1958-08-28

[Stage Direction]
Twelfth report of standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.-Mr. Fraser.


Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, while the housing program during the last year has generally been very successful, there is still a great need for a more modest type of home which would be suitable for erection in the less populated areas. In the past one of the difficulties has been the reluctance of approved lenders to lend on this type of house, especially in sparsely populated locations.
As hon. members are aware, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has been working on the design of a modest house which, while it is intended primarily for rural areas where municipal services are not available, can also be built in the smaller populated centres. The design and brief specification have now been completed and steps to publicize this "minimum" house are about to be taken. This is an example of what may be accepted for National Housing Act lending. Leaflets describing this house are available at every corporation office across the country. Working drawings of this house may be purchased at a cost of $10 a set.
It is hoped that the house will be erected in the more remote areas for a cost of approximately $5,000. Where there are some services in the smaller centres it is hoped that the cost will not be more than $8,000. This house conforms to the minimum standards required for houses erected under the National Housing Act, including a recent amendment which gives more freedom of design in that it permits access to the bathroom from a habitable room or the entrance hall. Copies of the leaflet describing the minimum house are being distributed to all hon. members, and I think they will be doing the country a service if they pass the word around in their constituencies concerning this new and more modest type of home.
I am sure hon. members will be glad to know that there has been a great increase in the number of loans made by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation in centres under 55,000 population. The figure for the first seven months of 1957 was 7,531 units, and for the same seven months of 1958 the figure is almost double, 14,581 units. There were over 1,000 more in July, 1958 than there were in July, 1957. We are hoping that this new type of home will be of great benefit to Canadians living in the smaller centres.


Mr. J. R. Garland (Nipissing):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the minister would care to comment in a little more definite terms on the C.M.H.C. attitude toward this type of home in the larger centres.
I have in mind the restrictions which exist now and which make it difficult for people in the lower income brackets to take advantage of these facilities. I should like to ask the minister whether or not this house will be available in the large centres, and at the same time we commend him for making it available in the rural areas.


Howard Charles Green: It will be available, but I doubt very much whether homes could be built for this price in the larger centres. The practical need for housing of this type has been in the smaller centres of Canada.


John Richard Garland: May I be permitted one further question. Have there been any conversations with the lending institutions as to their attitude toward making loans on this type of accommodation?


Howard Charles Green: We always do what we can to persuade the lending institutions to make loans in all centres, and I must say they have been very co-operative. We do believe that the use of this new design will greatly facilitate the construction of new homes in the smaller centres.


John Richard Garland: Is it intended that the lending institutions will carry the bulk of the financing, or will it be by direct loan from the corporation?


Howard Charles Green: If the loans cannot be obtained through the lending institutions, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation will make the loans directly.


Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: This is very welcome news, Mr. Speaker. I must comment on the remarkable swiftness with

Increased Aid to Universities which Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has moved. I think it was about a week ago that the minister told me the plans were not ready, and now they are in form. How far has Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation gone in clearing certain materials for specification in this type of housing? I am thinking particularly of plywood and that sort of thing, which will go a long way toward making this type of construction cheaper. One of the complaints I have had from the plywood manufacturers has been the fact that this material has not been cleared yet through the various testing processes. Is Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation working with the testing laboratory to clear various types of materials?


Howard Charles Green: Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has been working for a much longer period than the last week on the preparation of these plans. The hon. gentleman's question of a week ago was very helpful, but just incidental. I do not have the information necessary to give him a detailed answer to his question, but if there is any difficulty about clearing materials which could be used, we certainly will try to overcome that difficulty right away. I feel confident that there is no such difficulty now.

On the orders of the day:


Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Public Works arising out of the statement which he made this morning about low-cost houses, which I can assure him will be of special interest to people of my province. Will steps be taken so that arrangements can be made to make these new houses available to fishermen in the small fishing settlements of Newfoundland?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, I am not in a position to say to what extent they will be available to fishermen. I think the hon. member will be able to judge that better than I can when he sees the pamphlet. Then, if there is any difficulty we should be glad to try to iron it out.


Chesley William Carter: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is it the intention of the government to restrict these houses only to incorporated areas?


Howard Charles Green: No, Mr. Speaker.



ARTS, LETTERS AND SCIENCES ANNOUNCEMENT RESPECTING INCREASED AID TO UNIVERSITIES

Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, to assist the universities of Canada, parliament has made provision to authorize payments to the national

conference of Canadian universities. In accordance with the provisions of an agreement entered into between the conference and the minister of finance on March 26, 1957, payment is to be at the rate of $1 per head of population for the province concerned. The main estimates for this year contain an item of $17,100,000 to provide for payments at this rate. The government is now proposing that this per capita payment be increased from $1 to $1.50. Accordingly the further supplementary estimates will so provide, and will contain a further item of $8,500,000 for this purpose. The two items combined will bring the total federal aid to universities in Canada in the present fiscal year to $25,600,000.


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition):: I am sure, Mr. Speaker, all hon. members will welcome the announcement of the Minister of Finance extending the scheme for assistance to higher education in Canada introduced by the previous government, as he has indicated, a couple of years ago. We shall have an opportunity of discussing this matter in detail-and it warrants that discussion- when the supplementary estimates are before the house. At this moment I merely say that the universities need this help, and I am sure they will welcome the additional amount they are to receive from the government.


Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, the announcement by the Minister of Finance will go some small way toward solving the educational crisis in this country, and the crisis that faces our universities. We would hope that the government would enunciate an over-all educational program to include scholarships, and that the government would make this a first step in a rapid movement to the achievement of equal educational opportunities for all within our nation.

On the orders of the day:


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier):: May I
address a question to the Minister of Finance apropos of the announcement he just made concerning an increase in university grants. May I ask him if the government of the province of Quebec has given any indication whether or not it will accept these grants?


Donald Methuen Fleming: We have had no indication that the government of the province of Quebec will accept the grants on any existing basis.



CANADA COUNCIL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kooienay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister in a

position to give me an answer to a question I asked him on July 26 concerning the awarding of scholarships by the Canada Council to civil servants, to which question he intended, I know, to make an early reply.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman communicated with me and advised that he was going to ask for an answer to the question he asked on July 26, which was to the following effect:
I have been informed that some persons awarded scholarships by the Canada Council have been denied the opportunity to take advantage of these scholarships because they are civil servants. Can the Prime Minister inform the house of government policy in this respect, and would he have this matter looked into to see that there is no conflict in policy or with the government's intentions?
I would point out to the hon. member that on other occasions in the house I have been asked about activities of the Canada Council, and in reply I have said that the Canada Council is not an agency of Her Majesty and that the Canada Council Act clearly specifies the manner in which the council is to report to parliament annually. However, in view of the fact that on the occasion when the question was asked I advised the hon. gentleman that I would communicate with the council to see whether or not an answer could be secured, I may say that in carrying out that undertaking I also communicated with the civil service commission.
The civil service commission reports that a civil servant-not some civil servants- requested leave with full pay to take up a Canada Council scholarship of $4,000 for an academic year. The commission advises that it has no fixed policy or regulation that prevents a civil servant taking a scholarship but that it is a matter for judgment and discretion to be exercised in each case as to whether or not leave with pay should be granted. In this one case the commission felt that leave with pay should only be granted during the summer months, when the individual in question could be relatively easily spared from his regular position, and that leave without pay could be granted during the academic year for which he would hold the scholarship, and the stand he took was that he declined the scholarship on that basis. Had he been granted leave with full pay for the full period he requested it would have cost an additional $6,000 over and above the amount to be paid to him under the scholarship.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the Prime Minister's very lengthy answer to this question, but I have a letter here from Professor C. S. Burchill in which he says: 57071-3-267
India-Financing of Development Plan
The application for leave which I submitted followed precedents established at this institution, and was for leave on half-pay only-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I appreciate the hon. member's interest in the question, but this is not the proper place to give information. Perhaps he will find an opportunity on the estimates.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, hon. members may have seen in the press statements that during the earlier part of this week discussions were held in Washington under the auspices of the international bank for reconstruction and development regarding the foreign exchange situation confronting India.
The meetings were attended by representatives of the bank itself, and also of the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan and Canada. Apart from Canada all these countries may be described as India's chief creditors, either in the sense that the value of their exports to India substantially exceeds their imports or in the sense that they have extended substantial credits to India for past exports and the debts are now coming due. Canada is not a major creditor in either sense. However, the Indian authorities had advised us that they would wish Canada to be represented at the meetings, and the government accordingly decided to send a representative from Canada to attend. I know the house would approve this decision, in view of the great interest of Canadians in India and the important position which India holds in the commonwealth and in the world.
I am now informed that there was full agreement in Washington about the situation in which India now finds herself and also as to the urgent need to find a constructive solution. The problem arises chiefly from the fact that India's second five-year development plan is requiring more foreign purchases, in a more concentrated period, than India can at the moment pay for. While India has been cutting back both her imports for consumption and her domestic development plans, I am sure nobody, and certainly no Canadian, would wish to see India's development arrested or retarded.
Canada, as I have said, is not one of India's chief creditors either in the sense of accumulated obligations or in the sense of an export surplus. Therefore the Canadian government is not confronted by the main problem facing others; that is to say, the problem of how to arrange finance to cover
4214	HOUSE OF
India-Financing of Development Plan their excess exports to India or how to exchange short term obligations for medium and long term obligations. Officials of the other governments represented in Washington are now reporting to their governments and there seems to be good reason to hope that India's problems in this field for the immediate future may be solved.
We have not yet been able to give full consideration to the report of our representative, who returned to Ottawa only last evening, the meetings having concluded yesterday at noon. However, I think I may report to the house that it appears that in the context of the Washington meetings and the particular group of problems that were under discussion there, the most helpful thing that Canada can do is to continue to provide India with the Canadian goods she may require in her development program. In large measure these are provided on the basis of grants out of the moneys voted by this house under the Colombo plan. To this extent they create no financial obligations on the part of India, nor have they done so in the past. We may also be able to help by accelerating our Colombo plan shipments; and to the extent that this is physically possible, the house may be assured that it will be done.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, the minister's announcement deals with a matter of great importance, primarily of course to India but also to Canada, because there is nothing of much greater importance in the free world at the present time than the effort being made by a free democratic government in India to develop by democratic planning a way to take care of the needs of its great and growing population. Therefore I am sure the house will have welcomed the announcement made by the minister.
The problem of assisting India to meet its indebtedness from outside investment assistance has now been considered in Washington by representatives of the United States and of other countries, of which Canada is one. It is true, as the minister has said, that our assistance to India since world war II has taken the form of grants of capital aid rather than loans. Therefore we are not, as are some other countries, a major creditor of India. I welcome the statement of the minister that this kind of assistance is going to continue-I suppose through the Colombo plan -and I suggest to him that what he has said has underlined the desirability of emphasizing the necessity for capital rather than consumer aid. There has been a move, and I am not criticizing it, in recent months to assist India by sending to her under the Colombo plan consumer goods, but the Colombo plan was originally designed to assist India in the kind 

of development about which the minister has spoken by the provision of capital goods. I do hope that in our desire to help India in other respects we will not lose sight of the importance of maintaining this capital assistance.


Mr. Erhart Regier (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: Mr. Speaker, we listened with a great deal of interest to the announcement by the Minister of Finance. We are very concerned that the Canadian government should continue to help India develop her economy. India is, after all, the great fortress of democracy in Asia, and we feel that the Canadian government should do everything possible to maintain the outpost of democracy in that large nation. We believe the Canadian people have sufficient sympathetic understanding of what is happening in India that they would welcome this government taking a liberal approach to this matter and exerting much more effort on behalf of India than has been the case in years gone by.
We feel that the extent of Canada's aid to overseas territories, and especially those overseas territories which are attempting to develop our form of government, should be more like 1 per cent of our gross national product; in other words we should be thinking in terms of $300 million rather than in terms of $30 million or $35 million.



PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Outre-mont-St. Jean has a matter which he endeavoured to raise last night.
(Translation):


Mr. Romuald Bourque (Outremont-Sl. Jean):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. I have here before me an article taken from last evening's Journal, and which reads as follows:
(Text):
Nobody Told Him of Boycott!
At 3.30 this afternoon a lone Liberal, Romuald Bourque, Outremont-St. Jean, wandered into the public accounts committee.
He was given tremendous applause, looked slightly embarrassed, and explained that "nobody told me we weren't supposed to come to this committee".
Then he left.
(Translation):
That is absolutely untrue. In accordance with the statement made by my leader, I did not attend the meeting which was held at 1:30 p.m., but I attended the sitting of the public accounts committee in conformity with the decision made by our party to take

part in the meeting which had been called for yesterday afternoon at 3.30. I arrived at the meeting at 3.30 o'clock and I remained until the end. In other words, I only left the meeting when it had been duly adjourned and not before. I wanted to have the true facts on the record, Mr. Speaker.
(Text):



DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister arising out of a disturbing report in the Globe and Mail that the government will not make deficiency payments on western grain but will instead pay $1 per acre up to $200 per farmer, a most disturbing and inadequate amount. I would appreciate the Prime Minister's comments on this report.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to announce government policy by way of comment on any newspaper article, but I can say this to the hon. gentleman. No matter what is done he will always say it is not enough.


Hazen Robert Argue: Especially if it is peanuts, like this announcement.



FEDERAL-MUNICIPAL CONFERENCE INQUIRY AS TO PROPOSED AGENDA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Richard Garland: I wish to address a question to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister give the house any information he has concerning the meeting to be held soon with the Canadian federation of mayors and municipalities, in particular with regard to the proposed agenda?


John George Diefenbaker: As the hon. member knows, last February the association of mayors made representations to the cabinet and asked, among other things, for the convening of an informal meeting so they might place before the cabinet information concerning the position of municipalities throughout the country as a whole. The date of that meeting has now been determined as the 6th of October, and if may continue into the 7th.
Consideration has been given to the routine to be followed, but as yet the agenda has not been determined.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Minister
57071-3-2671
Inquiries of the Ministry of Agriculture. Has the minister's attention been drawn to the fact that a blight of unknown origin has been detected in the Ontario tobacco crop? If so, can the minister inform the house what steps his department is taking toward finding a solution to this problem?


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, research officers of the department are aware of the condition known as leaf spot or wet weather fleck in tobacco. The condition existed in a severe form in tobacco in Ontario in 1955 and again in 1957. Present indications are that damage will not be serious in 1958. Tobacco losses in 1955 and 1957 were estimated at eight million pounds and six million pounds respectively.
An extensive research program has been undertaken by the department with the co-operation of the meteorological service of the Department of Transport, the Ontario research foundation, and scientific officers of the Imperial Tobacco Company. Points under investigation include the effects of soil, fertilizers, varieties, irrigation, light, air pollution and meteorological conditions. No results are available to be reported at present. The research program will be continued and expanded if necessary.
(Translation):



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I should like to call to the attention of the Secretary of State question No. 96, on the order paper, which has gone unanswered although it has been there for over a month. I would ask him to be so kind as to note it and to see whether he could give an answer before the estimates of the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) are submitted to the house.
(Text):



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address another question to the Prime Minister. I apologize for not giving him notice. It is based on a document I received in my office just prior to coming to the house. It is a press release which indicates that the occupants of the Prime Minister's office are one month ahead of ordinary

Excise Tax Act
mortals in their understanding of the time-space dimension, or may indicate the influence of British Columbia in his office. The document is a press release concerning the Prime Minister's attitude toward the proposal of the President of the United States for an increase in the resources of the international monetary fund, and so on. My point is that the press release is dated Tuesday, September 26 and for immediate release. Will the Prime Minister say when we can make up this time?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I do not know anything about the press release, but the care with which the hon. gentleman has observed the mistake in the date indicates the meticulous attention which he gives to small matters.



TELEVISION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Guy Rouleau (Dollard):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the Minister of National Revenue. I would like to know whether there is any foundation for a press release which appeared on the first page of this morning's Globe and Mail to the effect that a United States firm has been granted clearance by Ottawa to bring closed circuit television to Fort Frances in Canada? If so, is it in accordance with section 14 of Bill C-55?


Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minister of National Revenue):: I have no knowledge of the press release; I have not seen it. There was no press release issued or authorized in any way, shape or form. I will look at the statement in the press and advise the hon. gentleman later whether there is any foundation for the statement; I am sure there is not.



EXCISE TAX ACT

Donald Methuen Fleming: the second reading of and concurrence in an amendment made by the Senate to Bill No. C-44, to amend the Excise Tax Act.
He said: Perhaps I should say very briefly here that this is a very minor amendment in the Excise Tax Act. The Senate looked at one expression in the bill which reads, "Shall be received in evidence as prima facie proof" and chose an alternative expression, "Shall be prima facie evidence". I may say that the former expression is preferred by the Department of Justice, but apart from some legalistic hair-splitting I do not think any member of the house will regard this [Mr. Herridge.j
as a matter of substance. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I am moving simply for concurrence in the amendment proposed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, amendment read the second time and concurred in.


Hon. E. D. Fullon (Minisier of Justice) moved: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Judges Act to provide salaries for two additional judges of the high court of Ontario, for one additional judge of the appeal division of the supreme court of New Brunswick and for six additional judges for the county courts of Ontario.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Rea in the chair.


Mr. Pickersgill:: Is the minister not going to give some explanation?


Mr. Fulfon:: Mr. Chairman, I do not think much explanation is necessary. The resolution is self-explanatory. The legislatures of the respective provinces have passed and proclaimed the legislation to provide for these judicial positions, and the attorneys general of the provinces have requested us to enact the necessary amendment to the Judges Act to provide the salaries in order that the appointments may be made to the offices. Accordingly we are recommending to the house that we be given the authority to introduce the necessary bill.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I have a few observations I should like to make about one item in the resolution; and I make them, I suppose, because I represent a constituency in one of the Atlantic provinces. In the province I represent, which has a population almost within 100,000 of the population of New Brunswick and where I do not suppose the people are very much more law abiding or less litigious than they are in New Brunswick, there are three high court judges and only two county court judges. In Nova Scotia, which has a population of at least 150,000 more than New Brunswick, and I would think a population at least as litigious, there are only seven high court judges..
It does seem rather extraordinary that in New Brunswick eight high court judges should be required for the discharge of the judicial duties. I understand that the hon. member for Northumberland-Miramichi has a word to say about the situation in New Brunswick, but it does seem to me there is a great disproportion between the figures for the three provinces. I know the minister's predecessor did not just automatically accept

requests to increase the number of judges when they came from the provinces, but made a very careful inquiry to see whether the money of the taxpayers of Canada should be expended for this purpose. It does seem to me that in this particular case we should have a more detailed explanation than we have had from the minister.


Mr. McWilliam:: Mr. Chairman, I am not completely clear in my own mind on exactly what procedure is followed with regard to the appointing of judges. Possibly I am right in presuming that the only purpose of this legislation is to provide for salaries. However, I should like the minister to tell me whether any examination of the need for the appointment of a judge is made in these cases. There is provision here for the appointment of an additional judge for the appeal court of New Brunswick, and as far as I have been able to ascertain the consensus is that there is much greater need for another judge in the Queen's bench division. If that is so, I wonder whether the minister has looked into the need for an additional judge for the Queen's bench division as against the present recommendation.
As I said before, I do not know whether that is within his jurisdiction. Possibly the purpose of the legislation is simply to provide salaries. Would the minister comment on that point?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Of course I have made inquiries and satisfied myself, as I have had to satisfy my colleagues, that there is necessity and justification for the appointment requested by the province. In the course of these inquiries I have had correspondence with the attorney general of New Brunswick. My hon. friends opposite will, of course, appreciate that the constitution of the courts is entirely a matter of provincial jurisdiction. It is therefore up to the province to determine to what branch of the courts additional appointments should be made, while we have the responsibility mainly of satisfying ourselves as to the necessity of such additional appointments.
I understand that there was discussion and consideration in New Brunswick with respect to whether the additional appointment should be made to the supreme court or to the appellate division, and the decision was that it should be made by way of an extra judge appointed to the branch of the court exercising appellate jurisdiction. That is my information from the attorney general.
As hon. members from New Brunswick will appreciate, there is in that province a judge exercising jurisdiction in divorce and matrimonial causes who is appointed under provincial legislation with authority in that
Judges Act
field. That judge, Mr. Justice Anglin, has recently tendered his resignation as the judge in divorce and matrimonial causes, and it is therefore necessary to find another judge to discharge that responsibility. The intention is that if this legislation carries the judge newly appointed will assume that divorce jurisdiction. He will be available, of course, as a judge in chancery, the division of the courts in New Brunswick exercising appeal jurisdiction, as I understand it, but will also have jurisdiction in divorce and matrimonial causes.
I am informed by the attorney general of New Brunswick that this matter has been discussed with the council of the barristers' society of New Brunswick and with the chief justice of the province, Mr. Justice McNair, who is of the opinion that this is the best way to handle the matter. I am also informed that the number of judges in New Brunswick has not been increased since 1913, and that the population of the province has increased by about 50 per cent since that time. I am also informed that in 1936, for instance, there were 196 cases before the court having jurisdiction in divorce and matrimonial causes, but that in 1956 there were 597 cases.
I might also point out for the information of hon. members that we are not unmindful of the fact that the appointment of additional judges requires the payment of additional salaries. Therefore hon. members will be interested to learn that although in the past it has been provided by statute under our Judges Act that there will be an additional salary of $500 payable to the judge in New Brunswick who is in charge of the divorce court, that salary will no longer be paid and, with the agreement of the attorney general of the province, the bill to be introduced if this resolution carries will provide for the elimination of that additional salary of $500.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister has given us statistics for New Brunswick. I suppose in making the decision to bring this matter before us he also looked at the case load in the province of Nova Scotia, where there is a very much larger population, where there is only one court, as I understand it, and where one would expect the need for additional judges would probably be greater than it is in New Brunswick. I also wondered whether there were any other provinces with two courts, such as there are in New Brunswick, Manitoba and I believe in most provinces from New Brunswick west, that is to say a trial and an appeal court, where the number of appeal judges equalled the number of trial judges.

Judges Act


Edmund Davie Fulton: I do not have the figures before me, but offhand I do not believe there are. As I have pointed out, however, it is the feeling of the government of New Brunswick, which is responsible for the constitution of the courts of that province, that this will be the best way to handle the matter. The new judge to be appointed to the appeal court will exercise jurisdiction in divorce and matrimonial causes, which will relieve one of the judges of the supreme court of that duty. Five hundred and ninety-seven cases, including 222 divorce cases, represents a fair burden of work in divorce and matrimonial causes.


Mr. Brooks:: I wonder if I might say a word; I had not intended to speak. I think the Minister of Justice has explained the situation in the province of New Brunswick very well. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has made a comparison between Newfoundland and New Brunswick. I think our population is about 125,000 greater than that of Newfoundland. Newfoundland just came into confederation a short time ago, and it is my understanding that that province is pressing for more judges. I believe that is correct.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would not know.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The hon. member would not know, and would not admit it if he did.


John Whitney Pickersgill: They only have three judges as opposed to the seven you have now.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I believe the number of judges New Brunswick has compares very favourably with the number of judges in other provinces of Canada. Nova Scotia has two more judges than New Brunswick, one more county court judge and one more supreme court judge. If the hon. member will look at the record- and I do not intend to take the time of the committee to go into detail on that point now

he will find that the other provinces in Canada have about the same number of judges in proportion to population as we have in New Brunswick.
There is another situation in New Brunswick which does not apply to most of the other provinces in Canada. We have about a 60-40 split in the population as between French speaking and English speaking. This makes a little extra work so far as the courts are concerned. I know that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has not mentioned this matter in too serious a vein. This request for a judge has been made by the barristers' society of New Brunswick and also by the chief justice, who is a very good friend of the hon. member-


John Whitney Pickersgill: And for whom I have very
great respect.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: -and whose judgment I think he believes as I do, is pretty sound in most things. We make no apology for asking for another judge in New Brunswick.
I might refer also to the fact that one of our judges, who is very well known to many of the members of this house, has been ill for some time. I refer to Mr. Justice Clovis T. Richard. We have been rather proud of our bench in New Brunswick, and for many years we have had outstanding men on that bench. I am satisfied that a judge is needed. I am pleased that the justice department has realized this and has acceded to the representations not only of the barristers' society and the chief justice, but also of the government of New Brunswick. I see no reason at all, Mr. Chairman, why the request should not be granted.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was just thinking of the taxpayers.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: You were just thinking, that is all.


Mr. Mcllrailh:: I want to ask the Minister of Justice some questions concerning that part of the resolution which relates to the province of Ontario. As I understand it, in the high court of Ontario there are a chief justice and 18 judges. The result of this proposal will be to increase the number of judges to 20. I believe that is undoubtedly necessary, because there has been a condition of overwork of the judges of the high court of Ontario.
With respect to the county courts in Ontario, my understanding is that there are now 64 judges in the county courts, and that the proposal is to increase that number to 70. The point which concerns me, and about which I desire some further information, is this. In the past, county court judges have been appointed to designated counties, that is each judge to his particular county. These six additional judges may or may not be necessary, depending on the areas to which they are to be appointed.
My reason for saying that is this. There has been a rapid growth in some parts of the province and a much slower rate of growth in other parts of the province. The boundaries of the older counties have not been changed for a great number of years. The consequence is that we have judges appointed to counties where the total population is of the order of 25,000 persons, and there is very little for them to do. In other parts of the province, where rapid growth has taken place, there may be one or two judges dealing with an area in which there is a population of a quarter of a million persons. The work is away beyond the capacity of

those judges, and it is that problem I have in mind. If the minister could give me any information as to where these six additional judges will be serving, I would be grateful to him.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I have had discussions on the point mentioned by the hon. member for Ottawa West, with the attorney general of Ontario. It is the intention that these judges be appointed to serve in those areas where their appointment will best resolve the disparity between places where there is a heavy case load and a carryover of cases, and other areas where there is a light case load and the judges are left with some time on their hands.
The attorney general of Ontario, as he has announced in the legislature of that province, is presently working on a scheme with a view to equalizing the judicial load as among the judges of the county courts and also with a view to equalizing what I might call the judicial services as among various areas of the province, so that ultimately county court judges in Ontario will each be doing approximately the same amount of work and the different areas of Ontario will be served, with respect to the speed of dispatch of their cases, equally well. In this way we will not have a situation where in one area the judges are overworked and cases are dragging, whereas in another area cases are heard and decided with dispatch.
As I understand it, and as the attorney general has discussed it with me, there is to be one extra judge for district No. 1.


Mr. Benidickson:: Could the minister indicate the geographical place name of the county seat?


Edmund Davie Fulton: As I recall it, in the No. 1 area the greatest case-load was in Essex; in district No. 2 there is to be one extra judge, and there the greatest case-load seems to be in Lincoln, Welland and Wentworth; in district No. 3 there is to be one extra judge available in the Simcoe area; district No. 4, which is York county, will have two extra judges. I do not think I need to say anything to my hon. friends from Ontario about the case-load in the county courts of that district. In district No. 8 there will be one extra judge, as I recall it, in the area of Sudbury.


George James McIlraith: It is rather interesting, as I understand it, that the minister is asking the house to approve a resolution providing for the appointment of judges in Ontario without knowing precisely where those judges will be appointed, and before the province has made the necessary legislative provision-
Judges Act


James Ross Fulton: My hon. friend is quite wrong.


George James McIlraith: I want to have that point clear.


James Ross Fulton: My hon. friend is quite wrong. The Ontario act, which was a bill to amend the county judges' act, was passed at the fourth session of the 25th legislature-that is their last session-and was proclaimed by order in council to come into force on August 21, 1958. Hence the six additional judges will be appointed under the provision of the Ontario act to which I have referred. If my hon. friend will look at section 2 of that bill he will see the provision relating to the appointment of these six judges.


George James McIlraith: I thank the minister for
clearing up that point; I had not understood his earlier remarks. I am concerned about one other thing. He has indicated the six areas in which he expects these judges to serve. As I understand the matter, the second or third heaviest case load in the province is in Ottawa, in the county of Carleton. There is a situation here which is not conducive to the best standards of the administration of justice because of overwork of the two judges in the county of Carleton. The situation has been alleviated by certain administrative changes whereby the county court judge of the counties of Prescott and Russell relieves and does a good deal of work in the county of Carleton. I hope that when this legislation passes the minister will bear that matter in mind in his further discussions with the attorney general of the province, in order to see whether the situation cannot be improved by way of providing additional judicial capacity for service in Carleton county.


James Ross Fulton: I shall be glad to do that.


William Moore Benidickson: My recollection is that these amendments to the complement of judges are preceded by conferences between the Minister of Justice and the attorneys general, because we have the peculiar situation in which the federal government pays the salaries of the judges yet the provinces must determine the geographical area of the county court set-up. In connection with the discussions which the minister has doubtless had with the attorney general preceding the introduction of this resolution and his announced intention, has he had from the attorney general of Ontario an indication that there would be any alteration in the pattern of the county court judicial seats in the Kenora and Rainy River districts?


James Ross Fulton: No, I have not. As I said a few moments ago, the attorney general of Ontario has in mind a scheme for improving the administration of the county courts generally,

Judges Act
but that is a scheme with relation to the whole province. Whether ultimately there would be any effect on the county or district mentioned by my hon. friend is something which I, of course, am not in a position to say. But in so far as the present situation is concerned, nothing in our discussions has led me to believe that a specific change will be made with relation to that area or that there will be any change unless and until there is an over-all change as a result of the implementation of a general scheme.


William Moore Benidickson: Our population there, of course, is growing fairly impressively, largely owing to the natural resource development. The Rainy River district court, perhaps from the point of view of the case load, has not been impressive, but on the other hand our geographical area is huge. In addition to that, on the eastern boundary of the district there is a development that I think will be extremely important from the point of view of population. I refer, of course, to the iron mine development at Steep Rock and Atikokan. I think it would be a most unfortunate step if we looked simply to the present case load and overlooked the great hardship to litigants as well as members of the bar if there was any thought of combining the two courts of Kenora and Rainy River.
The matter was drawn to my attention two or three years ago when I believe the attorney general of Ontario at that time asked the then minister of justice to increase the number of county court judges. It was conveyed to me indirectly that one of the places he had in mind for compensating reduction or economy in the matter of courts was the combination of the two county court seats of Kenora and Rainy River. I opposed that suggestion very strenuously and I think with some success. I just remind the minister that we would feel it to be a most unfortunate thing if, when we were increasing the judges in one place there should be great inconvenience caused to the public because of some form of trading on the basis of the final number of judges. Our geographical area is about one-eighth of Ontario, though we do not have that proportion of the 90 members of the legislature of Ontario.


The Deputy Chairman:: Shall the resolution carry?


John Richard Garland: Earlier the minister referred to what he described as the Sudbury area. Could he say whether it includes the district of Nipissing?


Edmund Davie Fulton: As I understand it, Mr. Chairman, at the present time it does not. Nipissing forms a separate county within district No. 8. As I understand the organization of the courts

in Ontario, Sudbury also forms a separate county or district within that general district. I pointed out that Sudbury seems to be the area of greatest case load at the present time within district No. 8, and I indicated that as I understand the scheme envisaged by the attorney general of Ontario, the intention is to make these initial six appointments as a first step in the equalizing of the case load throughout the county courts of Ontario. The exact places in which the judges will reside will be fixed later under the Ontario legislation. But the indication given me by the attorney general is as I have just given it to the house, namely that these are the areas of greatest case load and these are the areas in which he wishes to have these six county court judges serve in order to equalize the situation throughout the province.


John Richard Garland: When the minister says "reside" does he mean where they will carry out their duties.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Not necessarily. They will be available, as I understand it, to go on circuit, as it were. That is not the correct term because it usually applies to judges of superior courts, but it is something of the same nature that the attorney general has in mind. Their place of residence is to be fixed, but they will be available for work outside of that place of residence. The places I have designated are the ones which primarily need the assistance.


John Richard Garland: Will they have the status of judge or junior judge?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I am not certain. I believe they will all be judges except possibly the one in Essex, the one with respect to whom the intention is that he should primarily serve the Essex area. I do not have that information before me. Of course I shall have it before me at the time the appointments are actually made.


William Moore Benidickson: From time to time I
have noticed orders in council indicating that the Minister of Justice recommends to the privy council that certain judges be given leave of absence. I think probably it is required when for some reason they want to leave the province. Does the federal authority or the provincial authority deal with absences of judges of the county courts?


Edmund Davie Fulton: The federal authority also
deals with absences of judges from the county courts, and such leave of absence is given only after an assurance-which as I recall it in the case of county court judges comes from the attorney general-to the effect that arrangements have been made for

serving the area which that judge who was given a leave of absence would normally serve.


Mr. McMillan:: I think the minister referred to area No. 2, which would comprise Lincoln, Welland, Wentworth and, I presume, the city of Hamilton. At the present time Welland has two county court judges and Lincoln has one, and I do not know how many there are in Hamilton. I just wondered if the minister could be more specific and say to which county this extra judge would be assigned?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No, Mr. Chairman, I cannot
say at the present time. The scheme of the Ontario Act, as hon. members will see if they look at clause 2 thereof, provides for the appointment in such a manner that the area in which the judges are to reside and serve may be subsequently designated under the authority of the province. I have merely indicated that in the course of my discussions with the attorney general he passed on to me his desire to relieve the work load in the most overcrowded of these districts, that is, overcrowded in the sense of the number of cases on the dockets. I cannot be more specific at the moment than I have been, because this is the general outline I received from the attorney general.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Fulton thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-59, to amend the Judges Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times, considered in committee, reported, read the third time and passed.


Howard Charles Green: the second reading of Bill No. C-56, to authorize the construction of a bridge across Lubec channel between the province of New Brunswick and the state of Maine.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to authorize the construction of a bridge between Campobello island in the province of New Brunswick and the town of Lubec in the state of Maine. The bill provides that the province of New Brunswick may enter into an agreement with the state of Maine for the construction, maintenance and operation of such a bridge.
An act of the United States congress recently passed authorized the state highway commission of the state of Maine to construct, maintain and operate that part of the bridge
New Brunswick-Maine bridge extending from the international boundary to the mainland of the state of Maine. The matter will be submitted to the state legislature in Maine for action in January, 1959. The bridge will be for the free use and passage of persons, vehicles and goods from a point on Campobello island in New Brunswick to the town of Lubec in Maine.
At the present time there is a ferry service between Campobello island and Lubec, which is subsidized by the federal government under the Canadian maritime commission and the province of New Brunswick. The subsidy is shared equally between the two governments. The service, however, is limited and does not normally operate during the hours of darkness.
The province of New Brunswick has surveyed the area in conjunction with the state of Maine, and they jointly feel that the ferry service should be replaced by a permanent bridge. In part this decision is based on the fact that there are no medical facilities on Campobello island, and there have been many cases where emergency trips have had to be made under adverse and sometimes dangerous conditions. Further, for the development of trade and tourism it is felt that the existing ferry service is completely inadequate and should be replaced by a permanent structure.
The bill does not deal with financial matters; it merely permits the province of New Brunswick to enter into an agreement with the state of Maine, which agreement would cover the financial arrangements and the procedure for construction. This bill does, however, provide that any such agreement is subject to the approval of the governor in council, and also provides that construction must be in accordance with and subject to the regulations for safeguarding navigation.
The bill also provides that Canadian labour and materials to the extent of approximately 50 per cent shall be employed in the construction of the bridge. Arrangements for financing the construction of the bridge and approaches would in the first instance be a matter for agreement between the province of New Brunswick and the state of Maine, which agreement will be permitted by this legislation.
It is proposed that the design of the structure will be undertaken by the state highway commission. However, provision will be made in the agreement that tenders will be called both in Maine and New Brunswick.
As the proposed bridge would be built in the area included in the Passamaquoddy tidal development, which is before the international joint commission, confirmation has been obtained from the commission that the construction of a bridge at this location would not
4222	HOUSE OF
New Brunswick-Maine bridge interfere in any way with the proposals being considered by it. Furthermore, there would be no financial advantage in seeking to merge the proposed bridge with any of the dam structures under consideration for the power development project.
As this would be an international structure, and in view of the fact that the federal government now assumes 50 per cent of the ferry subsidy, the province of New Brunswick has requested that the federal government participate with the province in the case of the Canadian share of this structure. Should the necessary legislation be enacted and a satisfactory agreement entered into between the state of Maine and the province of New Brunswick, the federal government has agreed to share in the cost of the project with the province of New Brunswick. The present proposal is that the federal government will bear two thirds of the cost of the Canadian half of the structure and the New Brunswick approach and that the province of New Brunswick will assume one third of the cost of the structure and approach and, in addition, assume 100 per cent responsibility for the construction of a connection from the highway system to the bridge approach.
On the basis of preliminary estimates the Canadian share of the project would be $580,000, and funds for federal participation would be dealt with under the estimates of the Department of Public Works.
The total cost of the bridge is estimated at $1,050,000. The state of Maine will be responsible for half of that, and the federal government and the province of New Brunswick will be responsible for the other half, $525,000. In addition there is the cost of additional approaches to the bridge on Campobello island, which is estimated to be $6,000, and there is the cost of the road connection from the present New Brunswick highway on the island to the approaches to the bridge, which it is estimated will cost $49,000. The best figure we can get is that the cost in Canada would be approximately $354,000 to be paid by the federal government and $226,000 to be paid by the province of New Brunswick.
This is, of course, simply an enabling bill.


Mr. Maurice Bourgel (Levis):: Mr. Speaker, I do not think it will be necessary for me to speak at great length because, as the minister has just said, this bill is self-explanatory and is an enabling bill to give permission to the government of New Brunswick to enter into an agreement with the state of Maine, a measure which is necessary in accordance with article 92, section 10 of the British North America Act.
I suppose the minister has satisfied himself that there is a need for this bridge; in fact


I think he has shown that there is. And I take it he is satisfied that this is an economically justified project, because the share which the federal government will pay will replace the subsidy now being paid under the Canadian maritime commission. This being clear, I think we on this side have no objection to this measure. We are in accord with the principle of the bill and we approve the measure, though we will have some questions to ask during the committee stage.


Mr. R. D. C. Stewart (Charlotte):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on this bill with a great deal of pleasure and some degree of personal satisfaction. My personal satisfaction I will leave to my constituents to judge, but I do think some facts should be placed on the record to indicate the necessity for this bridge.
As hon. members know, Charlotte, my constituency, is a small county with a population of some 25,000, with three islands, one of which is called Campobello island, which has a population of some 1,300 and which is separated from the state of Maine by a narrow passage called the Lubec channel approximately 800 feet in width, and which is the means of access by the people of Campobello to the state of Maine and to the rest of Canada.
As the minister has pointed out, this need has been served in the past by a very inadequate ferry-a scow pushed by a small motor-which closes down at six o'clock in the evening. Anyone on the island after that has to stay on the island, and anyone who is off the island has to stay off the island. There are no facilities to enable people to to reach the island or leave it after nightfall; in case of illness a doctor cannot be brought to the island except by private boat.
The house might be interested to know that in 1957 exports from Campobello amounted to approximately $1,200,000. In the same year 130,000 foot passengers went from Campobello to Lubec, and 30,000 cars were taken across. Pulpwood was exported to the value of $200,000, and fish to the value of $600,000. As hon. members know, the greater proportion of the total export of sardines by the province of New Brunswick comes from my constituency, and a large percentage of that comes from the island of Campobello.
I think all this indicates very clearly the necessity for this bridge. As the Minister of Public Works has pointed out, this bill simply enables the province of New Brunswick to enter into an agreement with the state of Maine to provide for the construction and maintenance of this bridge. It will be a free bridge, and traffic will pass

over it freely. The people of Campobello have for many years advocated the building of such a bridge, and I am sure I am expressing their views when I say that they wish me to convey to this parliament the appreciation they feel for the steps which have been taken on their behalf. I am sure if this bill passes and becomes law we will have gained the undying gratitude of the people of Campobello and the people of Charlotte county.


Hazen Robert Argue: This is the type of bill which commends itself to all parties of this house. We know that the bridge which it is proposed to build will meet a very long standing need of the people of the island of Campobello, and we are pleased to lend our support to the passage of this measure.
This is another indication of the excellent relations which ordinarily exist between our country and the United States. The fact that we are able to work out with the United States a method of building a bridge such as this between our two countries is an indication that co-operation is usually possible and to our mutual benefit.
The Minister of Public Works has given us a fairly comprehensive review of the main features of the bill. I notice there is one provision which seems to make certain that the project will not run into such difficulties as have been experienced in connection with a certain well-known project in the city of Hull, namely the printing bureau. I do not know whether or not this is a new pattern which has been set by the government, but the government is certainly tightening its regulations and its supervision to make certain that if anything is done which might be of the nature of a scandal or an extravagant expenditure of public funds, it will be laid at the doorstep of the governor in council and not of some departmental official a certain number of rungs down the ladder. As the Minister of Public Works has explained, the governor in council will have to pass on the plans and drawings, and no subsequent material change can be made without his approval.
I do not know how the governor in council would have the time to supervise this kind of provision if it were in every act and if the government made it its business to carry it out under every act providing for construction, but it does seem to me to be an indication that the government is tightening up on the construction procedures in the Department of Public Works, and presumably in other departments, to make certain that full value is obtained for the construction dollar.
New Brunswick-Maine bridge
However, it will be very interesting in a few years, probably next year, to see whether or not we can have a full and wide ranging discussion of projects that have been built by this government such as has taken place in reference to other projects. I express the hope that in the days ahead we may have a chance to make a thorough and careful inquiry into projects constructed under this administration, following the provision of such a section as is in this bill, to see whether or not there has been inefficiency, extravagance and waste in connection with public funds.
There is a further provision in the bill which I think is most sensible, namely that in the building of this bridge 50 per cent of the content of labour and material in so far as may be practicable shall be Canadian. I think when we are building a bridge in conjunction with the United States it is only reasonable to say that 50 per cent of the labour force will be Canadian, if that is practicable, and also that 50 per cent of the material content shall also be of Canadian origin.
We are very pleased to support this bill, and we feel that it will prove of great value to the people of New Brunswick, to the residents of Maine and to Canadians and Americans generally in the years ahead.
Mr. G. R. McWilliam (Norlhumberland-
Miramichi): Mr. Speaker, the minister has said that this bill is enabling legislation. Like the hon. member for Charlotte, I say this bill is very welcome, particularly to the people of the southwest corner of the province and the people of Campobello island. I think the population figure is some 1,176. The hon. member for Charlotte gave statistics as to the amount of traffic and the volume of fish taken across Campobello island to the mainland and to the state of Maine.
While I support this bill, when I looked at the map the thought occurred to me to ask whether much consideration was given to the fact that perhaps in the days to come there may be a connecting link from the mainland of New Brunswick to the state of Maine by means of bridges or causeways across the islands in this part of the province. If that should come about it would seem to me it would be more practicable to build the bridge from Deer island to Eastport, Maine. Deer island lies fairly close to the state of Maine, but not as close as Campobello. On the other hand it is much closer to the mainland of New Brunswick, as the main part of Charlotte county.
Be that as it may, I do not offer it as anything that can be regarded as an attempt

New Brunswick-Maine bridge to object to the present bill. As I said before, I think everybody is in favour of it, and it is a bridge that is badly needed. When the bill is in committee I may have one or two observations to make. Perhaps at that time the minister may give us something more definite as to how the cost is to be shared. I did not quite catch his figures in his opening remarks. However, we can ascertain that when the bill is studied clause by clause.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Mr. Speaker, it is not my intention to hold up the passage of this bill. Like the hon. member who has just spoken and also the hon. member for Charlotte, we in New Brunswick are very much interested with the construction of this bridge from Campobello island across Lubec channel.
The hon. member for Northumberland-Miramichi spoke about connecting all the islands with Eastport or some other point in Maine. Of course this is a good start along that line, and it may be practicable in future years. If it is I am sure the present government will give it every consideration. It would have to be very carefully studied as a matter of course.
I am very happy indeed that the people of those three islands, Grand Manan, Deer island and Campobello island, have been recognized by the proposed construction of this bridge. In days gone by there has been excellent water transportation between Saint John and St. Andrews and the islands. No doubt that will still be continued, but this bridge means very much to the people of Campobello. I have recommended it in the past and I was very pleased indeed to give what assistance I could to the hon. member for Charlotte in his advocacy of this bridge.
Campobello island has had quite an interesting history. As a matter of fact all the three islands there of which we are very proud have a long and interesting history. They are very important, too, as part of the great fishing industry of the bay of Fundy. Campobello, as you know, was the summer home of the late President Roosevelt. I have not the least doubt that the construction of this bridge from Lubec to Campobello will bring about a very extensive tourist traffic from the mainland to the island. But more particularly it will be a great convenience to the people on Campobello island who, as was clearly stated by the minister and also by the hon. member for Charlotte, become isolated after certain hours of the day and the people also have not the necessary conveniences which people in other parts of New Brunswick, or in other parts of Canada have.
As I said a moment ago, I am very happy that this bridge is to be constructed and that 
the dominion government is bearing its share of the cost of construction.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Speaker, I too am not anxious either to oppose or hold up the bill. However, I do not think this is as routine a bill as some previous speakers have indicated. My recollection is that we have seldom if ever contributed to the construction of an international bridge. I do know that in the territory which I represent we have the United States across the Rainy river and for some years we have been interested in getting a federal contribution, probably jointly with the state of Minnesota and the province of Ontario, toward the construction of two international bridges which are badly needed in that area. We have always understood that since confederation this has not been one of the normal functions of the Department of Public Works. Therefore I hope when the minister replies he will indicate whether or not a new policy is developing in this respect.
As hon. members know, three or four years ago private bills were passed by the house for the construction of a bridge between Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, and Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, and so far it has not been possible to finance the bridge under the normal pattern that has prevailed at Niagara Falls, Brockville and other locations with which I am familiar. That pattern is that a private company usually arranges to obtain tax-free bond money from United States investors. The bonds are amortized over a period of years, and after they are paid off the bridge then reverts to the ownership of the people of the United States and Canada on a 50-50 basis. That has been the standard pattern. In the Rainy River district we have struggled valiantly to try to develop that kind of project, but we are having difficulty. Tenders were called two or three months ago and the costs were considerably greater than those estimated by the consulting engineers. That has caused a delay.
I think it is very important for people all across Canada to find out from the minister to what extent there are precedents for this type of federal contribution. We would be particularly happy to know that representations could be made from now on for federal contributions to bridges which have already been given approval in principle by the house but have not yet been constructed. I am thinking of the proposed bridges at Sault Ste. Marie and between Baudette, Minnesota, and Rainy River.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: I must inform the house that if the minister speaks now he will close the debate.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a very few words in closing the debate. First of all, with reference to the remarks of the hon. member for Assiniboia may I say that this is not a new type of bill. It is drawn in the standard form; and I would be unfair to my predecessor, Hon. Robert Winters, if I were to claim that we are adopting any new principle in bringing in a bill in this form. I am quite sure the hon. member will find that this is the standard form for an international bridge of this type.
The remarks of the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River were very interesting, but in the particular case now before the house the dominion government has been paying a subsidy for transportation and has recognized a responsibility to do so. I would not care to give any undertaking that every community which wants a bridge over international waters can get it merely by filing an application with the Department of Public Works. I think that would be true no matter who formed the government. It may be that the hon. member tried this out on Mr. Winters; I do not know. In any event, I am afraid I cannot give any commitment of that type today. With regard to the bridge at Sault Ste. Marie, I think that is a toll bridge.


William Moore Benidickson: There is no bridge at all
yet, but they are proposing to have a toll bridge.


Howard Charles Green: It is to be a toll bridge, and
there was no question at all of the federal government participating.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before	the bill passes,
would the minister permit me to ask one question. I do not think he answered the question of the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River with respect to whether this making of a financial contribution by the federal government was a new departure.


Howard Charles Green: No, Mr. Speaker, I believe it
is not a new departure. In certain cases this has been a responsibility that has been recognized before.


John Whitney Pickersgill: When I made statements
like that in the past I was always asked to cite an instance. Could the minister do that?


Howard Charles Green: I believe one example is the
bridge at St. Stephen, New Brunswick.


William Moore Benidickson: Since confederation?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Sevigny in the chair.
New Brunswick-Maine bridge
On clause 1-Short title.
Lionel Chevrier: Could the minister give
the house the total estimated cost of this bridge?


Howard Charles Green: The estimate of the cost is
$1,050,000. That is without the additional approaches and without the road connections from existing highways. Of the $1,050,000 the state of Maine will pay half, and I believe will be assisted by the federal government in Washington. The share of Canada and the province of New Brunswick will be $525,000. In addition to the $525,000 there will be the cost of the additional approaches on Campobello island, which is estimated at $6,000.


Maurice Bourget: May I interrupt the minister. Is he speaking of the approaches connected to the bridge directly? There are approaches to the bridge, but does the minister mean some other approaches?


Howard Charles Green: This is the approach to the
bridge itself. It is not a very big matter. It is only $6,000.


Lionel Chevrier: Could we have the total
estimate?


Howard Charles Green: That is a total of $531,000, of
which the federal share is two-thirds or $354,000, with New Brunswick paying the other one-third or $177,000. In addition, New Brunswick will pay the cost of a road connecting the present highway on Campobello island with the new approach to the bridge. That will cost $49,000, which brings the total of New Brunswick's share to $226,000.


Lionel Chevrier: Could the minister give me
the total estimate of all works including approaches and roads?


Howard Charles Green: The Canadian share-


Lionel Chevrier: No; the total project, the
United States and Canada.


Howard Charles Green: We do not know, of course,
what the cost of the approach on the Maine side will be. The total Canadian cost, including the connecting road, is $580,000. The Americans will have to pay half the cost of the bridge, $525,000.


Lionel Chevrier: What	is the	figure	of
$1,050,000?


Howard Charles Green: I should have said that this
is an additional approach on Campobello island. The main approaches on both sides are included in the total estimate of $1,050,000.


Lionel Chevrier: What	is the	figure	of
$1,050,000 which the minister gave earlier?

New Brunswick-Maine bridge I asked what the total estimate was and the minister gave a figure of $1,050,000.


Howard Charles Green: That is the estimated cost
of the structure, including approaches and engineering. The figure of $6,000 is for an additional approach on the Campobello island side.


Lionel Chevrier: Can the minister indicate
to the committee who prepared these estimates, and on what they were based?


Howard Charles Green: There have been long conversations among officials of the government of New Brunswick, the state of Maine and the Department of Public Works, and these estimates are the result of the collaboration among the three groups of engineers.


Lionel Chevrier: Can the minister say how many contracts will be involved in the Canadian part of this project?


Howard Charles Green: No, we cannot state that yet, It has not proceeded to that stage.


Lionel Chevrier: Will it be one contract or more than one?


Howard Charles Green: I cannot say that, but tenders are being called, both in Canada and in the United States.


Maurice Bourget: May I ask the minister if borings and soundings have been made?


Howard Charles Green: I am not in a position to give the committee that information, but I have little doubt that such precautions will be taken.


Maurice Bourget: May I ask the minister if the department has seen the plans for the bridge? Is it to be a steel bridge or a concrete bridge? I cannot understand clause 4, which says that the location, borings and soundings will have to be approved by the department. How can the minister explain this estimate of $1,050,000 if no soundings or borings have been made and no plans are made? Would it be a concrete bridge or a steel bridge?


Howard Charles Green: As the hon. member knows, it takes some time to work out plans. In this case the design will take about six months. The ordinary practice, as he is well aware having had experience in the Department of Public Works, is to have an estimate of what the project will cost. It would be unwise to go to all the expense of having this design done until there has been an approval of the scheme. As yet no one has any authority to proceed to prepare for the construction of the bridge.


Maurice Bourget: I just cannot follow the minister. He gave us an estimate of $1,050,000. How could he arrive at that figure if no plans have been drawn, no soundings and

no borings? It is just a figure taken out of the air. If you have no preliminary sketches how can you arrive at that figure?


An hon. Member:: Ask Mr. Walker.


Howard Charles Green: As the hon. member knows, this is always done. There is a preliminary estimate obtained.


Maurice Bourget: I have been told the policy has been changed.


Howard Charles Green: I did not say there had been any policy change in connection with this at all.


Maurice Bourget: We have been told that in the committee.


Howard Charles Green: Not in this committee.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: May I say, Mr. Chairman, that the province of New Brunswick knows this locality very well indeed, as do the engineers of the state of Maine. This channel is about 400 feet wide; they know how long the bridge will be and how wide a bridge will be necessary. They know all about the soundings and whether or not it is a rock bottom. There is no guesswork in connection with the estimate as to what it might cost to build a bridge that long, that wide, in that depth of water. It is very easy.


Maurice Bourget: It is not very easy. You may know the width of the channel and the depth of the water, but you are not sure unless you have made borings. We have had that experience. Unless you have made borings you cannot know the depth of the rock, and that is very important.


Mr. Bell (Sainl John-Albert):: The hon. member is in the wrong committee.


Maurice Bourget: I am in the committee of the whole here, and I am trying to find out how the department can arrive at an estimated cost of $1,050,000 without having borings or soundings made, without knowing what kind of bridge it will be, reinforced concrete or steel. We have nothing here. We have an estimate of $1,050,000, yet no one has seen the sketches.


Hazen Robert Argue: It sounds like the printing bureau.


Maurice Bourget: It sounds worse.


The Chairman:: I must remind the members of the committee that in this committee we cannot discuss what is going on in another committee. We must try to discuss the bill that is before us, and not become involved in a discussion of how costs for various constructions were arrived at.


Lionel Chevrier: On the point of order-


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: I have the floor at the moment. I must ask hon. members to please confine their remarks to the bill being discussed.


Hazen Robert Argue: On the point of order, I would ask Your Honour to give your ruling some reflection. As the Minister of Public Works has stated, it is estimated that the passage of this bill will involve an expenditure of $354,000 of federal money. Surely it is competent, on clause 1, for the hon. member for Levis, who has great experience in this field and wide knowledge because of his own training as well as his experience in the Department of Public Works, to ask the minister what I consider to be a very pertinent question, as to what prior knowledge the government has obtained before arriving at this very precise figure of $354,000. With great respect, although some of us have some other discussions in our minds, I would say that I do not believe the other discussion has been brought into this committee.


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: I really must say that what the hon. member for Assiniboia has stated has simply proven my earlier decision. I must ask the committee to discuss this one particular bridge. We cannot compare this bridge with what is happening in connection with the famous printing bureau, which is being discussed in another committee. I certainly agree with the hon. member for Assiniboia when he states that it is in order to discuss this particular bridge, and I must ask hon. members to discuss this bridge and this bridge alone.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I want to speak for a minute or two in a quite different vein.


An hon. Member:: One o'clock.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I shall reserve my remarks until later.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Charles Edward Rea: Shall clause 1
carry?


Maurice Bourget: I thought the minister would probably have some answer to the question we asked this morning prior to the luncheon recess.


Howard Charles Green: I checked up with regard to the preparatory work that has been done in connection with this structure. Apparently the state of Maine just recently completed a bridge of about the same dimensions. Hence
New Brunswick-Maine bridge they had a design which could be of use for this Campobello bridge. The work on the preliminary design was done by the government of Maine and that of New Brunswick. They had the estimate on the structural portion based on a tentative design which they were able to make as a result of soundings in which they found that there was a relatively firm bottom. It is believed that the bridge could be constructed on a pile type of foundation. No actual borings were done on the site.
If the bill becomes law, there will be detailed borings and they will take off a final design based upon them, from which detailed estimates will be made and plans and specifications prepared on which tenders would be called. Then, of course, there could be no final decision as to cost until the tenders were in. I point out that this is merely an enabling bill. Without such a bill nothing can be done leading to the construction of a bridge. The bill does not provide for the expenditure of any money. That would have to be done by an estimate, and of course that estimate would be subject to scrutiny by the house in the usual way. But there would be no point in getting final plans drawn if there is not the legislative foundation for the project.
In the bill which is being presented today that is all that is sought. It is merely an enabling bill. Once it has been passed there will have to be an exchange of notes between Canada and the United States. Then the state legislature will have to pass a bill; I believe they meet in January. If this enabling bill is not passed here at the present session there is a real doubt as to whether this bridge could be built. I am sure none of the hon. members would wish that to happen. Everyone who spoke on second reading spoke in favour of the bill. There is great importance in having it go through at the present session.


Maurice Bourget: I am quite in agreement with what the minister has just said, namely that it is only enabling legislation to permit the province of New Brunswick to enter into an agreement with the state of Maine. But in his remarks the minister also said that the cost of the bridge would be $1,050,000. I asked him at the time on what the estimate of $1,050,000 was based. There were no soundings, no borings and no plans.


Howard Charles Green: There were soundings; there were no borings.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Made by whom?


Howard Charles Green: The soundings were made by the state of Maine and the province of New Brunswick.
4223	HOUSE OF
New Brunswick-Maine bridge


Maurice Bourget: Even if soundings had been made, as an engineer I do not think that is the most important thing. From experience we know that what could be costly in the construction of a bridge are the piers, the foundation of the piers and abutments, because you never know what you are going to encounter. Even if the state of Maine had constructed a bridge 100 feet or 200 feet away from the location of the particular bridge mentioned in the bill, that does not mean that the solid rock would be of exactly the same nature in that particular location. It is necessary, and I do not think anybody will deny this statement, that borings be taken at that particular spot. I therefore cannot see how the minister can say the bridge will cost $1,050,000, because again there is no foundation for the estimate. He has not the information necessary to establish even an approximate estimate. What I am saying is said just to protect the minister.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Maurice Bourget: Oh, hon. members can laugh if they wish, but I am speaking from experience as an engineer. If the minister would ask his own chief engineer and his deputy minister, he would realize that what I am saying now is true. The minister has already mentioned that the share of the federal government will be $350,000. How does he know that? There are no plans, no sketches, no soundings, and no borings. The figure just came out of the air, that is all.
As I said, as far as our party is concerned we have no objection to the principle of the bill; far from it. However, we should like to have correct information about the cost of the bridge. That is what we want. I mention that point because the minister in his opening remarks stated that the cost of the bridge will be $1,050,000. Where that figure came from, nobody knows. Even the minister with the information he has is not in a position to tell us exactly where it comes from.


Howard Charles Green: The hon. member is not correct in that statement. I said this was an estimated cost at the present time.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Estimated by whom?


Howard Charles Green: This cost was worked out as a result of examinations made by the state of Maine and the province of New Brunswick. Soundings were taken in which it was found that there was a relatively firm bottom. They reached the conclusion that the foundation could be of a pile type. No one is committed to spend one cent at the moment. This is merely a preliminary estimate. My chief engineer advises me that this is the regular procedure, and is the proper procedure.


Lionel Chevrier: Certainly it is.


Howard Charles Green: Once there is authority to undertake the bridge, then of course detailed borings will be made and the plans and specifications will be drawn. In the meantime the government is not committed to spend one cent. I told the committee frankly this morning that this was the preliminary estimate, and how could you have anything more? If hon. members wish the project to go ahead I would say to them that they should let this bill pass. If it is to be dropped-


Maurice Bourget: We are for it.


Howard Charles Green: -they will have to take the responsibility. I am advised by my officials, and I believe the chief engineer is one of the best men in Canada for this type of work-


John Whitney Pickersgill: That is right.


Howard Charles Green: -that this is the way these preliminary estimates are made, and I should be unreasonable if I refused to accept that advice.


Maurice Bourget: May I say, Mr. Chairman, that as far as we are concerned we are for it. However, I just cannot see how the minister could give us an estimate of $1,050,000 when there is no plan and there are no borings. I hope he will ask his deputy minister or his chief engineer-


Howard Charles Green: I told the hon. member-


Maurice Bourget: The minister told me of soundings, and soundings are very different from borings.


Howard Charles Green: The state of Maine has built a bridge of approximately the same type.


Maurice Bourget: But not on the same site.


Howard Charles Green: No, but work has been done-


John Whitney Pickersgill: There was another printing bureau built in California.


An hon. Member:: The hon. member had better not mention the printing bureau.


Howard Charles Green: If it should be found as a result of further investigation that the scheme is going to cost more, naturally all governments concerned will have to consider whether they are going to go ahead with the project, and will be perfectly free to do so.


Lionel Chevrier: There are just one or two points about which I would like to ask the minister, and he will find very quickly that I am not in any disagreement with him but on the contrary I am in full agreement with some of the things he has said. In the first instance, I want it clearly understood that so far as we on this side of the house are

concerned, we are not opposing this bill. We are for this bill because we think it is a project which is in the general interest of the country.
The next point I would like to make is that I agree with the minister that it is only enabling legislation. The bridge may never be built, and this is to authorize the expenditure by the federal government of a certain amount of money.


Howard Charles Green: No, it does not authorize the expenditure of one cent.


Lionel Chevrier: It enables the federal government to enter into an agreement with the province of New Brunswick.


Howard Charles Green: No, no, it does not do that at all.


Lionel Chevrier: All right, perhaps the minister would explain.


Howard Charles Green: It enables the province of New Brunswick to enter into an agreement with the state of Maine.


Lionel Chevrier: Very well. I am corrected by what the minister has said; it enables the province of New Bunswick to enter into an agreement with the state of Maine for the construction of a bridge and I presume, from what the minister has said, that public funds voted by the parliament of Canada will eventually be paid in connection with the construction of the bridge. I could not agree more with the minister in respect of his statement that the practice followed by his department is that followed in respect of all projects, and I particularly refer to his statement that all this was a preliminary estimate and that you could not have any more at this time.
How could you? The project has not been gone into in the manner in which it should have been gone into, and it is therefore only a preliminary estimate; it is an intelligent guess, and it is not based on preliminary plans nor is it based on borings, as has been brought to the minister's attention.


Howard Charles Green: On soundings.


Maurice Bourget: There is a difference between borings and soundings.


Lionel Chevrier: If I might continue with what I was going to say, this is but a preliminary estimate, and when the time arrives for the determination of federal spending then the minister, I presume, will come forward with a detailed estimate based on complete plans of the superstructure and of the substructure of this construction on the Canadian side of the line, so we will be in a position at that stage, whether it is the
New Brunswick-Maine bridge second or third stage, to have before us all the details in connection with the project.
I was very glad, therefore, to hear the minister make the statement he did, particularly when he said it was a matter of practice in the Department of Public Works and that there was no change in policy, and with that statement I am in perfect accord.


Howard Charles Green: I said on projects of this kind.
Som


a hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Smith (Calgary South):: We are not in
the public accounts committee now.


William Hector McMillan: I understood the minister to say that this was the second international bridge built between the province of New Brunswick and the state of Maine; I think he referred to the one at St. Stephen, to which the federal government made a contribution. Most of the international bridges in the province of Ontario are fully paid for by that province, and at the present time there is talk of building another bridge across the Niagara river. Would the federal government give any consideration, if requested, to paying to Ontario two-thirds of the cost thereof?


Charles Edward Rea: Order. I must ask the hon. member for Welland to stick to the bill regarding this bridge.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I would like to continue with the point raised by the hon. member for Levis. We have been told by the minister and also by his colleague from New Brunswick, who is not now in the chamber-I hope I am not misconstruing anything he said-that the New Brunswick government knew all about this and that they had built other bridges and so on. We have now been told by the minister that he got some data from the government of the state of Maine, and that on this basis-


Howard Charles Green: And from the government of New Brunswick.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, yes, and from the government of New Brunswick. I do not want to be unfair in any way. In fact I want to be scrupulously fair about this matter, following an excellent example set for us in another place.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I want to get the facts straight and nothing but straight. In other words, there is absolutely no information in the possession of the minister's department which has been procured by his own officials on the site. Am I right in that assumption?


Howard Charles Green: I am not in a position to say to what extent the actual surveys were made
4230	HOUSE OF
New Brunswick-Maine bridge by officials of the Department of Public Works, but they were made by duly qualified engineers-certainly those of the government of New Brunswick and the state of Maine were well qualified-and all this information has been checked by our public works engineers. We have a tentative design in the department, and the officials have checked this preliminary estimate and they are satisfied with the information which has been furnished to them.


John Whitney Pickersgill: In other words, the minister believes that although no borings have been taken on the site and although there is no certainty as to where the piers for this bridge will have to be placed or how deep they will have to go, the estimate he has given us is an approximate estimate of what the cost of this project is likely to be; a good estimate, an estimate that will come somewhere close to what this structure will cost. I take that to be what the minister has been telling us, and that if he were not satisfied that this estimate is likely to turn out to be pretty close to the actual cost he would not be sponsoring this legislation at the present time.
I think we should not be misled; the minister has a very-I was going to say endearing, but perhaps that is a strong term to apply to the minister-a very insinuating way of implying things in this house without precisely saying them, and he has told us that no money will be spent on this project until an estimate is brought before the house and it has been fully considered and voted by this house. I doubt, however, that this would necessarily be the case, because it does not appear to me from this legislation that there will be any necessity of voting money until the stage arrives when the money is to be reimbursed to the government of New Brunswick.
I say this because if I do not misconstrue the legislation-and if I have misconstrued it the minister will correct me-this structure is to be built jointly by the government of New Brunswick and the government of the state of Maine.
When it has been built, the federal government will make its contribution to the cost. Therefore it would be quite possible for us to be faced with expenditures already made, as we have already been faced in this session with billions of dollars of expenditures which had already been made before parliament had had any voice in the matter. We would be faced with a fait accompli, and we would have no control over the situation. We would be told either you contribute or you don't; the money has been spent, and you can do nothing about it.


It seems to me this could easily happen under this legislation. The legislature of the state of Maine will meet, the minister says, some time next winter. They might want to get ahead with this bridge next summer. Our parliament might no longer be in session. The bridge might be one-third built before this parliament knew anything about the matter. There does not seem to be any safeguard in this bill to ensure that this would not happen.
It is true, as the minister has said, that we are not authorizing the expenditure of any money here. But we have had a little experience already of the relations between this government and the government of New Brunswick. We passed legislation in the last parliament, as will be recalled-and I am simply using this as an illustration, from analogy, of what might happen under this bill-lending $30 million to the government of New Brunswick to pay for a project which was already practically completed and over the expenditures concerning which we had no control in this parliament.


Thomas Miller Bell: Well, we got nothing out of the Liberal government for 23 years.


William Moore Benidickson: What about your St. Stephen, N.B. bridge replacement in 1956?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I may say I think the hon. member for Saint John-Albert ought to get himself put on the public accounts committee. He would be quite at home there.


Thomas Miller Bell: At least if I were on that committee I would go to the meetings.


William Moore Benidickson: Perhaps because you have nothing to do here.


John Whitney Pickersgill: What I am saying here is that we may very easily find ourselves in parliament in 1960, when the estimates of the minister's department come up for consideration, faced with an item in those estimates to pay for a bridge which is already half built, and parliament will have no opportunity to do anything about it.
That might not be so serious if there were some limit on what the federal expenditure might be, but under this open-ended commitment which the minister has been talking about there is no question but that after this debate today there will be an implied obligation on the part of this parliament to give the financial support which the minister indicated in his frank and forthright statement it is proposing to do, and I give the minister full credit for having made that statement. It does seem to me we are embarking on a very dangerous course which might end up by our being faced with the

expenditure of moneys which will have to be raised from the taxpayers of this country, moneys which will already have been spent by another government and another jurisdiction, over which we shall have no control whatsoever.
I think this was one of the reasons why my hon. friend from Levis was so concerned about the accuracy of this estimate and the completeness of plans and specifications. I think he has good reason to be concerned, because we know that the estimates in the minister's department are not always completely accurate; and if we have any doubt about that we could not have a better illustration than one which appeared in last evening's Citizen about a certain cafe or cafeteria on which the minister's department made an estimate of $700,000-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Charles Edward Rea: Would the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate explain to me how he relates a cafeteria to a bridge?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I suspect, sir, that your attention must have been distracted for just a moment from what I was saying. I was talking-


An hon. Member:: Just talking.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was talking about the estimate which the minister gave us for this bridge, and I was saying that estimates of that character-estimates without complete plans, without final specifications have been made and even estimates with them-can sometimes be very inaccurate. I was illustrating that from a very recent experience, not from an experience of 12 or 15 years ago but an experience about which we learned only yesterday, when the minister's department, after the plans and specifications for the job were completed-


Howard Charles Green: I must raise a point of order. This has nothing to do with the bill before the committee, and the hon. member has no right to be arguing along those lines. If he can raise a point with regard to one building he could argue in connection with this bill matters having to do with every structure built by the Department of Public Works across Canada. That shows how far out of order the hon. gentleman is in trying to argue in the way he is doing.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Would the chairman hear me on the point of order raised by the minister. My position is this. We have been presented here with a project and we have been told by the minister that this project will, he estimates, cost $1,050,000. We have been inquiring into the basis of the minister's estimate, and we have not been very well
New Brunswick-Maine bridge satisfied with the information we have as to the basis of that estimate, and I was suggesting that it might be very wide of the mark, that it might be a very long way indeed from what this project may cost.
In order to give substance to that argument I was not going far afield; I was illustrating from something which happened very recently in the minister's own department. Surely if we are going to be so circumscribed that we cannot compare one thing with another there can be no debate in this house, and we are moving toward a one party state which seems to be desired by some people in this house.


Charles Edward Rea: I do not think the hon. gentleman should read a newspaper report which may or may not be correct. The Chair does not think he should read these newspaper reports which may or may not be factual in these circumstances.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was not going to read a newspaper report at all. All I was going to say was that this building was supposed to cost $700,000-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


John Whitney Pickersgill: And the lowest bid was well over $900,000, which shows how inaccurate these estimates can sometimes be.


Charles Edward Rea: I do not know how the cost of a building has anything to do with the cost of this bridge. I cannot see that it does, and I think I will have to ask the hon. member to stick closer to this particular bridge that we are discussing.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am very happy indeed to do that.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I come back now to my main preoccupation, which is that under this legislation and in line with the intention announced by the government it will be possible for this bridge to be built before any estimate ever appears before this committee for consideration. I think we should have some kind of assurance from the government or some kind of safeguard in the bill, one or the other, that this will not happen; that this project will not be embarked upon, if there is to be any federal contribution to it, until we have had before us full and complete detailed plans and detailed estimates of costs and an agreement with the province about the sharing of costs on which this parliament can pass before the work is done.


Howard Charles Green: The hon. member has considerable ability. He has been a friend of mine for many years, but I would point out to him with great kindness that if he is not
4232	HOUSE OF
New Brunswick-Maine bridge more careful than he has been in recent days he is going to be considered as advocating a one man parliament, let alone a one party state about which he talks so much.
He has had experience as clerk of the privy council; he knows very well what happens, and he should not try to pull the wool over the eyes of many other members in this house, to lead them to believe there is something that is not just quite right about this whole transaction. This is merely enabling legislation. The federal government has the right to approve or reject plans which are agreed upon between the province of New Brunswick and the state of Maine. Those plans have to be approved by the governor in council.
If and when that is done I presume the procedure would be to put an amount in the estimates for the current year, I hope for the next fiscal year. The government of the day has to take the responsibility for doing that, and then it has to justify that expenditure when it comes to the House of Commons. If the members decide that the estimate is not a proper one, then the government will be defeated. This is the democratic process.
This suggestion that we should give a commitment on this and a commitment on that before this enabling bill is allowed to go through is childish, nothing more nor less than childish. Of course it might look all right in the press; for the moment it might impress somebody who has not had any experience in the House of Commons, but I am afraid that in making arguments of this kind the hon. member is not being very helpful. If he does not want this bridge built, if his aim is to kill the bill and stop the province of New Brunswick and the state of Maine from undertaking a venture of this kind, that is one thing. Mind you, his talk this afternoon makes me wonder whether or not that is the fact.


Lionel Chevrier: Why does the minister not stick to the facts?


Thomas Miller Bell: The hon.
member is against everything in the mari-times.


Howard Charles Green: Surely if everybody is in favour of this bill, and the normal practice is being followed by the present government and by the Department of Public Works, I do not see what the hon. member is whining about. I go right back to the statement I made some weeks ago, that in order to be effective in opposition you must learn the art of whining -I was good at it myself-but you must have something to whine about, and the hon. member does not have anything in this.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I cannot believe the Minister of Public Works would consider that talking about the rights of parliament, so long


as he sits in the cabinet with the present Prime Minister is something that is improper. Under our British system of government it is not for the government to decide finally what will be spent; it is for parliament to decide what will be spent. It is true that this government, having spent so many billions of dollars without the prior approval of parliament, has perhaps got the habit and has perhaps forgotten that even though the opposition is small it has still a duty to criticize any actual and also any potential expenditures and any commitments for expenditures. All I was pointing out was that it would be quite possible for this bridge to be partly built before one dollar ever appeared in the estimates. Parliament would then be faced with a fait accompli and the minister has done nothing whatsoever to reply to that argument.


Mr. Crestohl:: One thing is abundantly clear, namely that everyone is in favour of the bill.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Leon David Crestohl: Everybody has said so.


Mr. Palleil:: Everybody but the Liberals.


Leon David Crestohl: The agreement which the minister has mentioned could do him a disservice, and let me point out why. He says it is regular practice to make a rough estimate of a project, and it is sensible that it should be so, even before the final plans and specifications are cleared. We have learned that quite recently, and the minister is quite right when he says that. But I think a disservice to the minister could result if we do not put this bill through properly, because some day he may be facing the tender attention of the hon. member for Rosedale if the matter should come before the public accounts committee.


Charles Edward Rea: Shall clause 1 carry?


William Moore Benidickson: Earlier I asked the
minister about some precedents for a federal contribution of this kind. During the noon recess I examined the bill. I am not sure whether the authorization is based on the Navigable Waters Protection Act, as some of the private bridge bills have been in the past, or whether it is by reason of the information he gave us when he spoke on the introduction of the resolution, namely that there would be a federal contribution.
I point out that this feature perhaps makes this bill decidedly different from the two bills to which I referred this morning, namely the bill incorporating the Baudette and Rainy River Municipal Bridge Company and the St. Mary's River Bridge Company. This morning I was* not sure that the minister was too well acquainted with the situation with respect to an international

bridge at Sault Ste. Marie. It was with reference to that location that the St. Mary's Bridge Company came to this house and received authorization in a private statute. I ask the minister whether or not one of the key points in his negotiations with the province of New Brunswick respecting a federal grant was the stipulation which we shall come to subsequently, namely that if there is a federal contribution it will be a toll-free bridge? Was that a stipulation on the part of the federal administration?


Howard Charles Green: Oh, yes; this is to be a toll-free bridge. That is contained in clause 3 of the bill.


William Moore Benidickson: That is the point,
Mr. Chairman. So far as I can find out, everywhere else in Canada people are obliged to build an international bridge by use of the device that is outlined in Bill No. 115 of the 1955 session, which refers to the Baudette and Rainy River Municipal Bridge Company.
I believe the province of Ontario has been just as loath or reluctant to make contributions to international bridges as the minister indicated has been the history of the federal administration since confederation. I am not completely up to date in my research because of the lack of time during the noon recess, but I do have here a return of the Ontario legislature dated April, 1954, in which this question, No. 56, was asked and answered in the Ontario legislature:
What is the policy of the government relative to making any financial contribution toward the cost of construction of a bridge across an interprovincial or international river?
There were some other questions but for the sake of brevity I will not read them. The minister of public works for Ontario replied as follows:
No statutory provision. No financial assistance granted through the department of public works for new construction of an interprovincial or international bridge since 1947.
The actual contributions made over the years before 1947 were very small indeed. I believe that since that time the province of Ontario has entered into an agreement with the province of Quebec and the federal government with respect at least to the bridge at Pembroke and perhaps another bridge. I am just indicating again that this proposal is something very rare indeed so far as national policy is concerned.
I say that I am not opposed to it. If the minister will say forthrightly that he is now embarking on a new policy that will be applicable equally, where circumstances warrant it, in other sections of the country, I think the house will applaud such an assertion. But the point I want to make is that
New Brunswick-Maine bridge everywhere else in Canada where a means of crossing an international stream is required, it is necessary for private individuals to undertake through private companies the construction of a toll bridge. The public pays the cost of such bridges. I simply want to know whether or not, if the province of Ontario changes its mind and decides that it is willing to enter into agreements with the state of Michigan and the state of Minnesota-


Charles Edward Rea: Order. I will have to ask the hon. member to come back to the bill respecting a bridge between the province of New Brunswick and the state of Maine.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, I do not think we can accept the bill unless, as we normally expect in the federal arena, we have some assertion that the principle and policies of the bill will be generally applicable. I simply raise this question. If the province of Ontario decides, contrary to its announcement of about six weeks ago-


Howard Charles Green: The chairman ruled against you and you are going on.


William Moore Benidickson: No, he has not ruled
against me. I am saying there is an analogy here. I need satisfaction from the minister. I need answers from the minister at this stage of the debate before I can properly exercise my responsibility in voting upon subsequent clauses of the bill. This bill relates to the construction of a bridge in a certain section of Canada. I simply ask the minister whether, if Ontario changes its view about the construction of toll bridges at Sault Ste. Marie and Fort Frances and agrees to toll-free bridge construction, would a similar contribution be available from the federal government on the basis of this bill and this principle, which I say is rare and new, if traffic statistics and other things indicated that it was justifiable?


Howard Charles Green: I point out to the committee, as has been pointed out already by several hon. members, that this is a case where 1,200 to 1,500 Canadians are living on an island off the coast of Maine and their means of transportation to the mainland is by ferry to the state of Maine. There are occasions when people have become seriously ill and have had to be taken over by boat. I believe some very tragic incidents have happened because there has been no bridge there.


William Moore Benidickson: I am sympathetic to the bill.


Howard Charles Green: There is not the slightest comparison with conditions in other parts of Canada where thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of tourists travel every summer and are in a position to pay the cost of a toll bridge. This is a case which should not

New Brunswick-Maine bridge be confused with bridges in other parts of Canada. The government has no apology whatever to offer for proposing to undertake this project. At nearby St. Stephen, New Brunswick, an international bridge was built and the whole of Canada's share of the cost was paid by the federal government. The province of New Brunswick was not asked to make any contribution at all. There are other cases in New Brunswick of older bridges where there were different degrees of cooperation between the federal and provincial governments in order that an international bridge might be built.
This is the situation with regard to the proposed Campobello-Lubec bridge. The hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River knows very well that I cannot be tempted into making a commitment to build a bridge in his riding or to contribute toward a bridge in his riding simply because we are taking this step-


William Moore Benidickson: I referred to situations outside my riding.


Howard Charles Green: -to help the people of Campo-bello island.


George Roy McWilliam: Has the minister the figure available as to the amount of the ferry subsidy?


Howard Charles Green: It varies slightly. It is about $8,600 per year.


William Moore Benidickson: The minister referred to the St. Stephen bridge in New Brunswick, but I have found there are also others at such places as St. Croix, St. Leonard, Clair and Edmundston, all in New Brunswick, which were constructed with some form of federal assistance provided through votes or bills such as we now have before us. Is there any reason why all the precedents happen to be in the province of New Brunswick? Is there some pre-confederation agreement that applies to New Brunswick and therefore would rule out a similar grant in any other province.


Howard Charles Green: I do not know what the hon. member has against the province of New Brunswick.


William Moore Benidickson: Now, Mr. Chairman, the minister is putting words in my mouth. I said I had no objection to the passage of this bill, but I was hoping that something similar would be available to other provinces. I asked him a straightforward question. I am sure that before he decided to recommend the expenditure of this amount of money to his colleagues he must have looked at some of the precedents and the law that would apply. I simply ask him a straightforward question. Has he determined that there is some special reason why all the precedents with respect

to federal contributions to international bridges happen to apply only in the province of New Brunswick?


Howard Charles Green: No, Mr. Chairman, there is nothing. That question does not really arise at all. This project was undertaken because it was considered to be a proper project for the federal government to assist. I presume that earlier governments which gave assistance to other projects were of the same opinion. The hon. member must bear in mind that there are very few provinces in Canada in which any international bridges are situated.


William Moore Benidickson: What about Ontario, with its hundreds of miles of international boundary?


Howard Charles Green: Poor old Ontario has a hard time, I admit, but we are spending quite a lot of money in Ontario too.


William Moore Benidickson: I think the premier of Ontario will be coming to see the Minister of Public Works very shortly with respect to the Sault Ste. Marie, Fort Frances and Rainy River bridges.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 2, 3 agreed to.
On clause 4-Plans and drawings to be submitted.
Lionel Chevrier: I should like to move an amendment to this clause. I move:
That section 4, subsection 2, be amended by inserting after the word "council" in line 8 the following words: "and public tenders have been called."
I should like to say a few words on the amendment, Mr. Chairman. It is one which I feel should go into this clause. I hope the minister will not have any objection to it. If not, then perhaps we can dispose of it without anything more being said.


Howard Charles Green: The tenders will be called, I presume, by the province of New Brunswick. Of course the dominion would insist that proper procedures be followed. In view of the fact that there are several governments concerned we could not accept this amendment. It does nothing to improve the practice with regard to the construction of the project. As the hon. member knows, public tenders always are called, certainly by the federal government, and I think it would be quite inappropriate to put that in this bill.


Lionel Chevrier: It does nothing to improve it, but it simply affirms the position, and there would be no harm in doing that.
Amendment (Mr. Chevrier) negatived: Yeas, 23; nays, 64.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
On clause 5-Labour and materials.	Mr. Benidickson: See clause 3.
George Roy McWilliam: Clause 5 says:
Where available in Canada, Canadian labour and materials, to the extent of 50 per cent, as nearly as may be, of the cost of such labour and materials respectively, shall be employed in the construction of the bridge,-
Would the minister consider adding after the word "respectively", "with preference for local labour and materials so far as it is possible to do so".


Howard Charles Green: This is a provision which is found in the ordinary contracts of the Department of Public Works. There would be no need to insert that in the bill.


William Moore Benidickson: With respect to this
matter of construction, which involves the cost of both labour and materials, I do not know whether or not the committee is aware of the fact but when a bridge is constructed on the basis I previously outlined, namely by a private bridge company, the private bridge company is also obligated to provide accommodation for governmental inspection services on an international basis. Has the minister given consideration, in his discussions with the province, as to what the situation would be here? In so far as the federal customs and immigration facilities at either end of the bridge are concerned, are they to be part of the estimate of $1,050,000 to be shared jointly, or would facilities of this kind, unlike the obligation of a private bridge company, be solely at the expense of the two federal governments?


Howard Charles Green: I do not think they would be. We will bear that in mind.


William Moore Benidickson: The minister does not think they would be what?


Howard Charles Green: I presume the United States would have to pay for their own customs and immigration buildings, and we would have to do the same.


William Moore Benidickson: Is it not likely that the cost of the examining rooms on the Canadian side of the bridge or even on the United States side would be part of the estimate of a little over a million dollars, which the minister indicated would be the cost of construction?


Howard Charles Green: I am not sure about that, but I do not think the province should have to share in the cost of any such buildings.


William Hector McMillan: I want to ask one question. Would the federal government assume any maintenance costs after the bridge is built?


Howard Charles Green: I am not sure about that. I think the maintenance costs would have to be borne by the province.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clause 6 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Rea in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Indian affairs branch-
66. Administration, $565,938.
Lionel Chevrier: May I ask the minister, since this is a matter concerning Indian lands, how many islands in the international section of the St. Lawrence river were affected by the power development? What were they, and how much compensation was paid to the federal government by Ontario hydro?


Mrs. Fairclough:: I will secure that information for the hon. member as soon as the officials have appeared.


John Whitney Pickersgill: When the officials come, could the hon. lady tell us the point she has reached in the negotiations with the St. Lawrence seaway authority over the Caugh-nawaga expropriation, a subject that is not exactly simple, as I think the hon. lady would agree?


Lionel Chevrier: If I may add to that, Mr. Chairman, I noticed recently that there were a number of things being done around the Caughnawaga reserve arising out of the St. Lawrence seaway construction program. I should like to inquire from the minister just what expenditures were made, either by her department or at the request of her department by the St. Lawrence seaway authority: (1) to construct a drainage system; (2) to construct a sewage system; (3) to construct a water system for the village of Caughnawaga.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: With regard to the first two questions which the hon. member for Laurier asked with reference to the number of islands and the compensation, I am advised by my officials that we do not have that information in the house. However, we will secure it for the hon. gentleman.
The Depuiy Chairman: Shall vote 66 carry?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, no. The hon. lady was going to tell me about Caughnawaga. I think we ought to keep the Minister of Transport here because he is the other party.


Lionel Chevrier: He has a faculty of coming in and going out.
4236	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think we ought to keep the Minister of Transport here because he is very much interested in this matter.


Howard Charles Green: He is coming back.


Lionel Chevrier: I think the Minister of Transport should be sitting with the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I might advise the hon. member that he could ask these questions of the Minister of Transport because I think probably they are more properly related to his department than to mine. But in so far as compensation is concerned, I am told that a total of 214 individuals are entitled to compensation as a result of expropriations made by the St. Lawrence seaway authority and that as of August 20 settlements have been reached with 195 individuals.


Lionel Chevrier: For how much?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We do not have the amount. However, we can get that information very shortly.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I must say that, generally speaking, I find myself in substantial agreement with my friend and colleague the hon. member for Laurier. But when he was chairman of the St. Lawrence seaway authority we could never quite see eye to eye on this subject because I felt that my primary duty was not as a minister of the crown but as superintendent general of Indian affairs; and I took the view that we could never have final settlement with the St. Lawrence seaway authority until all the Indians had been satisfied. I trust that the hon. lady is holding firm in the same way I did, is not yielding to the importunities of the Minister of Transport or the present chairman of the St. Lawrence seaway authority and is not sacrificing any possible rights of the Indians. I am sure she is doing so.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The hon. member is quite right. We are not satisfied until proper compensation has been paid to all of them; until they are happy.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the hon. lady has gone a little bit far in saying "happy".


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I will say "satisfied". Maybe I did go rather far.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was quite sincerely trying to help the hon. lady when I said that, because I know what a difficult thing this is. I am not in the least seeking to be contentious about it. All I wanted to do was to be quite reassured. The hon. lady will no doubt recall that when I was in the position which she is in I gave on behalf of the administration of that day, an assurance that, notwithstanding the legal rights of the matter, any


Indian who wanted to take his case to the exchequer court would in one way or another be given the facility of doing so by the government. I should like to be sure that that will be the policy of the present administration as well.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: This matter has not come to my personal attention until now but I am informed that we are consulting at the present time with the Department of Justice on the matter.


Lionel Chevrier: There was some information that I required earlier about what was being done around the village of Caughnawaga in connection with water facilities, sewerage facilities and drainage facilities. Here perhaps the minister would allow me to say that I should like to commend the officers of her department, particularly the person who holds the position of superintendent general of Indian affairs, for insisting upon the protection that the Indians should get in so far as their rights were concerned. A while ago I referred to the superintendent of Indian affairs. I should have called him the director of the branch. He is the person I had in mind. Not only did he look to the interests of the Indians of Caughnawaga in so far as the project of the seaway was concerned but he insisted upon greater facilities being given to the Indians than they then possessed. While we could not see eye to eye with that point of view at the beginning, we gradually came around to it because we felt that here, while legally speaking the Indians were entitled to a replacement in kind of the facilities they possessed, nevertheless in this day and age the facilities which they received were far better than those which had existed in the past. Because of that consideration I believe water facilities and sewerage facilities were given to the reserve. I see now by the press that a contract is being advertised for drainage in connection with the village. That is why I should like to know from the minister what were these three items of expenditures that were made either at the request of her department to the St. Lawrence seaway authority, or by the seaway authority itself. Perhaps the minister cannot give that information to me at once but it may be that before the termination of the discussion of her estimates she can do so. I should like to be brought up to date on those items.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: With regard to sewage and water, may I say that the seaway contributed $200,000 to this project and the government $50,000. The project is now complete. In so far as drainage is concerned, that is a matter that is at present under consideration as the hon. gentleman apparently knows.


Lionel Chevrier: I know only what I saw in the press. How much will it cost?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We do not know until the tenders are in. We have called for tenders on it.


Lionel Chevrier: Is there not an estimate of the cost?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We think about $25,000. But of course until we get the tenders in, we cannot tell.


Lionel Chevrier: What about water? Provision was made for giving water to the Indians during the course of construction. What did that cost?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The individual connections are now being arranged. Arrangements are being made with the branch to handle actual mechanics of the connections.


Lionel Chevrier: What was the cost?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The individual will pay for the individual connection to the main. However, the actual work will be handled by the department.


Lionel Chevrier: I think there is a misunderstanding. What I had reference to was the contamination of the wells during the course of construction. It was so serious a matter that at one time we feared there might be an epidemic and we were obliged to provide water at the time. I wondered whether that project had been completed and what it cost.


Mr. Small:: May I ask the hon. member for Laurier a question? Would not the health authorities of the province, including the sanitation officers, insist on that being done whenever a new subdivision is going up? Would that not be insisted upon by the province, that proper water and sewers and so on be put in before they built any homes?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The actual installation of water services, that is the main service, was included in the figure I gave.


Lionel Chevrier: In the $250,000?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes, and the individual connections, of course, are the responsibility of the individual occupant.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if the hon. lady recalls the questions I asked last Saturday about education, scholarships and economic developments?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I prepared some answers to those questions which I shall be glad to give the hon. member. He raised the question of progress being made in joint education and in the scholarship plan designed to encourage promising Indian students to enter universities and other 57071-3-268
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration institutions of higher learning. During the fiscal year 1957-58 fifteen agreements for joint schools were completed at a cost of $949,747 to the Canadian government, involving 1,000 children. For the current year seven joint agreements have been approved, six are now under consideration and data is being gathered on nine more, making a total of 22 for the current fiscal year, involving approximately 900 children.
The number of children enrolled in provincial and private schools in 1956-57 was 6,272, and in 1957-58, 7,330. It is anticipated that 8,500 Indian children will attend nonIndian schools in 1958-59.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Just for the sake of continuity, does the hon. lady happen to have the total number of Indian children attending school, because I think it would be nice to have that on the record right at this point.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Attending all schools?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, so that we might have the proportion at the joint schools.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The total is 37,537, and that includes day, residential and non-Indian schools; at day schools there are 20,125, in residential schools 10,082 and, as I have said, in the non-Indian schools 7,330.


John Whitney Pickersgill: So that steady progress is being made.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes. Reference was also made to scholarships. The department has awarded 14 scholarships. These 14 scholarships are included in the number of 403 Indian students enrolled in professional and other courses and they were awarded simply on the basis of outstanding scholastic ability. These scholarships are in addition to the amount given as a tuition grant to Indian pupils who required it.
Mention was made of vocational training. This practical aspect of the educational process is gaining impetus with - increasing numbers of Indian boys and girls enrolled in trade and vocational schools throughout Canada, the cost of their tuition being provided by the department. Last year in our Indian schools 2,620 boys were instructed in the fundamentals of woodworking and motor mechanics, while 3,226 girls received instruction in home-making, cooking and sewing. This type of practical education is being extended into the adult field. Last year over 500 Indian men and women participated in similar courses on Indian reserves.
I am pleased to assure the hon. member that the economic development program which has been established by the Indian affairs branch is being vigorously pressed forward and that substantial progress has been made

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration during the past year in assisting and encouraging the employment of Indians in a variety of occupations in non-Indian communities.
Additional placement officers have been appointed and there are now six regional placement officers and a senior placement officer at headquarters to carry on this important work. The placement officers are largely concerned with the problem of selection of suitable Indians for employment in urban centres. Rural placement has not been overlooked and the fur supervisors employed by the branch were recently reclassified as field officers with the added responsibility of assisting in placement work in rural areas.
Up to the present emphasis has been placed on careful selection of Indians where individual placements are concerned and this policy necessarily should continue for some time to come. In other words, we have emphasized policy rather than the quantity of candidates placed on the grounds that they must prove their worth to employers as well as their adaptability in the non-Indian communities so that those who come after may find ready acceptance by the employer and the community generally. In addition, it has been necessary to develop procedures to recruit and train staff and to establish liaison with employment agencies and employers generally.
From April, 1957 to July, 1958 there is a record of 150 Indians successfully placed in permanent urban employment, of whom 117 were in skilled trades. Our records also show group placements of 788 Indians in agriculture, construction, road-clearing and lumbering. These figures represent only the employment achievements of the new program in its first year of operation. It should be understood that a large number of Indians continue to find work on their own initiative and through the assistance of the Indian agency organization in the field and are not included in these figures.
I should mention that the education division of the Indian affairs branch has been instrumental in providing vocational training and in arranging on-the-job training, and that the results of courses in carpentry and other technical trades have been encouraging. For example, of 29 graduates from the Vancouver vocational institute referred for placement, 26 were successfully placed in permanent employment. The practice of developing the educational standards and technical skills of Indians to fit them for employment in trades which provide greater opportunities will be continued and expanded as time goes on.
I should like to refer briefly to a few group placement projects which will illustrate the

progress made in this field. For several years there has been an influx of Indians to southern Alberta to assist in the cultivation and harvesting of beet crops. The numbers have increased each year. Last year approximately 600 were employed and this year the objective is to recruit 1,000 Indians, not only from northern Alberta but from Saskatchewan. Arrangements were carried on through liaison with the national employment service which was responsible for the actual movement of the Indians.
Last winter through co-operation with the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and the Department of Public Works the Indian affairs branch supervised the clearing of 24 miles of right of way between Fort Rae and Yellowknife in the Northwest Territories. One hundred and twenty Indians were employed at one stage or another and earned a total of $58,000. This was of great assistance in reducing the number of relief recipients in the area. In addition, 250 Indians were employed by a private contractor in clearing work in the same general area. In both cases the Indians' work performance was reported to be very satisfactory.
Substantial numbers of Indians are employed in the International Nickel project at Thompson, Manitoba and an Indian community has grown up at Schefferville, Quebec, the centre of the important iron ore project there. Elsewhere Indians continue to be employed in mining operations, both above and below ground, and in railway construction and maintenance, as well as in many urban occupations.
Employment opportunities are of course dependent to a considerable extent on the general level of business activity and we look forward to an increase in the number of Indians employed off reserves during the forthcoming year. The goodwill and support of employers are most important in expanding the placement program. In this regard I feel I should mention a letter received a few days ago from a mine manager in the province of Quebec who, on the basis of successful employment of Indians in his mine, has asked our assistance in referring to him an Indian who could be trained for a supervisory position in that mine. This is only one instance of the results which can be expected through confidence gained from satisfactory experience with Indian labour. It is anticipated that as this program develops there will be increasing recognition of the important contribution which the Indian labour force can make to the development and expansion of the Canadian economy in a wider range of pursuits and occupations.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
I should also refer to the questions asked by the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria with regard to drinking water facilities for Indians on the Eskasoni reserve. The department has been seeking a satisfactory solution to this problem and on technical advice came to the conclusion that the only permanent and satisfactory method of meeting water supply needs would be the installation of a water pressure system rather than reliance on drilled wells. To this end the Indians have agreed to meet partial cost of the installation from their band funds. It is estimated that the installation will cost in the neighbourhood of $100,000.


Lester Bowles Pearson: As the minister no doubt knows, for many years there have been Indian boys' and girls' high schools conducted by the Jesuit order at Spanish, Ontario, and these have done a great deal of good by providing for the education of Indians of Wikwemikong, Shequiandah, and Kaboni on Manitoulin island, and along the north shore as well as for some non-Indian students. These high schools are now about to close. I am sure that all those in the area will understand the reason for this, though they will regret the necessity. Can the minister tell us whether any provision will be made for the high school education of children who have in the past been going to these schools.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: If the hon. Leader of the Opposition will agree, perhaps we can wait until we come to the item on education.


John Whitney Pickersgill: There is one general question I should like to ask and which, I think, should come under the administration item. I might have asked it the other evening if I had not been in such a hurry to get the hon. lady's bill through the house. Would she tell me whether any cases are still unresolved with regard to the band lists? My recollection is that there were four groups of cases the last time I had any information about the matter on January 30, which had still not been settled. I wondered if these band lists were now final except for future births and marriages and, of course, deaths.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I am afraid the same four cases are still pending for the reason that the persons concerned are out of the country and the registrar is unable to get in touch with them.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It has now been reduced to four individuals, has it?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Then it really does look as if this operation is pretty well over.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We hope so.
57071-3-268J


John Whitney Pickersgill: I can only say I hope the minister never has to face a Hobbema incident such as I did.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I want to ask a question about medical services for Indians, but I do not know whether this is the proper item-


Ellen Louks Fairclough: As a matter of fact, medical services for Indians comes under the Department of National Health and Welfare.


Mr. Howard:: As far as Indian affairs are concerned, this being a matter primarily within the jurisdiction of the federal government and also inasmuch as each province deals with some aspect of it we often find that there is an overlapping of interests and a conflict of opinion with respect to the policies and the attitudes taken toward the Indian people.
We in British Columbia have had in the past year a number of interesting articles which have appeared in a newspaper and we are expecting a number of additional articles to appear in another newspaper beginning some time this month, and we also had a report from a team of professors and students from the University of British Columbia on Indian affairs all of which have done a pretty full and comprehensive job in analysing the problems of Indians and making suggestions with respect to Indians.
I hope the minister will undertake to review quite carefully in particular the Hawthorne report and will also, if she has not already done so, make a review of what I consider to be the excellent articles which have appeared in the Vancouver Sun written by the Vancouver Sun reporter, Jack Cahill which ran in a series of eight articles, I believe it was, during the first part of May, and the ones which we expect to start in the Victoria Times or the Colonist-it escapes me at the moment in which of the papers they are appearing-but they relate specifically to the Indians of British Columbia, even though the conclusions drawn and the studies made could be applicable to Indians in other parts of Canada.
Perhaps the most important long range thoughts of the newspaper articles and the Hawthorne report relate to the question of education which I think all hon. members will consider to be of paramount importance if our native Indian peoples and ourselves as non-Indians are going to work better with each other for the common good of both our groups and for the common good of society. With respect to education I should like to refer to one of the articles which Mr. Cahill has written in the Vancouver Sun of May 7 of this year headed "Segregation of Schools Deplored". Mr. Cahill mentions under eight separate headings questions relating to

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration education. Part of them deal with the number of Indian children attending Indian day schools, or segregated into schools which only Indian children attend, and the author points out that there is an increase in the number of Indian children, an increase in the number of the Indian people, and so on. One important point referred to in Mr. Cahill's article to which I am referring mentions this, and this is a most unfortunate and deplorable part of the results of our educational policy with respect to Indians. He says here, and I quote:
Only 387 of the 5,900 children attending Indian schools last year had reached Grade 8 or above. Three Indians were attending university and 86 were receiving private or provincial vocational grain training.
The unfortunate part of that is the very small number in comparison with the total number of Indian children in the schools who have reached grade 8 or grades ab*ove grade 8. There are very few who are in universities or who are taking additional vocational training. I am sure we all realize that until and unless we can make far greater steps in the field of providing facilities for education to Indian children on the same basis as education is provided for non-Indian children we are going to continue to have a difficult time with Indian affairs. I am not expressing only my own thoughts and ideas in this regard, but I am expressing also the ideas set out by a number of people who have studied the matter in far more detail than I have been able to do, and the views, also, of a great number of Indians, chief counsellors and members of band councils with whom I have spoken personally. Their opinion is the same, namely that it must primarily be a question of education in attempting to draw our two groups together so that we may have a better understanding of each other's ways and each other's cultures.
Mr. Cahill mentions a couple of other matters with respect to teacher qualifications and salaries paid under this branch. May I read further from what he says:
Qualifications of teachers of Indians are generally much lower than qualifications of teachers in provincial schools, though it is obvious that they need additional teaching skills and qualities.
With respect to salaries, Mr. Cahill says:
Top-quality teachers are not attracted to Indian schools because salaries are much less than salaries offered by provincial schools. (The top-paid principal of Indian day schools received $4,950 plus accommodation last year compared with top salary of about $7,000 for provincial elementary school principals.)
He points out further that very few teachers of Indian people have any conception of, or have mastered to any degree the

language of the Indian people whom they are teaching. Of course, not being familiar with the language of the Indian people, which is not a written language, and not being familiar with the terms and expressions and what they mean, their attempts to teach English by, as Mr. Cahill says, prolonged experimentation with sounds bring about very poor results. He points out that most of the young Indian population find this lack of good English a handicap in job seeking and in social life. He says further that the Indian education administration is seriously understaffed with respect to regional inspectors. He compares it with the educational staff under the jurisdiction of the provinces.
It has been my contention for a long period of time,-and I hope the present minister will at least exhibit the same zeal and enthusiasm that she used to exhibit on labour matters when she sat on this side of the house and the same attitude with respect to the department under her jurisdiction and specifically the division of Indian affairs- after discussing it with people who have studied this question quite thoroughly, that until and unless we can bring the education of the native Indian children under the same authority as that of non-Indian children, namely the jurisdiction of the provinces themselves, we are going to have difficulties which are compounded by the other factors that Mr. Cahill and other people set out, if they are valid ones. I refer specifically to lower qualifications for teachers under the Indian affairs branch and lower salary structures, and not as much emphasis being placed upon the question of education in the Indian affairs branch as is placed upon it in the department of education of the provinces. Until we can eliminate this overlapping jurisdiction and bring uniformity to the curriculum and to those who are responsible for education, until we can bring this under the jurisdiction of the provinces, we will be approaching the problem from the wrong direction.
In British Columbia for a number of years now we have had an experiment in integrated schools, if I may put it that way, schools which combine under provincial jurisdiction the teaching of Indian children and nonIndian children. A per capita student payment is made by the department of Indian affairs to the department of education for that service. I realize it may be difficult for the Indian affairs branch suddenly to say they were going to abandon the field of education so far as Indian education is concerned and put it in the lap of the provinces. I do not think such an immediate approach would accomplish much. In fact, it might create more problems than we have at the

moment, but we must express and exhibit more than a pious hope that the jurisdiction over education of Indian children is going to be in the provincial sphere. We must have direct consultations with provincial authorities and express to them the attitude of this department and of this government which must be, I think, that the provinces should take over the jurisdiction over the education of Indian children so that there will be a uniform approach, a uniform curriculum and an enhancement of the qualifications and salaries of teachers to make them more equitable, and so on.
This is just one phase of the problem. I appreciate the fact that we can all express the same ideas, and I am sure that mine are not too different from those of any other hon. member in so far as the necessity of more advanced educational opportunities for our native Indian people is concerned. But coupled with the question of formal education there is the question of the attitude of the Canadian people. The attitude of our so-called white people has generally not been a good one toward the native Indian people. In many instances that attitude has been one of paternalism, an attitude of superiority toward the native Indian people who grudgingly accept their position in life as being a little inferior to ours. That, of course, is something that you cannot legislate for. You can pass all the laws that you like about attitudes of one racial group to another, or specifically the attitude of nonIndian people to native Indian people, but that would not have too much value. There has to be a conscious desire to accept native Indian people as equals and that we will undertake to abandon our paternalistic attitude. We should undertake an attempt to appreciate and understand and experience the same feelings that Indian people have. We should try to understand their background, their cultures, their hopes, their desires and aspirations. In turn, we hope that they will appreciate ours.
To attempt to classify Indian native people as something apart from and different from the rest of Canadian citizens is just nonsense and it will not accomplish a great deal. While we have had, as I mentioned earlier, specifically the Hawthorne report of British Columbia, which has undertaken a comprehensive study and analysis of aspects of Indian life and problems; while we have had in British Columbia a provincial advisory committee established by the British Columbia legislature, in addition to those repor-torial and informative type of articles, such as the one I quoted from the Sun, and one which is accepted to appear in a Victoria paper soon, I doubt whether we have had
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the same type of analysis and constructive study made on Indian affairs generally throughout the nation.
I am sure we all know that the ideas and attitudes of Indians in one part of the nation may be different from those of Indians in another part of the nation in the same way that the attitudes of white people in the east may differ from those of people in the west or even in different parts of the same province. Over the years a number of joint committees of the House of Commons and the Senate have dealt with Indian affairs, but I would express the hope that one of the first things the minister will do is establish a royal commission on Indian affairs. I would also hope that its field of jurisdiction would not be confined specifically to the problems of native Indians but that its terms of reference would enable it to investigate the attitude of the Indian affairs branch.
If I were to voice the thoughts of a number of Indians whom I know with respect to the Indian affairs branch the chairman would be on his feet immediately to tell me that I was using unparliamentary language and I would be doing so if I were to use the same terms a number of Indian people have used to me with respect to the branch. I certainly suggest that such a royal commission should be established and I hope that its terms of reference will include the attitude of the officials of the Indian affairs branch and the structure, administration and entire approach of the branch to Indian affairs. Even if it is found that the attitude of the branch is acceptable and that its policies are desirable, such an investigation will at least show the Indian people that the government is sincerely interested in their affairs and it will give the Indians an opportunity to express their ideas about the branch.
That is about all I have to say on these two general matters. Quite frankly I hope that others will express their ideas about Indian affairs and offer solutions to specific or general problems but I still do not think this will accomplish as much as an all-inclusive commission on Indian affairs would. I know that the minister simply has to recommend such a move to her colleagues and action will be taken but if I had the opportunity to vote for it I certainly would do so. I know that she would also be taking a long needed step towards complete understanding and obtaining a compilation of the problems and solutions and recommendations so far as Indian affairs are concerned.
There is one other matter I would like to deal with which I raised during the last session when another minister held the portfolio. With all due respect to the gentleman, we always considered that it was more or less

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration a part-time folio on almost an equal basis with the justice portfolio, both of which jobs require the full-time effort of one person. We are pleased to see there is a minister looking after the affairs of this department and branch.
Last session I raised the question of the rations provided to indigent native Indians.
1	placed the schedule of rations on record at that time and I felt then and still do that the approach to the problem was most disgusting. There has been no change in the rations. They should not be considered rations at all. I am sure that anybody who looks at the list will consider that in no way at all could they hope to contribute to the survival of one person. This list is to be taken as a guide of minimum food requirements, and as I recite the items each hon. member can decide in his own mind whether he could expect to subsist on such rations or whether his wife and family could do so.
One adult Indian who is considered indigent and qualifies for this type of starvation food relief receives the following items: Flour, vitamin B, 24 pounds; rolled oats, 6 pounds; baking powder, 1 pound; tea, 1 pound; sugar,
2	pounds; lard, 3 pounds; beans, 5 pounds; rice or potatoes up to an equivalent value, 2 pounds; cheese, Canadian product, 1 pound; meat or fish, $2.50; salt, 10 cents per adult or 15 cents per month per family; matches, 10 cents or 20 cents per month per family; canned tomatoes or tomato juice in 28-ounce tins, 9-I imagine that means 9 tins-milk, 1 pint of milk or equivalent in evaporated milk per day for each child of an indigent family 12 years of age and under.
That is only for one person. One of my friends from the Hazelton band undertook to price these articles for me in the store there to indicate what this ration means in terms of cost. The flour cost $1.92, the rolled oats 72 cents, baking powder 44 cents, tea $1.32, sugar 30 cents, lard 96 cents, beans 95 cents, rice 38 cents, cheese 65 cents, meat, $2.50, salt 23 cents, matches 10 cents, for a total of $10.47 in foodstuffs by way of relief to one adult Indian. On an experimental basis the department has recently undertaken to substitute relief in terms of cash for relief in terms of food. The maximum amount authorized monthly for one adult under the cash plan is $18, for each additional adult, including children over 12, $15, and for each child 12 years of age or under, $12.
It is difficult to find words to express my attitude to this niggardly approach to our Indians. The amount is far less than unemployment insurance and, heaven knows, that

is not ample, but at least the people on unemployment insurance may have been working in some cases and have saved some money so that they can draw on their savings to supplement what they receive by way of unemployment insurance benefits. But many Indians, because we do not accept them in all walks of society, because we do not accept them in all types of jobs, because their educational background which we design for them does not fit them for many kinds of jobs, find it is not possible to earn the same amount of income in a year as others might be able to earn. Then, in addition to that, they get this grant of $10.47 worth of food to last them for a month.
Any housewife who has gone shopping, as I am sure the minister has on a number of occasions in the corner grocery store or the supermarket, will know just how far $10.47 will go today towards buying food, even if you buy the cheap cuts of meat and even if you shop for bargains. This $10.47 would not last a week, let alone a month. I hope the minister, with her humanitarian ideas, and in view of the fact she is a mother and knows what it is to try to raise children, especially small children, will express some ideas with respect to this niggardly amount of food relief. I hope that this amount will be raised substantially. After all, our native Indian people need to eat, just the same as we do. They have children, just the same as we do and want the very same things for their children as we do. This approach, which has been the rule for some period of time, certainly needs revision. One could talk in terms of trebling or quadrupling the amount of relief given under this program, and it still would not be sufficient.
Before I sit down I should like to draw one matter to the attention of the minister on which I have had some correspondence with the various people in the provincial department and the department of Indian affairs, dating back to sometime in 1955. This matter relates to a road that was built by the provincial department of highways from Hazelton through the Gitanmaax reserve. They expropriated certain lands, many of which were registered by locatees on the reserve. I do not know the exact date of this, but it would be some two or three years ago, that the provincial department of highways paid some $1,500 to this department of Indian affairs. I have a photostatic copy of a listing in which they listed the names of each of the locatees, the station along the roadway, the area and the amount of money involved. To my knowledge, only a few of these locatees have received any of that money up to this date for the lands that were taken.

As I say, I have had correspondence with this department and with the provincial department of highways, discussions on the telephone with officials in the Indian affairs branch, but have not succeeded in bringing this matter to a conclusion. I would appreciate very much getting it straightened up. It has been four or five years now since the money belonging to these locatees was transferred from the department of highways to the Indian affairs branch. Evidently this money got lost somewhere in all the red tape in that branch. I would appreciate it if the minister would try to straighten this out. It is a personal matter relating to these people.
In summing up, I want to say that I appreciate the opportunity of making these few remarks; some of them have been unkind and some of them have not been. I would certainly like to hear the comments of the minister with respect to these matters, especially the question of education and our approach to it. I should like to know whether the approach is going to be different from that of the former administration.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before the minister replies,
I should like to make a few brief comments.
I do not intend to make a speech, but since I said something about joint education the other day I want to make it clear that I could not go along with the suggestions made by the hon. member for Skeena. It seems to me that the federal government has an inescapable responsibility under the constitution for the education of Indians and for the preservation of certain rights in connection with the education of Indians that would be sacrificed in one or two provinces if education of Indians was transferred to those provinces without safeguarding those rights. I should like to make it quite clear, so far as we in this party are concerned, we stand solidly behind the preservation of constitutional rights in this matter.
With that reservation, I can say that I agree with the objectives of the hon. member for Skeena. As I said the other day, you cannot get the Indian children with other children too early because, as I recall it, even in Wallaceburg where we did not have them go into the schools until they were in grade 4, it was found that it took a year before they felt at home. In Sarnia, however, where the Indians went into the school right at the start they were accepted by the little tots right away and there was no psychological difficulty. I know this thing is going to take a long time and it is going to be difficult. In one or two provinces there is great resistance to this. We cannot have any compulsion in the matter, and we must be very sure we do not do anything that even appears to
28, 1953	4243
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration trample on any of the constitutional rights or other rights that are sacred by law and usage. Within those limits, I do agree with the objective the hon. gentleman has in mind.
I should like to say, as a former minister, that while of course I do not think every member of the Indian affairs branch is perfect-I am not going to embarrass the hon. lady today by asking her what she thinks of the efficiency of the officials-nevertheless, I do think they are very conscientious and hard-working officials. I had a special affection and interest for the Indian affairs branch, but I am sure the officials elsewhere in the department never held this against me. I do think that there is inherent in the position of Indian agent a difficulty that is perhaps like the difficulty a schoolteacher faces, and that has to be guarded against a little. Sometimes there is a tendency perhaps to treat the Indians a bit as though they were children, and that has to be guarded against.
I believe the department has been very wise in moving Indian agents from one reserve to another after a certain length of time, so that they do not get too set in their ways. The department is also wise in having conferences and in other ways stressing the importance of avoiding Indian agents becoming too set in their ways. I do think, too, that this business of having elections of the bands and providing for self-government cannot be pushed too fast or too far once the Indians accept it. I know, of course, there are difficulties in some places. I hope the minister, and the senior officials will seek at all times to find Indians to employ in the branch when they can, but not with the idea of making the branch a special reserve for Indian civil servants. That would be the last suggestion I would ever make. I know there are one or two already who are doing very well in the branch but it would perhaps be a good idea, since the branch is intimately associated with the Indians, to be able to encourage a few more Indians to come into the branch.
But perhaps it would be an even better idea to encourage them to go elsewhere in the public service. We know that one of the most distinguished public servants of our time, namely Mr. Monture, was an Indian who was not in the Indian affairs branch, as far as I know, at any time during his career. I remember meeting him one time at Dorval airport. I was on my way to Newfoundland. I asked him where he was going and he said he was going to Indonesia on one of the United Nations technical assistance missions. It seems to me that is the kind of thing that we need to hold before the Indians as a possibility for the future.
4244	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Charles Benjamin Howard: May I say one word, Mr. Chairman, before the hon. lady speaks. My friend the hon. member for Bonavista-Twil-lingate and I, as far as the constitutional question and the rights of Indians are concerned, certainly agree with each other except that we have expressed ourselves in different words and on different occasions.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Before the minister replies I just want to say one word. I want to express my gratitude and appreciation, through the minister, to the members of the branch for all the courtesies and consideration they have shown to the requests I have made over the years as member for Algoma East on behalf of the considerable number of Indians I have in my constituency. Even when they have not been able to meet those requests, they have always treated them efficiently and sympathetically.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for what he has said. I think we are all fairly much of a mind on this question and there is not much point in elaborating on it. I thank the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate who, I think, fairly well answered one point that was raised by the hon. member for Skeena.
There are one or two things upon which I should like to comment. One is the question asked by the hon. member for Skeena as to the number of students in various grades. Rather than taking the time of this committee to give this information, may I tell him that if he will refer to page 106 of the annual report of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration he will find all of those grades broken down. That page tells him precisely how many students are in every grade.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I did not ask how many students were in each grade.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I understood the hon. member to request information as to the number of those who were in some of the higher grades.


Charles Benjamin Howard: No. When I was speaking previously I was reading from an article by Mr. Cahill which appeared in the Vancouver Sun of May 7, 1958-I think the Hansard reporters have it now-wherein he pointed out a number of things with respect to Indian education. One of them was that only 837-
I may be wrong about that figure-out of 5,900 Indian children who were attending schools had reached grade 8 or more. I was decrying the fact that such a small percentage of Indian people had reached the higher grades. I just wanted to point out the necessity of expanding and enlarging our approach to education so that more opportunities are


there, hoping that the native Indian children would be able to advance into the higher grades more easily.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I think the information the hon. gentleman had was a little bit erroneous because from grade 9 up just in the non-Indian schools there are about 1,500.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Is that for British Columbia?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Oh, no. The hon. member was speaking of British Columbia only?


Charles Benjamin Howard: Yes.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: In any event, I think there is not much purpose to be served by discussing that matter because our figures would not be the same. However, more and more are reaching grade 8 every year.
With regard to the matter of rations which the hon. member raised, may I say at the start that first of all we consider that the list which is prepared averages out to about $14 per adult. However, the very difficulties which he enumerated have been at the base of the thinking which has caused and is causing us to change more and more to a cash basis. Even taking that matter into consideration, I might say that these payments were never at any time intended to be the complete living cost of these people. They are based on country food and on the supposition that the food will be supplemented by fish and game, as we know it is. This plan was prepared after consultation with the health authorities of the Department of National Health and Welfare. It may not be perfect. I do not think anyone can ever compile a list that would be absolutely perfect under all conditions. While it may not be perfect, it has been fairly generally told to those in authority that they are at liberty to vary the list to suit the needs of differing sections of the country and the requirements of different individuals.
The hon. member also asked about the funds which were paid into the department on behalf of those persons who surrendered lands for the building of highways. I will look into this matter at once. However, my understanding is that those payments which have not been made have been held up for the reason that it has not been possible to establish to a certainty the ownership of the lands which were surrendered; I have reference to the individual ownership. However, we will check that matter up and see what we can find out about it.
If I may, I should like to answer the hon. member for Laurier. I now have the information with regard to the islands. There were eight islands in the St. Lawrence which were purchased by the Ontario Hydro at a cost of $172,200.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Lionel Chevrier: Thank you.


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: Shall vote 66 carry?


Charles Benjamin Howard: No. I wonder whether the minister could indicate whether there is any possibility of increasing the ration allotment or how long ago it was established; could she say when this list, even though it is only a guide, was established or when it was last revised?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It is under constant study. It was changed or revamped within the last couple of years, and it is under constant review.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Last fall, I believe, or sometime not too long ago there was a conference of Indians in Vancouver of all British Columbia Indians. I think it had specific reference to the matter-I have not my estimate book here-of the method of distributing the $100,000 allocation to the Indians of British Columbia. In addition to that, a number of other items were discussed and a number of ideas were expressed by delegates at that conference. I wonder whether this is going to result in the follow-up in a revision of the Indian Act, or whether we can expect, as was apparently planned sometime ago, a normal two-year revision of the Indian Act after consultation with the Indians.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: All of the information gained from these various meetings is, of course, studied carefully by the department. The hon. member referred to the Hawthorne report. That report was made at the request of this department and was paid for by the department. All of the recommendations are being very carefully studied. In some instances we have already gone ahead with preliminary planning to implement those which were capable of immediate implementation. I can assure the hon. member that every word of that report is being carefully studied by the department. Any information which comes to the department from any source whatsoever is given careful study.


Lionel Chevrier: Did the minister give a moment ago the names of the islands that were expropriated?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: No; I did not give them but I can secure them. There were eight of them.


Lionel Chevrier: I asked for that and the amount of compensation. The minister gave the amount of compensation but did not provide the names of the islands.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Mr. Chairman, I had hoped that we would have seen evidence of a much broader attitude on the part of the government. This is not a criticism of the government but is a criticism of ourselves as people.
57071-3-269
We have been most delinquent in respect of our responsibilities, duties and obligations to our native Indian people over the years.
Every year the same comments are made in the house, and from the editions of Hansard which I have read it appears that the same type of general discussion has taken place year after year. More than anything the hope has been expressed that our Indian people will be given better opportunities for education and chances for advancement and that they will be accepted by society and improved opportunities for employment and generally enabled to improve their lot in our nation. But although the debates over the years have been somewhat similar to that which has taken place today they have accomplished practically nothing.
Admittedly we have seen a few more Indian children reaching higher grades in school, but certainly nothing has happened which would be anywhere near what should have happened. There have been changes- very slow changes-as has been pointed out, in our attitude toward the Indians, but practically nothing concrete has been accomplished as a result of representations, conferences with the Indians, joint committees of the Senate and the House of Commons and royal commissions. I recall, in fact, one royal commission as far back as 1916 which sat in British Columbia with reference to delineating the boundaries of the reservations or, more particularly, with reference to giving some of the land in those reservations to the C.P.R. Over all these years, however, we still appear to be just on the threshold of hope that something might be done.
This is the most unfortunate aspect of the matter, and as I say, this is not a criticism of the minister or of this government; certainly no more so than it is a criticism of the past government or the gentleman who held the post before the hon. lady or even the minister before him. It is a criticism of our non-Indian society as a whole and of the inability of government or parliament to come to grips with the problem.
If we can spend, for instance, something in the neighbourhood of $16 million per year on immigration-and I am not decrying the fact that we do spend this sum for that purpose-good heavens, can we not spend more than we are spending to take a more definite approach with respect to our native Indian people who were here long, long before the coming of our first settlers? That is the thing that is wrong.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Unless and until this minister or this government or any government in

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration office will undertake to do more than merely administer a department, we are going to have the self-same problem continuing and becoming more aggravated as the years go by.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I was unavoidably called away when the item upon which I wished to speak was called, and I will have to send the question X wish to ask the minister in writing.
Does the minister think it right and proper that an indigent immigrant should receive an allowance from her department much larger than the allowance which would be allowed to one of the native owners of Canada who also happened to be an indigent?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I do not think you can compare the two; they live under entirely different circumstances.


Mr. Peters:: I would like to hear more from the minister on the educational aspects of this problem because this is of great concern to the Indians and certainly to those in my part of the country. I have in mind particularly the question of the educational standards. The schools which the Indians attend are being run, so far as I can tell, by church organizations rather than other educational organizations, and less concentration is centred as the years go by on modern educational trends. Therefore, the educational standards of these people have deteriorated as their economic position has deteriorated. If our desire is to eliminate the Indian people then we are probably going about it in the right way because they are losing their identity more each year.
I have had the opportunity, as have some others in the more favoured urban communities, to attend school and to sit in classrooms with Indian children, and I have found that they have made a contribution when they have been able to obtain higher education, not only to our economy but to their own people. Particularly in the nursing profession and allied profession Indians have contributed much when they have returned to their own people. I think the minister must give consideration to this matter and that something must be done very shortly to at least bring educational standards up to the level in the province in which they live and I do not think we should wait for four years before action is taken in this respect.
I would like to draw the attention of the committee to the fact that when I attended a veterans' school I, among others, was asked whether I would take a job teaching the Indian children. The pay was relatively good for the type of employment involved, but our standards of education were certainly not in keeping with those normally required in the


teaching profession. We were merely high school students and were not, in my opinion, qualified to teach Indian children who I believe require more skilled teaching than would be required by average children. We were, however, asked to do this work, which I believe was evidence of the archaic thinking which might be expected if our aim was to dispose of the Indian population rather than to help the Indian people to become assimilated in the communities and to become first class citizens of Canada.
In my opinion the only advantage the Indians have received from us was that during the last war when they were provided with a better type of education if they were able to serve in the armed forces, but we have done very little in the field of elementary education during peacetime.
I do hope that the minister will give consideration to this matter and will have something more to say in this respect. The hon. member for Skeena has certainly given the whole subject a great deal of study and I think some of his ideas should be implemented in the very near future, not only for the betterment of Canadian Indians but for the betterment of the Canadian people as a whole. The Indians form one of the very few minority groups in Canada and we should be able to do better than some other countries with respect to improving the lot of our native population.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I believe I asked the minister at one stage whether any thought had been given to the possibility of increasing the allotments or the cash payments. If an answer was given I am afraid it escaped me.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I thought I had answered that Mr. Chairman. I said it was constantly under review.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Is there any thought of an attempt to make the cash payment coincide with welfare payments to the municipalities?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes, this matter is under review right now. I am informed that in one province our scale is higher than that prevailing for non-Indians. In another it is just the same, and in the rest it is a little lower than the prevailing scale.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Does the hon. lady have these figures so that we can compare them?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: As you get into the larger families it more nearly coincides with the provincial rate. We do not have any of these figures here.
May I reply to the hon. member for Laurier while I am on my feet? Would the hon. gentleman like to have the individual amounts?


Lionel Chevrier: Yes.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Here, then, is the list:
Sheik ... Wagner . Grassy .. Toussaint Doran .. Indian ...
Stein 

Adams ..

<Total	 $172,200


William Arnold Peters: Can the hon. lady say whether it is the intention to do anything about bringing up the standard of Indian education to that of the standard in the province in which the Indians live?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We are working on that constantly. I advise the hon. member that these schools are under inspection by the provincial authorities.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am very interested in this. I have just been handed this by the hon. member for Skeena. It mentions the rates of allowance to indigent Indians. The maximum amounts authorised are: one adult, $18; each additional adult, including children over 12, $15; each child 12 years of age or under, $12. I think it is disgraceful. If we can pay $65 as an allowance to persons coming into this country who are indigent, and if we can afford to pay $6 a day per person in respect of a certain group who came to this country and lived in hotels and restaurants, I want to protest emphatically against this small allowance made to our Indian population who were here before any of us were here and whose forefathers were here before any of ours. I do hope the department can do something to remedy this gross injustice to our Indian population.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I wonder if the hon. member is aware that this amount is for food only? Things such as shelter, clothing and so on are all in addition.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Even on that basis there is a great discrepancy.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Have you tried living on $18 a month for food?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: That is not a hard and fast rule. This is under constant review, and in one case at least it is above the rate paid by one provincial authority. But we are watching the position and hope there can be some improvement made.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I would suggest the hon. lady watches it out in the field close to where these people live. I live very near to a number of these reserves and I have personal knowledge of Indians reduced to such circumstances that they have to go begging to 57071-3-2691
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the Indian superintendent's office and they get a pretty short deal. That raises the question of the acceptance of the superintendent by the native Indians themselves, which is another matter.
You talk about supplementing the income of these people by game and fish, but they find it difficult to do that. At one time trapping used to provide a substantial amount of income to the native Indian peoples but in recent years trapping has declined because of a number of reasons. As far as our part of the country is concerned one reason is that even though they have registered trap lines and are the only ones allowed to trap there, the provincial government has come along and granted timber rights or mineral rights, and when a logging or mining company moves in it ruins the trap line and that takes away part of the income. As far as game is concerned it is the same thing.
Over the years our approach-and it has had a poor result-has been to try to get them to leave their old way of life of being nomads and living off the land and living off game and fish and so on, and to encourage them to set themselves up in our social structure where they should work as much as they can the year round and earn enough to keep themselves and to buy the goods and necessities they need in the same way as some others of us attempt to do. On the one hand, we have been trying to tell them to forget about fishing and hunting as a way of life and to accept our way of life and, on the other hand, we tell them, when they only get this paltry amount to subsist on: go out and fish and hunt to increase it. And in many instances they are not able to do so because civilization is encroaching on their lands.
North of Terrace we have one company in the logging and pulp field which has a forest management licence of over 750,000 acres much of which used to be land which the Indian fished and hunted. Now they cannot get in there because it would be trespassing. Our approach is foolish and I cannot help but take exception to this sort of attitude. I am not being critical of the minister. What I am being critical of is our attitude as non-Indians towards Indians, and as long as that attitude continues we will do nothing to help solve their problems or our problems in relation to them.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I can only assure the hon. gentleman that I am as gravely concerned as he is over the situation, and since the administration of the department is in my hands I will not leave any stone unturned to try to correct injustices.
4248	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Charles Benjamin Howard: Needless to say I would be the first to wish the minister every success in the world.


William Moore Benidickson: On item 66, and directly to the point of administration, I wonder if the minister would outline to me something about the decentralization activities of the department? Would she please say something about the jurisdiction of the sub-areas? 1 make no complaint against the minister or the present administration. I want to say very frankly that I have objected to the set-up under her two predecessors with regard to a situation which I do not think was improved very much in the line of decentralization.
In the district of Kenora-Rainy River we have three Indian agencies. They are obliged to report to North Bay. The minister, who has been a visitor to northern Ontario on many occasions, knows there is a distance there of eight or nine hundred miles and I have often felt that this idea of decentralization has merely been camouflage and that in fact it had created an additional post office where mail could get lost and procrastination could set in. The main thing I ask is that the minister should outline the jurisdiction at the Indian agency level for getting certain things done. Would she also indicate what might be within the authority in our area of North Bay without reference to Ottawa? As I say, over the years I have made these complaints to three ministers.
It is my experience that too many things have to be referred from the Indian agency to the subagency and then to Ottawa eventually. The result is that work does not proceed. With respect to such things as the laying of linoleum or putting in a boiler or something of that kind, the decision is received in August and the school does not open until January. I can illustrate that not only in the current year under the present minister's administration but also under the former administration. There is something wrong there, particularly in the construction field. Decisions of importance which involve construction should be taken in the summer holidays when the school is vacant, but the paper work is not completed until well on into August and the result is that the school is disrupted at the beginning of September. I know of at least three instances in the last four years where the schools did not open until after Christmas.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I am not sure whether I understand the hon. gentleman correctly. Is he advocating the placing of more authority in the hands of the superintendent or of the agent, probably with greater spending power at their level? Is that what he is advocating?


Is he advocating that the request should come right through to headquarters?


William Moore Benidickson: I am inclined to think that with respect to the larger items the latter is what I had in mind because I get the impression that while they are referred to this sublevel, they have to come to Ottawa anyway. If that is so, why is not some form of duplicate letter sent merely to the sublevel and the Ottawa administration, particularly on construction, repairs and things of that kind, deal with it immediately and not have a new initiating letter from the area superintendent.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Of course, the problem that the hon. member has brought up is not a new one. It has been one that has caused considerable headaches in the department for many years. I do not know to what extent we can streamline the operation to obviate the difficulties the hon. gentleman has suggested but I will look into it. I have not yet had the opportunity to go into some of those details, but I will have a look at it.


William Moore Benidickson: I appreciate the assurance, Mr. Chairman. I still recall some experiences in the administration of the post office in the past where there seemed to be too many levels of passing an item for decision and yet it had to come to Ottawa anyway. I am just wondering whether those things have to come to Ottawa for approval anyway or whether there should not be a very serious look at the levels of responsibility. My pertinent question was, what is the maximum authority of the sublevel jurisdiction under the superintendent-I think that is what he is called-without reference to Ottawa?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It is $1,000.


William Moore Benidickson: In my opinion that is ridiculous. There is no point in having a superintendent who is the supervisor of many agencies if his jurisdiction extends only to $1,000, and the correspondence eventually has to come to Ottawa.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: If my information is
correct, the public works districts are operated in the same way. Of course, $1,000 does not apply to just one item. For a small contract it does not mean $1,000 a year; it means an expenditure up to $1,000.


William Moore Benidickson: If you have to lay some linoleum and disrupt your classrooms it is too bad. If you intend to do that you should do it while the school is in vacation. If the amount involved is a little over $1,000 and it has to come to Ottawa, then the decision is not given until August 15, and my hon.

friend can understand what that means to the administration of the school.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian agencies-
68.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $1,195,630.
John Whitney Pickersgill: How much of this estimate is spent directly by the department and how much is spent through the Department of Public Works?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: On this particular vote none of the work has been done by public works.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Relatively speaking, these are all agency buildings. There seems to be quite a substantial increase in this amount; in fact it is about 50 per cent. The minister is better at arithmetic than I am, but it is perhaps 40 per cent more than last year.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: This is largely owing to the need for water supply and sewage systems.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The Caughnawaga business?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I suppose the amount paid by the seaway with reference to Caughnawaga went into the consolidated revenue fund and the minister had to get a vote for the full amount?


William Moore Benidickson: While the minister is preparing to reply I just want to put this on Hansard. This brings to mind something that has given me a great deal of irritation over the years. I refer to the matter of construction. I have been told repeatedly, not only by the construction branch of this department but by the construction branches of other departments of government, that the reason why we have not had much progress and particularly have not been prepared to embark on a building job in the best building season in this country, which is rather short, is that parliament has not passed an estimate. I have not the document in front of me but I am well aware that this is nonsense. There is a clause in the Financial Administration Act which permits a department, once the estimates are tabled in the house,-and normally they are tabled in January-to get on with the job, to get their work done and to get their tenders called. I do not think that the history of parliament indicates that parliament has ever been loathe to grant interim supply, if that were necessary. But it is utter nonsense to hear repeatedly from construction branches of government-and I think this department offends more than most-that the reason they
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration have not a contract let is that parliamentarians have not concluded the session or they have not passed the relevant item in the estimates. The Financial Administration Act provides ample remedy for that and 1 hope the minister will keep that in mind. I drew that to the attention of her predecessors.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I believe we are proceeding as rapidly as possible. I do not think any of our works are being held up at the present time for those reasons.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Reserves and trusts-
69.	Operation and maintenance, $327,912.
John Whitney Pickersgill: If the minister has ever had time to look at the proceedings of the estimates committee when this department was before that committee some years ago she will realize that at that time I made a frank confession that in so far as the winding up of Indian estates was concerned it was very badly in arrears and steps were being taken to bring it up to date. What progress is being made in that field?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I can assure the hon. member that we are making progress in this department. In 1957-58, 1,979 estates were concluded and in the same year an additional 702 were opened. The preceding year there were 1,420 concluded and 667 opened.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister does feel that steady improvement is being made.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes, very definitely.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am very glad to hear it.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Could the minister explain to me and to the committee what the statutory item, Indian annuities, refers to? I am sure she can do it far more quickly than we can by looking up the statute. Would she also explain what is meant by reserves and trusts? What is in trust?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I do not know whether the hon. member wants a long explanation. As far as Indian annuities are concerned, this provides for the payment of Indian annuities in pursuance of the conditions of any treaty entered into on behalf of Her Majesty or her predecessors, for which the government of Canada is responsible and which is a charge upon the consolidated revenue fund of Canada as provided by statute under section 71 of the Indian Act, which section reads as follows:
Moneys that are payable to Indians or to Indian bands under a treaty between Her Majesty and the band and for the payment of which the government of Canada is responsible, may be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


John Whitney Pickersgill: Would the minister allow a little help on that point? I think I can explain it in two seconds. It is what is called treaty money in all the other provinces and in British Columbia you do not have it.


Charles Benjamin Howard: In addition there was the question of the item in the estimates having to do with the operation and maintenance of reserves and trusts. I am interested in the trust factor. What is kept in trust?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: While we are getting the rest of the information maybe I should tell the hon. member that the functions are, first, the management, administration and utilization of Indian reserves and surrendered lands, which includes the acquisition of land for new reserves, and the sale, lease and disposal or other use of natural resources such as timber, oil, petroleum, natural gas and other mines and minerals; second, the administration of Indian band funds and annuities; third, the maintenance of band membership records; and, fourth, the administration of the estates of deceased and mentally incompetent Indians. These are all under reserves and trusts.


Charles Benjamin Howard: For argument's sake, and this is purely hypothetical, if a band in British Columbia sold some timber to a logging company the proceeds of that sale would go into this trust fund and come under the administration of this branch.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: That is right.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Is there any provision
whereby the band may prevent the money coming to Ottawa to be held in trust? Is there any arrangement whereby the band may decide that they do not want the money tied up in the Indian affairs branch at Ottawa and that they want to use it themselves for some specific or general purpose?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I am advised there is a section in the act which permits the Indians to handle their own funds but that none of the bands has yet reached that stage.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Who decides when they reach ihis stage?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: To some extent they do *themselves.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Again this is hypothetical, but if a band decided that they would use the proceeds from the sale of timber the branch would allow them to do so, or would there be any possibility of preventing it?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It is very difficult to answer hypothetical questions. If the member can give us a specific case, we will try to answer it.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I am sure there are some specific cases. I can think of one near Nanaimo. I pose this question and I am sure it can be answered. If a band decided that certain timber on their reserve would be sold and that the proceeds from the sale of the timber would be kept for use by the band and not sent to Ottawa, would the departmental officials be able to override the wishes of the band and make them send the money to Ottawa?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The funds come to Ottawa and if the band requires money for a specific purpose they make arrangements with the branch and in certain cases the money is used for purposes decided upon by the band.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I think it is getting clearer.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: There has to be a resolution of the band. The band has to decide what it wants to do with the money. Representations are then made to the branch and if agreement is reached the funds are handled in that way.


Charles Benjamin Howard: In all cases the officials of the Indian affairs branch are agents acting on behalf of the minister in any negotiations.


William Arnold Peters: How do the Indians eventually get the benefit of these moneys? Suppose they need to build new houses or want to buy new stoves for their houses and have sold a million feet of lumber from the reserve; how do they get the money back again?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: They would make representations to their own band and the band council would decide. The council would pass a resolution with regard to the matter expressing its wishes which would come forward to the Indian affairs branch and the matter would then be dealt with in that way.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Welfare and economic development of Indians-
70.	Operation and maintenance, $3,970,678.
Lester Bowles Pearson: I believe this item deals with the welfare and economic development of Indians and I should like to express my appreciation of what the branch has done for the welfare of the Indians in my riding. There are still some problems, especially in the West Bay band, but on the whole great progress has been made. But as the minister knows one important aspect of welfare is health, and while I now realize what she said a little while ago, that the health of Indians comes under the Department of National Health and Welfare, nevertheless the problems and the difficulties encountered by Indian affairs doctors, though not under the minister's jurisdiction, will have an effect on

the welfare of the Indians. That is why I venture to bring this matter forward. If difficulties can be created under the health and welfare regulations by a doctor serving not only Indians but in certain cases white patients and if that particular doctor is prosecuted for that under the regulations, then there can be trouble and the welfare of the Indians themselves will suffer. We have an unfortunate case at hand at the moment on Manitoulin island where an Indian doctor has been prosecuted apparently for giving service to some whites. I am sure that is causing a great deal of worry and anxiety and probably some discontent.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: That has been settled.


Lester Bowles Pearson: According to the press the case is coming up and the doctor is to be prosecuted. I hope this kind of thing can be avoided because it causes trouble. I am not assessing the blame because I do not know where the blame lies in this particular case but I hope that the two departments can get together and make sure that this kind of thing does not occur.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: If my memory serves me well, I saw either in today's or yesterday's paper that he had been acquitted and held blameless because whatever services he had rendered had been rendered with the consent of other doctors who were overloaded and any fees received were paid to the government.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I may be wrong. Perhaps the case has come up. Perhaps the doctor has been acquitted, but the charge was laid by the Ontario college of physicians. What I am suggesting is that surely arrangements could be made in the future so this kind of thing, with all the undesirable publicity, could be avoided.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I think the man was just trying to help out his colleagues in the vicinity, who simply could not handle their patients.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am sure he was.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I should like to make another comment along the same lines as the comment I made with respect to education. I should like to suggest the same approach should be adopted here, that is that in consultation with the various provinces which have fairly extensive departments of health and welfare an attempt should be made to have these provincial departments look after the health and welfare of the Indians. Having in mind the views expressed by the hon. member for B onavista-T willingsgate-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Twillingate, without any
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Charles Benjamin Howard: It is a hard one to pronounce, and I would find it easier to say the unpaid parliamentary assistant. However, with all due respect to the views he expressed concerning the constitutional problems and the hereditary rights of the Indians, we should attempt to move in this direction of having the health and welfare of native Indians under the jurisdiction of the various provincial governments, just as I advocated for education. I say that having in mind the general idea that we will be able to work more closely with each other as Indians and non-Indians; we will be able to appreciate each other's background and culture, and so be able to work together for the general betterment of society.
It is in that light that I am expressing this idea, as I did in connection with education. We should move in the direction of bringing the health and welfare of Indians under provincial jurisdiction so that we do not have two jurisdictions in the field of health and welfare overlapping one another so far as Indians are concerned and their friends who live right next door who are not Indians, and who normally fit into the program of the various provincial governments. I know that at the moment this is something we could not give to the provincial government and say, here, we are going to dump it all in your lap; you figure out a per capita payment and we will pay. It is going to require some extensive discussion.
I feel that the federal department, which now has Indian affairs under its jurisdiction almost exclusively, should take the lead in this matter and express its ideas to the various provincial governments. The hope would be, eventually, of moving in the direction of not having an Indian affairs branch but having the various services administered for Indians on the same basis as they are administered for the other people in this country, working towards equality. I merely want to express the same general thoughts with respect to health and welfare, as I expressed with respect to education.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We have been working on this matter for quite some time now with a view to making agreements with the various provinces. But the hon. member will understand that a plan such as he envisages must entail the province accepting some responsibility.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Could the minister indicate what progress is being made? Is she in a position to mention specifically the provinces which, in a few years, might be doing something?
4252	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We have at the moment an agreement with Ontario and 23 out of 26 children's aid societies.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Is there not the same kind of agreement with Saskatchewan?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It is not complete as yet.


William Moore Benidickson: I want to make a few remarks on this. I just want to mention to the minister a few of the difficulties with respect to Indians in my territory. She probably is already familiar with them, although she is new in the department. We are feeling, probably as acutely as anywhere in the country, the difficulties that result from Indians moving in, as we desire them to do, to the industrial areas and taking their place on an integrated basis. I want to pay tribute to the officers of the department, particularly the present executive assistant to the Minister of Transport, who visited our particular part of the country. I think his report is worthy of study by the minister and her officials. I know the director has always been very sympathetic to this type of thing.
We are having a great deal of difficulty in our municipalities which adjoin reservations-some reservations are within the boundaries of municipalities. I know that at the moment there is some litigation in this respect, and I feel sure the minister will give this matter study. I think very worthwhile advances have been made also in providing direction, and sometimes equipment, for the processing of lumber from the timber that is available on the reserves to aid the Indian to build for himself better accommodation. This move has certainly been worthwhile in our territory, and I think it could be extended. I wondered to what extent similar consideration is being given to directing Indians, and even providing them with certain of the basic equipment, in connection with fish processing.
In northern Ontario, according to my experience, most of the Indians today are at the mercy of the commercial fish brokers because they are not acquainted with some of the more modern methods of fish processing. I think some of the more basic equipment that is now available, and which is not expensive, as well as some advice on fish processing would have the result of giving the Indians better returns from their labours in catching fish. As a result of this lack of knowledge, and this lack of certain basic processing equipment, today the Indians are at the mercy of the fish merchants. Of course, if the Indian received a greater return there would be a benefit in the reduction of the welfare item. I think the same kind of attention ought to be given to this fish 

processing problem as has been given, in recent times, to the processing of lumber. I hope that will be done.
There are a great many difficulties, as I say, experienced by the municipalities. I must say I have found the department most sympathetic to these difficulties. I would only complain that I think, in some instances, inasmuch as we are able to rectify some things here, there may be some slight lack of knowledge on the part of the local agencies as to what is the desire in this respect. I am not one who believes, in so far as welfare and health matters are concerned, that the Indian who leaves the reserve is, forever and a day, a ward of the federal government. I think that might be a bar to integration. However, I am a great believer in a sympathetic attitude on the part of the department during what I might call the bridge stage when one would be moving from the reserve into the other type of life that would be lived normally by other Canadians. I believe that is the view of the director and, I am sure, of the minister. I just hope that it will be taken by municipalities and others who are constantly passing the buck and saying "once an Indian, always an Indian". It takes weeks sometimes for welfare and health situations to be taken care of. I hope there will be some more authority and conference provided to the local agencies so that they can deal with these things on the spot.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The matter of fish supervisors does not properly come under this item but, nevertheless, if the hon. member will make available to the department his requests in this respect we shall see whether we can comply with them. The department is always ready and willing to aid with whatever equipment will make it possible for the Indians to pursue their particular activities with greater efficiency. The supervisors will be glad to co-operate. If the hon. member has some specific suggestions to make or if he wants more supervisors in the operation of fishing and the gathering and marketing of fish, we shall be glad to do what we can to help him.


William Moore Benidickson: I think in the larger lakes it can be provided without very much expense. I am thinking of lakes north of Sioux Lookout and Red Lake. I think that either by loan or gift certain filleting and other types of processing equipment could be provided. If that were done I think the Indian would soon have a very much greater return per pound for the work he has put in to catch the fish in the first place.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We have assisted the Indians at Sandy lake in their goldeye program

and we shall be glad to assist any others who would like to benefit by the advice of the supervisors.


Charles Benjamin Howard: It may be that it is under this item that the question of the revolving fund comes, or does it come under the Department of Finance? I wonder whether the minister could indicate where this revolving fund could be dealt with.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We can discuss it under this item.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Very well. I do not know what has been the experience of the Indians applying for a loan under the revolving fund within the last year, but at least prior to that time many that I know of had a sad experience in trying to borrow money from the revolving fund for purposes which they thought-and in many instances I agreed with them-were ones for which loans should be made. As I say, I do not know from any personal knowledge how this fund has worked in the past year. However, the operation of it can mean a great deal to individual Indians or to groups of Indians who may want to perform some work on a farm, buy additional industrial equipment for logging, as some of them do, for fishing, for some other pursuit or even for the establishment of a store on the reserve. In years past the experience has been that it has been most difficult to get money out of the department from this revolving fund.
As the minister knows, Indians are in a most difficult position in respect of borrowing money from a bank because of the question of collateral. Those of us who are at the moment in the upper brackets of income have no difficulty in going to the bank and borrowing, say, $1,000. But an Indian would find it almost impossible to borrow money from the bank. Generally speaking, the only source from which he can get a loan is the revolving fund. I think that if there were to be a relaxation with respect to the granting of loans from the revolving fund it would certainly do a great deal so far as fishermen are concerned in the way of assisting them in getting out of the clutches of some of the fishing companies they work for. They get tied hand and foot to a fishing company, renting a boat, renting their gear, renting everything and buying everything from a particular company. They wind up at the end of the year to find that they still owe money to the company and they start off the next fishing season in precisely the same position of being in debt. I wonder whether the minister could indicate what are the general requirements for borrowing money from the revolving fund; what amount of money is in there at the present time; what
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration is the limit that any one individual may borrow, if there is any; and what is the total limit on the amount that may be borrowed from this fund.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The main requirements are character and a reasonable ability to repay. I may say that just within the last couple of weeks two loans have been given to individuals in British Columbia, each for about $10,000. From April 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958, 131 loans were made. Those are by projects so I cannot say how many were to British Columbia. But over the period this fund has been in existence there were 128 loans to British Columbia.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Is there a set length of time for the loan? Is it on a five-year or ten-year basis or does it vary with the project? What interest rate, if any, applies?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: They vary according to the need of the borrower, but the average is about five years.
Mr. Hov/ard: And the interest rate?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Five per cent.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
72.	Grants to agricultural exhibitions and Indian fairs, $7,025.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I have two questions I wish to ask the minister on this item. Why are these grants to agricultural fairs other than Indian fairs administered by this department instead of by the Department of Agriculture? Second, as the grants are all small, on what basis are they determined?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I think the hon. member has misinterpreted the wording. They are all for Indians. But some of the fairs are agricultural fairs and some are Indian fairs.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, but I did not understand the minister. Some of the fairs mentioned here are quite well known agricultural fairs.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes; but they are for Indians.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: In what way are the moneys used for Indians at these fairs?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: If they will sponsor Indian exhibits and work in co-operation with Indians.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: That is to say it is a form of prize for Indians to undertake that work?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
4254	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
73.	Fur conservation, $286,234.
Charles Benjamin Howard: I wonder whether the minister can explain how this operates? In what manner are fur-bearing animals conserved for Indians?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The purpose of this vote is to promote the stabilization of the Indian economy by management, in co-operation with the various provinces, of the fur and wildlife resources available to Indians, both on and off their reserves, including assistance in marketing and management of the proceeds therefrom. Although the amount is relatively small, in terms of total expenditure, this vote is of the utmost importance to the Indians who live in areas where the only vocations available to them are hunting, trapping and fishing and who, by instinct and training, are proficient in these vocations. Alternative sources of livelihood are constantly sought and developed, but to many Indians there will remain for some time to come, only furbearing animals, wild meat and fish as a source of food and revenue.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I would like to ask the
minister a question on this vote. In view of the fact that the trap line of the Arrow lakes band of Indians has disappeared because of activities in the early days, is the government under this vote preserving their traditional trapping rights on the west shores of the Arrow lakes and on the slopes of the Monashee?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We have received a report from the field on this particular problem, and I think I can best answer by reading that report:
It is reported that Mary Ann Joseph, last member of the Arrow Lakes band, transferred her interest in the trap line referred to, to an Indian of the Lower Kootenay band, Lazarus Louie.
The game branch advised that Lazarus Louie has not renewed his registration since 1949 but there is no indication that the line would be disposed of without consulting the branch.
An interview with Lazarus Louie, holder of the line at this time, will be arranged to ascertain his intentions of either renewing the registration or disposing of the line to another Indian.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I went to school with Mary Joseph.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: That is a recent report, just two weeks ago.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I thank the minister for that information because I know the trap line there very well indeed. Will the minister assure me that the Indian affairs branch will make sure that the rights of these Indians are protected with respect to this trap line?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes, absolutely.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Could the minister tell us
how much of this assistance went to Ontario

and how much is handled by that province? I know they have a system of allocating trap lines to Indians on a preferment basis, but I want to know if any of the money goes in compensation to those trappers whose lines are let us say devaluated by pulpwood operations?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The amount that was
allocated to Ontario was $150,000.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Why was the amount of
$150,000 required by Ontario when by agreement the total federal assistance is only $145,000?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It is just half the cost.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Oh, I see.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Half the cost, but the
amount has always been over-expended by Ontario, which province has no difficulty at January 31 of each year in submitting amounts in excess of the $150,000, but of course that is the ceiling.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Could the minister tell me whether there is any system of compensation to those people whose trap lines are affected, and the whole value of the catch and everything is devaluated by large scale pulpwood operations in their areas? This has happened to many trappers and I am thinking especially of the Long Lac and Marathon pulpwood operations.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: If there is any reason to believe that there should be some compensation the department looks into it. The ones mentioned by the hon. member are not known to the department as having been injurious to the rights of Indians. Apparently no protests were lodged.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I thought I heard the minister say, if the trap lines have been ruined and lost as a result of the situation mentioned by the member for Port Arthur, whether there is any possibility of reimbursement by this department. Did I understand the hon. lady to say that?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: No. If the trap line of an Indian is destroyed or damaged or otherwise interfered with, so that his livelihood is affected, and if he makes representations to the department, it is considered. Most of these are on provincial lands, and the matter is then taken up with the province and compensation is sought from them.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I thank the minister very much for saying that and my friend from Port Arthur for raising the matter, because we have a problem in British Columbia with respect to trap lines being ruined in this way. This has been the case for quite a

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
number of years and the position taken by the provincial authority is that inasmuch as the trap lines were on crown land the provincial government had the responsibility of considering whether or not reimbursement or compensation should be paid and up until this time they have seen fit not to make any compensation payments.
Their argument has been, and in my opinion it is a screwy one, "who is to say whether the entry into that trap line by a logging company drove the furbearing animals away; if a logging company had not gone in, the animals might still have gone away, so that the onus is not on us and we are not going to make any payments."
I can assure the minister that a number of representations will be made to her branch arising out of individual complaints that trap lines have been lost and that livelihoods have been affected by reason of logging activities in respect of crown timber, by reason of mineral claims and developments in respect of mines and by reason of hydro development and the flooding of trap line areas.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We have secured compensation in the case of hydro developments and I might especially mention Kitimat.


Charles Benjamin Howard: You have paid compensation?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: We have secured it.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if the minister has yet made a settlement with the Department of National Defence of the Cold lake business. I am afraid it was a terrible mess that I left her to settle, because the minister of national defence was not showing the generosity towards the Indians which I thought he should show and we never were able to reach a settlement. I do not expect an answer now because it is far too complicated a question, but I think the principle is, is it not, that in a case where any injury is done to an Indian trap line or an Indian's trapping rights the department seeks compensation from the person responsible for the injury, whether it is the provincial government, a private person or a corporation?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: That is right.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Education-
74.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $14,805,968.
Charles Benjamin Howard: On the first item I raised a couple of matters with respect to education. One matter had to do with salary structures for teachers in the Indian affairs branch not being comparable with salaries in effect in the provinces, specifically in the province of British Columbia. I am wondering if there
is any intention of so adjusting the salary structure of teachers in the Indian affairs branch that they will be comparable with provincial teachers' salaries?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I might tell the hon. member that it is quite true our salary structure was low but it has now been increased and favourably compares with the salary structure for teachers right across the country.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Is there now a uniform salary structure in the Indian affairs branch across the country?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes.


Charles Benjamin Howard: It appears to me that the salary structure of teachers might vary from province to province. I understand that the salary structure in the maritimes is quite low compared with that in British Columbia or that in other provinces. Is there an equitable situation between the provinces or how can we get the equation there?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: In government, as the hon. member knows, the same rates apply across the country. The rates are determined according to the qualifications of the individual concerned.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Can the minister inform the house if the rates paid to teachers in this branch equal the rates paid to teachers by the Department of National Defence?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The answer is, yes.


Lester Bowles Pearson: May I ask the minister what is the policy of the government in regard to Indian residential schools?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: There is a continuing need for some of the residential schools. Where there does not appear to be a continuing need the pupils are being transferred to day schools.
With regard to the hon. gentleman's former question as to the Spanish schools, it is only the boys' schools which will be closed. No Indian boy will be denied the opportunity of high school education, and provision has been made to accommodate them in other schools.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am glad to hear that. There was also the factor of non-Indian pupils at these schools who would suffer some inconvenience. That I know, is nobody's fault. I am also glad that it is not the policy to close any residential schools which are needed.


William Moore Benidickson: I do not wish to delay the minister or the committee in passing these estimates but I should like to ask whether or not the minister is familiar with an offer which was made by the department of the provincial government of Ontario with

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration respect to education in the Red Lake area to which I referred when discussing the welfare item.
I simply want to know if the offer is still open as far as the province of Ontario is concerned with respect to something which would have to be rather new in the matter of a contribution to the education of Indians, during what I again refer to as bridge period, who are not actually at that moment on reserves.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: At the present time we are negotiating with the school board about that.


William Moore Benidickson: I have mentioned in addition the fact that very worth while work is being done for these Indians that is not being done by the public schools and I learned to my surprise that a new separate school is not going to take care of them, either. I know a good deal is being done through a United States church which has, I believe, 45 or 50 pupils in its school. No fees, as far as I know, are charged these pupils. Apparently there was some doubt in the department that they were catering solely to Indians and on that basis I understood there was some hesitation about considering a financial grant. They looked upon it as a private school. It is entirely a missionary school for Indians and I am wondering if this is under active review at the moment by the department.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: There is some doubt as to whether the provincial government is going to take care of their needs and the situation stands there.


William Moore Benidickson: That was not the actual doubt that was last expressed to me two or three weeks ago. The deputy minister indicated that he had some cause in connection with the request for some help, largely on the ground that he did not understand it was a school which was completely charitable and, secondly, which was catering entirely for Indians. He had understood it was in the nature of a private school catering to both whites and Indians. I admit that the situation is odd in that some, if not most, of the Indians are not actually living on reserves but if the minister and the officials will assure me that there is continuing and active conversation with the province of Ontario with respect to this I will be able to convey it to those who are very interested in the Red Lake district.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: That is true, but I am told it is a private school and that it is not under the inspector of the province of Ontario.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Are there any educational facilities for Indians at either Lansdowne House or Weenusk?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: There is a school at Lansdowne, but with reference to Weenusk there has been a seasonal school operated there if and when we can get staff to go in during the season.


Douglas Mason Fisher: The place is about 600 miles north of Port Arthur and I doubt whether I will ever get into it but I understand there is a bit of a problem of Indian education there. It is one of the defence bases and I have heard from a white man who worked there that the conditions of Indian education were not very satisfactory.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes, that is the one I
have just mentioned, Weenusk.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Perhaps I might make reference to an allegation which appeared in a newspaper-whether factual or not I have no means of knowing at the moment-to the effect that the qualifications required of teachers in the Indian affairs branch were lower than those required of teachers teaching in the province of British Columbia where this comparison was drawn. I wonder whether the minister could comment on the accuracy of that report?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It is not true.


Charles Benjamin Howard: The qualifications are
normal?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes.


An hon. Member:: Six o'clock.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could we not carry on for one more minute and finish it?


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: Is it the pleasure of the house that we take one minute more?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I will yield to the hon. member for Port Arthur.


Douglas Mason Fisher: My question relates to the reserve at Longlac. Could the minister indicate whether there have been any difficulties in the reserve over the question of hydro power into the communities. I have been there personally; I still have not threshed out what the situation is but I know there have been general grievances with regard to hydro going into their communities. I wonder if the minister has anything in her files on that matter.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I have not, but I will be very glad to look into it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
75.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $6,647,200.
William Moore Benidickson: I just want to say on item 75 that the minister's predecessor in March, 1957 assured me that the residential school

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
at Fort Frances would be reconstructed. The Mrs. Fairclough: It is for a housing proofficials of the department said it was not gram. We hope to proceed with it at once.
worth repairing. Construction has not started, and I wonder whether the minister has any information.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The Department of Public Works is working at the present time on the design for the school.


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: It being six o'clock I do now leave the chair.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Chairman, if there is not going to be too much discussion could we take item 76?


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: Does the committee agree to follow the course suggested by the minister?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: Shall item 75 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
76.	Grant to provide additional services to the Indians of British Columbia, $100,000.
Charles Benjamin Howard: Mr. Chairman,-


An hon. Member:: Oh! Sit down.


Charles Benjamin Howard: I say to my hon. friend over there with the big mouth that I do not wish to get into harsh words with him, whoever he may be. Since I come from British Columbia and since the minister wanted to proceed with this item I thought it only fair that we might be permitted to make a comment or ask a question specifically with respect to the conference of Indians that was held in Vancouver, British Columbia a few months ago. This item was discussed at some length at that conference. Can the minister indicate what arose out of that conference with respect to the distribution of this money and what the plans are at the moment with respect to the recommendations of the conference?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It was suggested that the branch continue to spend this money with the assistance of three Indian advisers from different parts of the province. Right now we are endeavouring to secure those persons.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Welfare and economic development of Indians-[DOT]
539. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment-further amount required, $1,000,000.
Charles Benjamin Howard: This is a substantial increase. It is $1 million for welfare and economic development of Indians. Compared with the original amount, which was a little over $1 million, it is almost a 100 per cent increase. May we have some details?
It is for housing which is badly needed.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Where?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I presume the hon. member is most anxious to know how many are to be built in British Columbia. There will be 126 in British Columbia and the Yukon, 86 in Alberta and the Northwest Territories, 115 in Saskatchewan, 70 in Manitoba, 50 in Ontario north, 25 in Ontario south, 55 in Quebec, and 11 in the maritimes.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Is the lower figure for Ontario north in relation to Saskatchewan and Manitoba an indication that the facilities there are now considered to be higher or more adequate?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I do not think it is particularly that. It depends on the area and the need which is estimated to exist in the area.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Would it be possible for the minister, probably not at this time unless the information is readily available, to give us a breakdown of where the 126 will be built in British Columbia, on what reserves, and so on?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Would the hon. member be satisfied if I put it on Hansard?


Charles Benjamin Howard: Yes.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The places are as follows:
British Columbia and Yukon
Babine agency-3 new houses	 $ 6,000
Bella Coola agency-6 new houses	 12,000
Burns lake agency-8 new houses	 12,000
Cowichan agency-14 new houses	 14,000
Fort St. John agency-5 new houses ___ 7,250
Kamloops agency-7 new houses	 12,000
Kootenay agency-4 new houses	 7,000
Kwawkewlth agency-9 new houses ______ 14,000
Lytton agency-5 new houses	 9,000
New Westminster agency-7 new houses 13,000
Nicola agency-3 new houses	 7,000
Okanagan agency-6 new houses	 12^000
Queen Charlotte agency-3 new houses ..	3,000
Slceena river agency-2 new houses ... 4,000
Stuart lake agency-10 new houses .... 12^500
Vancouver agency-9 new houses	 18,000
West coast agency-7 new houses	 I3I00O
Williams lake agency-7 new houses ....	13,000
Yukon agency-11 new houses	 38,227
Total	 $227,000


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
226. Administration, production and distribution of films and other visual materials, $4,103,346.
Joseph Pierre Albert Sévigny: Shall item 226 carry?
4258	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


John Whitney Pickersgill: No. I am sure the hon. lady would like to tell us a little about the film board.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Chairman, this is one of those divisions of the government which is interesting and whose activities are complex. At a total additional cost of $92,380 this year, the board will be increasing during the present year the number of foreign versions of its films and will provide the deferred replacement prints for film libraries operated by the Canadian posts abroad, together with additional copies of new releases, and will supply a basic library for two new Canadian posts at Kuala Lumpur, capital of Malaya, and at Accra, the capital of Ghana.
The board has strengthened its science film division and wishes to increase by $31,500 its allotment of funds, bringing its budget up to $95,230.
Finally, the board wishes to commence the survey of 60 million feet of film held at Pendleton airport, 40 million feet of which is on cellulose nitrate base, an extremely hazardous substance. In the footage held in a hanger at Pendleton airport, in edited or unedited form, are materials from world wars I and II, the Canadian motion picture bureau, plus numerous miscellaneous accessions from government departments and others. The survey for which $20,000 is allocated will determine which portion of the material must be transferred over a period of years to film with an acetate base and also which part of it must be maintained as part of Canada's permanent historical records on film.
With respect to the distribution activities of the board, I should like to inform the house that during the fiscal year 1957-58 the board, through Canadian posts and film libraries, reached an audience of 21,008,919. Canadian films are being shown daily by the national film board in the Canadian pavilion at the Brussels fair. Approximately
3.000	visitors a day attend screenings in the 280-seat theatre operated by the national film board in the Canadian pavilion. In Canada in the last year, through the co-operation of 496 community film councils and other national and local voluntary associations and on the film board's own circuits
32.000	showings have taken place. In the northern territories and the Arctic alone the board has distributed, through the co-opera^ tion of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and the Department of Transport, 4,500 films. These figures do not take into account the mass audience
[The Chairman.]

which has seen national film board productions over the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation national network or on private stations through local bookings.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have one or two observations I should like to make about the film board. I am not going to embarrass the hon. lady by asking whether she thinks the film board is efficient but I do want to say a word about the subject she first mentioned in her observations, the preservation of old film going back to the first world war. If I caught the purport of the hon. lady's observations correctly, it is the intention of the present administration to preserve all of this valuable historical material that can be preserved. I am afraid from what I learned that there is some of it in such a state that this may be very difficult.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It will be edited.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I know I had some little difficulty persuading a hardhearted treasury board to make provision for starting this work and I hope the hon. lady is as successful with the present Minister of Finance as I was with his predecessor because I think in the future this is going to be one of the real treasures of our country. As to the film board itself, I think the hon. member for Dollard, in whose constituency the film board is now situated, would like to make a few observations. I do not intend to make any except to say that there is an apparent increase in the estimates of $239,000 and I was not sure that I caught the reasons for that increase.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: As a matter of fact, I started to speak about the foreign versions of films and I am afraid I overlooked the introductory remarks which would have explained it. The amount requested this year is $4,258,918 which is a net increase of $239,230, of which $152,562 is required to cover the increased cost of maintaining existing activities at the level of last year and $143,880 of which represents the cost of extension of activities and new projects. I enumerated the new projects. The difference is unrequired new building vote.


Guy Rouleau: Mr. Chairman, I find myself in a most difficult position tonight in discussing the estimates of the national film board. As I am still a bachelor I hate the idea of arguing with a lady, and being convinced that the national film board is doing good work for the Canadian people and for Canada it is hard for me to find room for criticism. But having in mind what the hon. lady said a few years ago in the house, that despite the fact that she was a woman she

would not ask for any quarter, I feel very much at ease in discussing the film board, and also because I have in mind that there is always room for improvement. Before making the few remarks I wish to make, I should like to ask the minister why we were not able to obtain the annual report of the film board for the year 1956-57 until today.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I understand there was some difficulty about the 1956-57 report. It was tabled, as the hon. member may know, on October 21, 1957, by the acting minister of the department. The responsibility for printing and delivering the report rests with the queen's printer. I do not know where the distribution fell down but in any event the report is available and can be procured by any member.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Was it tabled in manuscript form?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: No, it was tabled in printed form.


Guy Rouleau: I should like to pursue my remarks in French and I hope the minister will forgive me.
(Translation) :
It was on September 24, 1956, that the new national film board building was officially opened in Montreal, more exactly in the city of St. Laurent. On that occasion, we had the honour of playing host in Montreal and in the city of St. Laurent to federal and provincial government officials and to representatives of universities and colleges all over Canada. It was a great honour for my constituency of Dollard, and for the people of Montreal island.
All present at the opening were greatly impressed.
As member for Dollard, I must say that, when I looked at the national film board report for 1955-56, I felt proud of the frontispiece showing a picture of the new building, against the background of the city of St. Laurent and the constituency of Dollard.
At the opening of the NFB building his worship Mayor Cousineau, of St. Laurent, congratulated the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill), then minister of citizenship and immigration who was responsible for the NFB in this house, for having transferred the film board to the city of St. Laurent and for having caused this magnificent building to be put up with the co-operation of the minister of transport. These events took place in 1956. But then in 1958, this
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration mayor of St. Laurent, Mr. Cousineau, became an official candidate of the party of the present Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) and this time complained of the national film board being there and even indicated to the people of the constituency of Dollard that it was a charge on the municipality.
I then told the people of Dollard that nothing could be farther from the truth. On my arrival in this house, at the very beginning of the session, I put a question on the order paper asking what advantage could accrue to the city of St. Laurent from the fact that the national film board was situated there. I was told that in 1956 the national film board had paid $23,075 to the city of St. Laurent, in lieu of taxes, and $128,807 in 1957. I was also told that in future the city of St. Laurent would receive an annual payment of $130,000.
(Text):
I wanted to bring this to the attention of the committee, Mr. Chairman, because it reminded me of the fuss made by the Conservative opposition in 1954 when it was decided by the Liberal government to move the national film board to Montreal, and more particularly to St. Laurent in the constituency of Dollard. In spite of the criticism of some members of the Conservative party, the move was authorized and the new building opened its doors in the fall of 1956, as I just said in French.
The film board had to be located in a large cultural centre not too far from the capital city, where transportation facilities were available, having in mind the bilingual status of Canada, and in a place where cultural and creative talents were easily available in the two official languages of Canada. As stated in the report of the national film board for the year 1955-56, and I quote:
The building site was chosen after 21 sites had been carefully investigated, not only with regard to transportation, proximity to residential areas, utilities, soil conditions and other pertinent factors, but also with special consideration for such relevant conditions as ground vibration, noise levels and atmospheric contamination. Sound and vibration tests were carried out with jet aircraft overhead, heavy trucks on the highway and diesel trains on the neighbouring railway-all conditions common to metropolitan areas.
The government of that day found no better place than Montreal to meet the requirements I have just outlined. I was glad that St. Laurent, situated in the constituency of Dollard, was chosen as the site of the national film board. If the people of Canada now have reason to be proud of the beautiful
4260	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration building which houses the board, we in Dollard are very proud to have that board in our district. In its new building the board carries on the good job it has been doing since its creation. The working conditions are ideal.
It is stated in the annual report of the national film board for 1955-56, and I quote:
New quarters, to house the board's equipment and staff once the move was over, were specially designed to meet the necessities of film-making under modern conditions, including colour, wide screen techniques and television requirements. Every measure was taken to ensure that the installations in the new building were adequate for the program of the board and technically up to date in all possible respects.
When it was decided to build the $6 million building for the film board, we were accused as usual by the Conservatives of waste and extravagance. We realize now, once again, that the Conservative accusations came out of the blue. Those accusations of waste and extravagance have disappeared. The Conservatives, now in office, have just awarded a contract to a Montreal firm for a $350,000 addition to the national film board building. I am glad to see that the present minister is aware of the importance of the national film board, and its needs, if it is to discharge its responsibilities to the satisfaction of the people of Canada.
We owe the present building to the foresight of Messrs. Winters, Harris and Pickersgill. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate attended the opening of the national film board as the representative of the government. The people who met him on that occasion remember him as a man of foresight, action, devotion to duty and a great Canadian.
As stated in the annual report for 1956-57, at page 3,
Now, for the first time in its 17-year span of operations the combined facilities of the board- production, technical operations, administration and distribution branches-are located under the one roof.
Almost 500 people, many of them skilled technicians and craftsmen, are employed in the new building. In the spring of 1957, Mr. Guy Roberge was appointed government film commissioner and chairman of the national film board. Under his able direction the national film board in its new building has taken advantage of its many facilities and has done an outstanding job. Under Mr. Roberge's direction the morale of the national film board and of its employees has never been so high.
In the past year the film board has produced, to my knowledge, outstanding films. I should like at this time to commend the national film board for its production of the


film entitled "The Sceptre and the Mace" which was a report of the royal visit of 1957. This production, which has been seen by millions of people, is further proof of the high skill of the people of the national film board.
I should like also to mention the films produced under the direction of Mr. Norman MacLaren, who is, I should say, one of the best ambassadors Canada has. From what I know and from what I have heard, his films are known and admired all across the world and have been awarded prizes at many European festivals. I sincerely hope that the minister and the government will see fit to continue providing the national film board with all the facilities possible to enable them to do their job and achieve the aims and objects which have been assigned to that board. It is my strong belief that Canada cannot do without a body like the national film board. Again, I wish to say how happy I am to have the national film board in my constituency. I hope that the present minister will find it convenient to visit the building before long.
I may add that I would be pleased on that occasion to show her around the surroundings of the film board, that is, St. Laurent and the constituency of Dollard. I am quite convinced that her charms will conquer the hearts of our people. If I am not eager to see her at election time, I will be very happy to see her in my riding in between elections.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I have only a word to say about the film board. I should like to congratulate the board, through the minister, on the work it is doing and especially, if I may say so, upon its contribution to the projection of Canada abroad.
I have had some experience with the results of that work and they are admirable. The board that has done that work has done a great deal to make Canada known abroad and in the right way.
The other matter that I want to mention was touched on by my colleague the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate and it is this. I am glad to hear from the minister that the board is proceeding with the work of the preservation of these earlier war films. I am not quite sure of the technical considerations involved but I would hope that perhaps, in the relationship between the board and the C.B.C., it might be possible to show some of these films on television. The reason I say that is that, along with other members, I have been immensely interested in the series the C.B.C., is showing, I think by arrangement with the B.B.C., of British war films and American war films of the second war. If that could be done with Canadian films showing Canadian participation I think it would

be of educational value and it would be of great interest to viewers.
May I just conclude by expressing my satisfaction with the work that is being accomplished by the board.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I want to express our appreciation of the good work being done by the film board both at home and abroad. I can wholeheartedly support the complimentary remarks made by the previous speakers in this discussion. However, I do not want to take up the time of the house by repetition. I want to bring to the attention of the minister and of the committee one particular aspect of the film board's activities that I think have been very much worth while indeed. I refer to the programs of the film councils throughout the country. I think it was called a brain child of the board which some years ago I remember was criticized quite severely in some quarters as were some other policies of the film board. But the more people come to understand the value of these film councils, the greater support they get.
To illustrate that point I simply want to deal for a few moments with the success of the film councils in Kootenay West which, of course, is inhabited by a very progressive population. There are local film councils throughout the district which are operated under the sponsorship of boards of trade, service clubs, women's institutes, farmer's institutes and so on. They are associated together in the Kootenays under the direction of the Kootenay film council. Before proceeding further I must say how much we appreciate the excellent work that is being done by Mr. William Orr in organizing the activities of the film councils in the Kootenays and in getting much greater support for and appreciation of their activities. In the Kootenays we have the Kootenay film festival which has about 6,000 patrons annually. I think that is a very good record for the population. Then we have the children's film society, which organization had an attendance of some 29,000 at various film showings and so on. Then we have had some extremely interesting discussion groups, lectures and other activities associated with the film council based on films supplied by the national film board, sponsored by the parent-teachers association. They have asked me to say how much they appreciate the films with which they are being provided and the co-operation and assistance of Mr. William Orr in this connection.
I might say that I am not boastful in any respect. I am only speaking of things of which I have knowledge. We have in our district a group of people who have creative
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration ideas. There have been several activities undertaken in Kootenay West for the first time in British Columbia, ideas which we are certain have actually been copied in the last year or two as far away as Dublin. I just mention that matter in order to indicate how this participation in this form of cultural activity brings out talent and interest that goes unnoticed without this type of organization.
With those few words I want to express again the appreciation of all the people in Kootenay West who are interested in film council work for the work of the national film board and the co-operation that has been extended to them, so willingly and so beneficial to young and old alike.
(Translation):


Mr. Pigeon:: Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the hon. minister who is discharging her responsibilities with care and efficiency. I must say that she has shown herself superior to the former minister of citizenship and immigration, the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill).
May I say a few words about the national film board whose aim is to make Canada known abroad and to inform the people of Canada. The high technical quality of our films is recognized throughout the world. Yet we must not forget the formative aspect of film, but rather try to stress moral values and respect their priority. The national film board's mission should be to counteract bad films and bad publications.
Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Dollard (Mr. Rouleau) a few moments ago mentioned Mr. Cousineau. I am pleased to tell this house that the present mayor of Ville St. Laurent administers his town perfectly and sees to its progress. As a matter of fact, if the national film board is established at Ville St. Laurent, it is probably due to the good administration of the present mayor, Mr. Cousineau.


Guy Rouleau: Mr. Chairman, I shall hardly be expected to answer the remarks just made by the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon).
(Text):
I should like to say, however, that I was extremely glad to hear the hon. member for Kootenay West say that the film councils were doing a very good job in his own constituency. Film councils are doing a very good job all across Canada. I know that film councils do not come under the jurisdiction of the minister but I know for a fact that film councils have been promoted by the national film
4262	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration board. I should like to know from the minister whether, since the advent of television in Canada, these film councils have diminished.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: They have increased.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I was intrigued by what the hon. member for Dollard said about another building being constructed. I had not realized that previously. Can the minister tell us what it is for?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: That is the vault which is being built to store films.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is right there on the
same premises?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I just rise to mention briefly something that I overlooked. I was asked to bring this matter to the attention of the minister and the officials. Sometime in the future, owing to the great interest in and the great importance of the Columbia basin to the development of British Columbia and to Canada and the great opportunity for filming wonderful scenery, dam sites and remarkable characters on some occasions, the people I represent would like the film board to give consideration to filming a documentary of the Columbia river basin which would include its history, its beauty, its opportunities for development and its unique character.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: May I assure the hon.
member that the Columbia valley will not be overlooked. This year the board is undertaking to film a portion of the Fraser valley, and Kamloops and the vicinity. Eventually it will get around to the Columbia valley.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: That is splendid.


Guy Rouleau: In the report of the national film board for the year 1956-57, at page 2, I read the following:
The purpose of the National Film Board is stated in the National Film Act of 1950: "to initiate and promote the production and distribution of films in the national interest, and in particular to produce and distribute, and to promote the production and distribution of, films designed to interpret Canada to Canadians and to other countries."
I know the minister has had an opportunity to see the work of the national film board at first hand and would she care to comment on the role the film board has played both as an agent of the government and in relation to the film industry as it presently exists in Canada?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Chairman, that is father a broad assignment. However, may I say first of all that we are not in competition with private producers. The kind of film which is produced and distributed is intended


to fulfil the purpose described in section 9 (a) of the act. National film board films are produced in the national interest. They are information films; they are not of the type which a commercial firm would order through a private producer, at least speaking generally.
In distributing its films through such commercial channels and theatres, television and commercial distributors, the board charges standard commercial rental or royalty rates. In the distribution of its films in Canada as well as abroad, the board attempts to obtain the cost of prints from the user wherever possible. It should be noted that in the sale of its films or prints in Canada the board is competing primarily with information films brought in from abroad, since few of the information films produced by Canadian producers are offered for sale to the general public.


Guy Rouleau: I thank the minister for the information she has given me, and would ask her, since the annual report for last year is not available, if she would kindly inform the committee of the number of films produced by the national film board for television showings and for public cinema showings and, thirdly, to fulfil the orders of government departments.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Of the total number produced last year, namely 318, there were 73 for first release on television, 46 of those being English films and 27 French; there were approximately 20 films produced for first showings in theatres and there were 56 films produced for government departments or agencies. The rest were part of the general program of the board.


Guy Rouleau: May I ask the minister another question. I know the national film board has been distributing films all across Canada except, for a while, in the province of Quebec. Could the minister tell us whether any films have been distributed in that province during the last two years and, if so, I would like to know the numbers of showings in Quebec?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Of the theatrical bookings which numbered 7,484, there were 630 French bookings. As the hon. member will know, one booking may have involved several showings. So far as television is concerned, there were 5,866 telecasts of which 1,485 were French.
I think the hon. member also asked the number of showings, outside of cinema and television showings. There were 21,927 showings at which the attendance was 1,853,202.


Guy Rouleau: Could the minister tell me if showings of national film board films are

given to the public at the national film board building and, if so, is there any charge to the people seeing those films there? If there are such showings I would like to know how many were involved.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: There are no public showings of films at the film board headquarters except to groups, in which case there is no charge.


Guy Rouleau: Do groups such as the minister has mentioned have to have certain qualifications to entitle them to showings at the national film board itself?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: They are usually organized groups who intend to pay a visit to the board and they are shown around. We know in advance they are coming and if they are interested in some particular film we try to make arrangements to show it to them.


Guy Rouleau: Thank you very much.


Mr. Brassard (Lapointe):: I would like to say a few words on the first item, and I hope the hon. lady will forgive me for using my mother tongue.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, I had the privilege of going to Brussels after the famous NATO conference in Paris. I merely wish to pay tribute to the national film board which is doing a tremendous job in Brussels. I spent about four days at the Canadian pavilion there and saw huge crowds scrambling for seats in the pavilion's projection hall.
I am all the more anxious to pay tribute to national film board officials, because of the fact that the pearson in charge there is working under rather difficult administrative conditions.
I apologize for taking up the time of the committee to say those few words, but I wished to let my colleagues know that even though the NFB was removed to Ville St. Laurent, as a result of representations by my friend the hon. member for Dollard (Mr. Rouleau), it is doing a marvellous job.
(Text):


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
228. Administration, operation and maintenance, including industrial design division, $554,575.
Douglas Mason Fisher: I have just two questions to ask on this item. Firstly, I wonder whether it is true that in connection with the design originally prepared for the building that is going to be built a start was made by the gallery people themselves whom one would imagine would have a fairly good understanding of what they wanted and that the Department of Public Works did not accept their
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration particular ideas and design and the resulting building is strictly a Department of Public Works affair.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I am not sure that in the shuffle I did not lose the import of that question. Is the hon. member asking me with regard to the new building which is being erected?


Douglas Mason Fisher: I have already heard a number of aesthetic complaints about the facing by people saying: this looks like another monumental Grit building. I have heard it said or alleged that there was a design prepared by the national gallery people themselves which the Department of Public Works did not accept because they did not feel it was monumental enough, though this national gallery design was simple, chaste, and, they thought, beautiful. The result is the Department of Public Works is not completely in line with what the gallery people had in mind.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: As a matter of fact this is only a temporary building to serve the gallery until the new building, which may be built in a few years time is ready. The building which will house the gallery will probably be of different construction. This particular building is, I understand, being erected to be, eventually, an office building. The national gallery is merely a temporary occupant.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to say a word about this because I know what the facts were. There was a nationwide competition for a design for a national gallery and it was won by a firm of designing architects in Winnipeg. When it was decided not to proceed with the work on a permanent gallery-and in my opinion this building will be the permanent gallery for the lifetime of everyone in this chamber-it was considered by the government that the proper thing to do would be to give the architect who had won the prize for the original design the job of designing this temporary building.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I should like to say a word in appreciation of the good work done by the staff of the national archives and the national library-


Ellen Louks Fairclough: This is the national gallery we are talking about now.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Yes, and I want to advance a suggestion in view of the remarks made by the two previous speakers with respect to the design of the proposed new building. I ask the minister to pass this on to the Minister of Public Works. We do hope that the new building will be a fitting building
4264	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration for the cultural activities it is intended to house. I want to bring to the attention of the minister that in the middle ages up to quite recent times in Europe buildings of this type-state buildings and other national buildings-were often surrounded by what were known as gargoyles which were symbolic of mythical creatures which existed in the middle ages and previous days.
I want to make a suggestion in this respect, and I hope the minister will take it as a creative suggestion coming from Kootenay West, that in this type of building there would be a good opportunity to pay a tribute to the gentlemen of the press and those interested in literary activity. I would suggest that the architects have splendid models in the moving gargoyles who move along the rails above our heads to the right from day to day, and that there you have some excellent patterns for gargoyles-you have them bearded and with whiskers, you have them clean-shaven, you have them bald; gargoyles of all types and descriptions which would provide enough inspiration to furnish this new building with gargoyles replete with character and charm which, I think, would go with this type of structure.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I think, Mr. Chairman, we could also get some from the floor of the house.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I could give you eight.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
318. General administration and technical services, $582,826.
Douglas Mason Fisher: The first question I want to ask the minister she will probably be able to answer in the absence of the particular official. I wonder whether the minister can straighten out what may have been misconceptions that have arisen about the work and attitude of Dr. Lamb as a result of some comments and criticisms which were made in the other place the other day.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I will be very glad to do so because I think it was rather unfortunate that when questions were asked in the other place Dr. Lamb was in Europe. He is still there. Neither he nor his office gave the negative reply which appeared. It was one of those confusing things which sometimes happen, but because of the question which was raised we were in touch with Dr. Lamb and he left it to the minister's discretion to decide whether the speech which was requested should be tabled or not.
I may say this address was given in his capacity as president of the Canadian historical association, and that it has received


some notoriety because of the remarks which have been made in the other place. The text was turned over by Dr. Lamb to the editor of the Canadian historical association. It is now in the hands of the printer and it is to be published in the annual report of the Canadian historical association, probably in November. Dr. Lamb will be back in Canada in a month or so, and in this situation I propose to wait until he returns to find out whether he thinks it necessary to have an advance copy of his address tabled before the journals of the association are available.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Was not this speech a public speech made in a public place in public session?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It seems to me this is a tempest in a teapot about absolutely nothing.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I agree with the hon. gentleman and I think it is most unfortunate that aspersions should have been cast on the good name of a very excellent official.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I want to ask the minister a long range question. I would like to have her answer next year on her estimates. I am bringing up this question now at the request of a number of people of the same occupational group as myself, that is, librarians, I will not say in an official capacity. I have heard it discussed a number of times that the set-up of having a public archives and the national library under the one administrative head is not exactly satisfactory from the point of view of the library aspect of the matter and I want to make some criticisms later of the national library which would indicate more particularly the point I have in mind.
There is really very little connection between a library and an archives except that they both have printed material used for research. A library is a much more active institution with a much wider range of material; it is not riveted down to government departments or their histories. I am not making this suggestion because I feel that Dr. Lamb, for example, should be dispossessed of one or the other. It seems to me it might be considered and I would like to have the minister's view after she has been in charge for a while as to whether she thinks it would not be worth while to separate the two from an administrative point of view.
One of the other difficulties, I may mention in passing, is in our habit in Canada of alternating an English-speaking and a Frenchspeaking person at the head of affairs. In the situation we have now, Dr. Lamb has

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
an academic background that tends towards archives and Dr. Tanghe has an academic background that ends towards librarianship so there is an alternative there, but that could easily break down in the future and I wondered if it might not be better to consider having a librarian for the librarians' work in the national library and having an archivist separately.
In connection with the archivist there is one question I wish to ask the minister which is peculiar to a new administration taking over. The most difficult problem any archivist has is the obtaining of correspondence of ex-ministers of governments. This is a problem that every country that keeps a public records office has encountered. In most cases it is a voluntary arrangement. In Canada the situation is such that Dr. Lamb goes around and negotiates with ex-ministers. There are no sets of regulations or rules that spell out anything so far as I know so that incoming ministers would have some idea of their responsibilities and their duties in this regard. It was very welcome news to hear that when he turned over his papers to the archivist the Right Hon. George Drew gave them with an open hand. As I understand it, he turned them over practically holus bolus without bothering to sift through them. If one of the main purposes in keeping archives is for historical work in the future, the ministerial files that should be kept are those which should have a historical background rather than have a minister himself make the decisions on personal grounds. At the same time the minister-or the exminister I suppose it would be, in most instances-would certainly need to be consulted. Since we have a new cabinet, Mr. Chairman, I wondered whether it might not be the time to try to lay down a policy and some rules which would never be hard and fast but which might make the task of the archivist easier in the future in so far as ministerial records are concerned.
We have a couple of ex-ministers present and perhaps they could give us the best judgment of all on the difficulties connected with this matter.
I noticed in the New York Times for August 27 that the United Nations produced last year material for the archives at the rate of 242,855,500 pages. This amount of material was produced in one year. That indicates, I think, as the minister is probably aware after talking to the archivist, the tremendous pressures that are going to be placed on libraries and archives because of the monumental nature of government publishing. That is another reason why I think the archives, in the long run, should be
separated from the national library aspects of this problem, since more and more the archives, especially on the United States pattern, are tending to become very bulky record setters. The object of such bulky records is always to get the cheapest possible storage rather than the more expensive when you have the kind of show building a library usually is. Therefore, there are very good arguments from the cheapness point of view to separate the archives from the national library. I know the experience in Britain has been that the public record office contains at the present time really a historical selection rather than the more recent governmental productions. For these reasons I would like to ask the minister to consider this whole problem. I do not make this suggestion with the thought of criticizing the people who are involved with the work at the present time; I just thought it would be worth while to bring it up.
There is one other question I want to ask in connection with the public archives. I believe it comes under this item. I wonder what the situation is with regard to Laurier House and the present set-up? What will be the situation in the future from the point of view of personnel?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a word about the first suggestion my hon. friend has made because I am very interested in this both as a person who has an interest in the historical material for research and eventually for publication and also as an ex-minister who had a certain amount of material when he vacated his portfolio. It seems to me that there are already very clearly defined rules laid down for that sort of thing. When a minister goes he has no right to take away any material which is official or confidential and which is not personal in character.
In the first category, the material which is official material he leaves behind and presumably it becomes the responsibility of the new minister of the department to decide what to do with it. But certainly the incoming government would have no great difficulty with it. With respect to laying down rules, I know my hon. friend did not have in mind rules that pose any obligations, but even with that qualification, would the incoming ministers not have great difficulty laying down rules on what should be done with regard to material of outgoing ministers? I quite agree it would be helpful if there could be some way in which the archivist and the staff could have access to the material. It would become the custom that those papers should be turned over to the archivist. It would have to be left entirely to the discretion of the person who
4266	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration has possession of the papers and it would be very difficult indeed to lay down any rules or regulations covering this matter.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to say a word about this also because it does seem to me that it would be inimical to what the hon. member has in mind if any attempt were made by the government to lay down any kind of rules about these matters. After all, those papers are the private property of the ex-minister and he is not going to cede his private property to the archivist in most instances unless he can do it entirely on his own terms.
I have had some little experience with this. I think hon. members know that I am one of the literary executors of the late Mr. Mackenzie King. I also had something to do with the papers of the former prime minister. It does seem to me in these cases and in other cases I know about that there is nothing that can be properly done except to leave it to the individuals themselves and hope that out of a sense of patriotism and a regard for history, as I believe is increasingly the case, they will pass their papers over to the archivist while retaining ownership of them. The hon. lady will wish to explain the provisions for storage herself. There are provisions for that in the new records building.
It might interest the committee to know that until Mr. St. Laurent became prime minister there were no files in the prime minister's office except personal files. He was the first prime minister in the history of Canada who made a distinction between official files and personal files and left certain official files in the office when he left. Up until that time every prime minister from confederation on took everything away. Nothing was left but the filing cabinets. I believe in one or two instances even they were not left when there was a change of government. It was a quite extraordinary and, I might say, a very difficult problem to sort those files and to keep them sorted in the proper way; but I think it is going to be immensely to the advantage of the country and to historians in the future that that was done.


Leon David Crestohl: Mr. Chairman, in dealing
with the problems raised by the last three hon. gentlemen perhaps the minister will also deal with this one. I see no provision for the acquisition of any material that might go into the archives, such as items of interest, Cana-diana, that might be held by private citizens. Will the minister say a word as to how those items are acquired, whether there is any provision to purchase them and, generally speaking, the over-all historic items which turn up from time to time in the country and


which are in the archives? How are they acquired by the government or by the chief archivist?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: If the hon. member will look at page 449, I think it is, of the details, he will find an item of $20,000 under "objects". As he may appreciate, the acquisition of specific articles, works or objects is a matter of personal approach in many cases, an activity in which the dominion archivist is quite apt. He has done an excellent job in acquiring objects which might be of value to the archives.
I should like to refer to some remarks made earlier. The hon. member for Port Arthur referred to the great activity which centres around the library in contrast to that which centres around the archives. I think one must bear in mind that this is not a public library. This is not a lending library. Both the national library and the national archives are depositories whose nature is that of reference. It seems to me quite appropriate that a person of the capacity of the dominion archivist and the national librarian should, at least at the start of a national library, have the dual administration. I also draw the hon. member's attention to the fact that there is an assistant dominion archivist charged with the activities of that branch and there is also an assistant librarian charged with the activities of that branch. The two are co-ordinated under one administrator.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It is true, is it not, that there is no organic connection between them whatsoever? It is just like the situation when the Minister of Public Works was also Minister of Defence Production.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: That is quite right but the time may come when the national library, being housed by itself and having grown in stature and importance, may require the fulltime services of a national librarian as distinct from the archivist, but for the present I think the two positions are being handled very efficiently.
I think the matter of the availability and depositing of ministers' papers has been adequately dealt with by the Leader of the Opposition and the hon. member for Bona-vista-Twillingate, both of whom have had experience in this matter.
With regard to Laurier House, it is an endowed institution, of course, and we expect it will carry on as it has heretofore. I might say my own feeling is that we could do with more of these historical places and I hope that as Canada grows older more persons connected with the national life of

the country will make premises and funds available to perpetuate historical places.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I did not want the minister to think from my comment that I had anything against Laurier House. I just wanted the assurance that the present government was interested in it. I feel I did not make my point too well, no matter what the Leader of the Opposition and the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate said. Their statements would seem to indicate that on the departure of the ministers of the Liberal government there was a very clear situation and that the ministers knew what was their personal correspondence and what was departmental correspondence and everything went along just as sweetly as could be. That is not my information and I think my information is correct. With a number of ministers I think it did not go smoothly at all. All I was suggesting was that a bit of preparation on the part of the present ministry might mean that when the day comes when one of them drops out or when some day they may all go at one time they will know the proper moves to make and they will have planned ahead for it so far as their correspondence is concerned.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I may say I think there is something to be said for the hon. member's idea that there should be some way of marking or designating papers which might conceivably be of value. Whether or not the minister who owns them would eventually decide to make them available to the archives is another matter, but I can assure the hon. member that the matter will be considered.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National library-
319. General administration, $182,591.
Douglas Mason Fisher: There are a number of points I want to make on this item. I want to compliment the national library for continuing to print the accumulation for the Canadian periodical index. I do not know whether some members realize that much of the material for their speeches which is provided by the library of parliament is dug up through the use of that particular accumulation, and it is a very worth-while effort. It is the type of government subsidy that I think more than repays what is spent.
One question I want to ask the minister has to do with the book deposit regulations. When you consider that well over 20,000 books are published in the English language in a year it seems to me that the fact that we only have 2,410 under book deposit regulations indicates that there may be some loopholes in the regulations. Is any consideration
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration being given to acquiring more of these books and copyright privileges free or by trading arrangements with national libraries of other countries such as England and the United States which have copyright privileges for their nations and areas?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The opinion of the officials is that not more than one per cent escape acquisition. Could the hon. member tell us where he gets his figures of 20,000 published and only 2,410 acquired?


Douglas Mason Fisher: I was not suggesting that there were that many published in Canada. There are that many published in English throughout the English speaking world. When you consider that 2,000 or less than 10 per cent are coming into our national library freely it means that they will have to do a tremendous amount of purchasing. I wondered if some sort of mutual arrangement could not be worked out with some of the other countries.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It is the opinion of the officials that the copyright law only covers books published in Canada or books published by Canadians. However, the member's representations will be considered by the library.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I want to express criticism of the book purchasing policy as outlined in the report of the national library for 1958. There is a national library advisory council which I gather advises the national librarian on policy and they are going to give priority to a restricted number of fields including the following, Canada, bibliography, general reference works and so on. The whole emphasis of the policy is going to be concentrated on the social sciences and humanities. I am not suggesting for a moment that is bad but it is certainly not going to give us a well-rounded library in the sense of moving ahead with science and technology. The other factor is that there are already quite a number of relatively good libraries in the universities where the emphasis is in this direction. It would seem to me that this policy reflects what I would almost say was a cultural lag on the part of the people who are advising the national library. They seem to be obsessed with a pattern of scholarship that is changing, and I think fairly quickly. Now, this may be an incorrect judgment of them, but it seems to me this kind of collection is going to be excellent for historians and perhaps people in the literary field, but I wonder about the new disciplines and how they are going to fare with this kind of collection.
I should like to ask the minister whether or not she has any views on this particular emphasis that is going to develop in connection with the national library?
4268	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes, as a matter of fact, I have some. Of course, certain types of publications are acquired by various departmental libraries. One of the activities of the national library is the compilation of a national index, I think it is called a union catalogue, which provides information as to the depository of all publications which may be of interest and which, in itself, is a considerable work.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I, of course, agree, that the union catalogue is probably the most important function the national library has carried out or will carry out in its whole life. As a matter of fact, I should like to know what the stack space is going to be in the new library. We can assume that this library is going to run easily over the million volume mark. If that is the case, and this is the slant, it seems to me we are going to have what could be an old-fashioned collection in terms of scholarship, and in the relatively popular field there will be nothing. I would hope that the role of the national library, through its union catalogue and its reference service, will be to integrate the library service right across the nation, not necessarily at a high scholarship level. If a national library becomes merely a place where the professors of our universities get their material, I do not think it will be carrying out its work. This is the reason I am in doubt about this particular policy.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I can reassure the hon. member on that point. The stack space planned now is for 2 million volumes. The aim of the library is to make it a comprehensive collection. I can assure the hon. member that it is not aimed at any one segment or any one period, but will be a comprehensive collection.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I have two more questions. When will the destruction that is preliminary to construction get under way? The second question is, is there any consideration being given to have the national library encourage scholarships in the librarianship field?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I am informed that
tenders for the demolition of the existing building will be called in December, and tenders for the new construction will be called in the spring. I have forgotten the last part of the hon. member's question.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Is any consideration being given by the national library to the encouragement of scholarships for librarianships? I am making the point because, while the Canada Council has been doing some work in this regard, the Canadian librarian association's last report indicates that the financial resources for such scholarship work are very


meagre and there is a great shortage of librarians in this country, especially in the western provinces. I suggest that this might be one role that the national library might play, perhaps with some kind of in-training scholarship, to help the general activities in the librarian field.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: No, Mr. Chairman, so far any scholarships which would be available would be under the Canada Council.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have one small question. I noticed that only $33,334 appears to have been expended last year. I understand that under the statute there was supposed to be $40,000 expended every year. I daresay this has something to do with dissolution and the use of governor general's warrants. I was wondering if some provision is being made to put the full amount into the fund?


Mr. Chambers:: I understand the National Library Act requires the publisher of a book published in Canada to supply the national library with a copy. I was wondering if there was a provision that those who import books into Canada should also supply a copy to the national library. If there is no such provision, consideration might be given to changing the act.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I understand that under the present regulations only books totally produced in Canada are subject to the deposit provisions. If I may answer the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, the full amount of $40,000 is in the estimates this year.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It was not this year about which I was asking, but last year. What puzzles me is that the item given for last year is $33,334, and there was $40,000 in the estimates as they were originally tabled by Mr. Harris last year. I wondered how this discrepancy was explained, and if it was to be made up. The Prime Minister, on the federal district commission estimates, explained that the full amount of one of these votes of a similar character was not shown for last year, but it was being made up in the supplementary estimates this year.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I am afraid I cannot answer that. I was not in the department at the time. I do not know why the amount was reduced.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not want to hold up the estimates now, but I wonder if the hon. lady could get an explanation and give it to me later?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Charles Edward Rea: This completes the estimates of the hon. lady.



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

[Stage Direction]
414. Departmental administration, $2,144,060.
Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport):: The main estimates of my department, Mr. Chairman, and of the other agencies reporting to me, excluding loans, amount for the fiscal year to almost $254 million as compared with $219,750,000 the previous year. To this has been added in supplementary estimates an additional $7 million, so that the gross increase as compared with the previous year is over $41 million. The major portion of this overall increase is due to a substantial expansion of our construction program this year, designed both to meet the rapidly growing requirements of transportation and communications in this country and to assist economic conditions.
In view of the size and complexities of the department and its associated agencies, and because of the time at my disposal, I do not intend to explain the estimates in detail. However, it does seem to me that it would be helpful, and particularly so to those members attending their first session, if I were to touch upon the highlights.
In the canals branch, the level of activity will not materially change during the present year in so far as operation is concerned. We expect that towards the end of this year the mainline Ontario-St. Lawrence and great lakes canals will all be transferred for administration by the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority, since otherwise two canal organizations would be functioning in the same area. As for the secondary canals, such as the Rideau, Trent, Chambly and the Canso, we will continue our efforts to improve these both in facilities and in attractiveness as a means of serving the growing popularity of boating, domestic and tourist.
We are doing everything we can to find employment for those individuals who have been displaced by the flooding of a number of the Ontario-St. Lawrence canals consequent upon the opening of the seaway. Preferential treatment is being given in connection with work on the seaway and on certain of our other canals, and we hope that a large proportion of the individuals concerned can be offered alternative employment.
In the field of canal construction we have increased our program by $2 million or over 100 per cent. This expenditure is spread over a large number of small projects, but there are certain large items which merit attention. These include improvement of the Canso canal by installation of fenders and extension of the mooring wall; the initial funds required to start on the long delayed project of cleaning up the old, disused second 57071-3-270
Supply-Transport
Welland canal; two causeways to connect the main highway with the village of Cardinal across the old Williamsburg canal; continuation of the work on the new bridge across the Lachine canal at Ville St. Pierre.
As for the Chjgnecto canal project, previous economic studies have indicated doubt as to whether the benefits that would result from the project would offset its very heavy costs. Notwithstanding this, we have recently asked the Department of Pubic Works to give us a preliminary engineering estimate on the cost of the Chignecto project, on the basis of which I propose to have a further economic study made and to report my findings to my colleagues.
Staff requirements in this area of operation have not varied substantially, but there is an increase in our wage and salary requirements due to salary increases.
Turning to marine services, I should note in passing that there has been an extensive reorganization of the marine sections of my department which has resulted in three separate branches being established. One branch is charged with all regulatory matters in the marine field arising out of the Canada Shipping Act, such as nautical services, pilotage and steamship inspection; a second branch is charged with the provision of marine aids, such as lights and buoys, harbour administration, supervision of the secondary canals and the St. Lawrence ship channel; and a third branch is charged with construction and operation of departmental vessels, including our icebreaking program and Arctic patrol and supply work. This reorganization has been made necessary by the rapid growth of our activities in the marine field in recent years.
Our requirements for operation of our departmental vessels are substantially increased over last year. We will have a couple of new vessels to put into service this year, although the main impact of our new vessel construction program will not make itself felt until later years. Our vessels not only perform winter icebreaking duties and summer Arctic patrol icebreaking and convoy duties, but they are used for the placing and supply of our various aids to navigation in coastal and inland waters, a very extensive task. We do have substantial increases in our requirements for the charter of commercial vessels for northern and Arctic supply, and for provision of stevedoring services and ship-to-shore equipment for lightering barges in the Arctic. These are required because of our general responsibility in providing marine supply for civil departments of government, for the R.C.A.F.

Supply-Transport
buildings and the extension of existing structures; construction of entirely new airports and installation of special facilities such as runway and approach lighting systems, power plants, heating plants, barracks, garages, etc.
We have recently completed a ten-year analysis of expected airport and airfield construction needs in Canada and, based on that analysis, the figure included in this year's budget represents the approximate amount we may be required to expend annually over the next ten years if we are to keep abreast of aviation requirements.
There are also the usual items relating to grants for small municipal airstrips-either outright grants or those on a cost sharing basis. Our policy in this regard is under review and I am not in a position to make a definite statement as yet but it may be necessary to increase the existing ceiling in respect of the amount of a grant while at the same time making the prerequisites somewhat more stringent.
Hitherto we have made grants up to $25,000 when a municipality is willing to provide the land and to operate the field. If amounts in excess of this are needed for a small local airstrip we provide additional funds on a cost sharing basis with the municipality. I am inclined to think that in future we should make slightly larger grants when satisfied that an important local need involving the federal government exists, such as service to a remote community dependent upon air transportation, but that in other cases, where a small airstrip may be beneficial but not essential we should insist on cost sharing from the outset. However, the final outlines of this policy have not yet been determined.
Our assistance to flying training continues to represent a successful part of our program. We have for many years been paying $100 to the club or school which provides the training and $100 to the pilot, in the case of each person who learns to fly, which has led to a gradual but steady increase in pilot training. The number of student pilots being trained roughly eight years ago was 1,200 annually. This had increased a year or so ago to 1,600, and we expect that it should pass 2,000 this year.
There are many other points in connection with the departmental activities upon which I could comment at this time. I trust, however, that the foregoing will be of some assistance to hon. members in dealing with my estimates. I would remind the committee that we have spent many hours in a special committee of this house in examining my estimates in greater detail and have heard evidence from a large number of the officials

of the department and other agencies. I trust that the exhaustive inquiry which took place during those sessions will be borne in mind by hon. members in dealing with the estimates in this committee.


Lionel Chevrier: First, Mr. Chairman, I should like to thank the Minister of Transport for the very comprehensive statement he has made concerning the various activities of his department. Anyone listening to that statement from an unbiased standpoint cannot help but come to the conclusion that the Department of Transport is responsible for varied activities in the field of transportation.
I should also like to congratulate the minister upon his appointment to this department because I believe this is the first time any one of us has had an opportunity to do so, since there was no occasion during the last session of parliament to consider either the activities of his department or the estimates themselves. I congratulate the hon. gentleman not only because of the position he holds but more particularly because of the department over which he presides. I may perhaps have a preference for it but I have no hesitation in saying to the minister as well as to the members of this committee that among the portfolios in the government there is none in my opinion that is better than the one over which the minister presides. That is why I think he is fortunate in being the minister of this department which is not only extremely important but also extremely interesting.
I should like to add to that a word about those officers-those faithful officers-of the Department of Transport whom he has to serve him and assist him. I know something of their devotion to duty and their loyalty because of my association with them for a period of over nine years and I can therefore speak with some authority. That is why I am happy this evening to say to the minister that he is fortunate in the calibre of these men, and that in these men and women he is extremely well served in the Department of Transport.
Having said that, and realizing that the minister has already referred to the fact that these estimates have been given some consideration in the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines, I will not detain the committee unduly. I did have some remarks to make which were of an extensive character, but because of the fact that there was some consideration given to these estimates in the committee and because, also, of the fact that we are in the dying days of this session I do not intend to speak at length. I think I can finish what I have to

say before ten o'clock, and if I do not, I wish the minister would stop me.
I do want, however, this evening to deal with a special aspect of transportation. It is one which has to do with the province from which I come and which I represent. It has to do with the Lachine section of the St. Lawrence river and I would make a special appeal to the minister to give consideration to the treatment which I believe the province of Quebec is entitled to receive with reference to the development of the Lachine section. There has not before, I believe, been any consideration, of this aspect of the St. Lawrence seaway. That has been the case because, I think, an opportunity has not arisen. But an opportunity has now arisen to speak on it and I believe that serious consideration should be given to this point not only by the Department of Transport but also by the government as a whole.
The minister may know that recently a statement was made by an official of Quebec hydro that it is the intention of that division of the Quebec government to develop power in the Lachine section of the St. Lawrence seaway. The power development can, of course, be done independently of the navigation development, but I think it was envisaged all along that there would be tremendous savings if both power and navigation in that section could be developed on a joint basis. The reason I bring this up now is that there have been given in connection with the upper reaches of the seaway substantial amounts of money for channel enlargement and for power development there, and having regard to that it strikes me that because of commitments made by the federal government in the past and because of the present situation there is an obligation on the part of the federal government to make similar contributions to the province of Quebec.
Perhaps I can make myself clear by saying that I believe the vice-president of Quebec hydro stated recently that in the near future it would be necessary to develop the Lachine section of the St. Lawrence river, and in saying that he also stated that a group of engineers had been requested to prepare preliminary plans and studies of that development. He said it would be possible in his opinion to develop Lachine on a two-stage basis, developing the one stage at the head of the Lachine rapids and the other stage below Victoria bridge in the harbour of Montreal, all of which would bring about a power development in the neighbourhood of between 900,000 and 1,000,000 horsepower. I make that statement because the Department of Transport, as the minister knows, gave careful consideration to this whole matter
Supply-Transport
when in 1947 there was established a board of engineers on the Lachine section and a report was tabled in the House of Commons. The board of engineers at that time was asked three questions: first, is the scheme for the improvement of the Lachine section, recommended by the joint board of engineers in this report of November 16, practicable; does it provide to the best advantage for the logical and planned development of this section; and, thirdly, what alternative scheme, if any, would be better adapted to secure the ends desired.
The board of engineers in conjunction with the officers of Quebec hydro gave careful consideration to this matter and they recommended three schemes; first, exclusive power development; secondly, a joint power and navigation scheme; and, thirdly, a navigation scheme alone. It was attempted at that time by the former government to convince the province of Quebec to develop power jointly with navigation, but that government was not successful in its endeavour. I have no blame to cast on anyone, because the question of power is one which belongs to the provinces, and in the final analysis it is for them and for them alone to determine what is their responsibility.
The point I am making is that the federal government proceeded with navigational facilities in the Lachine section without regard to power. In my opinion the cost for the development of power because of that will be increased by some $25 million, and it strikes me that even now, even at this late date, I should ask the minister and his department to see if it would not be possible to make some agreement with the province of Quebec whereby power and navigation could be proceeded with jointly to the advantage of both the province and the federal government.
In locating the facilities on the south shore regard was had, of course, to industrial development and regard was had particularly to the triangle which extends between Valley-field on the west, Sorel on the east and Montreal in the centre, because there is a tremendous triangle there which will benefit because of industrial development.
In the endeavour to assist the provincial authorities with reference to this aspect of the project a number of things were done at the time, not only to assist them but also to protect provincial rights. One of those was that the seaway authority determined to enlarge the cross-sectional area upstream from Lachine rapids in order to provide for easier power development when that was undertaken at a future date. Then lands were exchanged between the authority and Quebec hydro at Beauharnois in order to assist Quebec hydro

Supply-Transport
in expanding its power development there. There was also provided a canal which would take 40,000 cubic feet a second of water in order to aid in additional power development during the non-navigation season. Finally, hydraulic models were constructed at the request of the international joint commission for the use of the seaway authority as well as Quebec hydro.
The point I am trying to make is this, and I will come to it at once. Back in 1941 Mr. Mackenzie King wrote to the then premier of Quebec, Adelard Godbout, dealing with this whole matter. The letter divides itself into three parts. The first part has to do with representations from the province of Quebec-on all international boards or other boards directing the design or construction of works and that, I think, has been respected. The next had to do with the apportionment of rights and obligations arising out of the development of the Beauharnois section. I would like to read the first sentence of the third because it is of extreme importance. Mr. Mackenzie King went on to tell the Hon. Adelard God-bout, the premier of the province at that time, the following:
With this end in view, the government of Canada would be prepared to undertake that, if and when Quebec takes over the control and operation of the Beauharnois development, there will be paid to the government of Quebec, by the government of Canada, the sum of $7,972,500.
That was in 1941. Roughly speaking, that was a sum of $8 million. That sum has never been paid to the province of Quebec. At today's value of money I would think it would be the equivalent of some $20 million. The point I am trying to make is that having regard to the sums of money paid for channel development and power development in the upper sections of the St. Lawrence river, as and when the province of Quebec decides to construct and develop power in the Lachine section that province is entitled to the same treatment as given to the province which resides upstream. Having regard to the value of money today I would say that would be no less than $20 million.
I make this statement having regard to the facts with which I have prefaced my remarks and I make it, too, with this appeal to the minister. Whether the Lachine section is developed in 1958, or next year, or the year after, makes no difference. There is no doubt in my mind that it will have to be developed. It will have to be developed because of the tremendous number of industries which are coming within that triangle and power from Beauharnois will not suffice indefinitely. It
will be necessary to get additional power from Lachine and it seems to me that the Minister of Transport will play an important part in that, not only because of the facilities which he is building today with the St. Lawrence seaway but also because of the fact that legislation will be required in order to develop this power. Legislation will be required with respect to the Lachine section in the same manner as legislation was required in connection with the international section. Therefore, it was decided to enter into an agreement with the province of Ontario and the terms and conditions were clearly set out in that agreement. The same thing should appertain with reference to the development in Lachine section.
I thought I should make this point because I am sure it has already come to the attention of the minister. If it has not, it will in the near future and I know he will give it his careful attention.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the hon. member for Laurier for his very constructive contribution to the debate and to assure him that we will follow his suggestion. We will be very glad to approach the province of Quebec and see whether that province will be interested in developing the power in the Lachine section at this time. I can assure him, and we will assure them, that if they are interested we will give them every co-operation in such an endeavour.


Charles Benjamin Howard: It is so close to ten o'clock I wonder whether we can call it ten o'clock.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Lionel Chevrier: May I ask the house leader what we shall do tomorrow and on Saturday, if he can give us the information now?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, there remain only the estimates of five departments, some of which have been partially considered already. They are transport, post office, trade and commerce, finance and public works. Tomorrow we shall deal with them but I am not sure about the order.


Lionel Chevrier: We shall commence with what?


Howard Charles Green: We shall commence with the estimates of the Department of Transport.


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

[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:

[Stage Direction]
65.	To provide, subject to the approval of treasury board, for trans-oceanic and inland transportation and other assistance for immigrants and settlers including care en route and while awaiting employment; and to provide further for payments to the provinces pursuant to agreements entered into, with the approval of the governor in council, in respect of expenses incurred by the provinces for indigent immigrants, $8,180,000.
Indian affairs branch-
66.	Administration, $565,938.
Indian agencies-
67.	Operation and maintenance, $3,251,836.
68.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $1,195,630.
Reserves and trusts-
69.	Operation and maintenance, $327,912.
Welfare and economic development of Indians-
70.	Operation and maintenance, $3,970,678.
71.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $1,166,892.
72.	Grants to agricultural exhibitions and Indian affairs, $7,025.
73.	Fur conservation, $286,284.
Education-
74.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $14,805,968.
75.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment, $6,647,200.
76.	Grant to provide additional services to the Indians of British Columbia, $100,000.
Supply-Items Passed Indian agencies-
537. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works,	land and	equipment-further amount
required, $100,000.
Reserves and trusts-
538.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $50,000.
Welfare and economic development of Indians-
539. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works,	land and	equipment-further amount
required, $1,000,000.

[Stage Direction]
226.	Administration, production and distribution of films and other visual materials, $4,103,346.
227.	Acquisition of equipment, $155,572.

[Stage Direction]
228.	Administration, operation and maintenance, including industrial design division, $554,575.
229.	Payment to the National Gallery purchase account for the purpose of acquiring works of art in conformity with section 8 of the National Gallery Act, $100,000.
230.	Grant to the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts, $4,025.

[Stage Direction]
A-Public Archives-
318.	General administration and technical services, $582,826.
B-National Library-
319.	General administration, $182,591.
320.	Payment to the national library purchase account for the purpose of acquiring books, in conformity with section 12 of the National Library Act, $40,000.
[Stage Direction]

[Stage Direction]

i 
[Stage Direction]
<	' i:	1	! :*-	;	: <	* r
[Stage Direction]


Friday. August 29. 1958	ARTS, LETTERS AND SCIENCES

[Stage Direction]
Twelfth report of standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.-Mr. Fraser.