern development and all the other matters which are envisaged. With the establishment of national unity, with a plan for the future, with leadership such as the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) is giving to the country, there is every reason to look forward with confidence to Canada's development and we will continue to grow and expand during the years ahead in a way in which our forefathers and even we ourselves have never envisaged in the past.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, at the outset of my remarks I should like to place on record my view of the good fortune of the House of Commons in having

chosen the present Speaker as its presiding officer. I consider the matter of real importance at this time in history when the free parliaments of the world are under so much attack by the communistic dictatorships in every part of the world and particularly when the desire to dominate the world is being pressed so aggressively by these dictatorships. I know that my experience in the house has confirmed my strong conviction that our system of government offers the best hope for mankind. I believe very strongly in the conduct of public business by free expression on the part of free men, freely elected to a free parliament.
I regret that the Speaker is not in the chair at the moment because I wanted to say to him as the presiding officer of the house that not only has he had a high honour conferred on him but also that the house is fortunate indeed in having chosen him. It is quite true he has a very high responsibility but I for my part have the utmost faith and confidence in the ability of Mr. Speaker to discharge that responsibility with fairness and with dignity. I wish him well in the discharge of his duties, and to the Deputy Speaker and deputy chairman of committees I would like to express the same sentiment.
It is a happy tradition in this country that we congratulate the mover (Mr. Lafren-iere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne and I would like now to do so. The Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) is also to be congratulated in having amongst his followers so many young men who are in this parliament for the first time, not only so many of them but from such widely divergent parts of the country. It is quite true that I deplore the methods used by the Prime Minister in his campaign, and I hope he will not misunderstand me when I say this. The methods I refer to are the high pressure, high priced antics of the public relations agencies in, if I might use the term, selling the Prime Minister to the electors of this country as though they were selling a breakfast cereal or soap flakes.


An hon. Member:: You mean like Uncle Louis.


George James McIlraith: Yet I congratulate him on the success of that method in bringing to this house a large number of new members whom he has the good fortune to number among his followers.


Mr. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: You also need a pretty good product to sell, you know.
The Address-Mr. Mcllraith


George James McIlraith: I did not catch the interjection of the Postmaster General (Mr. Hamilton) but perhaps I can find it in Hansard tomorrow.
In dealing with the throne speech, it is true that it does cover a large range of subjects and it is also true that a good many of these matters can be individually discussed later in the session, so I will content myself with picking out one or two matters for discussion at this time.
I was rather intrigued with the remarks of the speaker who immediately preceded me

the hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings (Mr. Nowlan)-who spoke about the speech from the throne in a rather interesting way. He talked about two hilltops in the life of a session .of parliament, one being the throne speech, and presumably this is a hilltop, and the other being the budget speech. Later in my remarks, if time permits, I hope to say something about one of these hilltops, the missing hilltop.
The hon. member also had something to say about the diet offered by the opposition speakers not being too robust. I have listened to the speeches made in this debate and I must confess that I had formed the conclusion that the diet offered by the ministry in this debate was not too robust. As a matter of fact, until the member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings rose to speak a very few moments ago, only one other minister of the crown had taken part in this debate. I will have a good deal to say about the speech of that minister on another occasion, but with respect the minister of the crown who took part in the debate today-just what did he have to offer by way of outlining the policy of this very strong new government, strong, that is to say, in numbers? What policy did he outline; what solution did he offer to the problems confronting the country? It is a mistake to assume there are no such problems and there are one or two which I would like to take a moment or two to discuss. There is no doubt at all that the widespread unemployment in Canada is a real problem-


Mr. Baskin:: Which you brought on.


George James McIlraith: -and deserves the closest attention of this house. I recognize the interjection of the hon. member but there are many new members here and I also recognize that in their eyes history only started on June 10, 1957. Sometimes their research work on these matters is not equal to their enthusiasm. However, I think very kindly and very well of them, but I do wish sometimes that they would look at the facts.
440	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Mcllraith


An hon. Member:: We are looking at the facts.


Mr. McCleave:: We are coming out of the middle ages.


George James McIlraith: Another interjection made by an hon. member looking through the same rose-coloured spectacles. I know many of these hon. members seem not to wish the opposition to take part in the debate, but I am sure when they are here a little longer they will rapidly change in this regard and I believe they will become more appreciative of debate on public issues. They do seem to constantly express the feeling that the government is letter perfect and that nothing ever happened before June 10, 1957, but that feeling is not quite in accord with the facts.
I want to deal with some of the things which did happen since June, 1957, and which were the responsibility of the previous government headed by the present Prime Minister. I have spoken of the matter of unemployment and have mentioned that except for the minister who immediately preceded me no minister of the crown has spoken about the subject in this debate although there was one rather interesting interjection yesterday when my colleague, the hon. member for Richelieu-Vercheres (Mr. Cardin), was speaking. His remarks appear at page 360 of Hansard of May 22, when he said "There is unemployment which is far above the normal seasonal unemployment level". This was a simple statement of fact but the interjection of a minister of the crown, the Minister without Portfolio (Mr. Browne), was "So what?"
Then what was the solution offered by the minister who spoke today? He referred to a document put out jointly by the Department of Labour and the bureau of statistics dealing with most recent unemployment statistics. I think this document was dated May 21 and he referred to its contents as "good word". Is it good word when we are given official figures indicating, according to the bureau of statistics, that those without jobs and seeking work number 516,000 or, according to the figure used by the unemployment insurance commission, that those registered as seeking employment totalled 825,000 as of April 19 last? Is that good word? It is not good word at all; it is a very serious matter. He went on at some length to try to prove that if there had not been an increase in the labour force these unemployment figures would not have been so high. That was so illogical that I am sure after reflection-


An hon. Member:: It is quite logical.


George James McIlraith: No, it is not logical at all. It was a simple error into which he fell in trying to prove that if there had not been any population there would not be any unemployment. I am sure that is not what he intended. I think I can appreciate the point he was trying to make, but that is not what he intended to say, I am sure.
The causes of unemployment are varied and I realize that some of these causes are of a nature that they arise outside of Canada and are not under the control of the government. I grant that at once, but there are some causes of unemployment which do lie within the control of the government and some of those causes should be examined and we should seek to do what we can to remove them. That is the responsibility of the government and I, for my part, would like to discuss what I apprehend to be some of those causes.
I would now like to refer to a subject I mentioned earlier, one of the two hilltops, a rather picturesque phrase chosen by my hon. friend the Minister of National Revenue; that is to say, the budget.
What is the history of this new government? What is its record since history began on June 10, 1957? Let me tell the hon. member who interrupted me a few moments ago that the history is that the party of which he is a member, led by the present Prime Minister during the whole of the last parliament of Canada did not see fit to bring forward a budget. Let me seek to show him that this fact contributed materially to the unemployment which exists today, and let me try to indicate in what way I believe that to be true.
There is another aspect of this matter. I take the view, of course, that the Prime Minister was departing from constitutional practice by his failure to have a budget delivered during the last parliament, particularly when he was not defeated in that parliament and was not forced to call an election. But that is not the point I am stressing at the moment; that is a constitutional issue.


An hon. Member:: You have a short memory.


George James McIlraith: No, I have a good memory on the point, and I am quite prepared to debate it with the hon. member any time he wishes.
The traditional budget performs three main functions in our system of government. It provides a statement of accounts for the fiscal year; it provides a financial forecast for the coming year, giving certain economic data; and, in addition to those two things, it sets forth the whole fiscal, financial and taxation policy of the government. That is its traditional function.

We have heard a great deal in recent months about the Conservative party having assumed the responsibility of office on June 21, 1957, for the first time in 22 years. I should have thought-and I believe many people in the country shared this opinion- that a situation of this kind would lead to changes in fiscal and financial policy. I should have thought that one of the first things the new government would have sought to do would have been to bring forward its changes in fiscal and financial policy and to expose to parliament and the public what those changes were, together with their implications to business and industrial life. Indeed, that is what business in this country did expect. And when the budget was withheld and did not come forward business firms one by one took decisions not to proceed with various projects whose development they had in mind. They took decisions to delay work on those projects for the time being, and those delays meant that men who might have been at work on those projects today were never put to work on them.
I regret very much that decision by the Prime Minister and his Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming), not to present a budget-and I know that before the Prime Minister is through this parliament he will have occasion, on his own responsibility as Prime Minister, to regret it. I admit, of course, that the refusal to expose these matters to parliament or to the country may have been successful in helping the Conservative party in its re-election, in that no opportunity was provided for criticism of its financing. That may be true and seeing the vast array of hon. members opposite and to my left I admit that it was certainly successful. But it was a high price to pay for success if it added to the numbers of the unemployed, as it undoubtedly did.


John George Diefenbaker: Would the hon. member allow a question? I am following what he says very carefully. Would he name those companies which altered their plans?


George James McIlraith: I certainly will not. I cannot name private companies. I know them, and if the Prime Minister will discuss the matter with any man who is active in the business and economic life of this country- any type of enterprise where they are going ahead with new projects-he will find that what I have said is true. And I know of my own personal knowledge, and assert on my personal responsibility as a member-which the hon. gentleman does not often do-that there are cases of this sort in respect to which I am thoroughly familiar with the exact
The Address-Mr. Mcllraith decisions taken. I make that assertion on my own responsibility as a member.


John George Diefenbaker: That is meaningless.


George James McIlraith: No, it is not peanuts. One of the items was $1,500,000, and the other was $30 million.


An hon. Member:: He said "meaningless".


George James McIlraith: I regret, then, that I misheard the interjection. Well, that is not meaningless in terms of employment. This country has developed basically on an economy of private enterprise and there is no doubt at all that when by any action of government you interfere with the elements of a free economy, in this case business firms, in this way so that companies hesitate and decline to proceed until they know what the policy of the government is, then you have interfered with employment. There can be no doubt about that.
Now, with regard to the solution of the unemployment problem, the Prime Minister has said a good deal about public works in recent months, and reference is made to this subject in the speech from the throne. I am obliged to limit my comments on this subject a little more than I would wish, but perhaps not more than hon. members opposite would wish, because under the rules of this house this part of the debate will be brought to a close in a very few minutes. Let me, however, deal with perhaps three items. It is interesting to note that the summary of the estimates tabled in the House of Commons shows an increase of only $8 million in the public works estimates this year under the item "construction and acquisition".
Perhaps this aspect should be developed a little more fully. I want to mention one project which is referred to in the speech from the throne, namely the reference to the construction of a railway to Pine Point. I think that while this may be a very desirable project, it is quite misleading to the 516,000 or to the 825,000 unemployed men, whatever the figure is, who are looking for work, to suggest that this offers them an immediate prospect of work. This project is, by its nature, one which requires planning, surveys and so on.


Mr. McDonald (Hamilton South):: Why
didn't you begin it five years ago?


George James McIlraith: Had we been here last year we should not have had this unemployment. This railway project will not provide jobs for a large number of men, before, I should guess, one or two years have gone by, and I suppose the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) will not quarrel with that estimate. It is quite

The Address-Division
wrong to refer to this kind of project as something that will bring immediate relief to unemployment.
I have time to read a short excerpt from the New York Times of May 21 which I should like to place on record. It is a report of the remarks of President Eisenhower, President of the United States. He said:
I am determined not to get bogged down in a slow-starting, emergency public works program, which would provide a minimum of jobs now and a maximum of budgetary headaches in the years ahead.
I do not know any better way of attempting to summarize within a moment or two the question of public works for the immediate relief of unemployment.
I had intended to deal with the question of foreign trade, but I see that my time appears to have elapsed.


Mr. Speaker:: It being 5.45 o'clock p.m., it is my duty, pursuant to section 3 of standing order 38, to interrupt these proceedings and forthwith put the question on any subamendment now before the house.


Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege, and although I know it is not a question of privilege I hope you will

accept it as such at this time. We should like, through you, to convey our congratulations to a member of the staff who since the 12th of this month has been able to learn the names of the members so well that on the first division he has recognized everybody by name or constituency.
Business of the House BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Lionel Chevrier: May I ask the house leader
what the business will be for Monday?


Howard Charles Green: We shall continue with the throne speech debate.


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

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

Mr. Chevrier: 1.	Has the boundary line between Ontario and Quebec on lake St. Francis been settled?
2.	If not, has any progress been made toward settlement since October, 1957?
3.	When was the last survey of this line made?
4.	Has the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys approached the provinces of Quebec and Ontario in an attempt to bring about a settlement of this question?
Answer by: Hon. Paul Comtois (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):
1.	Not to our knowledge.
2.	We have not been informed of any progress.
3.	We have no official information.
4.	Yes. Inquiries have been made with the provincial authorities in Quebec and Ontario concerning the boundary line in question, but it is not the responsibility of the federal government to bring about a settlement of this question.


&quot;DO IT NOW&quot; EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
Mr. Howard: How much money, if any, was spent from October 1, 1957, to date, in promoting winter
employment through the so-called "Do it now. why wait for spring" program?
Answer by: Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of
Labour):
$166,576 in paid advertising was purchased by the Department of Labour including the unemployment insurance commission since October 1, 1957, for the promotion of winter employment through the program for combating seasonal employment.
I would like to point out that this expenditure represents only a small proportion of the total cost of the publicity campaign which was developed with the support of the provinces, municipalities, industry, labour and a great number of organizations at both national and community levels. The manner in which the newspapers, magazines, radio and television stations, motion picture theatres and outdoor advertising companies offered public service support to the "Do It Now" campaign last winter is deserving of the highest commendation. At the same time, business operators, particularly those connected with building and construction, took advantage of the general promotion campaign to increase their advertising to promote the idea of taking advantage of the availability of men and materials during the winter lull. The result was that the advertising and publicity program conducted by the government was increased more than tenfold throughout Canada.

Monday, May 26, 1958