1958-05-26

COMPANY DIRECTORS


Mr. E. J. Broome (Vancouver South) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-16, respecting company directors (directors' qualifications).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Ernest James Broome: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to require that all companies created by the parliament of Canada be managed by a majority of resident Canadian directors. The exception is where such a requirement already exists, as in the Canadian and British Insurance Companies Act or in the Companies Act, part III.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



AMENDMENT OF STANDING ORDERS TO SET UP ADDITIONAL COMMITTEES

[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Government Notices of Motions:-The Prime Minister-The following proposed motion:-That standing order No. 65 be amended by adding the following paragraphs to subsection (1):
(m)	On estimates, to consist of 60 members, 20 of whom shall constitute a quorum;
(n)	On veterans affairs, to consist of 40 members, 15 of whom shall constitute a quorum.
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Stand.


Mr. Speaker:: There is apparently a technical difficulty under the rules in having this motion stand. I refer to standing order 21 (2), which states as follows:
When any other government notice of motion is called from the chair, it shall be deemed to have been forthwith transferred to and ordered for consideration under government orders in the same or at the next sitting of the house.
It could be withdrawn; otherwise it should be transferred in accordance with the order and, of course, would not be dealt with until the government was ready to proceed.


Mr. Green:: It will be satisfactory to transfer it to government orders, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Pursuant to standing order 21 (2) this notice of motion is transferred to and ordered for consideration under government orders.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the
Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs whether the government has been invited to participate in the international discussions at Geneva announced in Washington over the week end, to be held with a view to working out a system of inspection, and control of the prohibition of atomic tests.
Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for having given me notice of his intention to ask this question. May I say, as I stated before the house last Monday, that we are delighted that the Russians have made this proposal to hold a meeting of experts qualified to consider matters of inspection and control in relation to nuclear tests, and I again express the hope that this action gives us some encouragement that Soviet Russia may be willing to consider larger questions of disarmament.
With respect to the hon. member's question, the answer is that we have not been invited to participate in a meeting of a group of experts, but I can assure the house that we have been in constant touch with the United States authorities on the reply to be given to the U.S.S.R. proposal and that we have expressed our approval of that reply.
It seems to me that the most important aspect of this matter is that experts from at least those countries which have conducted nuclear tests should meet together, and we are concerned lest our insistence on participation in such a conference would result in delay, having regard to the composition of such a group.
Canada, as we know, has not conducted nuclear tests and has not operated a comprehensive system for the detection of such tests conducted by other countries. Nevertheless, if we are asked to contribute experts as part of a formula for participation which would make for progress rather than delay in holding a meeting, having in mind the composition of the body of experts from both sides, I am confident Canada could provide the services of highly qualified scientists.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. Paul Marlin (Essex Easl):: May I ask
a supplementary question. I am sure the Secretary of State for External Affairs would wish to correct what he said at the opening of his statement, when he said he was gratified that the Russians had made the proposal. In a matter of such great importance does he not agree that this is a proposal which was made by the government of the United States?


Sidney Earle Smith: Mr. Speaker, I was referring to the last proposal, which was made in a letter written by Mr. Khrushchev to President Eisenhower. That was the last proposal. I agree entirely with the hon. member for Essex East that this was not an original idea on the part of the U.S.S.R. I was referring to the last letter from the U.S.S.R. to the United States.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Was this proposal not made by the United States almost two years ago?


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Koolenay Wesl):: As
the member who sent the Secretary of State for External Affairs written notice of a question similar to that asked by the Leader of the Opposition, I wish to ask a supplementary question. In view of the fact that press secretary Hagerty said that this included Canada, does the minister assume that the United States government is expecting Canada to participate?


Sidney Earle Smith: I can only reiterate what I was endeavouring to say in reply to the question addressed to me by the Leader of the Opposition. We have been in full consultation with the United States, and we have taken the position that if Canada were invited by the United States to participate it would raise wide questions concerning the composition of the group, and thereby cause delay in the convening of the experts.



CANADIAN PACIFIC STEAMSHIPS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. D. McPhillips (Victoria, B.C.):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of Labour. What is the present situation with regard to the strike affecting Canadian Pacific steamship services on the Pacific coast?


Hon. Michael Starr (Minisler of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the hon. member's question I should like to make a statement to the house on the situation which exists at the present time. As hon. members are aware, a strike of unlicensed personnel employed by the Canadian Pacific Railway

Company in its British Columbia coast steamship service took place at midnight, May 16. Ten vessels of the company were tied up, and service between Vancouver and Vancouver island was partially disrupted, services of other companies still continuing. Some 300 men are on strike and some 750 other employees of the company were indirectly affected.
Prior to the strike a board of conciliation had made recommendations in this dispute. The board consisted of Mr. F. E. Harrison, Vancouver, as chairman, and Messrs. R. A. Mahoney and Owen E. Mason, both of Vancouver, nominees of the company and union respectively.
The report of the board was received on February 14, 1958, and the chairman recommended a wage increase of 16 per cent from September 15, 1957, to September 15, 1958, with an additional increase of 9 per cent from September 15, 1958, to September 15, 1959. The nominee of the company recommended a 12 per cent increase effective September 15, 1957, to September 15, 1958, with an additional advance of 5 per cent from September 15, 1958, until the expiry of the contract. The union nominee recommended an average of 50 per cent wage increase, and a two-year contract to expire September 15, 1959.
The attitude of the parties toward the recommendations of the board is as follows. The S.I.U. on March 15 advised that it would accept the recommendations of its nominee to the board.
On May 8 the Canadian Pacific Railway Company advised me that it could not accept any recommendations of the board as forming a basis for settlement. Both parties since have made some proposals, but are still far apart.
Following the strike I brought the parties together through the west coast representative of my department but, as in their direct discussions prior to the work stoppage, no settlement resulted. The officers of the department at Vancouver are in constant touch with the parties, ready to render any assistance.
I understand that over the past week end there have been proposals made for the arbitration of the dispute which under certain conditions have been accepted by the company. We are now awaiting the reaction of the union to the proposal.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, if I may I should like to answer the supplementary question asked on Friday

last by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twil-lingate regarding the latest figure for active claims. The latest figure we have is for April 30, which I gave the hon. member on Friday.



CANADA-U.S. ECONOMIC RELATIONS  RESEARCH COMMITTEE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Erharl Regier (Burnaby-Coquillam):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce if the government is aware that a Canadian-United States committee, a private organization, is commencing a $150,000 three-year research program to find ways of improving United States-Cana-dian economic relations and, if the government is aware, is it intending to participate or keep itself informed of developments?


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I have not seen the article in the press to which the hon. member refers. I presume that the government will be kept informed of developments if this project goes forward.



INQUIRY AS TO RESTRICTIONS ON IMPORTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of National Revenue. My question is based on many rather concerned inquiries and is somewhat related to commonwealth relations. I ask it in order to give him an opportunity to clear up what appears to be a misunderstanding. Can the minister inform the house of the mystery surrounding the reported haggle over the importation of haggis?


Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, the fact that an hon. member of English origin and a minister of Irish extraction should attempt to discuss haggis is in itself a mystery, and certainly is a situation which is very likely to result in a haggle, I would think. But, in any event, Mr. Speaker, I am informed by the officers of my department that haggis itself is not prohibited entry in any way under the provisions of the Customs Act.
There are, however, other acts which it is our responsibility to administer, including the Meat and Canned Foods Act and the Animal Contagious Diseases Act. Under those acts the collector of customs is prohibited from admitting any food product into this country unless it bears a certificate issued by certain officers in the country of origin. There are
Inquiries of the Ministry also regulations laid down by the Department of National Health and Welfare with respect to the labelling of food products. Any haggis which complies with the regulations of these two acts and which bears a label authorized in accordance with regulations of the Department of National Health and Welfare is automatically admitted to this country. Those which do not, unfortunately, under the acts are barred from entry by the collector of customs. That is the haggle.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. It is possible for the exporters of haggis in Scotland or in whatever point it is exported from to obtain these certificates?


George Clyde Nowlan: Surely it is, Mr. Speaker, if the product complies with the regulations laid down by the acts in question.



SHIPPING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. W. Martin (Timmins):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Has the minister been informed of an accident in Hamilton harbour to the freighter Manchester Pioneer? If so, could he inform the house if the vessel had a pilot on board at the time of the accident?


Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, I have not been informed of the accident. I will check on it and inform the hon. member as soon as possible.



CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. What action is being taken with respect to the claim of the Blackfoot Indians of Alberta to the effect that the federal government has been using treaty fund money improperly and therefore owes the Blackfoot tribe some $6 million?


Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Minisier of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, representatives of the band were here the other day. There were some questions on this particular matter. The term in which it was described in the newspaper was not a matter of discussion. I can assure the hon. member that all matters affecting the welfare of this band are under active consideration by the department.

The Address-Mr. Jones GRAIN



STATEMENT ON DISTRIBUTION OF POOL

Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, may I have permission to revert to motions in order to make an announcement with regard to the barley pool?


Mr. Speaker:: Has the hon. member permission to revert to motions?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, the 1956-57 barley pool was closed on May 9 and the final accounting has now been completed by the Canadian wheat board. The surplus in the pool for distribution to producers is $7,570,416.35. Producers delivered a total of 120.6 million bushels of barley to this pool. The average final payment will be 6.28 cents per bushel. The principal grades of barley delivered to the 1956-57 pool were No. 3 Canada western, six row, No. 1 feed and No. 2 feed. The final payments to producers on these grades will be 6.011 cents per bushel, 5.153 cents per bushel and 6.830 cents per bushel, respectively, these payments being prior to deduction of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act levy. The wheat board will commence mailing final payment barley cheques to producers on May 28, and this distribution will be completed by June 12.
I expect to be able to advise the house of the operating results of the 1956-57 wheat account within a few days.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Friday, May 23, consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Lafreniere for an address to his Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Pearson.
Mr. H. F. Jones (Saskatoon):: Mr. Speaker, in complimenting you, the Deputy Speaker and the deputy chairman of committees of the whole respectively on your election, and the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne on their selection for that high honour, I follow a tradition which, in each of those particular achievements, affords me a great deal of personal pleasure and satisfaction.
Everyone was delighted at the election of yourself and the deputy chairman of committees of the whole house, not only because of the affection in which both of you are
[Mrs. Fairclough.l
held by this house but also because of the ability of yourself and the deputy chairman of committees, as was demonstrated in the last house in the offices you held. The high honour accorded to the seconder of the address, coming on the heels of contesting three federal elections in less than a year, was a tribute in which we all joined.
You will pardon me, Mr. Speaker, when I say that the election of the Deputy Speaker and the selection of the mover of the address gave me a particular and special delight. They are the symbols of that which some hon. gentlemen said could not be; they are the symbols of a national unity which those of us in this party have sought over many, many weary years.
Last year on October 18 the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier) made a speech in this house which epitomized the struggle of some Liberals toward a certain type of vision, division. They complained then of too little unity, Mr. Speaker.
Their only complaint now can be that there is too much. What a contrast are the words of the mover of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I quote from the English translation of his speech as recorded at page 4 of the translations for May 12, 1958, when he said:
For too many years, Mr. Speaker, a few politicians have attempted to create disruption and disunity among the people of Canada by playing on racial and religious prejudices. In the name of the province of Quebec, which I particularly represent, I wish to say to the house that we are proud of the coexistence and cohabitation of the two great races which constitute the population of our country. We of Quebec earnestly want national unity through the respect of the rights and privileges of each and every one of our citizens, whatever their race, religion or language.
Then he went on to say:
There have been differences of opinion and difficulties in the past but, to me, the last election has the same significance for all those living in the province of Quebec. That province, the province of Ontario and all the other provinces, as well as people of all nationalities, are all determined to work for the success of that great experiment which is the building up of our country.
That sentiment, Mr. Speaker, as expressed by the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency is an aspiration to which all those in this party and in the constituency of Saskatoon earnestly subscribe. As to the Deputy Speaker, may I say there have been few in the history of this house coming afresh into its membership who have demonstrated their ability so convincingly in such a short time.
I was astounded the other day, Mr. Speaker, to learn that among the Liberals there still appears to be opposition to an early start on the South Saskatchewan dam. The hon. member for Gloucester (Mr. Robichaud) said in effect, as found on page 201 of Hansard

of May 19, that while they are not against such a project as the South Saskatchewan dam it has not been proved to them that such projects are economically sound and urgently needed at this particular time of recession. As recorded on page 5 of Hansard of May 12, it was said in the speech from the throne:
My ministers have made progress in arrangements for the construction of the South Saskatchewan project. Proposals will be placed before you to make possible the commencement this year of the construction of the main dam intended to create a great reservoir in the heart of the prairie in order to further the productive development of this part of Canada.
Set against the background of the speech from the throne, the only inference I can draw from the remarks of the hon. member for Gloucester is that he still wishes to delay the construction of the dam. I am sure that much will be said about this project and much will be heard from the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Cooper) who has worked so hard for so many years for its construction, both in his personal capacity and as vice-president of the Saskatchewan rivers development association.
In view of what has already been said on this subject in the house during this debate I want to emphasize the nature and urgency of the project. This is a multi-purpose project. The object of its construction is to satisfy six specific and urgent needs of the people of that area, and in the satisfaction of those needs to strengthen the general economy of the country. The project will require the construction of an earth dam on the South Saskatchewan river between the towns of Elbow and Outlook. The structure will be 205 feet high with a length of 16,700 feet. Associated with the dam will be a power house having an installed capacity of 150,000 kilowatts. An auxiliary earth dam in the Qu'Appelle valley will also be necessary to prevent the escape of waters impounded by the main dam.
The irrigation development will require the installation of 500 miles of main canals and laterals as well as 12 pumping stations. With regard to the irrigation aspect of this project, I should like to point out that over 500,000 acres of good soil can be irrigated. This area is distributed over 300 miles, and will be of direct benefit to over 50,000 farmers.
Another important aspect of this project is river regulation and flood control. Mr. Speaker, the wide variation in seasonal flow of the Saskatchewan river makes power development impracticable without large storage facilities. The reservoir as it is planned will provide for almost complete regulation of the river flow, and will increase 57071-3-29
The Address-Mr. Jones the power potential of five possible downstream sites. Of particular interest to the citizens of my constituency is this fact. The Pike lake area in the vicinity of Saskatoon and the Carrot river area near The Pas in Manitoba have been subject to flooding in the past. By the creation of the South Saskatchewan river reservoir this flooding will be eliminated at Pike lake and will be materially reduced in the Carrot river area.
As to water supply, the cities of Regina and Moose Jaw are now supplied with water from Buffalo Pound lake. The government of Canada is maintaining adequate levels in this lake by pumping from the South Saskatchewan river. The presence of the dam will mean that these needs can be met by gravity flow, thus eliminating the cost of pumping. But much more important than that, by the construction of this reservoir and the regulation of the flow of water in the river, the citizens of Saskatoon, Regina and Moose Jaw will be assured of adequate water supplies.
With regard to hydroelectric power and some of the other features of the dam that particularly bear on this district, it should be noted that it is estimated that 53 per cent of the population of our province live within a radius of 125 miles of the dam, and 69 per cent within a radius of 150 miles. After full upstream development of the river basin it is calculated that 375 million kilowatt hours can be produced annually in the hydro plant. Of this amount, 50 million kilowatt hours will be required for irrigation and the balance will be available for commercial and industrial use.
I have mentioned the large percentage of the people of the province who are within the vicinity of this dam. Over two-thirds of the people of our province will be within an automobile drive of less than three hours from the sorely needed recreational facilities and the other benefits which are associated with parks, lakes and streams, and which will be created especially around the lake formed by the reservoir. This lake formed by the reservoir itself will extend a distance of 135 miles from the dam. Additional recreational benefits may be expected from the raising of the levels of lakes in that area. It is to be hoped that suitable roads will be provided to the area by the province for use during as well as after construction in order that men and materials as well as the general public may move readily to the site of the dam. Everyone desirous of reaching the dam site from Saskatoon for purposes of work, supply of materials or for pleasure will realize the importance of this suggestion.
Others vitally interested in this project will undoubtedly deal at length and in much

The Address-Mr. Jones greater detail with the benefits of the dam as it will affect employment, land values, agricultural diversification and industry, but I should like to stress now the urgency of its construction, particularly with regard to power development and stream control as well as agricultural diversification, especially in the light of the rapidly increasing size of the three cities which are chiefly affected by the first two aspects of this project that I mentioned, namely power development and stream control.
My own city of Saskatoon at present has a population of 80,000. It is estimated that the population will rise to 100,000 in five years. In an additional 20 years it is expected that the population will reach 160,000. In the light of that consideration and the industrial needs which will develop as a result of the increase in population, it is clearly evident that stream control with assured adequate supply of water is a necessity. The main dam, Mr. Speaker, will take eight years to complete. By that time what are now difficult circumstances in connection with power development and stream control will have become urgent essentials requiring immediate relief.
Before parliament met, Mr. Speaker, I heard the surprising suggestion that because of their numbers, Conservative members will not have enough to do in this parliament. With the greatest respect to those who advance this theory, I suggest that it is based on a completely incorrect notion of the duties and the responsibilities of a member of parliament. On the contrary, after reading the speech from the throne and seeing what is indicated in it, some say there are not enough Conservative members to inquire into, consider and resolve the formidable legacy of tasks which we inherited from the previous administration in addition, of course, to the projects we have in mind and the problems which will inevitably arise for consideration in the course of time.
Difficult decisions will have to be made, Mr. Speaker, in the area of national defence, balancing the security needs of this country with the need for expenditures on development and other matters. In external affairs there is the relating of foreign policy to the economic advancement of this country, a relationship which seems largely to have escaped the attention of our predecessors. In that connection also I note with interest, Mr. Speaker, the suggestion of the hon. member for Calgary South that a committee look into this problem of Canada-United States affairs in order that the relationships between our two countries in connection with economic and other matters may be improved.

In agriculture there is the provision of long term credits to farmers to help them to purchase land or sufficient additional land to enable them to form economic farming units. There is the difficult problem of crop insurance and the problem of the disposal of agricultural surpluses, and the consideration of other pressing problems which beset the agricultural community and of which we have all heard.
Attention should be given to consideration of the problems relating to storage at Churchill. For example, it has been suggested that instead of pressing for more storage at Fort William, where the great lakes are frozen over for many months of the year, storage facilities might be built at some other place such as Newfoundland, where the grain could be stored and be available every day of the year for ocean shipment. During harvest time the grain could be shipped to Churchill by rail, there loaded on coastal ships and taken to Newfoundland, where it could be stored for future delivery as sales are made. I sincerely regret that the royal commission on coastal shipping neglected to study the possibility of such a development.
The topics I have mentioned are but a few of the many which come readily to mind but are, I hope, sufficient to dispel the notion that there is not enough to keep all hon. members very busy indeed-and all this in addition to all the regular duties of the members in connection with the house and its committees. The committees of the house have been greatly strengthened and have been given increased importance by the suggestions of the Prime Minister for reform.
I should like to turn for a moment to the economic wastage arising out of the failure of the present mental health facilities to make adequate provision for the effective treatment of the mentally sick. It has been asserted that there are at least as many people in this country suffering from crippling mental sickness as there are people suffering from physical sickness. In general, persons suffering from a physical ailment go to a hospital with the expectation of returning to employment and to a useful life because while there they receive treatment appropriate to their illness. What is the situation with the mentally sick? I am told that in the province of Saskatchewan the government provides $4 per day for the total care of a patient with a sick brain, and that this is comparable to the amount provided in other provinces; yet the total cost, not including doctors' bills, for the care of a patient with a sore foot is now more than $14 per day.

What is the result of this low standard of care? At the present time there are more than 70,000 persons restrained in the hopelessly overcrowded confines of the 75 mental institutions of this country. Seventy thousand persons are restrained under conditions where it is not unusual to find 75 people in a single room, sleeping in beds less than six inches apart. Living under such conditions would have a serious effect on the mental health of the most robust minded; what must it do to the mentally sick? Is this effective treatment; indeed, is effective treatment possible under such circumstances?
It has been emphatically recommended by those whose profession is the treatment of the mentally ill that, given the same standard of care as the physically ill, the mentally sick could go to the hospital with the expectation of returning to the community after treatment rather than remaining incarcerated for years or even for life. Mental sickness can be treated effectively. Much mental sickness can be treated effectively with very little hospitalization, provided the patient is afforded the same standard of care that is afforded to the physically sick. Such treatment could be provided in small hospitals or in the wards of general hospitals, and in fact much mental sickness can be treated without any hospitalization at all if adequate out-patient clinics are available.
Mental sickness, when treated effectively, changes a person from a continual drain on the taxpayer to a person who may take his productive place in life, who can pay taxes and fill his place in the community, discharging his duties and obligations. It is held by many that the present overcrowded mental institutions can never effectively perform this task; in fact the existing conditions in many cases may aggravate rather than lessen the degree of emotional disturbance.
This problem is particularly important because of the numbers involved, and also because this government might consider the advisability of encouraging the same standard of care rather than encouraging, either directly or indirectly, the perpetuation of the present type of mental institutions.
In closing my remarks on this particular subject I would like to quote from an article by Dr. D. G. McKerracher, professor of psychiatry at the University of Saskatchewan, which was published in the Canadian Journal of Public Health in October, 1957. Dr. McKerracher has a psychiatric ward in a general hospital in Saskatchewan which maintains the same standard of care for the mentally sick that is given the physically sick, and he has this astonishing thing to say:
57071-3-29J
The Address-Mr. Godin
We never refuse admission to a patient because of the degree of disturbance. We never transfer a patient to a provincial hospital because he is too disturbed. Day or night no patient is ever locked behind any door. All doors from the front entrance to the most remote area of the ward are open. Very sick patients get special nursing care, just as they do on a surgical or medical ward.
That, I think, indicates the advances that have been made in this field in recent times.
Before I resume my seat, may I say what a pleasure it is to me to be associated with the many new members of this house and in particular with those new members from Saskatchewan. I am very proud to be associated with these earnest, sincere and friendly men, and I am sure their constituents will be proud of the practical and capable manner in which they are already discharging their duties as they take up the various tasks of particular interest to their constituents and to the nation as a whole.
Many reasons have been advanced in this house for their being here in such numbers, but I want to say-and I am sure you will agree with me, Mr. Speaker, when you know them better-that not the least of those reasons is their own personal capability and the resolution and determination which each one of them has, in addition to a wide and deep knowledge of the affairs of his constituency as well as of the affairs of the nation. This wider knowledge is, of course, essential if narrow regionalism is to be avoided.
Mr. Speaker, in the days ahead it would not be unexpected if hon. members from western Canada devoted a great deal of their attention to the particular problems of western agriculture and petroleum and mineral production, as well as to the establishment of a second trans-Canada highway through Saskatoon to the Yellowhead pass. The strengthening of the economy of the west adds directly to the strength of the great central provinces now in a way which was not so readily apparent in the days when many of our western necessities were purchased from abroad. Central Canada now -its labour, management and capital-therefore has a greater and more direct interest in the prosperity of the west than it has had at any time in the past. I do not need to say that as this region, along with the various other regions of this country, becomes strengthened so will the whole of Canada advance.


Mr. O. J. Godin (Nickel Belt):: Mr. Speaker,
I wish to thank you for having at this moment recognized me and thus afforded me the splendid, though fearful opportunity of addressing this house for the first time. I am aware, from the many reflexes under which
452	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Godin I am now labouring, that this is a day which Will remain forever an unforgettable one for me. I trust, however, that at least one or two of the remarks I make may remain in the memory of the government for at least the duration of this session.
I know that my constituents would wish me to avail myself of this opportunity to congratulate you-and it is a pleasure for me to do so-on your unanimous election to the important post you now hold. I should like to echo the experienced remarks made by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition when they had occasion to move and second your nomination. I should like also to endorse the remarks made by the hon. member for Laurier with regard to the wonderful task of impartiality and justice which you have undertaken in your own city of Toronto in supporting the drive for a bilingual high school there. May I add, with your permission, that it is well known that you have from the first aided an admirable Canadian institution, namely the Canadian alliance, in its objectives.
I should like, also, to add words of congratulation to the Deputy Speaker on his appointment; to the leader of this house and, possibly, to those ministers of the government who have once again been entrusted with the duties which they formerly performed, with a special word of congratulation to those who have been switched, and more particularly to those who have undertaken their present duties for the first time.
Before entering on the main purpose of my speech I should also like to pay tribute to a fellow citizen of mine who for 13 years has rendered many services to the Nickel Belt riding in this very house. I refer to my good friend and neighbour Mr. Leo Gauthier, formely member of parliament for Nickel Belt. Mr. Gauthier is endowed with a great deal of humour and common sense, and I know that while he was in this house he well performed the duties which the electorate had asked of him. The only sorrow I have is that my becoming a member of this house is due in some part to the misfortune of Mr. Gauthier, who is now ill. May I wish him a speedy restoration to his former good health, and express the hope that both he and his wife may enjoy many years of happiness.
May I pay tribute also to my two worthy opponents in the last campaign, Mr. Anthony Falzetta of White Fish, the Conservative standard bearer, and Mr. Harold Prescott of Capreol, the C.C.F. candidate. I should like to congratulate them for the loyal efforts they have made to explain the doctrines of their respective parties. I hasten to add,
[Mr. Godin 1

however, that I do not go along with them to the point of wishing that the result of the election had been different.
Mr. Speaker, I wish also to congratulate the hon. member for Yukon, who so well seconded the address in reply to the speech from the throne. His work was splendid, and I know that all hon. members were very pleased with his speech.
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I would feel remiss if I failed to offer the usual congratulations to the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafre-niere) who, a few days ago, had the privilege of moving the address in reply to the speech from the throne. He delivered a marvelous speech; however he showed his submission and attachment to his leader, the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) and to the policy of his party.
If I so congratulate him, this should not be construed as meaning that I support the policies he advocates. In fact, I have been quite surprised to hear the hon. member state in this house that he was speaking on behalf of all bilingual Canadians.
Then too, Mr. Speaker, I was very much surprised when the hon. members for Park-dale (Mr. Maloney), for Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanaudiere (Mr. Paul) and for Saskatoon (Mr. Jones), dealt at great length with the doctrine of the Conservative party in connection with the problem of national unity and sound Canadianism. I was amazed to hear the hon. member for Parkdale state that the Conservatives preach the same doctrine in Vancouver, Quebec or Halifax. I was still more surprised when the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency, wishing to repeat in English what he had just said in French, gave a far from faithful translation of it.
Mr. Speaker, we Liberals believe that if there is a field where words should be followed by deeds, it is the field of national unity and sound Canadianism. So, we think that those hon. members could have cut down their speech by some 39 minutes if they had gone to the trouble of refuting the speech made two or three months ago in this house by their colleague, the hon. member for Danforth (Mr. Small), on the matter of bilingual cheques.
We place more reliance on the doctrine of the Liberal party which a few years ago gave this country political independence when it abolished appeals to the Privy Council. We understand this doctrine even better

because the Liberal party expressed it in deeds by giving the people of Canada the family allowances despite the opposition of the former Conservative leader, the Hon. George Drew, who objected to it here in this house on racial grounds.
Mr. Speaker, all hon. members will have many opportunities to state what they really think of this great Canadian problem, and that is why I will say no more at this time. I will therefore deal now with a more important part of my speech in which I will have the opportunity of telling hon. members something new with regard to the Nickel Belt area.
(Text):
Mr. Speaker, I realize it is my privilege, on behalf of my constituents, to inform this house of the many advantages which can be found in the riding of Nickel Belt, and possibly also inform the government of some of the problems which prevail there. Of course the riding of Nickel Belt forms part of the belt of Liberalism which is so well known in northern Ontario, and which extends from Pembroke to Fort William. It has a unique feature in the sense that it completely surrounds the district of Sudbury, and this is why there is so much co-operation between hon. members from the district of Sudbury and the district of Nickel Belt.
Nickel Belt, of course, is endowed with a great mining industry. We find there many mines operated by International Nickel and Falconbridge Mines. We also have a lumbering industry, though I must admit that since June last lumbering operations in our area have diminished by approximately 50 per cent. There are a great many farms in the valleys of the French river, the Veuve river and the Sudbury basin flats. I would like to pay tribute to one of the farmers in this area, Mr. Despatie, who distinguished himself a few years ago by being acclaimed the champion potato grower of the world. I offer his family my respects.
The nickel industry which is found in our riding, also in the riding of Sudbury, produces 75 per cent of the world's nickel. The population of the area is most cosmopolitan. The hon. member for Parkdale in his remarks the other day referred to the fact, which I respect very much, that the Conservative party in this house is composed of hon. members of at least five different racial origins. In my riding I may say I was supported by people of at least 40 different racial origins whose support I deeply appreciate.
The people in my area are worried about the present status of our economy and are suffering as a result of the present recession. If this government were to bring our economy back to the standard of a year ago I am
The Address-Mr. Godin convinced that it would solve approximately 80 per cent of our problems. May I refer to the fact that four mines in the Nickel Belt district have closed down within the last six months, with resultant hardship for the people in our area.
We have many fine local institutions in Nickel Belt, but there are no hospitals. There are, however, four hospitals in the immediate vicinity, the district of Sudbury. This situation is perhaps understandable, since the growth of our region necessarily took place around the metropolitan area of Sudbury, but I hope that before too long it will ibe possible to establish a hospital in the district of Nickel Belt. As hon. members may know, Canada's newest university is the University of Sudbury. I am proud to state that recently this institution purchased a $500,000 campus site in the district of Nickel Belt and in this aspect of our social life the Nickel Belt district has made an advance beyond the district of Sudbury.
As the representative of my riding and one who is interested in the subject of education I was surprised to realize that the speech from the throne contained no reference to the problem of higher education. It is well known today in Canada and possibly throughout the world that the standards of higher education in this country have not reached the levels that are merited. Canadian standards of higher education cannot be compared with those which obtain in certain unfriendly countries. I regret that the federal government is not prepared either to assist students who would like to specialize through better facilities for higher education or to assist educational institutions themselves without, of course, infringing on the autonomy of the provinces in this field granted under the British North America Act.
I urge the government to consider making contributions to the cost of establishing universities, and I trust that other opportunities will be afforded me at which time I can plead for assistance on behalf of our institution in Nickel Belt.
I am pleased to inform the house that the new federal building commenced some three years ago in the city of Sudbury has been completed and is rapidly being occupied. This building is a source of pride to all those in the area. I am also pleased to note that the project of constructing an armoury in Sudbury for the purpose of providing facilities for our militia and army is now proceeding. Some two years ago when I was a member of the planning board of that city I recall that the difficulty was in finding a proper site for the new armoury. Through the generosity of a local citizen a proper
454	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Godin site was acquired and donated for this purpose; and I intend, of course, to assist the minister with the forthcoming project in any way I can.
I am slightly embarrassed to note that one other project in Nickel Belt which would greatly assist the active tourist trade there has been forgotten by the present government. I refer to the construction of a dock on the French river. I feel it is my duty as the representative of the people of Nickel Belt to press for the completion of this project for which appropriations of money were granted some two years ago and the construction of which was to be commenced. I trust the dock will be built under a Conservative administration in the same way it would have been under a Liberal administration.
I have read the speech from the throne and listened to the many addresses that have been made in this house. I know that my constituents will be amazed and disheartened when I inform them of the slowness of operation of the government, and especially the confusion of the government in dealing with the problems at hand. I made reference earlier to the fact that we in the Nickel Belt district rely on the continued prosperity which this country has known for our own development. It is obvious to me at this time that a high degree of confusion exists within the government as to how to solve the problems confronting it. Indeed, I cannot resist observing that a marked degree of confusion exists on the part of the government in assessing one of the major problems in Canada today, recession. I wish to refer hon. members to a statement made by the Prime Minister. I trust that everyone remembers this. When the last election campaign commenced the Prime Minister, assisted by his candidates told the Canadian public that the Liberals were prophets of doom; that they were falsifying unemployment figures and that there was no such thing as unemployment in Canada. From coast to coast Canadians listened to that type of propaganda for some two weeks, until those who were without television sets and had to visit their neighbours' homes to watch television, because they had lost their jobs and their television sets were repossessed informed the Conservative group that it was not so; that the situation was not of a mere seasonal character.
Then came the greatest turnabout on the part of the Prime Minister that this country has ever seen. Then we heard these words: "It is true, my dear fellow Canadians, that there is a recession in this country at the present time, but the fault lies with the


Liberals if we did not know it". We all recall the story of the secret letter and document. The Conservatives admitted that they should have known from the Liberal group what the conditions were in this country. This, I feel, only added to the confusion, and explains why the government is not capable of solving the problem in Canada today.
This secret letter and document were apparently written by some expert on finance about April or March previous to the general election of June, 1957. If there is any remark to make about this document written by an employee of the government it may be this. I understand and I am told that many economists were asked to inform the government as to the situation. I am told that many specialists informed the government that things looked good ahead. Of course there was this one letter in which there was one single little paragraph which made reference to a possible recession.
The argument is simple, Mr. Speaker. Possibly those specialists who were asked to make a survey for the government took into consideration the forthcoming election in June. Any specialist who wished to give a proper opinion would take such a major fact into consideration and, of course, those who wrote that good times were ahead possibly had in their minds the fact-and it was easy to believe-that the Liberals would be re-elected. Of course it is also easy to believe that this one man who wrote this paragraph about the recession had made up his mind that the Conservatives would be taking over in June. He was right, and the recession came along.
There is some confusion as to the problem and also the policy. May I refer hon. members to the policy of the Conservative government to divert 15 per cent of our trade from the United States to the United Kingdom. Hon. members will recall the squeezing and wiggling the Prime Minister had to perform the other day to try to get out of the claws of the Leader of the Opposition when this problem was put to the Prime Minister. As a Canadian I must believe what the Conservatives say about themselves. I am absolutely convinced as a Canadian and as a newcomer to this house, Mr. Speaker, that it was definitely the policy of the Conservative government to divert 15 per cent of our trade from the United States to Great Britain. May I say that the confusion will be greater, now that the Prime Minister has stated or tried to state that it is no longer the policy of the Conservative government, when we see all the Conservatives vote favouring the diversion of 15 per cent of our trade from the United States to the United Kingdom.

It is obvious to all of us that the confusion can be found among the Conservative members of this house. Just a few days ago we were made aware of that confusion when the Secretary of State for External Affairs stood up in this house and said that the agreement to be signed with the United States would not be placed before this house. The very next morning, however, when questioned by the Leader of the Opposition, the Prime Minister denied this and said the agreement would be placed before the house for debate. Such confusion is obvious to at least the newcomers.
Very recently the hon. member for Resti-gouche-Madawaska spoke in this house, and I as a newcomer sincerely felt that the hon. member was perhaps sitting on the wrong side of the house when he made his speech. I recall that he was constantly applauded by members of the opposition. He criticized the government, and I was amazed when informed that he formed part of the government group.
Confusion is also found, Mr. Speaker, in the fact that the program laid down by this government does not contain proper remedies to deal with the unemployment in this country. In the last two weeks we have discussed two major matters, namely an extension of unemployment benefits and the provision of moneys for the construction of houses under the National Housing Act. The first measure, the extension of benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act, does not bring about a solution to unemployment; this should be made clear.
Unemployment insurance was placed on the statute books by a Liberal regime. The history of this country will show how one party has done so much to protect its people from the administration of another party. It is true that some years ago unemployment insurance was introduced by the Liberal party and for many years funds have been accumulated, for what purpose? To protect the people of Canada against future possible Conservative administrations. That is what we witness in Canada in 1958. We are asked to extend the time of those benefits, and we Liberals are pleased to support the same. We are prepared to give our people all the protection they can receive against the present administration.
May I refer the house to the problems which municipalities are facing today. In making this reference I may state that there is one Canadian who is much involved in the present situation in Canada today, and he is the small home owner. Taxes in our municipalities are much too heavy. There is a reason for this. We realize that when confederation came about the problems were not
The Address-Mr. Godin what they are today. Our standard of living has greatly risen. If we have some knowledge of municipal problems we all realize that our municipalities are giving themselves, and rightly so, many services which were unknown years ago and which are now part and parcel of municipal activities. One example is the playground services for which municipalities are paying today.
Such facilities should be provided, but they are an added expense which was absolutely unknown in years gone by. In the province of Ontario there is a statute permitting the construction of arenas and community centres which permits municipalities to provide these services, but a possible informal meeting with the municipalities is not in itself a solution to the problem and there are two reasons why I so think. To provide under agreement for moneys to go from the federal government to the provinces and then also by agreement from the provinces to the municipalities is not the answer. In the first place we will only add expense to the present high cost of municipal administration.
In that regard I should like to refer to an editorial that appeared in the Sudbury Daily Star of May 24. Regardless of the political affiliation of the newspaper I subscribe to the view expressed in the editorial as it quotes the Montreal Star in these words:
Municipalities everywhere have gone about as far as they should go in the field of real estate taxation, the principal source of local government income since confederation.
If the federal government enters into an agreement with a province and the province enters into agreements with the municipalities, in every case the provincial government will only pay part of the cost of the undertaking. Therefore every time this occurs the municipality is burdened with additional expenses.
A moment ago I referred to the community centres act. As a member of the city council of Sudbury some years ago I recall people on the streets talked about this statute and wanted the city of Sudbury to build an arena coupled with an auditorium for concerts and such. Upon checking the act it was found by the members of the city council that if a municipality undertook to build an addition to an arena to provide for an auditorium the provincial government would grant the municipality $5,000. We all knew that an auditorium of the type contemplated would cost at least $150,000; therefore to comply with the request of those citizens who were asking for an auditorium would have meant that the city would have been faced with a further expenditure of $145,000.
That occurs all down the line. That is why the principle is wrong. The principle of

The Address-Mr. Godin granting municipalities money by way of provincial agreement is also wrong because the citizens of the municipality lose their autonomy. They are the ones who know what services are required. The speech from the throne makes reference to services and works. The people know what services are required, and they are definitely not the same from one municipality to another.
With higher governments dealing with the problems of small municipalities only certain types of works will be approved under the present scheme. Therefore we will see many small municipalities throughout Canada undertaking certain endeavours that possibly they would not otherwise undertake, for these municipalities will want to share in the benefits under the program proposed by the government. In my opinion the man who should decide what services are required for the community is the land owner.
There is a simple way for the federal government to return funds to the municipal rate payer, and it is not by way of provincial agreements. May I suggest that a tax deduction could be allowed from income for municipal taxation payments. This may surprise many, but I see a lot of merit in it. The other day I read an article in Le Devoir of Montreal in which it was stated that the plan to provide additional money for housing in no way solves the real situation. The real truth is that the ordinary Canadian cannot afford the type of home, the construction of which the government is trying to encourage under the National Housing Act. That is the main problem.
In this regard I am pleased to have the support of the council of Neelon and Garson, the largest municipality in my riding. I understand they have prepared a brief which is to be or has been sent to all members of the house. I suggest that the same principle could be applied that is used with regard to the medical expenses of the income taxpayer. The taxpayer is allowed to deduct from income medical expenses above a certain percentage of what he earns. I feel that we would obviate much red tape if the same principle were applied to property taxes and income tax, and at the same time we would strike at high taxation on the homes of workers and the high rate of interest which the workers cannot afford.
Under the National Housing Act a $14,000 home with a $11,000 mortgage costs a lot of money to maintain. We all realize that interest alone amounts to over $700. Then there are the taxes amounting to $500 or $600, in some cases. It is well known that a man cannot afford to own a home if it costs him more than 25 per cent of his income. If we


make the necessary calculations it is obvious that the ordinary worker earning $3,500 or $4,000 a year cannot afford a home which costs him nearly $200 a month.
Therefore I suggest that when Canadians are making out their income tax returns they should be able to attach their municipal tax and interest receipts and claim exemption over and above a certain percentage of their income. After the matter had been studied that percentage could perhaps be set at 2 per cent. Then he would be able to claim the difference between 2 per cent of his income and the amount he had paid in taxes and interest on his home.
This would obviate all the checking which might have to be done and the arrangements which might have to be made with the provinces and in turn with the municipalities under the proposed agreements. The man on the street would have in his pocket the amount of money required to meet the interest charge and taxes on his home and would be able to meet his taxes for the succeeding year. It would also help to obviate the problem faced by many of our smaller municipalities that are having great difficulties in collecting taxes. If such a procedure were implemented it is likely the taxpayers would pay their taxes promptly so they would have their receipt enabling them to make a deduction from income in the same way they are permitted for medical expenses.
I realize that this suggestion may be a surprising one, but I believe it should be adopted in order to safeguard the autonomy of our municipalities, to permit them to undertake those projects which they feel are necessary in their communities, and to provide relief to the average home owner. We all want as many Canadians as possible to own their homes. That is the object of the National Housing Act, but today only those people interested in the building and sale of homes are making use of the act because the ordinary worker cannot afford to assume the maintenance expenses which the act places upon the shoulders of the Canadian people.
I believe that if such a plan were adopted it would sufficiently reduce the tax on people owning homes. I also suggest that a ceiling might be placed on the amount they could claim, so that the person owning a $50,000 or $75,000 home would not benefit. The ceiling might be set at $500 as the greatest amount that could be claimed. This provision would have a beneficial effect if it were made to those people who require assistance, and not to those who do not.
I realize that if our Canadian people are faced with such a problem it arises mainly because of the fast Canadian growth. There

is no doubt about that fact. It is true in my riding. My riding is greatly affected especially so as a result of the difficult rocky terrain in our area. It is undoubtedly true, Mr. Speaker, that it is costlier to build services in certain municipalities than it is in others. Services such as those in connection with sewers and so on are more costly in some municipalities than in others.
Certain municipalities are located in places where local improvement costs bear heavily. By deducting in proportion as stated the government would assist in equalizing the benefits to all Canadians. Those people living in my riding and interested in the mining industry cannot very well build their homes on other soil; they must build within the mountains. They have no choice in the matter. That is where they must live. It should therefore be obvious to every one that a method of exempting the taxpayer up to a certain amount would necessarily be beneficial.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but I must inform him that his time has expired.
(Translation):


Mr. Roland English (Gaspe):: Mr. Speaker, I should like at the outset to congratulate you upon your re-election as Speaker of the House of Commons.
(Text):
Mr. Speaker, the distinguished and impartial manner in which you have discharged your duties in the past shows that you deserve this rare and seldom-bestowed honour of being re-elected Speaker of this house.
(Translation):
I should also like to congratulate the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) on his appointment to the post of Deputy Speaker of the house.
(Text):
I should also like to congratulate the Prime Minister for the unequivocal approval his government and his party received on March 31. His popularity is such, Mr. Speaker, that even the province of Quebec, reputed to be the impregnable fortress of Liberalism, recognized in him the true representative of this new Canadian spirit of unity and equality which he has been advocating since being elected to this house.
In my own constituency of Gaspe his devotion to the well-being of every Canadian citizen made such an impression that I had the privilege of being re-elected by the sweeping majority of nearly 5,000 votes, while a year ago I had barely slipped through by 67 votes.
The Address-Mr. English (Translation):
In my constituency, as in so many others, I believe that the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefen-baker) has been rewarded for a political career entirely devoted to the promotion of the best interests of this nation.
I also congratulate the mover (Mr. Lafre-niere) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. His victory bears witness to the ascendancy of that new spirit which the Prime Minister has infused into Canadian politics and the repudiation of undesirable methods in the discussion of public affairs.
(Text):
I should also like to congratulate the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) who has espoused with such eloquence and authority the cause of the new frontiers of our immense country.
( Translation):
I should like also to offer my congratulations to the hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. O'Hurley) and the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche) on their appointment to the functions of Minister of Defence Production and Secretary of State respectively.
Mr. Speaker, if my constituency represents one of the oldest sections of Canadian territory, since Jacques Cartier landed there in 1534, it has some points of resemblance, on the other hand, with the Yukon territory. It is indeed one of the most picturesque areas of Canada. It is also, alas!, one whose immense resources are least known and developed. It can be stated, Mr. Speaker, that the Gaspe peninsula is undoubtedly, together with the maritime provinces, one of the under-developed areas of Canada.
Its population is rich in qualities and energy but poor financially, for this reason that the Gaspe peninsula has remained, for too long a time, the terra incognita of the province of Quebec. And yet it would take so little to make this area prosperous.
Similar causes result in similar effects. If the maritimes do not fully share in the country's prosperity, it is because of failure to develop their national resources, and because little was done to give them adequate means of communication. Gaspe is in the same position.
At this point I have to admit that the "electric power" of which there is no source in Gaspe itself, is now distributed throughout the peninsula, thanks to the development of resources on the north shore of the St. Lawrence. I also recognize that the province of Quebec made a generous effort to give roads to Gaspesia. But in either case the attempt is definitely inadequate. It is now up to this country's government to provide
458	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. English the auxiliary assistance expected from its new policy regarding the development of national resources.
I know, Mr. Speaker, that the Prime Minister and the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) have already had submitted to them a project which is close to the hearts of every Gaspesian, the extension of the railway line from Matane to Ste. Anne des Monts. Construction of this line would enable an entire coastal area in Gaspe to develop abundant forest and mining resources which have so far remained untapped because of the lack of economic communications.
Mr. Speaker, I find it hard to understand why an area such as this has so long suffered neglect. For over 50 years now every succeeding government has used Gaspe as a political football, at each succeeding election.
It has always been the same thing. There has always been promise of a railway joining Matane to Ste. Anne des Monts and, later, Murdochville to Gaspe.
It will be quite impossible to develop that part of our country unless Gaspe is provided with a railway. Gaspe is one of the areas which suffers most as a result. To begin with, Mr. Speaker, it has no industries except fishing and logging. It is altogether impossible to interest industry in setting up plants in Gaspe because of the lack of railroads.
And yet, Mr. Speaker, I had always been given to understand that the railway preceded progress, instead of it being the other way round. I have already made requests in this regard; I spoke about it last session. I am taking it up today and will keep doing so as long as I have not obtained the building of this railway.
Mr. Speaker, every day I get more than 100 to 125 letters. My constituency is an extremely large one. In fact, it extends over 320 miles, just about the distance between Ottawa and Quebec. Because there is no industry in the area, and because the unfortunate people who live in my constituency cannot find work there, they write to me about their problems. And I don't blame them. I repeat what I said a moment ago; that railways are indispensable to that area. For the moment we are asking for the construction of a line approximately 47 miles long. It seems to me that that is not asking too much. Surely the people of Gaspe are entitled to ask for the construction of that line from Matane to Ste. Anne des Monts. If the line were constructed, we are convinced that we could interest businessmen in bringing industry to the area.
I have met Gaspe businessmen who would be quite willing to set up a pulp and paper


industry and newsprint industry at Ste. Anne des Monts. I have already met businessmen who would be interested to set up a chips factory. However, all such projects are out of the question for the moment since motor transportation between Ste. Anne des Monts and Matane would be far too expensive. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I am convinced that the present government for once will take heed of those people who, at this time, are in unfortunate circumstances. They are not asking for charity; they are simply demanding their share of the national income.
Mr. Speaker, the people of Gaspe pay taxes like those of any other area. The only difference is that they cannot benefit from the social legislation enacted by the previous government and by this government.
There is talk of making a considerable amount of money, namely $300 million, available for housing. This is of no benefit to my particular constituency. Insurance companies are not interested in lending money there for the construction of houses because they find the Gaspe peninsula too remote from large centres. The people of my constituency cannot take advantage of this beneficial legislation.
There are other excellent social laws but, when it comes to my constituency, they cannot be applied the same as elsewhere.
Let us take for example the matter of pensions to disabled persons. Well, as I said a minute ago, there are only two industries in the Gaspe peninsula: fishing and logging. If a man working in one or the other of these two industries has the misfortune of losing a leg or an arm, there is no other industry where he could, like city workers, find a job as an elevator operator or as a night watchman in a factory or somewhere else. Yet, the percentage of disabled is the same among the people of Gaspe as among city people. And the Gaspe people are told that a 25 or 30 per cent loss of capacity is insufficient to entitle them to the disability pension. On the other hand, a city worker who has got only one leg or one arm can more readily find a job in some other industry. The fisherman who has the misfortune of losing an arm or a leg can no longer practise his trade. Moreover, he can certainly not cut wood in the bush. What then is there left for him to do? Just sit down and wait until he dies. It seems to me that, for once, the voice of Gaspe should be heard and that every member in this house should co-operate to give that part of our country what these unfortunate people have been requesting for so many years.
Mr. Speaker, the implementation of that project which I have just mentioned not only would improve to a substantial degree

the commercial relationships between Gaspe and the north shore of the river, but it would prove to be a boom to the economic life of the peninsula.
The existence of a railway line in the neigbourhood of Ste. Anne des Monts would be sufficient to bring in many mining and industrial concerns which would create jobs in the Gaspe peninsula and help alleviate unemployment there. Too many Gaspesians up to now have had to go out and seek jobs in large cities or more favoured areas. If they stayed at home, they could make their peninsula one of the most prosperous areas in the country. But then they need the tools to bring about such an industrial development.
The Ste. Anne des Monts railway line would be one such tool. The construction of modern harbours at Gaspe and Chandler would be another one. I am not revealing any strategic secrets, Mr. Speaker, when I recall that, during the last war, the port of Gaspe was one of the mainstays of our military security system in Canada. I sincerely believe that if the necessary amounts are spent there, the port of Gaspe, while continuing to play that role, if ever such an eventuality arises, could be the starting point of that economic recognition of the peninsula which the whole of Canada hopes for today. A modern harbour at Gaspe would mean for the neighbourhood the installation of new industries for the development of our maritime as well as of our forest resources; it would bring to an end the decidedly tragic isolation which is at present the lot of our population.
Besides the marvellous bay of Gaspe, there is also an industrial and maritime centre, that of Chandler, which, given a little assistance, could be further extended. I know, Mr. Speaker, that, in this case also, a project for the extension of port facilities has been referred to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees). Every Gaspesian is awaiting the outcome anxiously. If Chandler were turned into a real seaport, the northern part of the Gaspe peninsula would be sure of getting all its winter suplies, local industries would benefit from better and cheaper means of transportation, the fishing industry could be extended and the construction of fishing boats could be undertaken on a larger scale. Finally, let us not forget that those are our most valuable human resources which can be used for the production of new wealth.
Three great resources can guarantee the prosperity of the Gaspe peninsula: the forest, the mines and the sea. Now then, at the present time none of those resources are properly worked or developed because the Gaspe peninsula lacks the tools of economic conquest. Let us then supply the peninsula 57071-3-301
The Address-Mr. English with those tools, and at the same time we will put an end to the complaints of courageous Canadians who are asking for the same chance that others are getting of being a powerful asset in the confederation.
All along the shore of the Gaspe peninsula there are abundant fishing grounds, but how can the rest of the country be expected to benefit by them when the peninsula does not have the communications required to reach the large markets under conditions which would allow it to meet competition.
In the interior of the Gaspe peninsula, a part of our rich forests is still undeveloped. As for the remainder, poor transport facilities prevent the farmers from selling their pulpwood and lumber at reasonable prices. Even the Chandler paper mill has to send its products to Bathurst before shipping them to their normal markets, because ships cannot put into Chandler harbour. The companies no longer let them stop there, several ships having been lost -last year.
Consequently the raw materials bound for the larger centres are transported to New Brunswick.
I believe, Mr. Speaker, that if a seaport were built at Chandler, it would provide jobs to local men loading and unloading ships. The setting up of a port would eliminate considerable handling costs.
As far as mines are concerned, they are still waiting for a railroad to facilitate production and marketing at a reasonable cost.
Mr. Speaker, during the last election campaign, the hon. Prime Minister aroused an immense hope in the hearts of all Canadians when he spoke of the tremendous future he is contemplating for our country. To that future, the Gaspe peninsula wishes to contribute, since its people know, as well as others, the greatness of the mission entrusted to them.
Mr. Speaker, I shall now insert a few remarks on the fisheries of the Gaspe peninsula. Our fishermen have been victimized for many years. I have always been interested in our fishermen, because, about 20 years ago, I had the great pleasure to introduce the first fisheries co-operative in my native parish of Riviere-au-Renard, following a one-year course I attended in Antigonish, Nova Scotia, in order to study the position of fishermen. If their lot has now improved, it is due to that co-operative.
I am glad to hear my western colleagues' many representations on behalf of western farmers. I approve them and I am in favour
460	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Nixon of the assistance extended to the farmer, though it seems to me that the eastern fishermen should not be forgotten, who, last year, in my riding, sold their produce for 2\ cents a pound, whereas the year before, they had obtained 3 and even 3J cents a pound, which means that there has been a reduction instead of an increase. I believe we should grant the fishermen of Gaspe protective price support.
If the people of Gaspe are holding out their hands at this time it is not to beg but to grasp the tools which are vital to their prosperity. I know that the government of Canada will not refuse them those tools.
Mr. Speaker, before concluding I again appeal to the government. I ask it to bring pressure to bear on the Canadian National Railways so that, within the shortest possible time, we may obtain construction of that railway. Not only would it provide needed employment, but it would promote the development of the whole of the Gaspe peninsula.
(Text):
At one o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Mr. G. E. Nixon (Algoma West):: Mr. Speaker, at the outset I would like to join with the other hon. members who have spoken before me in congratulating you on the high honour that has been conferred on you in your re-election as Speaker of this house. I believe we are particularly fortunate in the fact that your guidance of our deliberations will be helpful and fair, as was our experience in the previous parliament.
I compliment, too, the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne in the opening of the twenty-fourth parliament. I also congratulate the Prime Minister and the government on the tremendous majority acquired through the people's mandate on March 31. Their responsibilities in the tasks ahead are heavy, and the fact that their numbers are great brings, I believe, an added burden to the task of fair and representative government.
As opposition members we too have great responsibilities, not as obstructionists but in the spirit of true Canadianism to work for Canada's continued prosperity through the deliberations of this house. We of the Liberal

party are very fortunate indeed to have as our leader the hon. member for Algoma East (Mr. Pearson) who is recognized throughout the world as an outstanding statesman and a loyal and devoted Canadian.
As hon. members are well aware, much of the important legislation scheduled to be brought forward this session will be a followup of legislation initiated or given earlier consideration by the former Liberal government, namely all the fine welfare measures; the completion and expansion of avenues of transportation already under way such as the St. Lawrence seaway, which is now practically an accomplished project and which Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth has graciously consented to officially open next year; airports and air travel facilities; the trans-Canada highway; equalized distribution of wealth to the provinces-and I sincerely hope that the term "equalization" will continue to hold prominence in this important matter- health insurance, the foundation of which was started a decade ago by the former Liberal government through a constructive program of hospital and health grants making it possible for the plan to be implemented in the near future.
I suggest that there appears to be no considered plan in the legislation forecast designed to bring relief for unemployment, nor has any policy been proposed to bolster Canada's failing economy at this time. In the main estimates brought down by the Minister of Finance a few days ago there were expenditures indicating an increase in practically every department of government, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration being the one exception. If the increases were extended largely to public works projects and items of relief for unemployment, then I believe it would be more constructive; but the estimates reveal no special program to relieve unemployment.
Considerable emphasis is being laid by hon. members of the government on the increased payments which the government authorized through the many welfare measures initiated by the former Liberal government. I submit that this is not building for the future; it is merely digging into the coffers of the federal treasury, the taxpayers' money. Such a policy is not constructive because it gives no indication of an effort to even maintain, much less improve, Canada's economic structure, which is the base from which these benefits were made possible. The present system is nonproductive and self-defeating. We cannot hope to maintain these benefits for Canadians except through continued increases in the national income.
All these welfare measures, including unemployment insurance, were designed by

the former Liberal government, not to provide a livelihood for Canadians but as a means of assistance to the handicapped and afflicted as well to alleviate the fear of old age dependence. As far as unemployment insurance is concerned, this was designed as a protective measure for the worker, as a provision for maintenance at such times when for one reason or another he found himself temporarily out of employment. At this time last year the reserve in the unemployment insurance fund stood at something like $300 million. It would be very interesting to know the present financial status of this fund considering the strain that has been put on it in the last several months and the consequent decrease in contributions to maintain it.
The Conservative government has been in power for almost one whole year. It has been a year of stalemate as far as Canada's economic progress is concerned. National income remained practically static last year. The forecast for the current year is that conditions will remain much the same, and as a matter of fact in the final analysis revenues may be down, as our total production is not increasing in comparison with our increasing population and general commitments.
Admitted in the speech from the throne is the fact that Canada is suffering from a situation which is both recessional and inflationary. Neither of these situations is healthy and one must ask himself where is the remedy. Recently an hon. member on the government side of the house dealt with the recession problem by quoting the increased payments that have been made through welfare measures. In his summary, however, he did not mention the great benefit of family allowances, which of course completely missed consideration when the Conservatives were authorizing increases in other benefits. This is consistent with the fact that the bill was strenuously opposed by some hon. members of the Conservative party when it was introduced in 1944, and had no place in the program set out at the Conservative national convention in 1956. Yet this benefit, which is available to all Canadian families, has provided them with approximately $4 billion since its inception in 1944.


Howard Charles Green: Would the hon. member permit a question? Will the hon. gentleman tell me the names of the Conservatives who opposed family allowances in 1944?


Mr. Pickersgill:: Dr. Bruce.


M. Nixon:: 1 am sure if you will examine Hansard you will find who opposed it.


Howard Charles Green: I was convinced you could not
provide me with names.
The Address-Mr. Nixon


Paul Joseph James Martin: There is no doubt about it. Dr. Bruce opposed it, and I believe you were here at the time.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The present Prime Minister moved an amendment to try to prevent the bill going through.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Your party was opposed to the measure at one time. What about Dr. Bruce?


Howard Charles Green: That is not true.


Mr. Baskin:: Stop smiling, Paul.


George Ewart Nixon: Taking one year's payments as a concrete example, nearly $4 million was distributed for the benefit of Canadian children in the year 1956-57. The hon. member further emphasized the proposed extension of periods for payment of unemployment insurance as another remedy. We endorse this action, of course, but will it help unemployment? In reality it does nothing to relieve the situation.
The splendid Liberal program of welfare benefits has been and is at the present time of utmost value to the Canadian people. These measures were designed by the former Liberal government with that object in mind, but they were never intended to carry the country's economy. They were made possible because of wise administration which produced increasingly greater national revenues, and I submit that this same system is still necessary for the continued well-being of our people.
The fault-as fault there must be, Mr. Speaker-lies with our present government. During the election campaign the Minister of Trade and Commerce is quoted as having made the statement that because capital investment for the year 1957-58 would equal that of the previous year we had nothing to worry about. The same situation seems to apply in the forecasts for capital investment for the current year, 1958-59. This type of figuring indicates stagnation, and bears a very close resemblance to the figures of the early thirties.
We see nothing in the legislation forecast which would encourage capital investment, either domestic or foreign. I believe it is essential to keep in mind that during our periods of progress a large part of our national income was derived from capital investment. I am afraid the extravagant promises of the last two election campaigns have rapidly dissipated the faith of prospective investors.
While Liberal policy has always been one of trade expansion, Conservative policy seems to be one of trade diversion. Certainly the suggestion of diversion of trade from our
462	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Nixon best customer, the United States, has done nothing to strengthen Canada's economic position. Apart from the fact that it has brought about retaliatory cut-backs in exports to that country, it has alienated the friendliness of our good neighbour to the south and may further be the cause of increased tariff walls which will still more adversely affect our imports. Canada is in need of this market as the most readily accessible and natural field for those products which Canadians have to sell. Trade, of course, is the keynote to progress. Great productivity can only be profitable when markets are available, and it is only by wise trade and tariff arrangements that this can be accomplished.
I should like now to refer briefly to my riding of Algoma West, which I have had the honour to represent in this house for the past 18 years. Apart from the great Algoma Steel mills and their subsidiary mining companies, which provide much of the industry in Algoma West, forest and farm products contribute considerably to the production of the area and a thriving business is carried on by commercial fishermen; but lake Superior fishermen have problems the same as any other people, Mr. Speaker. One of the problems that is causing great concern is the heavy destruction of lake trout by the sea lamprey. I sincerely trust that the Department of Fisheries will continue with the program started a few years ago in co-operation with the province to cope with this difficult and serious matter.
I might mention here, Mr. Speaker, that the Department of Public Works is already investigating another difficulty being encountered by some of those fishermen owing to the obstruction to the harbour on the Montreal river some 80 miles north of Sault Ste. Marie. The fault is a gravel bar which is continually reforming, and it is my hope that early and permanent remedies may be applied in this instance, as it is the only harbour available to commercial fishermen and other boatmen for 30 miles on either side of the Montreal river. Its present condition is not only a detriment to the financial welfare of the fishermen, but the fact that the harbour is inaccessible at the present time might easily be the cause of loss of life to the fishermen and other boatmen owing to the danger of turbulent storms on lake Superior.
Sault Ste. Marie is the largest urban centre in my riding. It was in 1622 that two French explorers, Brule and Grenolle, visited the rapids at this point and gave them the name of Sault du Gaston. It was in 1762 that a British garrison took possession of the fort. The region was under British rule until 1867, when the act of confederation created Canada.


Earlier, under French rule, Sault Ste. Marie became the central fur market of the northwest. In 1797-98 the first Sault canal was built, with a lock large enough to take the largest freight canoe. This lock still stands to remind us of the hardships of the early travellers. Preserved, too, is the old Hudson's Bay blockhouse, telling of the days when fur trading was an armed affair.
As an indication of progress, four separate locks, of proportions sufficient to accommodate ocean-going vessels, now exist in the St. Mary's river, linking lake Huron with lake Superior. Next year these canals will form part of the great St. Lawrence seaway which will continue on to the great lakes. When it is realized that more tonnage passes through the locks at Sault Ste. Marie in a season than passes in 12 months through the Panama, the Suez, the Manchester and Kiel canals combined, one can get some idea of what the opening of this river has meant to the economy of our country.
In view of the developments described I have previously taken up in person with the Department of Transport the fact that there may be need some day for an additional lock on the Canadian side of the St. Mary's river in order to accommodate the increased traffic when the St. Lawrence seaway is opened up. The time has now come to look into the development of such a project. It would create employment when jobs are urgently needed, and it would prove an asset to the navigation facilities of this busy waterway.
Additional harbour facilities are also required at the Sault. This need was recognized by the former Liberal government. A survey was made and reports are on hand in the Department of Public Works. During the past year the question has been given some consideration by the present government. A suitable site is available, and I would ask the government to recognize this as a much needed improvement and urge them to give it their immediate consideration. Also, under the former Liberal government land was purchased for the building of an airport at Sault Ste. Marie. Surveys were made and the field is now being constructed. I have every faith that the government will proceed quickly with this project.
The riding of Algoma West, and in fact the whole district of Algoma, abounds in historic sites due, no doubt, to the early settlement of this part of the country. In the Sault Ste. Marie district there are two special landmarks of historic interest, both of which are well known to the national historic sites division of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. I refer in the first instance to Fort St. Joseph,

located on St. Joseph's island east of Sault Ste. Marie. In 1783 this was a fur-trading fort built by the Northwest company. In 1796 British troops took it over as a military establishment. Today parts of three buildings and the military cemetery still remain. Laid out as a park and bird sanctuary, this is of considerable interest to tourists. The main fort and the grounds are in fairly good condition, and I have recently approached the department requesting that certain items be given attention. I believe it is in the interests of our national background that such an historic landmark as Fort St. Joseph be preserved and further improved.
The other landmark is located in Sault Ste. Marie and is known there as the old stone house. Beginning with the early 1800's mention is repeatedly made of an elegant house on the north bank of the St. Mary's river, below the rapids. The house was built in 1814 by a fur trader. I understand it is the oldest house in existence north of Toronto. I could describe in some detail the workmanship and architecture which this house displays and also the part it played in the lives of the fur traders and the British settlement which followed Captain Roberts in his military campaigns in the early 1800's.
All details in connection with this house are on file in the national historic sites division. Representations have been made that the national interest is involved, and an appeal has been made to the federal government for assistance in the preservation of this historic monument to early Canadian history and culture. I hope this historic old house will receive the sponsorship of the national historic sites division, and that special consideration will be given this request by the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources.
In closing I might say that the district of Algoma West has a tremendous attraction for tourists and sportsmen, and acts as a distributor of visitors from the United States to all parts of Canada. Sault Ste. Marie is the only port of entry to Canada from the United States between Sarnia on the east and the head of the lakes on the west, a distance of about 500 miles each way. Well maintained highways lead directly to the Sault and the stupendous new bridge built by the state of Michigan across the straits of Mackinaw, officially opened last fall, will greatly increase traffic during the coming tourist season.
It is interesting to note that within a day's drive of the Sault there is an American population of nearly 40 million people. We have every hope that an international bridge will soon be built between the Michigan Sault and the Canadian Sault, which will further facilitate travel. At the Sault there is a
The Address-Mr. MacEwan direct traffic connection with the trans-Canada highway. The lake Superior link of the highway, now under construction along the north shore of lake Superior, will go through the Michipicoten area, a very important section of my riding because of the rich iron ore potential and the natural resources of the district.
While this area has been well served for many years by the Algoma Central Railway, the linking of the district with the trans-Canada highway will mean the realization of a dream that its residents have had for many years, namely the provision of adequate motor transport facilities; and with the development of resources already in sight, plus potential discoveries, it may well prove to be the gateway to a world of new wealth.


Mr. H. Russell MacEwan (Piclou):: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate very much the opportunity today to take part in the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne. During the last session of parliament I did not have the opportunity to do so. At this time I should like to congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, on your election as Speaker of the house. As others have said, I know from having been here during last session that you will carry on with fairness and impartiality befitting the high standing of Speaker of the House of Commons of Canada.
I should like to compliment the hon. member for Longueil (Mr. Sevigny), on his election as Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons. May I as a dour Scot from the historic Scottish county of Pictou salute the French speaking members of the house and attempt to congratulate you in French, sir. (Translation):
Mr. Speaker, may I congratulate you on your re-election to the office of Speaker of the House of Commons. I also congratulate my good friend the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) on his election to the office of Deputy Speaker of the house. (Text):
At this time I should like to welcome to the house two hon. members with whom I attended that honourable college by the sea, Dalhousie University, in the person of the hon. member for Westmorland (Mr. Creag-han), with whom I roomed for two years at law school, and the hon. member for Inver-ness-Richmond (Mr. MacLellan) who has joined us at this time. I should also like to congratulate the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen)-who also attended the college by the sea-of the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
There are a few matters I should like to discuss with regard to certain things mentioned in the speech from the throne. The

The Address-Mr. MacEwan first is the reference to a bill of rights which is to be introduced at an early date. This measure is most important so far as the freedom of all Canadians is concerned, when we see in this day and age throughout the world transgressions upon freedom in many countries. I believe it is a most important matter, and I congratulate the government on this announcement. We look forward to the introduction of the legislation.
Then there are the amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act. Certain changes have already been made, and the speech from the throne indicates that other changes will be made at a later date. At this point I should like to refer to certain suggestions and submissions made to me by the united steelworkers of America, local 1231, of Trenton, Nova Scotia. Before I came to Ottawa they submitted a brief to me, and I should like to refer to certain parts of it. They make the suggestion that it would be a good thing if a measure were introduced to increase the amount of unemployment insurance benefits. They point out that there should be an increase of at least 40 per cent in order to make larger benefits available to the workers of Canada under the Unemployment Insurance Act. I think this is something that could be taken into consideration by the government in the amendments which will come forward at a later date. The union points out in its brief that increased benefits would probably help to make more consumer money available in Canada.
Certainly we know that the benefits are not large, the greatest amount payable at this time being $30 a week. Hon. members will realize that with the cost of living today this amount will not go too far. I draw this matter to the attention of the government as one which could be readily considered in making changes in the legislation.
The changes in the National Housing Act are welcome. In discussing the matter last year in this house I said the government might consider accepting owner labour as part of the down payment for the purpose of loans under the act. I believe one hon. member also suggested during the resolution stage of the recent amendment that owner labour could be applied to more advanced stages in the building of a house.
The area I represent contains a number of smaller towns, the largest having a population of perhaps 11,000. I do not believe the National Housing Act has been used enough by the people in the area because of the fact that there seems to be a little too much red tape in obtaining loans. I think perhaps the red tape could be cut down somewhat and that there should be more publicity as

to the act and how it works, so that more people can take advantage of this important legislation.
Another matter dealt with in the speech from the throne had to do with expansion in the construction of airports and airstrips. Certainly this will be welcomed by the people of Canada, because we are living in an age of accelerated air transport and we should keep pace with the age in which we are living.
In my work as a barrister I have had something to do with criminal law and particularly the Ticket of Leave Act. I believe the setting up of a parole board as forecast in the speech from the throne is important. The Ticket of Leave Act has certainly had its place in the matter of parole, but in my opinion there have been a number of worthy cases which could have been more fully investigated. The matter is of great importance throughout the country, and a national board to deal with parole is a most important measure.
During the debate it has been most interesting to listen to members from various parts of Canada, from the Atlantic right through to the Pacific, from Newfoundland to British Columbia. I was particularly interested in listening to members from the western provinces, especially the province of Manitoba, and learning about the various problems they brought forward. I can say that I have an interest in the province of Manitoba, as some of my own relatives went west in the early days and settled around Brandon. I believe that some of them play a part in public life in the legislature of that province. I am therefore most interested in the speeches of those members from that province.
In the county of Pictou various types of industry are represented. In fact it is a constituency which involves almost every type of work. Among other things we have a car company which manufactures freight cars for the various railways in Canada. In that regard, in the submission which was made to me by the local union and which I am sure would be concurred in by the management of Eastern Car, which is part of A. V. Roe Limited, a former Dosco subsidiary, is the suggestion that the Canadian National railways could consider a carbuilding program to help the industry. I understand there are approximately 50,000 obsolete cars used by the Canadian National Railways. I would suggest that the transport department, along with the management of the Canadian National Railways, consider a car-building program instituted for a period of five years to help the various car plants in Canada.

This car work involves not only work on freight cars; it also involves various other allied trades in the county and indeed in the province and in the Dominion of Canada. There are other plants sharing it. There is the steel works which is next door which manufactures axles, and Maritime Steel and Foundries Limited, well known for its foundry work. It involves a great deal as far as labour is concerned and, as I understand it, as far as other plants are concerned in the immediate area and throughout the province.
Also in the constituency is the Pictou shipyard of Ferguson Industries Limited. I would submit that work should be placed in that area as well as in other parts of the province, and in the Atlantic provinces generally.
Among other things, a ferry was built by Ferguson Industries Limited, Pictou, that plies between Caribou on the mainland of Nova Scotia and Wood Island, Prince Edward Island; it is known as the Lord Selkirk. If it is not in operation at the present time it will soon go into service between those two points. It means a great deal as far as transport between the mainland of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island is concerned. After considering the help given and the size of this ferry, which is very modern, which will carry some 60 cars, and is much better than the ferry which formerly plied between those two points, I would ask the Department of Transport to look into the submission that another ferry be built for the area to help out the transportation problems. Every summer we see a number of cars, particularly tourist cars, lined up at the wharf at Caribou, and this has done a great deal to emphasize the fact that we need better facilities for this area.
We also appreciate greatly the passing at the last parliament of the Atlantic provinces power bill which involves subventions on coal going out of the maritimes for power use. This is something which is extremely helpful. It will mean cheaper power for industries within our area, within the province and within the Atlantic provinces.


Mr. Robichaud:: Why do they not use coal?


Howard Russell MacEwan: I will answer the hon. member for Gloucester. As far as my own area is concerned, I believe he was in there during the last election campaign or during the past year; at least he passed through. If he would travel down to Trenton he would come to the Trenton power plant, which is now being enlarged; and of course it uses the coal of independent producers such as Greenwood Coal Company at Thor-burn. It definitely uses coal; I can assure him of that fact.
The Address-Mr. MacEwan
There is another point in connection with the subvention; the fact that these power plants of course will come into being and new industries cannot be set up immediately to use the extra power which will be available. This is a matter which was brought to my attention before leaving, namely the fact that some coal mined by the independent producers-I am not referring to A. V. Roe mines but the independent producers in the county-is sent out. I refer to Greenwood Coal Company in Thorburn and the Drummond Coal Company in Westville, Nova Scotia. The amount sent out depends on the market in Halifax. Something might be done, I submit-and this suggestion has been made-in the way of freight subventions to the C.N.R. to help provide markets for these independent producers.
I believe that throughout the province there are other independent producers which this step would help out greatly. I submit that the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys could perhaps bring this matter to the attention of the dominion coal board, and that it is something which should be considered along with other measures to help our coal industry.
We have our Atlantic provinces power bill which will help us to have cheaper power as far as our provinces are concerned. There is something which should be considered by the government, I submit, namely some change as far as freight rates are concerned. I know this matter has been brought to the attention of this house a good many times in the past. However, I believe that with new industry, with an abundance of cheap power, and with help in our freight rates we can progress as we should in our province and indeed in all the Atlantic provinces.
Under Industrial Estates Limited, a crown company of the province of Nova Scotia, we have been able to secure an Italian textile industry to set up in our county of Pictou this fall. I hope that others will follow suit. I hope this is only the beginning of a great economic step forward for our province.
In our county of Pictou we also have farming carried on. In the speech from the throne I note that mention is made of the fact that changes will be made in the Canadian Farm Loan Act. In the province of Nova Scotia a royal commission was set up, and it reported on the matter of loans and farming generally in the province. Among other recommendations it submitted was that there should be changes in the Canadian Farm Loan Act in order to make it possible for young farmers to get loans readily from the Canadian farm loan board.

The Address-Mr. MacEwan According to the submission to the commission by the farmers' federation of Nova Scotia, the Nova Scotia federation of agriculture, the Canadian Farm Loan Act seemed to be so framed as to help farmers perhaps in the western part of Canada in larger tracts of land. They submitted that most loans now are obtained under the Nova Scotia land settlement board, and that there should be changes in the Canadian Farm Loan Act in order to make it possible for smaller farmers to obtain loans. They must have the credit to commence their work and to set up their farms. I believe the government should take this matter into consideration.
We also have in the county fishing of various types carried on. As a result of the report of the royal commission which dealt with agriculture and fishing I hope that encouragement will be given to this industry also.
In the Atlantic area, speaking generally, we have the Atlantic provinces economic council, which is a body made up not just of politicians but of men from various types of work and various professions throughout the whole area. This APEC has been doing a good job, and I suggest that members from that area encourage them in their efforts. Among the things they have set up, of course, has been the shoe show last year in order to show the various types of shoes we produce, and also this year the food show exhibiting Atlantic products.
In my own area, if I might just mention it once more, we have the Hamilton factory which manufactures biscuits of various types. I have today received discouraging word to the effect that this plant will probably be shut down. During the last two election campaigns I visited this plant and became acquainted with its products, its workers and its management, and I must say that this is a particularly fine plant. The workers and management have always worked very well together, and I do hope that in addition to all possible efforts on my own part, every effort will be made to see that this fine little industry will not have to be closed down, as has happened in the case of some other industries, but that it will be able to continue to serve Pictou and Nova Scotia.
Among other measures mentioned in the speech from the throne is the setting up of a standing committee on veterans affairs. During the short time I have been actively engaged in politics many veterans have brought this matter to my attention, and I commend the minister and the government for having taken this most important step.
I Mr. MacEwan.]
We have heard many hon. members speak of other measures set forth in the speech from the throne, including the work to be done in the far north; and this, of course, is a step in the right direction. All these things are necessary for the future of our great country, of which, as each year advances, we as members of this House of Commons and members of the government party will be a part.
The people of Canada have given this party and this government an overwhelming majority, and I submit that it is up to the government and to each and every member of the party to see that such power is used as wisely as it should be. The people of our country have placed in the Prime Minister and the government a trust which I wholeheartedly believe has not been misplaced.
(Translation):


Mr. Maurice Bourgel (Levis):: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to see you in the chair this afternoon, because this gives me the opportunity to join hon. members who rose before me on all sides of the house, and tender my own congratulations. I do not see anything I could add to the praise already expressed, so I shall just say that it was amply deserved.
I also would join the other speakers in commending the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. They have carried out their task with great eloquence.
I also would congratulate the two new ministers from the province of Quebec, to whom I wish the best of luck in their new responsibilities, which I am sure, will end with this parliament.
(Text):
Mr. Speaker, a few days ago when I had occasion to speak in this house I made my remarks in English, but this afternoon I would like to make myself understood in French, because just a few minutes ago we had yet another opportunity to see that the French lessons given to some members are beginning to bear fruit and that some English speaking members are now able to say a few words in French. I hope they will not have any difficulty in following me. (Translation):
Mr. Speaker, in taking part this afternoon in the debate on the speech from the throne, I should like first of all to draw the government's attention to three questions of vital importance to the majority of the people in my constituency. I am sure these matters are also of the greatest interest to thousands of citizens in other districts of Canada.

I already had in the past the opportunity of discussing those problems right here in this house, but I think that, in view of the circumstances, it is good to turn back to them again today.
The first matter I should like to deal with concerns the shipbuilding industry. I shall deal with its present position and especially with its future. Many of us-and I would go as far as to say most of us-know that in my constituency of Levis, which I have been representing here for the last eighteen years, we have two important shipyards which, for hundreds of families in my constituency, and in other constituencies of the area, represent their sole livelihood. Incidentally it is the only heavy industry we have in the district.
The importance of keeping that industry in operation will therefore be readily appreciated. If its activities were curtailed, hundreds of men would be laid off who depend on this industry for a living and the support of their families. And if this sad situation came about, it would certainly likewise affect other districts where shipbuilding and repair are vitally important.
As we know, at the present time there are 17 major shipyards in Canada. They are located on the Atlantic coast, on the St. Lawrence in the province of Quebec, on the great lakes, and there are two or three other large ones in British Columbia. According to the latest figures I could get, at the end of March of this year those shipyards were employing over 15,000 men, and this figure of course does not include the other thousands of employees working in the industries which produce the necessary materials or machines for the building or repair of those ships.
Therefore I do not see that I should speak at great length on the necessity of keeping an industry such as this in operation at the present time in this country, either from an economic standpoint or for purposes of national defence. Hon. members who were sitting here when the last war broke out will remember how much taxpayers had to pay to put that industry back into full operation, at a time when it had slowed down, not to speak of the precious time lost, in the circumstances, in training a specialized labour force which was practically nonexistent.
It is recalled that during their peak war time activity, our shipyards were employing more than 75,000 workers. We are also proud to recall the efficient role played by our shipyards during the conflict, and their priceless contribution to the Allied victory.
At this time, Mr. Speaker, we are living in a somewhat precarious state of security,
The Address-Mr. Bourget with almost every country spending vast sums on defence, because no one knows when another conflict will break out. It is therefore necessary to remain constantly on the alert. If another war breaks out, more up-to-date arms will no doubt be used than during the last war. But nobody, I think, inside or outside this house will be able to deny that our navy will have an important part to play during a future war. The necessity of keeping up this essential industry so that it may be used without delay in case of a national emergency will therefore be conceded.
Ever since 1940, the naval shipyards in my riding have been quite busy, through contracts awarded first of all by the Department of National Defence, by the Department of Transport, and, in a lesser way, by private industry. Incidentally, I would like to point out to hon. members that, from 1949 to 1957, our two naval shipyards received contracts for an average of $16 million a year, for the construction and repair of government-owned vessels. I might also state, without any fear of contradiction that all other shipyards, whether in the Atlantic provinces, on the Pacific coast or on the great lakes, relied to a large extent on the generous help of the government in order to carry on.
Mr. Speaker, will the present government continue this precious help awarded by the federal authorities, and which, to my mind, is essential for the survival of this industry? I am no pessimist by nature, nor would I like to be one now, but judging from the statements made by some government members and the action taken by the government in the last few months, we are compelled to admit that the future of our shipyards is uncertain at present.
As a matter of fact, at the beginning of January, there were press reports to the effect that the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Pearkes) had stated that the government proposed to discontinue its shipbuilding program until such time as the possibility of building nuclear-propelled ships had been thoroughly considered. That policy aroused criticism in several papers and especially, of course, among shipbuilding associations. It was criticism based on serious arguments against the decision of the Minister of National Defence. One critic mentioned the opinion expressed by the Commander-in-chief of the NATO Atlantic fleet, Admiral Wright, who is said to have stated that there was a scarcity of ships and especially of submarine destroyers.
I do not know, Mr. Speaker, how long it will take national defence experts to make a thorough study of the plans for the building of nuclear-propelled ships, but on the

The Address-Mr. Bourget other hand, I am sure that our shipyards will suffer through being deprived of the contracts granted them in years past by the Department of National Defence.
I hope the Department of National Defence and its experts will reconsider their decision, and that the shipbuilding program will be resumed. Even if they are not nuclear -propelled, the ships could easily be converted later on, at no great cost, according to the experts.
In the last few days, the future of our shipyards has become grimmer still. In fact, on Wednesday May 21, the hon. Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees), in a statement made in this house, announced that the registration of eight ships of the Canadian National Steamships Limited had been transferred from Trinidad to Canada, and that they would shortly be put up for sale through advertisements in the press.
Needless to say, this announcement by the Minister of Transport caused much concern and disappointment among shipyard owners and employees. Indeed, these people, who relied on statements made by prominent representatives of the Conservative party, had been looking forward to a revival of the merchant navy now that the party has been returned to power.
Who does not recall, Mr. Speaker-especially those who have been here for several years-the promises made by the present Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green), at the time when he was accusing the previous government of having scuttled our merchant navy and was clamouring for its rebuilding? One may read on pages 7410 and 7411 of the Hansard report dated August 10, 1956 that he made the following statement in this house:
I do urge in all earnestness that the government delay no longer in adopting a policy which will put a Canadian flag deep sea fleet into being again.
And further on he said:
Canada is now in a position where she could have a modern merchant navy, and it is far more important to us now than it has ever been, particularly because of the development of the St. Lawrence seaway.
I do urge upon the minister not to be satisfied with the program he announced tonight as the great cure-all. This is only a stop-gap. I would ask him to see that his colleagues in the cabinet approve a policy which will favour the reappearance of a Canadian flag deep sea fleet.
A little later-and on a date which is not so very remote-i.e. on January 21, 1957, as appears on page 443 of Hansard, the minister said the following words:

On these four questions, the joint development of power projects, re-establishing the Canadian deep sea fleet, legislation for veterans and welfare legislation, the government as yet is offering no leadership. On these questions the speech from the throne is just one big blank.
And farther on he said:
I suggest that the government bestir itself and deal with these problems. There is no reason why these and other problems should be shelved. They should be dealt with this spring, and I can assure you-
And these are remarkable words, Mr. Speaker.
-that if they are not the new government which will take over this fall will deal with them promptly and effectively.
Besides, he was not the only one to call for a Canadian merchant navy, for if you read pages 7412 and 7413 of the official record for August 10, 1956, you will see that the hon. member for Saint John-Albert (Mr. Bell), who represents a riding extremely interested in shipbuilding and repair, approved the remarks and wishes of his colleague.
As reported in the Winnipeg Free Press of November 13, 1957, the hon. Minister of Transport himself stated the following, in March 1955, before the Conservative women's Primrose club in Vancouver. I quote:
(Text):
In March 1955, Mr. Hees himself told a meeting of the Primrose Women's Conservative Club in Vancouver that ''do-nothing" policies of the Liberal government were "destroying" Canada's merchant marine. Mr. Hees said then, that the federal government should adopt a policy of developing and maintaining a strong nucleus of at least 50 oceangoing ships for foreign trade and to protect the country's supply lines in the event of a war.
(Translation):
As you can see from those statements, Mr. Speaker, our shipyard owners and employees were right when they were looking forward to a new era of prosperity, through the creation of the merchant navy so often promised by our friends opposite.
I am very sorry for their sake that their dream should have been shattered so soon. This serves to show up the Conservative party's swift about-face in this matter, as on many others. Indeed we now realize that when a party has to face reality and is itself responsible for solving problems, it does not always find it easy to solve them to everyone's satisfaction. As is often said among our people, Mr. Speaker, criticism is easy but art is difficult.
I trust however that the government will find some way to help that important industry survive and remain prosperous-and I

emphasize the word because our yards have been very active since the end of the last war-and I hope they will remain as prosperous as they were under a Liberal administration.
Mr. Speaker, the other matter which I would like to bring to the attention of the government, and more particularly to that of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) concerns railway employees.
For some time now many of these men have been living in uncertainty and fear following a series of lay-offs. They are wondering whether, in spite of their record of service of ten, twelve, fifteen or even eighteen years, they will not themselves be the next victims of these lay-offs in the very near future. For instance last fall, in the Levis division of my own constituency, thirty sections out of eighty were eliminated, adding forty people to the already long list of jobless.
At that time the hon. member for Mont-magny-L'Islet (Mr. Lesage) and myself drew the matter to the attention of the Minister of Transport. After taking it up with the Canadian National Railways authorities the minister answered that nothing could be done. His answer, Mr. Speaker, I must admit, was in strange contrast to the speeches he made when he sat in opposition. It was in 1955, in Moncton, I think, that he stated that these layoffs were regrettable and quite unnecessary.
I must add that I feel particularly sorry for those railwaymen who lose their jobs. More than any other class of workers they find rehabilitation difficult and have a hard time finding new jobs in other industries. Having worked as specialists for years, they cannot easily obtain the same type of employment in other industries.
To be perfectly fair, Mr. Speaker, I will admit that technological changes, changes due to automation, are largely responsible for these lay-offs. On the other hand I do believe that the Minister of Transport, in co-operation with the management of the Canadian National Railways, could devise some way of keeping these men on the job.
One way in which it might be done would be for the railways to undertake themselves much of the work they farm out to private enterprise.
The time has come also, in my opinion, to implement the suggestion made by the leader of the Liberal party in favour of the immediate establishment of a National Advisory Board on Economic Development and Automation, made up of representatives of the labour, industry, agriculture and universities.
One of the essential functions of the board would be to study long term measures to
The Address-Mr. Bourget guarantee a high level of employment and to soften the impact of automation on labour, by developing rehabilitation programs to ensure a greater mobility of our labour force as well as by recommending other necessary steps.
Secondly, the board would be asked to set long term programs of investment and development to promote the continuing expansion of the Canadian economy and the maintenance of full employment.
Mr. Speaker, I humbly make this suggestion to the government for the sole purpose of being useful to my fellow-citizens.
The last point I wish to deal with today is the one which, to my mind, presents the most difficult problem at this time, namely unemployment. I do not want to speak at length on this subject because several of my colleagues have already done so. However, I should like to say a few words about it. Everybody regrets that, in a country as rich as Canada, there should still be at this time of the year more than half a million unemployed. The fine promises made by the Prime Minister and the members of his government, as well as the announcement of this famous special public works program have not solved the problem.
With respect to this special public works program, I must say, Mr. Speaker, that as far as the area of Quebec city is concerned, our unemployed have not been favoured, nor spoiled, because I had occasion to look at the estimates after they were tabled and I found no special project for the Quebec city area. I expected to find a certain amount of money earmarked for the building of a post office in Quebec city but I saw nothing for that purpose. Be that as it may, we shall have occasion to deal with this matter, because in the estimates which were tabled recently I saw no special project other than ordinary public works which were also carried out by the former administration. Like everybody I believe that it is not enough to be content with vague promises but that it is important to act and try to find the solutions required to improve the situation.
With this in mind, I should like to make another suggestion to the government.
A few days ago, when I took part in the debate on the amendments to the National Housing Act of 1954, I suggested that the government, with the co-operation of provincial governments, set up a municipal loans fund so as to make long term loans available for financing important municipal improvements.

The Address-Mr. Bourget
It is well known that many municipalities are delaying many works, even urgent ones, because of lack of required funds, or perhaps also because the interest or the cost of the money is too high. Through that fund, money would be more readily available and it would be possible to make an immediate start on municipal projects which have been neglected up to now.
It is easy to see that such a project would create jobs all over Canada. I know from personal experience that, in the province of Quebec, those urgent projects have been put aside because the necessary funds were lacking, or because the interest rate was too high. Well, with such a plan, jobs would be available all over Canada, unemployment would be greaty relieved, and our municipalities and cities would be supplied with the essential services they lacked up to now.
The purpose and the administration of that fund would be established after consultation with the representatives of the provinces and municipalities. This plan would complete, without ever replacing them, the methods currently in use to finance ordinary municipal projects.
Mr. Speaker, even if this suggestion originates from this side of the house, even if it is part of the program outlined by our leader, I hope the government will not consider this as a good reason to reject it. I am convinced it will contribute a great deal to help Canadians again enjoy the prosperity which was theirs under a Liberal administration.


Mr, Jacques Flynn (Quebec South):: Mr. Speaker, having been a regular reader of the official record of the one and only session of the 23rd parliament-probably in anticipation of what could happen to me and what, in fact, did happen on March 31 last-I know how admirably its Speaker presided over its discussions. This is why I was quite happy when the house showed its confidence and its approval on reappointing him to this post. You will be so kind, Sir, as to express to him my most respectful regards.
I was glad also to see you elected Deputy Speaker and chairman of committees. This is not only because we are old friends but also because I know how remarkably intelligent you are and how you are, by nature, admirably suited to the difficult post you now hold.
I would also like to congratulate the members for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafre-niere) and the Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) on the excellent speeches they delivered when moving and seconding the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
I also wish to congratulate most cordially the member for Lotbiniere (Mr. O'Hurley)
(Mr. Bourget.]

and for Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche) on their appointment to the cabinet. They were deserving of the Prime Minister's confidence.
In this house I represent the constituency of Quebec South. This is an entirely urban constituency which includes Champlain ward, the oldest in Quebec, the whole of the old part of the city situated within the walls and including the Citadel, plus that strip bounded on the south by the St. Lawrence river, on the north by St. Jean street and the Ste. Foy road, and extending to the limits of the municipality of Ste. Foy, which takes in the whole of the town of Sillery.
Problems of federal jurisdiction peculiar to this constituency have to do mainly with the improvement of harbour facilities in Quebec city, which are entirely within its limits. This shows how much I rely on the care and sympathy of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees).
I wish again to express here to the people of Quebec South my gratitude for the confidence they have shown me and reiterate my determination to serve them to the best of my ability.
(Text):
In paying a tribute of gratitude to the electors of Quebec South, Mr. Speaker, I wish to mention that 15 per cent of its population is English-speaking. However, the majority of this group understands and speaks French as the majority of the French-speaking group understands and speaks English, which prompted the remark that in my riding we have the best system of simultaneous translation that can be designed. Speaking in English, I wanted it to be known that I am very proud of my one-eighth Irish blood.
You will allow me, Mr. Speaker, to draw the attention of this house to the fact that this summer the city of Quebec will be celebrating its 350th anniversary. I take this occasion to convey to all hon. members and to the population in general an invitation to visit our fair city and take part in the celebration of this important date in our history.
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, the founding of Quebec city is really the starting point of the establishment of Canada. Indeed, Quebec city was the first permanent settlement on our territory. And we owe this feat to one of the finest figures in our history, Samuel de Champlain.
It was in the constituency which I have the honour to represent, at the foot of Cap Diamant, close to what is now the rue du Porche, that Champlain built his Habitation. May I quote this well deserved eulogy of the one who was the true founder of our country:

What was most admired in him was his steadfastness in his undertakings, his firmness in the face of the greatest dangers, an indomitable courage in the face of the most unforeseen setbacks, a warmhearted and unselfish devotion to the country, and a great fund of honour and honesty.
The constituency of Quebec South has one of the longest records of historic events and I could not possibly mention all its monuments and all the gallant actions that were accomplished there.
I will say, however, that it is in that constituency, on the Plains of Abraham, which is now a magnificent public park, that on September 13, 1759, a battle was fought between the armies of Wolfe and Montcalm, which was going to change the course of history in this country. As a matter of fact, it is from that time that French-speaking Canadians and English-speaking Canadians began to learn to live side by side, to become later, through confederation, equal partners for the building of the Canadian nation to which each group wanted to bring the wealth of its own culture.
It therefore seems to me that it is appropriate in this year 1958, to pay a special tribute to the city of Quebec and its founder.
Mr. Speaker, it is the first time since 1887 that there is a majority of Conservative members from Quebec in this house. That is the outstanding fact of the election; it means that the province of Quebec wished to join with the rest of the country to give a great Canadian, the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker), an unprecedented mark of confidence.
To understand the true meaning of the speech from the throne, it is necessary, it seems to me, to study it in the light of the events which happened this last year in this country and in this house.
The speeches delivered by our hon. friends of the official opposition, particularly from our colleagues of Quebec, do not conceal their desire, quite understandable in some ways, to ignore such circumstances. In fact, when they deal with the economic situation, fiscal relations between the central government and the provinces and especially with national unity, no one would suspect that, less than a year ago, they were sitting on the other side of the house.
Yet it is quite true that they were then supporting a government which, through old age and complacency, had become indifferent to the aspirations of the people, which, as was admitted by its leader after its defeat,
The Address-Mr. Flynn was no longer close to the people. That government considered itself infallible and indispensable. Convinced that it had recruited the best minds, it thought that it was impossible for any other party to assume power. It no longer heard anyone, it no longer listened to the provinces, it went its own way.
What have been the consequences of that attitude on the economic situation? For a few years, there had been evident signs of a recession, but because such signs were not accompanied with a drop in the cost of living index, the former government did not see fit to act. By the winter of 1954-55, the number of unemployed had reached serious proportions and during the following winter, the government was warned by some of its advisors that an economic recession was to be expected as a consequence of overproduction in several fields, south of the border, as well as at home. But why worry when events and the electorate had been approving the government for so long, and when luck was on their side?
Such an indifferent attitude is in curious contrast with the horrified concern our hon. friends now display. But most peculiar of all, is that despite the true signs of the slowdown of our economy, the former government showed concern about an increase of the cost of living, and initiated its now famous tight money policy.
Mr. Speaker, as was realized later, this acted as a sedative at a time when a stimulant was required. A remark made at a time by a well known Quebec city industrialist comes to my mind:
This is the first time in the history of the world that a government has willfully started a depression.
To relieve the present unrest, the speech from the throne proposes a series of measures which are going to inject large sums of money into our economy so as to restore its activity. That is why we adopted a measure providing $350 million for housing loans; that is why we are told that a huge amount is to be spent on public works.
But when our friends protest that it is not enough or that it is bad, they forget that, during the single session of the 23rd parliament, other measures were adopted, the benefits of which are now beginning to be felt; they forget that a further sum of $300 million was appropriated for housing loans, that taxes were reduced by $179 million, that old-age pensions, pensions to the blind, to veterans

The Address-Mr. Flynn and their dependents were increased to put considerable money in the hands of the public.
Just as the bad effects of the tight money policy took some time to show, the good effects of all the measures taken by this government to restore economic activity cannot show at once. But already, everything seems to suggest that we can confidently look forward to some improvement soon, thanks to the bold initiatives of the government.
I, for one, prefer to be on the side of optimism, which is an essential factor of prosperity, than on the side of pessimism, which stifles private enterprise.
Now, Mr. Speaker, several of our Liberal colleagues say they are worried about the attitude of the Quebec Conservatives on the question of fiscal relations between the central government and the provinces.
There again, they are forgetting all their past record; they forget-and this is very important-that the problem was created by the former government when, after the war, it refused to give back to the provinces their taxation rights which had been rented from them, while clearly expressing the intention, according to the now famous statement of the former minister of justice, Mr. Garson, to perpetuate the wartime taxation agreements.
Later, our hon. friends had to make some concessions, and the present equalization formula is far from the original agreements, because, when a provincial government makes any direct levy, the taxpayers in such province may deduct from their federal tax a percentage of the provincial charge.
But it is a formula that is not entirely satisfactory. It was forced upon the provinces, the former government having refused to negotiate and stated that the provinces could take it or leave it.
Under such circumstances, and in view of such arrogance, it was normal and natural that anybody believing in fiscal and legislative autonomy for the provinces opposed the previous government, and our friends in the official opposition know but too well that the province of Quebec was not, and is not, the only one to be dissatisfied.
Whatever may be said among the members sitting at the extreme left in this house, the attitude of my party on this matter has always differed from that of the former government. It was never backward in affirming and reaffirming its respect for the constitu-
IMr. Flynn.]

tion. Especially, since coming into office, it has clearly demonstrated that it wishes to negotiate with the provinces as equals so as to arrive with them at a solution of this matter.
Nobody will underestimate the difficulties that lie ahead, because every related problem has to be taken into account.
But it will be admitted that the last people from whom we have to endure compassion or sarcasm are the ones who created and left that problem in the lap of the present government. Those who got us into this mess have no business asking how we will get out of it. In any event we are in a better position than they are to do so.
Besides, federal-provincial relations have considerably improved since June 10, 1957, and the attitude of the present government is most hopeful indeed.
Some of our Liberal colleagues from Quebec have had a great deal to say about national unity. They have claimed that Quebec Conservatives had a philosophy at variance with that of their colleagues in the other provinces.
These remarks are intended to create disunity in our ranks. Such tactics are so obvious that it might be well to say nothing further about them.
However, if certain statements made in this house can be accepted as fair, politics being what they are, others are inexcusable since they are calculated to prejudice national unity for purely electoral purposes.
National unity, or better still understanding and respect between all racial groups, must remain above party politics. It is not the exclusive property of any one of them, no more, incidentally, than patriotism and honesty-including electoral honesty- are the exclusive property of any party. For my part, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the great majority of Canadians, be they Conservatives, Liberals or C.C.Fers, sincerely hope for national unity.
No doubt the election of 50 Quebec Con-*servatives this year favours national unity but this does not mean, in my opinion, that our party is the only one to advocate harmony between all Canadians. In anything that may be related to that good understanding, it is imperative that the members of this house weigh their words, here or elsewhere, in order not to stir up motives of division.

I do not contend that all the Conservatives are without fault; their responsibility in this is the same as the responsibility of our friends in the opposition. In any party, there are extremists. But this does not mean that one can unduly stress such statements for merely electoral purposes if, in the end, national unity must suffer from it.
Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, the Quebec Conservatives are no more different from the Conservatives of other provinces than are Quebec Liberals from their fellow members, and I am convinced that there is unity of thought in our party. The official opposition will come to realize it.
Let not the official opposition worry too much because of the fact that the Conservatives in the province of Quebec have had the support of ministers, members and organizers of the Union Nationale. Let them not worry about that more than about the support they themselves received from the provincial Liberal party.
As for us, the support we received was freely given and freely accepted. We were not dictated any policy nor is there any intention of dictating one to us. We know that ours is a federal mandate, and we are sincerely determined to discharge our responsibilities.
In brief, we are determined to mind our own business, and our Quebec colleagues who like to bring up provincial politics in the house, who have already given a leader to the provincial Liberal party and appear willing to give it another, are certainly not in a position to teach us any lesson in that regard.
Mr. Speaker, the speech from the throne is a substantial one. It deals with the most urgent questions, and that is normal. It does not exhaust the program of the government because it is impossible to implement it all at once.
There is every indication that this session will be a fruitful one. Much will remain to be done. The task taken on by this parliament is a huge one. I am sure that under the enlightened guidance of the Prime Minister, we will manage to give our country a new impetus in the direction of progress, both material and moral, and that is why I am so happy to be here in the house to do my modest share in the achievement of that objective.
The Address-Mr. McWilliam
(Text):


Mr. G. R. McWilliam (Norihumberland-Miramichi):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to join with others in extending congratulations to the house on the selection of the Speaker as the first commoner of this house and this country. I also wish to extend congratulations to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. May I also congratulate you, sir, upon your appointment as Deputy Speaker.
The throne speech made mention of many topics that will eventually come before the House of Commons for deliberation. Until that time comes it is not possible to gain any detailed information as to what is actually proposed. One of these subject matters is a proposed bill of rights which is described as a measure to safeguard the rights of all persons in Canada in respect of all subjects within the jurisdiction of parliament. In what form it will be and to what extent this proposed legislation will go are at this time matters of conjecture among most of the members of this chamber and the people of the country. Its extent will be confined to the limits of federal jurisdiction, something which would mean that little if any improvement will be made in what we now enjoy. It is my understanding that the supreme court will be asked to decide what phases come within the legal rights of the federal government.
It takes more than words printed in a legal document to safeguard all the rights and privileges of our citizens. In every case the spirit of the law is more essential than is the letter of the law. When one compares the situation in Canada with that in other free countries, including our great neighbour to the south, it will be found that Canadians have enjoyed rights and privileges to a higher degree even without a bill of rights down through the years. Rights and privileges will prevail only where there is a spirit of fair play, recognition and tolerance, without which a bill of rights would be meaningless.
On the international front the general policy of the present government is the same as that of the former government. It is the fervent hope and desire of all Canadians that Canada's effort toward world peace, in cooperation with other peace-loving nations, will bring the world closer to that desired state.

The Address-Mr. McWilliam
Despite all the moneys made available for housing over the years the Miramichi area of New Brunswick has derived little benefit from government loans owing to the fact that money lending institutions do not look favourably on making investments in that area.
Part of the loans for housing made available by the government should be earmarked for areas like Northumberland county in order to ensure an equitable distribution of public funds for housing. The excuse is offered that municipalities and towns do not do enough promotional work. I feel that is not a very sound attitude. After all towns and municipalities are not in the home construction business. By setting aside a part of the available loans to designated areas, home building to a greater degree would be assured in the less favourable investment areas. Encouragement and assistance should be given those interested who are striving to promote construction of homes in these areas.
It is not my intention to make extended remarks about the unemployment situation and the confusion that arises over figures released by the bureau of statistics and the unemployment insurance commission. However, before I conclude my remarks I will make an appeal to the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Pearkes) to find alternate employment for civilian personnel of Renous naval depot whose services will be terminated on Saturday next. The public across Canada is looking for concrete action from the government for an improvement in the unemployment situation, one that will be beneficial to rural constituencies.
In New Brunswick the wood products industry and the mining industry are at low ebbs. In fact the Heath steel mines in Northumberland-Miramichi and Brunswick Mining and Smelting Company in Gloucester have suspended operations and the machinery is being placed in mothballs. Curtailed pit-wood orders this year and the falling off of the United Kingdom market for long lumber, with future prospects very dim, are matters causing grave concern in the Miramichi and other areas in the maritimes whose economy depends upon the lumber industry.
This situation has an adverse effect on woods work, mining and exploration activities and longshore work with a resultant drop in retail trade. An improvement in woods operation industry is imperative for the future economy of Northumberland-Miramichi.


May I say a few words about the proposed development outlined in the throne speech for Canada's northland and for the construction of the South Saskatchewan dam. These projects will be financed with moneys from the federal treasury. Desirable as it may be to provide these facilities in other parts of the country, the senior members of confederation should receive the same treatment. I imagine the maritime provinces were disappointed that no mention was made in the speech from the throne of the construction of the Chignecto canal or the New Brunswick-Prince Edward Island causeway. These projects are essential to our maritime economy. The Chignecto canal has been promised ever since confederation, before there were any western provinces or northlands under federal jurisdiction. The causeway between New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island should be promoted at an accelerated pace and the Chignecto canal project survey should be undertaken now.
The action of the Department of National Defence in connection with the lay-off of civilian employees at the naval ammunition depot at Renous is regrettable. These layoffs become effective May 31 and the action is regrettable because the lay-offs are permanent and there is no hope of other employment in the local labour field.
During the month of March reliable reports indicated that the lay-offs would take place not later than April 30. Protests brought about a deferment but in previous years when this same situation arose and when appeals were made lay-off orders were rescinded on account of the general employment situation. During the election campaign the Conservative candidate and his speakers gave assurance that no lay-offs would take place on April 30 or in the future, and attempts were made to lead those concerned into thinking that the rumour of proposed lay-offs was Liberal propaganda, despite the fact that this serious matter was not raised or discussed by Liberals as a campaign issue.
The reason given for these lay-offs, or 1 should say the permanent doing away with certain positions and work classifications, by the Department of National Defence was that the department must maintain a continuing review of the size of its staff in relation tc work loads. Does this mean that further lay-offs will be made at Renous in the near future? Will lay-offs of civilian personnel be

made at the other two national defence establishments at Chatham and St. Margarets?
The department advised the national defence employees' association of Renous on May 2 that a committee was working on the problem in an attempt to re-locate the employees involved in other suitable employment. What results the committee will bring about remain to be seen. With unemployment at a high peak in this area it is doubtful if these employees will be re-located in employment of any kind. Previous correspondence on the matter from the Minister of National Defence led the Renous federal union executive to believe that alternate employment would be provided before the personnel involved would sever their connections with the ammunition depot. The present unemployment situation and the future prospects in this area are very dim.
Mr. R. J. Martin, the provincial Conservative member for Northumberland, when speaking at a meeting in Chatham on May 12 is reported as follows:
Mr. Martin stated that there should certainly be no lay-offs and that every effort be made by the people concerned to drive home to the federal government the unemployment picture here.
Mr. Martin's remarks on the Renous depot situation were, I would judge, well received by the meeting, but they are hard to reconcile with his provincial government colleagues' statements that unemployment is only a temporary pause, only a seasonal unemployment situation. When Liberals spoke about unemployment both at Fredericton and Ottawa they were accused by the Conservatives of spreading doom and gloom. Do Mr. Martin's colleagues think he is spreading doom and gloom? Do the people of Northumberland-Miramichi think the unemployment situation should be driven home to Premier Flemming and his cabinet, who also have a responsibility in this unemployment situation?
The figures given by an official of the local office of the unemployment insurance commission at this meeting of May 12 were as follows:
Four thousand one hundred and fifty registered as unemployed out of a working force of twelve thousand-approximately 29 per cent of the registered working force unemployed. There are many others unemployed who are not registered.
Is this the situation that condones reductions in personnel by a government department with a promise of alternate employment. The municipal council, the town councils and the boards of trade of Chatham and Newcastle and the Legion branches, all of whom made representations in addition to the general public, feel that the personnel dismissed from the
The Address-Mr. McWilliam Renous ammunition depot-many of them overseas veterans-have been dealt with unfairly. Alternate employment should have been provided before dismissal instead of adding these men to the overflowing ranks of the unemployed. I appeal to the Minister of National Defence to reconsider the department's action and to retain these men on their jobs until they can be placed in some other suitable employment.
I now turn to a matter which is causing much concern to the geological association of Canada. With the closing down of mining and exploration across our country, this is forcing many geologists and mining engineers to seek employment in other fields and there is a grave danger that these specialists, with their wide experience and knowledge, will be lost for all time to the mining industry. As a result, in later years the development of our mineral resources will suffer. It is my understanding that this association will make representations to the government and I appeal for every consideration to be given to finding a solution that will offset a serious loss and a threat to the future development of our mineral resources.
I wish to make a further appeal to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees), and I am glad he has just entered the chamber and has taken his seat, in connection with the telephone service-I should say the inadequate service-provided by his department for the people residing between Black River Bridge and Escuminac, on the south shore of Miramichi river and bay. The minister is familiar with the circumstances and I am sure realizes the great handicap here. I trust his department will without further delay provide adequate telephone service for this area and, in fairness, I must say I think the minister has been most co-operative with me in respect to my efforts and representations to him. I trust that with his officials something can be worked out to provide a better service.
The paragraph in the speech from the throne in connection with proposed assistance for small business has created wide interest. The paragraph reads:
In order to assist small business, there will be established a small business section within the administrative machinery of government. The functions of this organization will be to provide liaison between the government and small businesses and to study the problems of small business and to advise on measures necessary to meet them.
As hon. members will see, the paragraph makes it clear that the function of the small business section of government will be to provide liaison between the government and small businesses to study the problems and advise on measures to meet them.

The Address-Mr. Rapp
Most provincial governments have departments of government which carry out this function to varied degrees. In most cases the problems of small businesses can be boiled down to financial problems. The interest costs on capital funds in many cases exceeds the operational profits. What small business needs is a source of credit at interest rates that will enable it to get firmly established within a reasonable time.
Much can be done to assist our economy and encourage small business by providing financial assistance to small businesses at rates which will make it possible for them to survive, operate at a profit and ensure permanent employment. A credit bank for small business providing credit as is now provided for large business concerns through the development bank would serve such a purpose.
There are many other matters in the speech from the throne debate, all of which have been discussed in this debate by speakers of all parties. We look forward to the time when the matters referred to in the speech from the throne are presented here in legislative form so that hon. members may have the opportunity to discuss them in greater detail.


Mr. Reynold Rapp (Humboldt-Melfort):: Mr. Speaker, may I take this opportunity on my first occasion of rising here in this chamber to congratulate you on your election to your present high office. It gave me a great deal of satisfaction to know that the hon. gentleman to whom I was first introduced upon my arrival in our parliamentary buildings was none other than Your Honour. It gave me a great deal of pleasure and comfort to listen to your very friendly words of encouragement. That, of course, was three weeks ago and today, on the occasion of making my maiden speech, I am in the same shaky position as I was then; I hope your friendly understanding will work the same magic now as it did on that occasion. Before going on to deal with other matters, I should like to associate myself with all those who have congratulated the Deputy Speaker. I should like, further, to extend my congratulations to the mover and seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne on their contributions to the debate.
When I arrived here in Ottawa for the first time and walked across from Union station to Parliament Hill I was all eyes, and my heart was filled with emotion when I saw the graceful parliament buildings, the statues and the other historic sights. The first statue that I walked up to was that of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, the great French-Canadian statesman, and as I looked up I could almost see


a twinkle in his eyes. I thought I could hear him say these words: "What are you, a little immigrant of just 29 years residence, here in Ottawa for? Didn't I hear you say that all you wanted from life was to come to Canada and make a home for yourself and your family? I thought you were very content when Canada had given you this opportunity and your life's ambition was achieved, but now I see you are here as the new member for Humboldt-Melfort to represent this great constituency in the 24th parliament. As this is the case, go on then, and do the job assigned to you for the glory of Canada and your constituency." These are the words I thought I heard this great statesman say to me, and as I walked slowly away a vision appeared before my eyes depicting the last 29 years spent in this wonderful country of my adoption.
However, I had walked only a few steps before I reached the statue of another great Canadian statesman, Sir John A. Macdonald, the father of confederation, who was so instrumental in uniting two great races and two great cultures into this united Canada of ours. This great statesman's wisdom and foresight made Canada a land which many millions of people outside her borders desired to enter so that they might establish homes for themselves and for their families in a country where there are no racial prejudices and where freedom of speech and freedom of religion are no idle words-in a Canada where you are given the right to work, prosper and shape your own destiny without interference, state control or state supervision. One can only understand and evaluate the meaning of these God-given rights and privileges if one has never had them, or, if at one time or another during one's lifetime, one has been deprived of them. And as I stood before this statue, as a new member of parliament, I made a solemn pledge to safeguard the virtues and to preserve these high principles which are the pillars upon which our democratic system stands, to preserve them, use them and safeguard them until the time arrives to pass them on in all their purity and greatness to those who follow us. This, I felt, was part of my most noble task here in the 24th parliament of Canada, and I know this view will be shared not only by the new members but by all the senior members of this house also.
At this time I should like to associate myself with my fellow members and congratulate the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) on the overwhelming victory our party achieved under his leadership and on the confidence the people of Canada showed in him on March 31. My heartiest congratulations go

also to the ministers of the cabinet, to members of our party both senior and junior, and to all hon. members of either parties, too, who are here to serve Canada in whatever capacity they may be called upon to do so. We who are conscious of the merits of our democratic system will appreciate very much their constructive contributions so that we can all serve the Canadian people in this parliament to the best of our ability.
I have the honour to represent the constituency of Humboldt-Melfort which is located in the northeastern part of the province of Saskatchewan. It is an agricultural district and predominantly a grain-growing area although livestock raising has increased considerably during the last few years. It is one of the better farming districts in our province. The population of my constituency consists of people of many national and racial extractions such as Anglo-Saxon, French, German, Scandinavian, Russian, Ukrainian and many others. There are no cities within the boundaries of my constituency but there are four larger towns and a number of smaller towns and villages which provide the citizens of the area with all the required services.
We have one agricultural experimental station and through their research and experiments with different grain varieties, grass seeds and livestock breeding they have given the farmers of Humboldt-Melfort many useful and beneficial services of which they have continuously availed themselves. There is a senior citizens' home in Melfort and another will be opened shortly in Tisdale, and there are a number of hospitals some of them very modern in design. We have not very many paved highways but the proposed second trans-Canada highway, if proceeded with, will pass through some sections of the Humboldt-Melfort constituency. The citizens of my riding will appreciate this undertaking very greatly and are looking forward to its inception.
I took notice with a great deal of satisfaction of that part of the speech from the throne where mention was made of amendments to the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. Although in the past this act gave assistance to many farmers who needed it western agriculturists felt it never went far enough to cover those farmers who had their land under water from the spring run-off or inundated through an abundance of rainfall during the summer. This flooding took on devasting proportions for about four or five years and its effects were ruinous for many farmers. I now wish to bring it to the attention of this house that the proposed amendments to the P.F.A.A. mentioned in the throne speech should contain a definite provision to
The Address-Mr. Rapp cover and classify the flooding of farms, if on a large scale, as a natural hazard and, if larger areas are under water, as disaster areas.
Our agricultural industry in the west is becoming a highly machanized industry and it takes a skilful person to operate some of the implements and machinery on the farm these days. It is difficult to secure skilful farm labourers and there is a reason for this situation. First, the farm labourer is a seasonal worker and in the fall when all the work is finished he must seek employment elsewhere. In years past when winter employment was readily available the changeover was not so complicated and he did not suffer financial loss as a result of this but now in many cases he is left unemployed and still he cannot obtain unemployment benefits or payments because he has not contributed to the unemployment insurance fund. Other seasonal workers such as fishermen are contributing to the unemployment insurance fund and are entitled to unemployment assistance. Why,# then, the discrimination against the seasonal farm labourer? I would like to bring the matter to the attention of the house and suggest that early consideration be given to the plight of the seasonal farm labourer. I noted with pleasure the remarks of the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) to the effect that studies and research have been conducted by his department concerning the seasonal farm labourer and how to bring him under the terms of the Unemployment Insurance Act. Such a measure would indeed be welcomed.
As I mentioned earlier in my remarks my district is predominantly a grain-growing one and as a grain grower myself I am well aware of their plight and I recognize that the cost-price squeeze for them is growing worse and becoming unbearable. We western grain growers are not a group of people who like to be a burden to our government. We do not like to be subsidized or bonus-supported farmers but we would like to obtain the same protection from the government as other industries in our country are receiving for their products and manufactured goods all of which are protected by tariffs and subsidies. We are supplying our domestic market with high quality bread milled from the best wheat in the world but we must accept the export price that our good customers overseas are establishing for us. In contrast to this, there is not a piece of machinery or any other necessity that we farmers must buy in order to produce our grain that does not come to us with a set manufacturer's price tag on it. Why should there be discrimination against

The Address-Mr. Rapp the wheat-growing industry? This matter too must be given fair and just consideration by all hon. members of the house, whether the solution be a deficiency payment for our grain by taking into consideration the cost of production, or a two-way price system, that is to say one price for the farmer's wheat that is sold in the domestic market and another price for wheat sold in the export market. It, of course, should be left to the discretion of hon. members of this house which of the two is the most workable and just system which could be applied for the solution of this urgent problem which must receive early consideration. The plight of our western farmers must be alleviated. I have in mind in particular the younger farmers and those who were established through the Department of Veterans Affairs under the provisions of the Veterans Land Act. They are the ones who are feeling the brunt of the price squeeze much more than the older established farmer. If for no other reason than this action must be taken and I appeal to the house on their behalf.	[DOT]
I wish now to deal with the subject of education concerning which much has been said both in this house and elsewhere. I do not agree with many who are of the opinion that our educational system is outmoded and greatly inferior to that in the United States, Europe or elsewhere. What is wrong is that many who have the ability and willingness to apply themselves to obtain higher education cannot, owing to the lack of financial means, avail themselves of the opportunity to do so. Although much has been done by our governments in this regard through the means of grants, scholarships, et cetera, much more needs to be done to assist worthy students to further their education. The greatest investment in our future generation is to give them the best education this country can offer.
Mr. Speaker, I would now like to express my sincere gratitude to you for the time given me, and to hon. members of this house for their attention and if in future days I am given another opportunity to speak on behalf of my constituents of Humbolt-Mel-fort I will be most appreciative. My constituents have sent me to Ottawa as their representative in this new parliament with many instructions and constructive suggestions. It is my duty to bring these before hon. members of this house and by so doing we then can draft and implement policies that will serve the needs of my constituents and those of the people of Canada. This I will endeavour to do.

(Translation):


Mr. Augustin Brassard (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, my first words will be to say how glad we are that you were returned to the chair of this distinguished house. I have had the honour and the privilege of seeing you exercising your duties in the last parliament and, like all those who were here, I had occasion to appreciate your amazing knowledge of parliamentary procedure and your sense of justice, as well as your impartiality.
In another regard, as a Canadian, you may rightly be given as an example to all those- and they are many-who, in our country, uphold the cause of good and mutual understanding between the various elements which make up our nation. Your behaviour on this point is made all the more eloquent because your statements, or rather your deeds, prove in no uncertain way the sincerity of your words. You and your worthy and charming wife have made several stays in the old capital to take summer courses in the French language at Laval university. Your three children have studied in convents of the province of Quebec. Mrs. Michener even published an essay on the French philosopher Jacques Maritain. You are yourself an officer of the Visites Interprovinciales and one of the founders of the Alliance Canadienne, two groups dedicated to the task of promoting, through more frequent meetings, even more friendly relations between the representatives of the two main racial groups in our country. And, as pointed out to the house recently by the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier), you have agreed to become a patron of honour of the group devoting itself to the establishment of a bilingual secondary school in Toronto. Your behaviour, Mr. Speaker, is a refreshing contrast, to say the least, to a certain statement which was once heard in this house.
(Text):
I feel I would be remiss in my duty if I did not extend sincere congratulations to the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) on his outstanding victory last election. From the outset of his political life, notwithstanding certain defeats when running for public office, he has continued to show that tenacity of purpose which has helped to place him in the position of the Prime Minister of Canada.
We must recall that he had an excellent opportunity from the time of his election as leader of his party in December, 1956, until June 10, 1957 to have a full six months to do political campaigning inside and outside of the house. His party did not obtain the complete confidence of the people of Canada

in that election, but notwithstanding that, the resignation of the former prime minister, the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent, afforded his party a further period of nine months to mend its political fences. I must say that this period of time is not always presented to a leader of the opposition.
I wish to emphasize to the Prime Minister that he must continue with the tenacity of purpose and exert every effort to do what should be done for the best interest of all Canadians. In particular, the youth of our great nation need an example of leadership and tenacity by the first citizen of our country, and they look for those qualities in the Prime Minister, not as a politician but as a man. I am sure that he will continue to show the qualities which provide a good example to the coming generation. However, I do not wish these sincere words of mine to be misinterpreted by the Prime Minister to mean that he and I will agree on political principals on a common ground. I am as convinced in my political faith in the Liberal party as he is himself in his own party. I intend to reiterate more than once during the course of this session and throughout the lifetime of this parliament how strongly I oppose his political approach in many fields.
(Translation):
While I am still in a congratulatory vein, I wish to express my appreciation to the mover and seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne, the hon. members for Quebec-Montmorency and Yukon (Mr. Lafreniere and Mr. Nielsen), who showed themselves worthy of the honour conferred upon them by the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) in entrusting them with that task. I also congratulate the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) for his appointment as Deputy Speaker of the house, and I wish him every success in the discharge of his high functions. My congratulations also to the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Rea). And, above all, I wish to mention the two new ministers from Quebec, to whom I want to express my best wishes. During the last election campaign, the Prime Minister had asked us, in Quebec, to send him so many members that he would be embarrassed in choosing among them. Quebec showed great generosity by sending 50 members. Judging from the time the Prime Minister had to take in selecting Quebec representatives for his cabinet, we must conclude that he was indeed embarrassed!
And to close this congratulatory chapter, although I have not been myself sitting very long in this house, I want to wish every success to the new members elected on March 31 last.
The Address-Mr. A. Brassard
Mr. Speaker, on May 1, 1957, I resigned my job in the office of the Minister of Transport to become a candidate at the convention which elected the Liberal candidate for the constituency of Lapointe for the June 10 election. I held that position for about three years, and I wish to tell the house how much I appreciated and admired the ability, the devotion and the sense of duty of all the division supervisors and employees of the department whom I have so often dealt with. May I add that I took great pleasure in my relations with the officers of the many boards, commissions and crown corporations responsible to the Minister of Transport. Finally, 1 wish to express my thanks to the members of the minister's office. Their devotion was always unfailing and their temper was such as to lighten the load on every one of us. I hope that the new minister has not yet managed to spoil this state of affairs.
As for my former employer, the hon. George Marler, I hope I will not be imposing on his modesty when I say that I would like to express publicly my gratitude to him. I experience, in this connection, a little of the filial gratitude the pupil feels towards his master. I can think of no better school to enrol in than that which is provided by close relationship with such a man as he. There is no better way of learning to work steadily and systematically, of learning to devote oneself to the service of one's fellow-citizens, to be at once broadminded and far-sighted, to want to see a job well done, of learning to be a gentleman, in short of learning to be a man in every sense of the word. No one could fail to want to improve and to raise his standards by working side by side with him. All too often unfortunately, the wisdom of the pupil is far removed from that of the master. Being no exception to that rule, I am the first to realize this and to deplore the fact.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The pupil is pretty good too.


Augustin Brassard: I am convinced that all those who know him and who have seen him at work, either in Quebec or in this house, will feel his loss very keenly. This is no reflection on the hon. member for St. Antoine-Westmount (Mr. Webster) who must not be altogether devoid of merit since he has managed to get elected. Mr. Marler's contribution to the debates of this house would have been far more useful and far more intelligent than that of yours truly, especially in the present position of the Liberal party here. The fates have willed otherwise. This may however make it possible for him as well as for his charming wife to enjoy life for a few years, a very legitimate pleasure which has been largely denied them for almost twenty years.

The Address-Mr. A. Brassard
The constituency of Lapointe, which I have the honour of representing, Mr. Speaker, is a young constituency. It is situated in that part of the province of Quebec called by some the Kingdom of the Saguenay, by others, the Lake St. John area and by others still the Saguenay-Lake St. John region. It includes the cities of Jonquiere, Kenogami, Arvida, as well as several other surrounding municipalities, together with Chute-des-Passes, almost 200 miles from Jonquiere, where in September 1956, construction work was begun on an underground power plant of a one million h.p. capacity. The cost of the project is [DOT]estimated at about 150 million dollars and the Aluminum Company of Canada Ltd is the one undertaking this project which will .surely rank among the marvels of the genius of man. The Price Brothers mills are in Jonquiere and Kenogami, while those of the Aluminum Company of Canada Ltd are in Arvida. The population of the constituency of Lapointe is therefore largely made up of workers, to which must be added a large farm population.
The constituency was represented for the first time, from 1949, by the devoted notary Mr. Jules Gauthier, a Liberal, who a few months before the 1953 elections decided not to run for re-election in order to be able to spend more time in the practice of his profession. Among the main achievements to which !he devoted much of his time, there are the federal buildings in Jonquiere and Arvida. Mr. Gauthier was painfully struck by the recent death of his wife and I wish to repeat to him here how I sympathize with him in his bereavement. From 1953 to 1957, the -constituency of Lapointe was represented by Mr. Fernand Girard, an independent. Mr. Girard was one of those mainly responsible for the coming of the reverend Oblate fathers in Jonquiere where they have opened a classical day college which is a great honour to the community and of which, not only Jonquiere and the constituency, but the whole area is proud.
Mr. Speaker, may I now express my deepest gratitude to the electors of my constituency who saw fit to re-elect me to this house. I was greatly flattered by their decision, especially when I consider I am the only Liberal member of the four constituencies of my area. The results might have been different had more ministers come to my constituency to try and convince the electors to vote against me. This may or


may not be an invitation to do so at the next election! But I am in no way referring to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees).
I must say that my Conservative opponent put up a good fight. I also had the great honour and pleasure of having as my opponent the provincial leader of the Social Democratic party in the federal election. In case my hon. friends to the immediate left of Mr. Speaker do not know about it, the phrase "parti social democrate" is the Quebec version, I was going to say a literary translation, but it is rather almost a literal translation of the phrase "Co-operative Commonwealth Federation". If the universities decide some day to award diplomas for demagogic vocabulary, I am sure that one of the first men to receive one will be the provincial leader of the C.C.F. party in Quebec. I hope however that great care will be taken that such a diploma is not awarded "honoris causa".
I was very much interested in hearing the leader of the C.C.F. party reading in this house, on May 13, part of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Regina of 1933, as recorded on page 44 of the debates official report. This was a confirmation of what I had said during the election campaign.
I feel all the more indebted to our workers who could have allowed themselves to be deceived by the mean exploitation of their misery at a time when unemployment has struck, in my riding, harder than ever before for the past few months. The Arvida factory workers especially, among whom my late father worked for several years, have suffered more than others because, last year, they had to bear, for more than four months, the hardships of a strike which seemed endless. Many workers wondered, and are still wondering, whether the strike could not have been settled in the office of the hon. minister of labour of Quebec, who, for almost five weeks, showed the greatest consideration for the representatives of union as well as for those of the Aluminum Company.
Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, I wish to pay tribute in this house to these gallant workers of the Aluminum Company who have given to the labouring class of the whole country, in these difficult times for them and their families, the most impressive example of discipline towards their union leaders. It is very seldom that we witness such a frank co-operation and friendly comprehension be-

tween the workers, the tradesmen in general, the owners, the municipal authorities and school boards as well as the professional classes. In a word, everyone joined hands to support those who for four months were without a means of livelihood and I repeat, Mr. Speaker, that we very seldom see such an example of brotherly co-operation among our population.
Today, many problems confront the population of my constituency and of my whole district. I do not hesitate to say the most acute problem, the one which requires an immediate solution, is obviously the problem of unemployment.
I do not claim that the government is entirely responsible for that deplorable situation. It is not by passing the buck that we shall solve the problem. What no one can deny is that in my district, as everywhere else in this country, unemployment has reached alarming proportions; what nobody can deny is that the government has the responsibility of taking steps without further delay. The Canadian National has dismissed a great number of its employees in my area. Some of them had 12, 15 and 17 years of service. These are questions which I propose to deal with in detail on the budget debate in this session, together with the ever growing requests in favour of an increase in family allowances, the implementation of the health insurance plan, the assistance to our municipalities by means of loans as well as the payment of subsidies to our universities.
(Text):
I regret that the time at my disposal will not permit me to speak at length on the many important subjects of interest to me and my constituents. I must, therefore, limit my remarks to the vital topic of trade and to the so-called trade policy of the government. In order to deal with this matter from the beginning, we should remember that the Prime Minister when he was leader of the opposition spoke feelingly of the imbalance of trade between Canada and our neighbour to the south. In the election campaign of 1957 this was a major platform of his party.
Immediately after becoming Prime Minister and on his return from the commonwealth conference he trumpeted to the newspapers of Canada that we would have to divert 15 per cent of our imports from the United States to the United Kingdom. He stated recently outside of the house that the newspapers had misinterpreted the meaning of his statements to the press. This is rather astonishing to me because it seems to be a rare occasion of misinterpretation by the 57071-3-31
The Address-Mr. A. Brassard press when we recall that there were no words of criticism about how well and how often he had been correctly quoted during the last election campaign. In any event, the Prime Minister surely cannot deny in the house that he has stated publicly on numerous occasions that we must reduce our imports from the United States. At no time, however, has he given the slightest inkling of the manner, the method or the products involved whereby this could be accomplished.
I am sure the Prime Minister will agree that this diversion will have serious effects on part of the economy of our country and that it has already had some effect on certain Canadian industries and businesses. By his action with regard to the subject of trade the Prime Minister has not proven himself to be a serious statesman. He should, I submit very humbly, have kept in mind the real need in the western world today to retain our good relations, but it seems that he did not give serious concern to our friendship with the United States before making these statements.
We all agree that the matter of trade is most serious to our country. I believe, however, that the Prime Minister would have been better advised if, rather than making his approach by talking about United States trade and diversion to the United Kingdom, he had given more serious consideration to retaining the trade channels we then enjoyed and at the same time not aiming for trade solely with Britain but seeking new trade outlets which would be advantageous to Canadians.
In order to maintain a favourable balance of trade with all of our customers, as we enjoyed under the previous Liberal government, there is some need for the Prime Minister to take action. But such action should not have been in the hasty manner of the Prime Minister, it should have been taken after serious and careful reflection and consideration, particularly with a view to avoiding the undermining of our good relations with any other country.
In my view, by making these hasty and ambiguous statements for publication our country was left in a position for retaliation by the United States. The Prime Minister did not, and does not even now, give us any firm plan of operation. On the other hand, the United States within a very short time put into effect what we may consider as a retaliatory measure, namely a serious reduction in the import of crude oil. In fact, the reduction took place the day it was announced. This 15 per cent reduction in the amount of our export of crude oil amounts to approximately 72,000 barrels per day. It does have a far greater effect on our population of 17 million persons, than a reduction of 15 per

The Address-Mr. A. Brassard cent would have on the population of about 170 million in the United States.
Let us look at the logic of the Conservative government. In the field of trade and commerce they make unfriendly statements and arouse ill feeling and, on the other hand, in the military field they seem to want to bend over backwards in an effort to co-operate. For example, an American is the commanding officer for the unified defence of Canada, United States and Alaska. It is evident that our continental defence requires the closest co-operation between our two countries. Why, on the other hand, do we salute them by a kiss on the both cheeks and on the other hand give them the boot?
I do not hestitate to say that the Conservative government has not acted in the best interests of Canada in the field of trade. As an example, of what use would it be to purchase more goods in England when they would continue to buy from countries other than ours? The cost of production in England is much lower than ours because, as one example, the wages and the standard of living of our workers are much higher. What will happen if we import from the United Kingdom large quantities of their products? There will be a continuation in a larger form of what has been happening in Canada for the last few months. Our manufacturers will be seriously concerned about the government's continued and future policy on trade, and will have to stockpile because of the lack of sufficient markets in which to sell their goods. We all know that in business a company can continue to thrive only so long as the flow of production is kept going by consistent and steady buying. If this flow is cut off, even to a limited degree, lay-offs of our workers is eventual.
I am not afraid to say that in my view the lack of foresight, the instability and also the lack of a definite trade policy by the present government did not in any way give assurance to our people for a continued expansion of trade or full employment. The Canadian people, by their vote in the recent general election, have indicated that we should now have more stability in government. However, if the government persists in following the obstinate, vague policy of trade as has been expressed, I am much afraid that our figures of the number of unemployed in this country will continue to astonish us.
I wish now to deal briefly with the subject of trade relating to the United Kingdom. Over the years Canada, under previous administrations, has encouraged trade with the United Kingdom but we must take into account the complexities involved. As I understand it, the basic principle of trade is that individuals, groups or countries exchange goods and services that each one needs for his 
own good living and betterment. We have, as I have said, had exchange of goods with the United Kingdom to the point that has been of mutual advantage to both countries. Can the government let us know how and in what way we can increase the number of products that we can supply when the United Kingdom can purchase these items at a more favourable price from European countries. In line with the same thought, the United Kingdom has been faced with similar problems in this connection because the right hon. prime minister of the United Kingdom, when speaking of trade last fall, said: "We have no friends, we have interests".
I do not want to be misunderstood about my feelings in this regard. My reaction is not an ethnic one. It is simply a matter of sound economics and good business. In this connection, I should like to mention that if the former prime minister, Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent, had advocated a policy of trade with France similar to the one proposed by the present government with the United Kingdom I would have objected as strongly as I do now. Every one knows that the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent had so deeply in his heart the welfare of Canadians that he would not espouse an approach of this type.
I think it would be of interest to look at a few matters having a direct bearing on this relationship. For example, the present government had a block of advertising posters about Canadian bonds printed in the United Kingdom. In answer to a query in this house, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) said that the number printed was negligible. If this was the case, of what particular advantage was this order to the British people? I would think that the cost of shipping from England to Canada alone would be high in comparison to that of shipment from Montreal or Toronto to Ottawa. Was consideration given at the time to giving the entire order for those posters to our own competent Canadian printers?
A trade mission appointed by this government was sent to indicate to the United Kingdom producers that we wished to buy additional products from them. It was of interest to read in the press that during a visit of the mission to a shipyard the members were informed that the yard had a five-year backlog of business. Is it not surprising that we should show a desire to purchase under these conditions when some of our shipyards are barely existing? Is it any wonder then that there seems to be a feeling on both sides of the ocean that this mission was in fact a present to the people of the United Kingdom.
I look at this problem of trade with the feelings, as I understand them, of a Cana-

dian. Our fellow countrymen expected that the government in this great country of ours would develop a continued policy in trade and in all other international matters that would reflect wholeheartedly the views and opinions of the majority of Canadians. In this whole question of trade this government has ignored the interests of the Canadian people. Under no circumstances should we try to trade with any country on a sentimental basis. It is an old adage that there is no room for sentiment in business. Those people who have had more centuries of experience in this field and from the experience have the most logic, namely the British people themselves, give us the most eloquent lesson from which we should learn.
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I listened with a deal of attention to what was most elegantly put by the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Flynn) in connection with the help of the Union Nationale given to and accepted by certain Conservative members for the province of Quebec. Like many other hon. members I would have been most interested in finding out if this assistance was received with as much thankfulness as was the withdrawal of the two original Conservative candidates in Quebec East and Quebec West.
Mr. Speaker-and 1 will conclude by these words-the government is now confronted with a very heavy task, a huge task both in the national and international fields. It must give it its immediate attention. The results of its labours, of its attitude and of its policy will allow us to tell if it will measure up to the situation and whether it is capable or incapable of conducting the affairs of this country. We will wish it well in the interest of all of us here as well as in the interest of each and every Canadian.
(Text):


Mr. R. C. Coates (Cumberland):: My first words to you, Mr. Speaker, are of congratulation upon your re-election to the high office which you hold. Your impartiality, wisdom and humour during the 23rd parliament very clearly indicated that the rights and privileges of all hon. members would be jealously guarded.
I also wish to take this opportunity to congratulate the chairman (Mr. Sevigny) and the deputy chairman (Mr. Rea) of the committees of the whole house and congratulations are also in order for the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. It is indeed an inspiration to hear men of the same age as myself rise and acquit themselves in such an outstanding manner.
57071-3-314
The Address-Mr. Coates
The constituents of Cumberland, whom I have the honour to represent, discovered before confederation that the party of progress and imagination was the Conservative party and have seldom changed their minds since 1867. Indeed, in 18 of the 24 parliaments we have seen since that year Cumberland has been represented by Conservative members. Of the 33 fathers of confederation, four came from Cumberland. Probably no other constituency in Canada can boast of a similar contribution. All of these men went on to make further outstanding contributions to the political life of this young nation, and Sir Charles Tupper-known in his day as the warhorse of Cumberland- served this country as prime minister in 1896. Cumberland continued to contribute outstanding members; the Hon. A. R. Dickie, the Hon. E. N. Rhodes, R. K. Smith and Percy C. Black. Many hon. members of this house are well aware of the abilities of the last mentioned member and his friends here will be pleased to know he is enjoying good health and still takes a keen and active interest in the affairs of the citizens of Cumberland.
Cumberland also contributed two outstanding gentlemen to the Liberal party in the Hon. J. Layton Ralston and the Hon. Norman McLeod Rogers. Their contributions to the Liberal party and to Canada will not be forgotten.
Cumberland county is the first county in Nova Scotia as one enters from New Brunswick, and those who have travelled to Nova Scotia by car will bear me out when I say it has the most impressive entrance of any county in Canada. It is here that the Nova Scotia government has its beautiful information bureau. The Cumberland beauty only begins at the border and the scenic grandeur throughout the county is almost overpowering. The beaches between Amherst and Pugwash along the Northumberland strait, with water as warm as can be found anywhere on the east coast, the drive along the Parrsboro shore, the ruggedness of the Wentworth valley and the friendliness of the people have for many years made it a tourist playground.
Cumberland county is surrounded by the Tantramar marshes, which have for centuries been worked by the settlers of Cumberland and Westmorland. The potential of these marshlands has never been truly tapped. Before the day of the automobile they were valuable hay-producing lands but since that time have to a large extent been allowed to deteriorate. With the establishment of the M.M.R.A. many of these lands have been redyked and thereby saved from the sea. In the very near future work will start on the
484	HOUSE OF COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Coates Tantramar dam. This will have the doublebarrelled effect of providing needed employment and still further protection from the sea for the marshlands. I hope to see in the not too distant future thousands of head of cattle roaming on these marshes, for it has been proved beyond doubt that they have tremendous potential for this line of agriculture.
Agriculture is a very important industry to Cumberland and a large proportion of the population look to it for their livelihood. In my travels throughout my constituency I have seen many abandoned farms or farms worked by part-time farmers. It is my belief that most of these part-time farmers wish to work their lands but have found this to be an impossibility as a full-time proposition. Credit restrictions have been so tight that they were unable to enlarge their units and to stock them properly. I feel the prosperity of the east depends largely on the prosperity of our farming industry and I know that if credit restrictions were such as to allow them to obtain economical units, properly stocked, long strides would have been taken in the right direction.
The coal mining industry has always played an important road in the economy of Cumberland. May I take this opportunity to thank this government for its prompt action to ensure the continued operation of No. 2 colliery at Springhill. Today Springhill is, however, faced with a situation over which governments have no control. In the past two months four bumps have occurred in this mine. For those who are unfamiliar with this term, a bump is the meeting of the roof and the floor of a mine as a result of pressure. This mine's continued operation is necessary to this disaster ridden town of 7,500 people and it is the prayer of everyone that nature will correct the situation.
When one speaks of coal in Cumberland, Springhill comes immediately to mind, but there are two other important coal producing areas-River Hebert and Joggins. They as well as Cumberland have been more than gratified by the action of this government in respect of the coal industry.
Although the present marketing problems in Springhill have been solved, those of the Nova Scotian coal industry are very real. Indeed, during the past winter we have seen stockpiles of coal built up estimated to be in the vicinity of one million tons. It would appear with the continued mechanization of these mines and as the result of increased output per man a new look must be taken at the present subvention and subsidy policy. It is my humble opinion that these problems can best be solved by the establishment of a

federal coal marketing board which would take, not a year by year look at markets as under the present arrangements but the long-range view needed to provide a solution to the problem.
The change in ownership of our major coal mines was watched with deep concern by the people of Nova Scotia. There was, indeed, the feeling that parts of this huge empire might be transferred to the central Canadian firms which this company also owns. Today this concern has disappeared. We know that as a result of the forward looking policies of this company-one of which was the aforementioned stockpiling of coal-a great deal of hardship in our coal mining areas has been prevented and the coal industry has received a much needed shot in the arm.
When one speaks of concern being shown with respect to the closing of industries it might seem strange to some hon. members, but I can assure them that there is some foundation for such fears. My home town of Amherst was once known as "busy Amherst", a thriving community owing its prosperity to a large number of small industries. Our people watched as large concerns from central Canada came in, purchased and shut down these industries. As a result, there were hardships and unemployment. Amherst came back during world war II when a large aircraft plant was established there, employing 2,000 or more people, but before 1945 this was closed and once again the people braced themselves and for a time after the war it looked as though we would suffer as we had in prewar days. Through the efforts of prominent citizens in the area this firm was re-established and, coupled with the continued operation of a firm which has been part of Amherst for close to 100 years, this has helped to maintain the employment level.
We find in Canada today that a large portion of our major industry is located in Ontario and Quebec. This is necessary to a certain extent, for in these areas are located the larger concentrations of our population. However, defence industries located in these two provinces could just as conveniently be established in the east; in fact, from the defence point of view, this would appear to be a logical move. To keep all our eggs in one or two baskets means that one or two hydrogen bombs could cripple our defences completely. Problems would be presented if such a policy were adopted as the giant companies undertaking this work are also located in these areas I have mentioned, but I do not feel the problems are unsurmountable and, once tackled, I believe we would see

the economy of the east rising and our defences would be more secure.
The industry mentioned earlier attributes its existence to defence work and has the facilities and technical help necessary for further expansion. Might I say also that it would be difficult to find an area in Canada that has a better employee-management relationship, or a finer and more dedicated type of citizen.
Both the fishing and lumber industries are watching the progress of this government's foreign trade policies. At one time both these industries enjoyed considerable export trade with the United Kingdom, and have through the years watched it disappear. Indeed, I was told by the biggest lobster packer in my constituency, when it was suggested that this government's trade policies threatened his industry, that at one time he shipped 90 per cent of his vacuum packed lobster to England, and that with a Liberal government in power he had watched this market disappear completely.
We see a new industry looming larger and larger on the horizon in Cumberland. We have had a salt mine at Malagash for many years. In recent years a salt plant was established at Nappan and has remained at full production since its establishment. We now have another company drilling for salt at Pugwash, of Cyrus Eaton fame, where the reserves are estimated in the billions of tons.
It is the expectation of the citizens of Cumberland that with cheaper power resulting from the thermal power program we will see new industries established there. We have seen more than our share of industries being brought out by Upper Canadian firms and closed down, and we now look with optimism to this power program as a means of establishing industry with the knowledge that our children may remain with us and have opportunities for a future the equal of those in other parts of this great country of ours, something impossible to imagine during the 22 years of Liberal reign in Canada. It is amazing to see the change in attitude of the people of the east. I remember very clearly their remarks after the increase in freight rates was disallowed by this government. They add up to the fact they have again been discovered, that this government realizes there is an Atlantic area, and plans to see equality of opportunity from coast to coast.
We in Cumberland are keenly interested in the results of the survey initiated by this government for the construction of a causeway from New Brunswick to Prince Edward Island. There is hardly a maritimer who at some time in his life has not been delayed at either Cape Tormentine or Borden, and
The Address-Mr. Ratelle it is no exaggeration to say that during summer months a half day's delay can be anticipated. It would be difficult to estimate the number of tourists visiting the Atlantic area who refrain from visiting Prince Edward Island because of this anticipated waiting period. This is not a criticism of the present facilities, for we are all aware that from a business standpoint they are the best that can be expected; a causeway is the only answer.
One of the prime reasons for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick confederating with Ontario and Quebec in 1867, was the hope that one of the immediate projects resulting would be the Chignecto canal. We have discussed the building of the canal almost continually since that date, but it never seems to get beyond the discussion stage. Surveys have been carried out in the past. Today, however, we do not possess up to date information on this matter. I feel information on this canal should be brought up to date, and a survey carried out to determine its feasibility from an engineering and economic standpoint. Only then can we truly pass judgment on the merits of this project.
(Translation):


Mr. J. G. Ratelle (Lafontaine):: Mr. Speaker, at the outset I wish to congratulate you on your election to the speakership, a post which you have occupied with dignity and impartiality.
I also congratulate the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) on his appointment to the deputy speakership.
I also would like to congratulate the hon. members for Lotbiniere (Mr. O'Hurley) and Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche) on their appointment to the portfolios of defence production and Secretary of State respectively.
Finally, I congratulate the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafreniere) and the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen),, who moved and seconded the address in reply to the speech from the throne. They have worthily acquitted themselves of the task which the Prime Minister had entrusted to them. I am sure that the electors of their respective constituencies will be proud of them.
I feel it my duty, and not the least, to thank in this house the electors of the fine constituency of Lafontaine for showing me the same confidence they have given me ever since I have had the honour of representing them, that is for almost 20 years.
I must tell you, Mr. Speaker, that it is not through the help of the Union Nationale that I am here today.
486	HOUSE OF COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Ratelle
I listened to the speech of His Excellency the Governor General, and read it afterwards, but I found with regret that there was no mention of more favourable labour legislation.
It is true that an eight week extension of unemployment insurance benefits has been granted to seasonal workers in order to help those who have not yet gone back to work. This assistance represents little improvement in their situation. I will give more details on this question later.
It is the same thing with the funds to be voted for public works. Of course, this will be a benefit to some groups of the working people. However, we should not forget that such works perhaps will not be started soon.
I will now try to explain the reasons for those hardships suffered by the Canadian people.
In 1957, those of our friends opposite who were sitting on this side repeatedly said that we were rich, that we had surpluses but none of them could speak of unemployment because there was no unemployment. There was prosperity everywhere; people were happy and it was good to live in Canada. Elections have been held. The Prime Minister and his lieutenants, when they came in the province of Quebec, just as they did in the other provinces, stated repeatedly that Canada was prosperous, that we had a reserve of 250 million dollars and that we should now return that money to the people because we had collected too much in taxes in comparison with their income.
On June 10 last, our friends got more of their candidates elected than we did. That was the will of the Canadian people. What I can't understand, however, is that hardly three months had passed after they came to power, when uneasiness began to be felt. Trade was no longer reaching the same level, industries were laying off people. Very few of the hon. members who were then sitting in this house and have been re-elected have not been asked by their constituents for help in finding a job.
You will admit, Mr. Speaker, that there is something unusual in that, in so short a space and rich as we were, we should have become so poor.
I would be very much obliged if the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) or the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) could explain to the house how it is that our industries and our trade, which were so prosperous, have seen their prosperity vanish so soon.
Before 1896, the population of Canada was rather poor. In that year, the right hon. Sir

Wilfrid Laurier became prime minister of this country and within two short years he not only threw wide open the doors of Canada but succeeded in expanding our trade, so much so that, in 1898, as statistics prove, our country was prosperous, Canadians were staying here instead of going to the United States and many of those who had left the country even came back.
That prosperity continued until 1911 when the Conservatives, under the leadership of the right hon. Sir Robert Borden, came to power. In 1913, two years later, the prosperity we had known had completely disappeared and we were back to the state of economic despondency experienced prior to 1896.
In 1921 the right hon. William Lyon Mackenzie King came to power. Needless to say the Canadians of that time had not known prosperity before the arrival of the Liberals. But could the country have been more prosperous than between 1921 and 1930? Everybody was happy, trade, industry, house building and the building trade generally had once again undergone considerable development.
Subsequently those who lived under the administration of the Hon. R. B. Bennett in 1930 lived through the worst times of their lives, the like of which I hope we shall never see again.
In 1935, the Right Hon. Mackenzie King again became prime minister of Canada and was succeeded a few years later by the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent. The prosperity which the Right Hon. Mr. King had brought back to the country continued under the administration of the Right Hon. Mr. St. Laurent, without interruption until 1957.
One is forced to the conclusion that, if there is no malice on the side of the Conservatives, they have had really hard luck. You will admit, Mr. Speaker, that every time the Conservatives have come to power, prosperity has disappeared within a few months and there has been uneasiness among the workers.
I would suggest to the present administration that if it wishes to have prosperity, it must carry out the Liberal program by fostering trade which is the very basis of progress in any field connected with the welfare of the population.
Secondly, until trade has been restored once again, do you not think, Mr. Speaker, that instead of providing for eight additional weeks of unemployment insurance benefits for certain classes of workers, it would have been better to extend those benefits to all the unemployed who are not entitled to unemployment benefits, so that they might support their family until they find some work

to do? There is no reason for leaving our workers without money, especially after they have enjoyed some prosperity, and for not helping them so that they may live and provide for their family.
We have accumulated large sums of money; we cannot keep that money while people are suffering. Since we were wealthy last year, we must have the means to help the unemployed.
My colleague the hon. member for Papineau (Mr. Meunier) has urged the government to do the impossible to come to an understanding with the premier of the province of Quebec about the construction of the Trans-Canada highway. I agree with him and I wholeheartedly support his request. This would give a job, of course, to those who work on the highway, as well as to those who will carry the materials required, and even to the city workers, because staff will be needed to prepare and distribute stone, cement, etc. This would be a great help to the unemployed, and to that end it is essential that the premier of the province of Quebec agree to come to terms.
It should certainly be easier for the present Prime Minister to have his views accepted by the premier of the province of Quebec than it used to be for the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent. We now have two Conservative governments; one of them is named Union Nationale, but it is only, as everyone knows, a mask to hide its real identity, but not, of course, to the Conservative members who have been elected on March 31 last, in the province of Quebec.
The speech from the throne refers to an increase of several million dollars which will be made to the National Housing Act fund. I find that amount quite normal, and it is certainly going to help people who want to become homeowners. However, I feel that a 6 per cent interest rate is too high and that it should be reduced to 5 per cent. The government would lose nothing since it borrows at 2i per cent, 3J per cent, and 3J per cent. There is therefore no reason why the government should make a profit on the loans granted to workers. To that reduction of one per cent, which I feel is justified, could be added an insurance which would cover the payments the borrower has to make each month, when he would be unemployed. This would make things easier to more people who would not have to fear the loss of their savings when they want to borrow money under the terms of the National Housing Act.
The Address-Mr. Pascoe
There is nothing new to such measures. They were enacted by the Liberal government several years ago. It is only a matter of extending the provisions of the act in order to ensure greater security to our workers and allow a greater number of persons to own their own house.
I should like to add a word on personal income tax. I would ask the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming), when preparing his budget speech, kindly to examine the possibility of raising the basic exemption to $1500 for single persons and to $3000 for married people. This would allow all Canadians to enjoy the same exemption as was granted by the government of the province of Quebec when it imposed the personal income tax.
I would also ask the Minister of Justice (Mr. Fulton), in the course of this session, to define the word "obscene" so as to be able to prevent unwholesome literature and indecent shows from spreading in the future.
In conclusion, I wish to say that I am relying on the good intentions of the government. I hope it will be able to help workers out of their present difficulties and towards better things.
(Text):


Mr. J. E. Pascoe (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, this is my first opportunity to add my congratulations to those already extended to you, to the Deputy Speaker and to the deputy chairman of the committees of the whole house and to the mover (Mr. Lafren-iere) and to the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. The two weeks we have been here have shown very clearly, Mr. Speaker, the reasons why you have been chosen for the high office of first commoner.
I welcome this opportunity to speak after the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) invited us to express our views as new members. Also, I want to make it very clear that we in this section of the house, the biggest proportion of the members sitting to your left, Mr. Speaker-and if I may say so, the most enlightened; politically at least-are very strong supporters of the government. We may be separated by the seating arrangements, but we are united with those on your right, sir, in the conviction of what we have been called on to do for national development and for a greater Canada. It may be, too, that we have been chosen to sit on this side of the house because our political faith and our confidence in our national destiny are so strong that we
488	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Pascoe cannot possibly be influenced by proximity to other lines of thought. We may even be over here as missionaries seeking converts.
I am proud to speak as the representative for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre. I want to thank the wonderful people of that constituency for the confidence they have shown in me. I will do all in my power to justify that confidence.
The name "Lake Centre" was made a byword in this house by a previous and an illustrious representative, none other than the Prime Minister. The Moose Jaw portion is well known, not because of former representatives, but because of the name "Moose Jaw, the friendly city", and because of the reputation of the Moose Jaw farming district, one of the best in the west. Moose Jaw-Lake Centre can be described as a farm and city constituency. It includes the city of Moose Jaw, a large and growing part of the city of Regina and more than a dozen very important towns and, as I indicated before, some of the finest farming communities in the west. Few other ridings combine farmers, labour groups, business and professional men in such nearly equal proportions.
Other speakers have boasted of the recreation spots and tourist attractions in their ridings. In my constituency we, too, can boast of the summer pleasures along the beaches and on the waters of Last Mountain lake and Buffalo Pound lake. Even the names of these lakes are an invitation to those seeking new places to visit.
The speech from the throne is of great interest to those farmer, labour and business groups I mentioned earlier, not only because it forecasts a great development program for all Canada but also because of the promise of government action on particular problems.
I am one of 47 members, who have been sent here from the three prairie provinces of Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba to support the government, 47 members elected out of a possible 48, and even the 48th had a close race, although he may want to argue that point. I suggest that these 47 members can speak for the prairies and express the general views of that section of Canada better than any other group in this house. We are not here from the prairies as a pressure group; we are here to work in the best national interests but we shall be expected, I am sure, to speak out for our own constituencies and for our own particular part of Canada whenever there is need to consider local or sectional problems.
My remarks perhaps should deal directly with the amendment to the speech from the throne; but I suggest, sir, that the speech itself contains all the essentials necessary for


Canadian development and, therefore, no amendment such as the one before us needs to be considered.
The speech from the throne emphasizes what has always characterized our party, namely practical policies for present needs, coupled with a great and abiding faith in the future of Canada. The speech does not deal with generalities; it concerns itself with those things which we believe are necessary for the good of the people of Canada now and in the years to come. The future of Canada can be seen in the program set out by the government in that speech.
The speech pledges the government, "to make unremitting efforts in the peaceful solution of international problems". The hopes and the prayers of all groups will be with our leaders in this endeavour.
The speech pledges the government, "to major concerted efforts to encourage the expansion of trade." In this connection the commonwealth trade and economic conference in Montreal in September will be watched with great interest and with a great deal of expectation and hope. Export trade is essential for prosperity in that section of Canada I help to represent. The government can find no stronger supporters than those on the prairies for its commonwealth trade policies.
The speech promised an extension to June 28 of the benefits of unemployment insurance. This was not merely a promise; it was a pledge for quick action on a pressing problem. This pledge has been fulfilled. Already the measure granting this extension of benefits has been passed and has received royal assent. The opposition members spoke in criticism of the measure, spoke at great length, but they all voted for it. The quick fulfilment of this government's pledge will be well received in my constituency and in others. It was an emergency measure to help those temporarily without jobs.
Further amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act are indicated in the speech. There will be opportunity for us then to inquire into the possibility of unemployment insurance for hired farm labour. This question is of interest to many in my constituency, to both farm owners and to hired workers. Members from rural ridings will be pressing this matter further later in the session.
The speech from the throne promised a vigorous program of home building. Here again we have had quick action. In the first week of this new parliament the government put through a measure adding an additional $350 million to the public funds available for house builders under the National

Housing Act. This extra help for those who desire to own their own homes will be well received in my constituency, especially in the new development areas of Moose Jaw and in that growing portion of Regina that is in Moose Jaw-Lake Centre. I hope that help for house building will be made available in greater degree for those living in smaller towns and villages.
The speech promises "a small business section within the administrative machinery of government" to assist small businesses. We have many of these small businesses in Moose Jaw-Lake Centre. They play a big part in the life of the community. Owners of some of these small businesses came to me during the election campaign and indicated great interest in this government proposal. In the short time since the speech was made public I have had requests for more information and many expressions of approval of such a plan.
References in the speech to "national development on our frontier of the north" fire the imagination with the possibilities of this northern expansion. The whole government program of Canadian development has a special interest and offers great possibilities for our young people, hundreds of whom we have seen passing through the galleries of this house in the last two weeks. It is gratifying and reassuring to see these young people becoming familiar with the processes of government and showing such interest in public affairs. Everything we do here in this house will have some bearing on their future.
In this connection, I would like to congratulate the 190 Rotary clubs on their participation in the "adventure in citizenship" for high school students from all across Canada.
From my own constituency the Rotary clubs of Moose Jaw and Watrous sent worthy representatives with whom I had the pleasure of sharing an evening banquet program. We hear much these days about juvenile difficulties. I am sure that those hon. members who have had the privilege as I had of sitting with and talking to the young people in the Rotary groups will agree that the average young man and young woman of today also have a vision of the great future of Canada and realize the part he or she will be called upon to play to make that future a reality.
The speech from the throne contains references of special interest to western farmers. As a farmer myself and as a member who received a large farmer vote on March 31, I can say that there is intense interest on the prairies in the government's agricultural program. The speech from the throne indicates 57071-3-32
The Address-Mr. Pascoe that it is "the desire of parliament that agriculture should be assisted to realize fair returns for its labour and investment." That is the policy we advocated in our election campaign. That is the policy which western voters, not only farmers but all groups, supported. It is the policy which, as I said, brought about the election of 47 prairie representatives out of 48 as government supporters.
The prairies are necessary in Canada's business and industrial life. One need only look at the big map in the railway committee room to see the great area of the three prairie provinces and to realize their importance in the whole Canadian economy. Everyone in the house should take a long and careful look at that map to see just where Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba fit into the national picture.
Putting more purchasing power in the hands of western farmers is in the national interest, in the interest of all sections of Canada. The Agricultural Stabilization Act was made a main election issue on the prairies by the opposing parties who probably now wish they had never opposed it. The vote results show that the act was endorsed overwhelmingly. It offers great hope for the future of agriculture.
But we all know that no single piece of legislation can provide the complete answer to prairie farm problems. There is need, among other things, for a more extensive farm credit program. We will have an opportunity later, I trust, to offer our views on possible changes in the operations of the Canadian farm loan board for the benefit of small farmers and young people who want to start farming.
There is hope on the prairies that some effective form of crop insurance can be worked out between the federal and provincial governments, perhaps through an extension of the protection now offered by the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. There is reference in the speech from the throne to possible changes in that legislation. We western members will have opinions to offer in this regard, particularly with respect to expansion into a crop insurance plan in which the provincial governments will play a large part.
Another big hope lies in the improving record of the government with respect to increased wheat sales. Because western wheat farmers are in competition with subsidized farmers in other lands, extension of our wheat markets is not easy. While new markets are being found and while present markets are expanded emphasis will be placed on the great value of the government's policy of cash advances on farm-stored grain. In the past

The Address-Mr. Pascoe year over 50,000 farmers availed themselves of these advances, advances of what actually is the farmer's own money against later sales of his own wheat. As soon as harvesting starts this fall these advances will be available for the threshed grain while the farmer waits for delivery quotas. At that time the great benefit of these cash advances will become more apparent.
While I am on the subject of added revenue for the farmers, may I say that I welcome the statement by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill) that he will soon announce the final payment on the 1956-57 wheat sales. The wheat board cut-off date for these sales was May 9. A final wheat board payment at this time would help the western farmers meet the cost of their seeding operations.
We in Saskatchewan are gratified with the progress the government has made in trying to reach final agreement on the South Saskatchewan dam. The benefits from that project will extend beyond the province and will be felt in the national economy. This is another election promise that is being kept as fast as the Saskatchewan government will assume its full responsibilities for its share of the project.
This brief reference to items in the speech from the throne gives some indication of the government's farm program. I was greatly surprised to read a newspaper interview with the Saskatchewan minister of agriculture in which he is quoted as saying that he was most disappointed to learn that nothing will be done for our farm people at this session of parliament with the possible exception of minor amendments to the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. It would be more helpful to Saskatchewan farmers if the Saskatchewan minister of agriculture stopped taking this negative attitude and took some positive action on provincial farm policies that might receive federal support.
For instance, he might help to work out some form of provincial-dominion crop insurance with the province taking the lead. As a farmer myself I think we should have a crop insurance plan and I think that the Saskatchewan government should work out the details of the plan and pay at least part of the cost. The Saskatchewan government through the Saskatchewan minister of agriculture should assume its full responsibilities towards the farmers and not attempt to put the whole burden on the federal government. The speech from the throne has emphasized that the federal government is ready to meet its agricultural pledges. The Saskatchewan


minister of agriculture should indicate the willingness of the provincial government to do its part.
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.
James Ernest Pascoe: Mr. Speaker, before adjournment, I expressed surprise at the reported statement by the Saskatchewan minister of agriculture that nothing will be done for the farmers at this session of parliament. I suggested that the Saskatchewan minister should drop this negative attitude and take some positive provincial actions of his own to help tackle the farm problems.
I think the outline I gave of the federal government's farm program, as listed in the speech from the throne, effectively refutes the reported statements which, of course, were merely for the purpose of turning attention away from the provincial government's own farm policies or lack of them. There could be a provincial farm loan board operating in Saskatchewan as there is in some other provinces, but there is not; at least it is not lending any money to farmers. There could be some provincial action taken in Saskatchewan to help start a crop insurance plan, but nothing has been done along this line. It is the same old cry, "Let Ottawa do it all".
As I said, the speech from the throne emphasizes what the federal government intends to do to help the farmer. It is up to the provincial governments, including the Saskatchewan government, to do their share, too.
I consider it my duty to bring to the attention of the Postmaster General (Mr. Hamilton) and the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) correspondence from Moose Jaw with regard to cancellation of air mail service from that city at the end of this month and the substitution of mail transportation by truck. I hope the Minister of Transport particularly will consider carefully the representations received from the Moose Jaw city council and from the Moose Jaw chamber of commerce with regard to continued air commercial service for Moose Jaw. As the letter states:
We deplore the fact that a city of 30,000 citizens, in the centre of a rural area with the same population, is to be deprived of a commercial air service after having enjoyed the same for 24 years.
I support these letters and express the hope that Moose Jaw will continue to have at least its present air service.

I should like to conclude with a statement to Moose Jaw that I am very happy to announce. I have just received word from the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) that construction on the much-discussed federal building for Moose Jaw will be started this fall. Tenders are being called in August and the contract will be let out about September 1. This project will provide jobs for many workers this winter and will be a big help to Moose Jaw's building program. The federal building, which will house the post office and the unemployment insurance office, will be built on what is known as the old arena rink site. As I said, I am happy to make this announcement which will be of great interest to Moose Jaw. I am happy also to have had the privilege of taking part in this debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne.
(Translation):


Mr. Yvon Dupuis (St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville):: Mr. Speaker, before we conclude the debate on the address in reply, I would like to bring to the attention of the house a very important matter. No reference was made in the speech from the throne, as far as I could see, of any intention on the part of the government to introduce legislation intended to provide every citizen of this country with a compulsory identity card. Nevertheless there are a number of important reasons why such legislation should be introduced.
It is a well known and incontrovertible fact that, at this time, Canadian citizens are unable to produce an efficient means of identification. Yet everybody knows that the introduction of legislation designed to remedy this situation would be highly advantageous.
Several countries of the world adopted such a provision many years ago. They are constantly reminded of its benefits in all the various aspects of modern social life.
We should make it compulsory for every citizen aged sixteen and over to carry an identity card. This is an urgent need in a country such as ours, especially in times such as these.
What are the advantages of legislation such as this? A national identity card would protect the banker against the counterfeiter, the hotel keeper against the undesirable individual who attempts to register under a false name. It would make police investigations easier. It would make it impossible to use a credit card lost by a citizen. It would allow owners of night clubs, hotels and places of entertainment to detect young people who have not yet reached the legal age of admission to such establishments.
57071-3-32J
The Address-Mr. Dupuis
From the government's point of view, a national identity card would make census taking and preparation of statistics easier, besides making it easier to apprehend people who have entered this country illegally. Finally it would protect the voter's right by making it impossible to impersonate an elector on voting day.
Mr. Speaker, there is social uneasiness today, not only in the province of Quebec, but in all parts of the country. In my opinion, too often do we see young people 13, 14, 15 or 16 years old going into night clubs, taverns, licensed establishments of all kinds, to see shows which are not good for young people. And there is no way of checking the age of these people. When asked what their age is, they answer that they are 18 years old and there is no way for the owner of a night club or other establishment of this kind to check upon their age. Young boys or girls of 13 or 14 years of age often have the appearance of 18-year olds though their mental development is that of a young child for whom it is bad and dangerous to see shows of poor quality, to find themselves in night clubs among older people.
Mr. Speaker, there is also civic uneasiness, which could be eliminated with the national identity card. It is an uneasiness observed after each municipal, provincial or federal election. In every election, specially for the past two years, we have noticed that, for the three levels of government, there are people who specialize in passing what is called, at least in our province, "telegraphs". Well, Mr. Speaker, such dishonest tactics to win elections must absolutely be prevented and, if citizens are required to carry an identity card, we will manage to cure this uneasiness which allows some members to win elections fraudulently, not only here in the federal parliament but also in provincial or municipal parliaments.
What does the Canadian citizen have today by way of identification? We have nothing but secondary documents: a driver's licence, a pass, a credit card, all of which can be stolen by someone else and used fraudulently. In my opinion, it is absolutely necessary that people have a real identity card, so made that it could not be imitated. It would be an authentic document which, besides showing a photograph of the bearer, would include all useful information for a complete identification, such as name, address, place of birth, date of birth, racial origin, religion, marital status, occupation, signature of the bearer, and so on.

The Address-Mr. McLennan
I respectfully submit that this should be entrusted to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and I am sure all Canadians would be glad to carry a proof of their identity.
Who would feel wronged by such a government measure? The crooks, forgers, swindlers, racketeers, juvenile delinquents, smugglers, murderers, stool pigeons of the underworld and, finally, election tricksters.
On the other hand who would stand to gain by it? Every honest citizen, without exception, every Canadian who is proud of his nationality, and of our democratic institutions, all the various organizations in this country, official institutions, banking houses, social, commercial or cultural organizations of all kinds.
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that there is no mention made of this important matter in the speech from the throne. That is why I made so bold as to rise this evening and why I intend, in the near future, to enter a motion on the order paper in this regard.
(Text):


Mr. W. A. McLennan (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, may I extend to you my heartiest congratulations upon your election to your high office, and also for the high regard and esteem in which you are held by all hon. members of this house. I would also like to extend my congratulations to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne and for the wonderful job done by these two young men. I would also like to extend my congratulations to the Deputy Speaker (Mr. Sevigny) and to the Deputy Chairman (Mr. Rea).
It is my honour to be the first Progressive Conservative elected from New Westminster riding for 32 years. New Westminster is the largest riding west of Ontario with a population of some 120,000 people; it covers the western portion of the lower mainland of British Columbia and is, I think, one of the most diversified ridings in Canada. At this time I would like to pay tribute to the candidates who opposed me on March 31. The Liberal, C.C.F., Social Credit and L.P.P. candidates were all real gentlemen. Never in any riding in Canada was there a cleaner campaign.
With all due respect to the hon. member from our capital city, the hon. member for


Victoria (Mr. McPhillips) I would like to say that I represent the first capital of British Columbia, Fort Langley, and I extend a very hearty welcome to all hon. members to visit that historical fort, which is now being rebuilt, when they next visit British Columbia. I also represent the second capital of British Columbia, affectionately known as the royal city and the home of the famous salmon bellies, and the Adanac lacrosse teams-the thriving city of New Westminster. I also represent the fertile municipalities of Langley, Surrey and the Delta, as well as those two fine young cities born within the last year or two, White Rock and Langley City.
There have been many postmortems held on the results of the last election but one thing is certain

the Canadian people knew they could trust the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) and his government and, above all, they wanted a strong government with a united Canada policy.
I congratulate the government on the additional money being made available under the National Housing Act, and I am sure this step will be received with great satisfaction by people in all parts of the country, especially the people of British Columbia.
I would suggest to the government that they might go further and make available to fast developing municipalities low cost loans for essential services such as sewers, water lines, hospitals and schools. This would I am sui'e it would not cost the government create a great deal more employment and a nickel.
We are all very happy with the extension to the benefit period provided under the Unemployment Insurance Act. This, at best, is only a stop-gap to alleviate hardship until industry and the development program of our government provide employment for our fellow Canadians. I am sure we all hope that our industrial and labour leaders will refrain from demands which will raise prices, the cost of living and the cost of production.
I would urge the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness), in conjunction with the provincial government of British Columbia, to have a survey made of the drainage, erosion and soil conservation difficulties of the fertile Fraser valley. I do hope some consideration will be given to this matter during the session and also to the plight of some of our senior citizens. I have in mind those unable to work and living on a very small income apart from their present $55 old age pension. Even a small increase if necessary under the means test would help them to keep body and soul together.

I would like also to say a word in regard to the position of our veterans, especially those of the first world war. I believe the means test should be abolished in respect to those who have drawn pensions for more than five years. Such a step would give them new hope and they would feel they still had something to contribute to this nation and that they were still honoured citizens in the country for which they had sacrificed so much.
I thank the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) for having authorized a survey of the lower Fraser river and the port of New Westminster. This harbour is potentially one of the greatest fresh water ports in the world and with the right planning and under good management this port could become the Liverpool of the west coast. True, it would cost money to put it into good condition and keep it open. This is the case with all river ports, but the revenue it would produce and the employment it would create would be of great benefit to Canada and especially to the coastal area of British Columbia.
The feed grain situation is a problem of great concern to the farmers of my province. They are a unique group; they do not look for additional subsidies, but they do want a fair chance to compete as businessmen. They cannot understand why they should have to pay three times the price for feed grain paid by their counterparts in the state of Washington and in their sister province of Alberta. They feel that if this is a free country they should be able to buy for their own use in competition with farmers in other provinces.
I would add my support to the hon. members who have spoken in favour of assistance to and support for the soft fruit growers of British Columbia. The strawberry acreage of the Fraser valley has dropped from 3,500 acres in 1948 to 1,500 acres in 1957. I know the product of this area is much superior in quality but it does not come on to the market for two to three weeks after the products of Washington and Oregon. A few thousand tons dumped on the local market means nothing to the producers south of the line, but it depresses the local market to a point where the local growers barely get their cost of production.
We have hundreds of commercial fishermen who have fished for generation after generation in the Fraser river between the Pattullo and the Mission railway bridge. Some two years ago this section of the river was closed to commercial fishing and this has uprooted many families and caused hardship to many others.
I would like now to pay a tribute to a fine group of men and women who seldom get
The Address-Mr. Fisher credit for the services they render to this country. I refer to the members of the press. I congratulate them on their fairness during the last campaign and upon the exceptionally fine job they did on election night.
British Columbia is a province which depends very heavily on exports. Over 50 per cent of her citizens are dependent, directly or indirectly, on the forestry industry. It is indeed encouraging that this government has arranged a commonwealth conference to be held this September, and I urge the government to do everything within its power to build up our trade with all countries, United Kingdom in particular so that British Columbia may develop markets for our forestry, fisheries and fruit products.
This parliament faces a great task and a still greater responsibility. I think it is the wish and the desire of every hon. member of this house that the youth of today, the leaders of tomorrow, should say when this 24th parliament is over that it was one of the best Canada ever had. We are a great, fertile and wealthy nation. We have the greatest leadership we have had in this country for 50 years. If we work in co-operation, jf we believe in Canada, if we believe in ourselves and our fellow Canadians, we cannot fail.


Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: Mr. Speaker, may I add a small drop to the full measure of congratulation you have already received? I trust that some day it will be possible for hon. members to know that you will continue in the chair both until their old age and your old age. I should also like to mention what a pleasure it was to see the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Rea) appointed deputy chairman of committees. We all remember his forthright decision last year in committee on the question of the excise tax reduction, and that commended his impartiality to us.
To my mind, however, there is no question that the gentleman who merits a real extravagance of congratulation is the man who set up the speech from the throne. He, of course, is the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefen-baker). The first job of a political leader is to get power. An able politician, journalist, and Conservative member of the British parliament has written: "If you would go into parliament, you must be a little vulgar and more than a little vain. You cannot do this unless you like being noticed and standing on platforms and people cheering you. Vulgarity and vanity are not serious vices, but they are vices, and if you would be a politician, it is important to make sure that you have them."

The Address-Mr. Fisher
As Macdonald's great biographer has said of him: "Every device, every ruse, every conceivable subtlety was instantly at his command."
Such observations are generally applicable without any niggling or nasty intent to the Prime Minister. I think any connoisseur of North American politics knows that a successful leader needs toughness, ruthlessness, deception, a sense of timing and a tight grasp on his party. It is not a game for patsies or sweet sayers, although a bit of sugar helps. I would not want to stop at this point, having presented a rather lurid caricature without commenting on the political revolution-and it is a political revolution-that the Prime Minister has carried out. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) has commented on it as a feat of superman, "a triumph of the cult of personality". In the wasteland of our shattered hopes we all need to assess the victory, to examine our defeat. It is a most significant one. To my mind it is analogous to, though a sharper expression than, the political revolution in the name of the Republican party carried out by Dwight D. Eisenhower in the United States. A quiet but fundamental change in communication, in the whole concept of political presentation, has taken place. The Prime Minister and/or his immediate advisors organized this. In essence, it is the simplification of symbols. The common denominator of the public mind is made available more easily today because of television and the concentration of the press on personality and simple statement.
Northern and northwestern Ontario was a redoubt, a Berchtesgarten, if you like, that resisted the Diefenbaker tide. This is a superficial assessment. The Prime Minister polled very well in northern Ontario, in each constituency from 2,000 to 5,000 votes more than one might have expected in ordinary circumstances. Any member of parliament in the area who denies the power of the Prime Minister's campaign is afraid to face the facts.
Why is there still a redoubt? Perhaps the strongest factor was the vigour of both Liberal and C.C.F. candidates in the region, perhaps a general weakness of Conservative candidates in finding the coat tails, and, certainly, a blase reaction towards the main Diefenbaker symbol, a vision of northern development. That is something which is not particularly new in northern or northwestern Ontario. I may comment in passing that one of the planks in that particular platform, the undertaking to build a railway from Churchill to Moose Factory is almost an insult to the common sense of the people in that area and, I think, to the common sense of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources (Mr. Hamilton). I suppose I should paraphrase


the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) and say it would be a railroad from wigwam to wigwam. Certainly it would be a railroad that went nowhere, and if this government is considering putting railroads into the north it might remember that we have quite a large number of low-grade iron ore deposits which are closer to the centre of things than a railroad from Churchill to Moose Factory would be.
And now to return again to the details of the election campaign. Willy-nilly, we have to live and work with the new means in political presentation. If there is to be a cult of personality, we must make it a cult of personalities. If there is to be a simplification of symbols, we must do our simplifying too. A major factor in any campaign in the future from a constituency point of view is a large campaign treasury. Our party has long advocated a ceiling on election expenses. If this cannot be attained, we must go out to see our war chests are as able to present the modern political message.
The Progressive Conservative party has an exceptional leader. His party is not the Conservative party as we have known or thought it was. It is more progressive, more socialistic than conservative. The inherent compulsion of its leader to act, to be at the centre of the stage, means that it may continue to be progressive and not to swing right, as parties traditionally do on attaining power. North American politics create paradoxes within any parties successful on a national scale. The regional and occupational conflicts of interest prevail within the one framework

Bay street and Portage avenue together, though restive; the balanced-budgeters and the deficit budgeters; the free trade farmers and the high tariff industrial workers. In the speeches so far in this dull debate the- Conservative backbenchers have shown no common indication of what we call conservatism. Within 18 months to two years we may have a rump within the ranks of the majority; perhaps one dissident against the progressivism of the leader; the other dissident over regional disabilities and inattention. We will welcome both. It may be fascinating to watch the way in which the leader handles them.
Much of our interest in this parliament will centre on heirs-apparent. A long reign may legitimize and then destroy some aspirants. The outcome is more than casually important for the Liberals and ourselves. It is tough being left of left when the extreme left is impossible.
Members of parliament and their duties are roughly to be classified into four fields with, of course, a certain amount of overlapping. First, there are the personal

problems of his constituents that relate to the federal government; secondly, the presentation of constituency and regional needs to the government and in parliament; thirdly, matters of national significance that he should understand; and, fourthly, the duty to outline and to follow party policies and ideas.
There is little difference, I think, in any of the responsibilities which lie on ministers, as opposed to backbenchers, with regard to looking after the first section, whether the member belongs to the government side or to the opposition. Those of us who do reach parliament seem to be fairly able to assess constituency needs.
I think I can do no better than to repeat what I said last year to the effect that the average member of parliament unfortunately is often uninformed, misinformed or uninterested. Naturally each one of us cannot hope to cover all topics. There is the prospect, and postulated action as the Prime Minister has indicated several times, that this parliament's plethora of government members could lead to a lax or stultified parliament. Reform within parliament rests on more than respect or a return to respect of parliamentary rights.
The suggestion that committees shall have much more work is worth close attention but I raise this question: Is our reference, our informational service for parliament, as distinct from the services available to ministers, adequate to serve a new conception of duties for committees and members of parliament? Are our secretarial and office facilities adequate? There is, of course, the fact that those qualities which lead to our election by the voter are not necessarily the qualities that make us informed active members within the House of Commons framework. We can improve ourselves and we all seek in our own way to do so.
I would propose a number of drastic changes in the services of the House of Commons. The raison d'etre stems from my experience as a librarian and the contact I have had with the academic community. I propose a rota of House of Commons research fellowships awarded on a merit basis to graduate students and professional-rank people in the fields of economics, statistics, political science, sociology, labour relations, history and bibliography. To dovetail this with work of hon. members I propose a coordinated reference centre with a small permanent staff associated with the library of parliament and the national library. The fellowship holders would work for two years, with some time allowance for their own work but their main purpose would be to be research talent for members of parliament, available to hon. members on the
The Address-Mr. Fisher latter's presentation of a subject field related to political matters within the scope of the House of Commons. Such fellowships would stimulate and increase the political knowledge of our best talent in the social sciences. It would improve the calibre of our members, deepen their knowledge of national problems and give some compensation for the disadvantages they are under in an informational way compared with their counterparts in the United States congress.
In passing, a reference to the problem of leadership in the library of parliament is in order. Three years ago a debate on the library of parliament in this house showed some attitudes, notably on the part of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill), which were very discouraging to the library profession in Canada. The Canadian library association argues that the head of this pivotal library should be a trained librarian skilled in all phases of that social science. The association cares not if he or she be French or English. They want the best trained librarian available for that post. The present honoured incumbent of the post is on the eve of retirement. Let us hope the government will reconsider the stand taken by the former government and follow the arguments presented three years ago by the lady member for York-Humber (Miss Aitken).
In this session the secretarial and office arrangement so far as our party is concerned are fair. Might one suggest in view of the relative responsibilities of those in the other house and members of parliament that there will always be a sense of indignation at members of parliament sharing rooms and sharing secretaries while the hon. gentlemen from the other place operate in their present spatial surroundings and secretarial glory.
We were all pleased to note in the speech from the throne reference to the forthcoming visit to Canada of President Eisenhower. On May 16, 1958, the senate foreign relations committee of the United States had the American ambassador to Canada before it as a witness. At that hearing we learned that Senator Morse of Oregon possessed a confidential letter from the Prime Minister of Canada to his ambassador in Washington. The letter did not go with the accompanying aide-memoire to the state department and therefore the responsibility for its reaching foreign hands lies within the Canadian service. The Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Smith) is satisfied that Canadian embassy officials are not responsible for the leak. Are we to assume that ghostly gremlins are spiriting letters away from the Canadian embassy in Washington? Obviously someone had the

The Address-Mr. Fisher time to creep in and make a phototatic copy of this letter or remove it entirely and surely someone in the service of the Canadian embassy must be responsible if it has fallen into other hands.
I wish to put on record a portion of the transcript of the proceedings before the United States senate foreign relations committee during which the following exchange between Senator Fullbright and Ambassador Merchant occurred:
Senator Fullbright:	The Canadian government
has strongly argued that under the terms of the tax treaty its tax ruling should be recognized. The United States tax court also held our own tax court held unanimously that for the United States to impose taxes in this case was a violation of the treaty with Canada. Is that not so?
Ambassador Merchant: That is my understanding.
Senator Fullbright: Why did you issue a formal statement at Ottawa (April 9) claiming that a favourable judgment for the United States treasury department would not affect the treaty? You did make such a statement, did you not?
Ambassador Merchant: Yes we did, senator.
Senator Fullbright: Why did you do it?
Ambassador Merchant: My understanding, senator, is that the appeal relates to the determination of the facts surrounding the case. That when judicial determination has been made on the facts, that then the question of the applicability of the treaty arises. This is a very complicated case and I am not a lawyer, sir.
Senator Fullbright: But you did make such a statement?
Ambassador Merchant: Yes.
Senator Fullbright: Who asked you to make that statement?
Ambassador Merchant: We felt in the embassy, sir, that a statement clarifying the position would be helpful. There has been a considerable amount of publicity in the Canadian press on this.
Senator Fullbright: The Canadian press has been very exercised about it, hasn't it?
Ambassador Merchant: Yes.
Senator Fullbright: Who instructed you to make that statement?
Ambassador Merchant: It was our own suggestion from the embassy, sir.
Senator Fullbright: I know, you were the ambassador. Who instructed you, who in our government in Washington instructed you to make that statement?
Ambassador Merchant: The idea was mine, sir. I requested authority to do it.
Senator Fullbright: You apparently knew very little about it. At least you seemed to in the beginning. Why did you do that?
Ambassador Merchant: There had been a considerable amount, sir, of we felt in the embassy-
Senator Fullbright: You said that. Who instructed you? Did our treasury ever discuss with you?
Ambassador Merchant: I was never instructed to do that sir. I was authorized to do it. It was my recommendation.
Senator Fullbright: Who authorized you?
Ambassador Merchant: I am authorized by the state department, sir.
Senator Fullbright: Do we have a representative of the treasury in Canada in connection with your embassy?
Ambassador Merchant: Yes sir.
Senator Fullbright: You never discussed this with him?
Ambassador Merchant: I discussed this with him, but I was not instructed.

Senator Fullbright: Did he suggest that you do this?
Ambassador Merchant: No sir.
Senator Fullbright: It originated with you?
Ambassador Merchant: Yes, sir.
Senator Fullbright: Although you had no background in this matter and you are not a lawyer, as you say?
Ambassador Merchant: That is right.
The point I wanted to make with this quotation is not that United States senators seem to attack civil servants with a considerable amount of relish-and perhaps we cannot have that kind of attack with that degree of relish in our situation because of ministerial responsibility-but it is that the statement issued on April 9 came after the state department was in receipt of a message from the Canadian government. As indicated in the house the other day by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Smith), this message said in effect that the Canadian government would have to reconsider the whole tax treaty if the decision went in favour of the United States tax authorities and yet after this letter was sent by the Secretary of State for External Affairs the United States ambassador in Canada issued the statement that that interpretation was completely wrong. The effect of Ambassador Merchant's statement of April 9 was simply that the Canadian government did not have to worry. I would suggest that this case is a typical example of the kind of misunderstanding and the kind of sloppy work concerning which something might be done when the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Canada get together this summer as indicated in the throne speech.
Returning to the transcript of the proceedings before the United States senate foreign relations committee, the following exchange took place:
Senator Fullbright: It strikes me as the kind of thing that does not really affect the major interests of this country. I am very sympathetic with people who have industries that are being injured by foreign competition wherever they are. I have tried to be a liberal in trade policies, but there are real substantial interests involved in that. But here is an instance, it seems to me, of going out of our way to irritate the Canadians in an inexcusable way. I think it is very suspicious that this matter was let lie. No one ever thought of bringing it until ten years after it took place. This exemption was given in Canada in order to increase, accelerate the production of war materials, and then years after this case is brought and our tax court unanimously held for the Canadians and still we pursue it. I must say I do not see any justification for this kind of action on our part.


The Chairman:: Are you asking a question?
Senator Fullbright: If he can give one, I would like for him to do it. He presumed, or did you assume, to make a statement in Canada about it which only irritated the Canadians all the more? Can you give any reasonable explanation as to why it wasn't pursued earlier?

Ambassador Merchant: No Senator.
Senator Fullbright: You see, he does not offer any at all. That and the type of thing of the Norman and Bryce case, it seems to me, and many cases I believe you will agree can be more irritating than even the question of the import of oil, don't you think?
At least we in this corner agree with Senator Fullbright.
I want to touch on another question that involves United States relations with Canada, and that is the great lakes pilots' dispute, the dispute between the so-called shipping federation of Canada and the great lakes pilots' association. Here is another case, a little bit in reverse, where we are going to find the United States congress protecting Canadian pilots. There is at present, waiting to be approved in Washington, a law that would require any British or foreign ships on the great lakes to carry a pilot who is certified by the United States coastguard or by the Canadian Department of Transport officials. What is the Canadian government doing in this particular case? It appears as though we are taking the usual stand. We are waiting for the United States to take the initiative and then they may solve some of the difficulties, for example, that are involved in this dispute. It seems almost incredible that deepsea ships, once they pass Kingston, do not require pilots. There is no pilotage district laid on that requires them to use pilots on the lakes, despite the very valuable canals and other shipping facilities that the Canadian and the United States public have provided. This rather shocking condition is something for which the Department of Transport must accept some responsibility.
The key to this dispute seems to lie in the fact that British and foreign shipowners have organized a shipping federation, called the shipping federation of Canada, and its obvious purpose seems to be to establish some sort of relation with pilots that does not involve a union organization. The effect of the ships sailing without pilots can be gained from this excerpt from the Hamilton Spectator of Friday last:
An 18-foot steel beam was torn from the bottom of the Burlington bascule bridge by a British freighter passing through the canal last night.
Bridge officials said the beam was left dangling in the path of small craft under the bridge.
Damage will not interfere with the operation of the bridge and passage of large ships.
Officials said a strong northwest wind forced the ocean-going freighter Manchester Pioneer to the side of the canal, the ship's stern dragging along the wall.
I will skip a bit. It goes on:
Seven years ago the northern bridge section was knocked into the canal by a loaded sandboat. The
The Address-Mr. Fisher huge crash that sent 400 tons of wood and steel into the canal gave Hamilton one of its worst traffic problems.
This ship, the Manchester Pioneer, was one of those vessels that was sailing without a Canadian pilot. Hamilton harbour is very difficult and dangerous to get into and out of and the master of the ship had an accident. In this particular instance it was not a serious one; but what would have happened had it been serious and the ship had sunk in that particular place? I think hon. members can realize the howls that would have gone up if this foreign ship-a British ship in this case; I call it a foreign ship, not a Canadian one-had sunk while without a Canadian pilot.
Since March 31 the shipping federation of Canada has attempted to carry out a completely new policy for sailing on the great lakes with no pilot except between Port Weller, which is the entrance to the Welland canal, and Sarnia at the north end of the St. Clair river. The purpose of this seems to be, as I said before, to break this organization of the great lakes pilots' association. In order to explain the remarkable and drastic departure that this is from the previous practice I think it is worth noting that up until this time all foreign ships always took on a pilot in the great lakes in any of their travels. Canadian and United States ships operating within the great lakes-St. Lawrence system, of course, have masters and other officers on their ships who must meet the Canadian standards and they know the lakes very well. Now we have foreign ships-and the number of bottoms is increasing very much each year -this year taking the stand that they do not need pilots. You can have German, Norwegian and Dutch skippers, with very little knowledge of sailing on the great lakes, without anyone in the pilothouse who is able to handle radio communications in the English language. The problem is further aggravated by the fact that on the lakes there are a number of whistles and other types of signals that are completely different from the kind of signals on the ocean-shipping routes.
We have no doubt at all that more and more ships will be coming into the lakes this year and next year, and unless we are saved by the United States law we could have a continuation of this situation where foreign ships are dragging around our lakes, through our valuable installations, without having any Canadian on board.
I think one point worth noting is that both the lake shippers' association, which is an American association representing the employers or the shipping interests on the great lakes, and the dominion marine association
498	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Fisher are both against the shipping federation in this particular matter. The dominion marine association has tried to arbitrate or get the parties to the dispute together, and they are certainly very much against this practice for the same reasons, of course, that the great lakes pilots' association are against the practice, namely that of having foreign ships in our waterways without pilots who are familiar with the waters.
One of the other factors involved is that on Canadian and United States ships, as a consequence of regulations issuing under the Canada Shipping Act, Canadian and United States sailors have to be very thoroughly screened for security reasons, finger-printed, their past investigated and all the rest of it. Here we have foreign ships without any contact at all, really, with such regulations, without a Canadian on board to watch them in their various moves, and they are allowed to get away with it by the Department of Transport. An indication of what the United States thinks about the situation is that they will not allow foreign ships to use their Sault locks. Foreign ships going up into lake Superior have to use the Canadian locks. Anyone who is familiar at all with the locks realizes that in almost every lake of the great lakes, but especially in lake Erie, lake Huron and lake Superior, there are a number of very dangerous passages and we have dangerous weather. We have fog conditions that can come up at any time and create difficulties for very experienced mariners, and ocean mariners are not familiar with these conditions to the extent that our pilots are. That leaves the whole situation wide open.
One of the points that makes the United States law, when it comes into effect, effective in Canada is that any ship plying the great lakes has to cross the international boundary line quite a number of times. That point should be mentioned in order to emphasize that we may be saved in this particular instance by the United States law.
But in seems to me that the Department of Transport could have anticipated this whole situation by stepping in and creating pilotage districts between Port Weller and Sarnia or between Sarnia, Detroit, Windsor and Fort William or Sault Ste. Marie. The Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) has the authority to create pilotage districts at any time, to lay on pilots for a particular area and even to set fees, but so for no action has been taken. The Department of Transport has pilotage areas up to Quebec city, from Quebec city to Montreal and from Montreal to Kingston but beyond that foreign ships are on their own.
When the shipping federation of Canada first refused to negotiate with the great


lakes pilots association in this particular case they came out with the statement that they had created a pilotage district from Port Weller to Sarnia, that is, they had set it up on their own. I understand that the deputy minister of transport sent a letter to the shipping federation of Canada telling them that only the Minister of Transport had the authority to set up such a pilotage district, but so far there has been no indication that the minister is going to act in that regard.
Furthermore, not enough pressure has been put on the shipping federation of Canada to bring them into conciliation talks. So far they have refused all offers extended through the Minister of Transport to get together with the great lakes pilots association. It seems to me that this is particularly a case where we could ask the government to take a forthright stand, show a bit of Canadianism and keep our pilots working on our inland waterways.
I should like to make a brief reference to another phase of anti-Americanism that is very rampant in the particular part of the country from which I come. It has to do with the trans-Canada pipe line and the construction work that is going on on the five spreads administered by the Northern Ontario Pipe Line Crown Corporation. I think it is worth while to hand out bouquets now and then even to those opposed to myself, and I should like to compliment the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) for his efforts to see that the men who are working on the pipe line are bona fide Canadians and also for his efforts to try to keep as many Canadians ready and trained for the job as possible.
There are many difficulties in the way. There is a great deal of misunderstanding but at present I would say there is nothing more unpopular between Port Arthur and Kapuskasing than these people whom we call "You-alls". These "You-alls" come from Texas, Arkansas, Kentucky and places like that. They call themselves "pipeliners." They are experts in doing their job and unfortunately in Canada at the present time we do not seem to have enough people who are capable of doing the more complex jobs, certainly not welding. We have very few back hole operators or cradle operators or anything like that.
I should like to suggest to the minister that under schedule M, which gives him the power to institute training in conjunction with the provincial authorities, a really serious effort be made this fall and winter to train operating engineers and various other kinds of pipeline workers so that in the future we will not have this running feud that is

going to go on all summer between native Canadians and the "You-alls" from the southern states.
It is most welcome to hear that the government is going to introduce something in the way of support for university education. It certainly has not been spelled out yet. Welcome as that will be, may I suggest that the other problem of retraining within the ranks of the unemployed is at this particular stage really of critical importance. I feel that one reason unemployment was not as great an issue as many people hoped it would be in the last election was that the majority of the people who are unemployed are those who are stuck, shall we say, with a low level of education. You can be fairly sure that almost 70 per cent of them have a grade eight education or less. In no mood of snobbery I should like to suggest that these people tend to be inarticulate but the fact that they are inarticulate should not be used to deny their great need for further education, especially of a technical kind, at the adult level. If we are saddled with seasonal unemployment we not only want to have campaigns to "do it now" but campaigns to train these people.
Along with the government's program to do something for the university people I suggest the government should take action with regard to something that is much more extensive and serious and retrain the unemployed or give some of them the first training they have ever had. In the main these people would appreciate it very much because with unemployment they recognize not only their personal need but the general need for more training.
I should like to comment on one issue that came up in the campaign. It was mentioned by the hon. member for Gatineau (Mr. Leduc) and has to do with pulpwood and support prices for pulpwood. The provincial legislature of Ontario has passed an amendment to an act extending the farm marketing facilities to pulpwood but I have checked and I gather that it is not planned to make it effective in northwestern Ontario. We know that the combines investigation people have brought out a report charging a number of pulp and paper companies with a combine and suggesting that they have set prices to the pulpwood farmer of Quebec and deliberately kept them low.
The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness) has a problem. If he does decide to bring pulpwood under the agricultural support legislation he has the problem of determining whether it will be done on a regional or national basis, and obviously because of the nature of the market we in northwestern
The Address-Mr. Fisher Ontario think it has to be done on a regional basis. The difficulty with setting pulpwood prices on a national basis lies in the fact that the pulpwood farmers of Quebec have been receiving such outrageously low prices for so long that any price set by taking their figures would put the Ontario pulpwood farmer in a very bad position.
There is another factor in this regard on which I think action by the minister might be worth while from the point of view of enhancing or maybe salvaging the reputation of some of the pulp and paper companies in our part of the country. Three of the pulp and paper companies in our area are included in the general charge made by the combines investigation branch and I think those companies would be encouraged if the minister would step in and set a floor price for pulpwood because it would certainly get them off the hook with respect to any possible inference that they were guilty or would be guilty of setting a price that was unfair to the pulpwood farmer.
I should like to say a few words about the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation which seems to be all alone in a hostile world at the present time. One of the central issues has to do with what will happen if big city television service is provided by private stations, something about which some members of the government are so vociferous in their demand. At the present time the C.B.C.'s production facilities are partly supported by advertising and if the corporation is forced into a situation where the advertisers are going to turn over their programs to the private stations in order to get the big city audiences what is the C.B.C. going to have left with which to provide service in the hinterland where we are still clamouring for television? We still have not got it in many places and we know we are not going to get it from private television station operators. That is just realism on their part, not a refusal to give service.
As the house has been told, there is a tremendous demand for television service in the bush country all across Canada. We are not going to get it from private operators. The C.B.C. is going to have to provide it and the people are anxious that the C.B.C. should do so. People in many parts of the country are demanding that it be provided because their taxes help to support the C.B.C. If the C.B.C. is taken apart under any new legislation and not left with the money and power to provide this service, then a situation will be created that will cause a great deal of dissatisfaction. Much as we appreciate the fact that the C.B.C. is not popular in certain areas, we would suggest that the government
500	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Martel be cautious in its approach here and follow generally the outline of the Fowler commission report on broadcasting.
In closing I should just like to refer to the fact that the leader of this party in the last house and in many other houses has gone, as well as the deputy leader, and to say that those of us who are left here will aim, although we shall most certainly fall short, for the same standard of parliamentary conduct as those gentlemen managed to show during their many years in this house.
(Translation):


Mr. J. J. Martel (Chapleau):: Mr. Speaker, my first words will be words of thanks to the electors of the constituency of Chapleau for the confidence they have placed in me. I want to assure them of my full co-operation, which in any case will apply to the whole valiant population of my constituency to whom I have promised, in the last election campaign, my complete devotion. I will do my best to represent them well.
I take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to offer you, on behalf of my electors and fellow citizens of Chapleau, and on my own behalf, my congratulations on your re-election to the post you so brilliantly occupy.
I also take this opportunity to congratulate the Deputy Speaker of this house and chairman of committees of the whole, the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny). I know that this honour is in recognition of his personal merits, but is also evidence of the right hon. Prime Minister's (Mr. Diefenbaker) consideration for the new Quebec members.
I also take this opportunity of congratulating the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Rea) on his election to the post of vice-chairman of the committees of the whole house.
I want, moreover, to associate with previous speakers in tendering very special congratulations to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne, to whom was bestowed an honour which reflects on all young representatives in this house, and on all young people in this country who have taken an entirely new interest in public affairs during the recent years, and more particularly during the last federal election.
At the same time, I want to tender my warmest congratulations and respects to the new ministers in the cabinet, i.e., the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Mrs. Fair-clough), the Minister of Defence Production (Mr. O'Hurley) and the Secretary of State (Mr. Courtemanche).

The appointment of two new Quebec ministers is a clear demonstration of the ground gained by the Conservative party in that province since last year and the attention given to the fine people of Quebec by the Prime Minister of Canada and his government.
I have a special reason to be drawn to the two new Quebec ministers since both of them, along with the member for St. Hyaeinthe-Bagot (Mr. Ricard), came to Amos last January to preside over the convention where I was chosen candidate. To do so they had to travel several hundred miles through a snowstorm and return to Ottawa during the night to take up their duties on the following morning. I am convinced that they will long remember this flying trip and that even if they had to leave as soon as the convention was over, they will have fond recollections of their visit to the constituency of Chapleau and of the well known hospitality of the people I have the honour to represent in this house.
I also thank the Solicitor General (Mr. Balcer) who was kind enough to come and officially open my election campaign last winter.
Mr. Speaker, the speech from the throne gives an excellent general picture of the program which the new government intends to put into effect in the coming months so as to give Canadians all the attention they have a right to expect from their leaders and holds out prospects of a brilliant future for our great and beautiful country. The strong measures already taken by the Conservative government at the last session bode well for the future and are a guarantee that the projects announced by the new government will serve the whole of the Canadian people in years to come, and at the same time be of substantial assistance in the present period of stabilization.
I have noticed in the speech from the throne that very special attention is being paid to the progress of science for peaceful purposes. I am all in favour of this policy-Of what use would all our weapons be-and in many cases they are already obsolescent- if our Canadian fellow citizens were not making every effort to promote higher learning, or if, one day, they were to lose even the will to defend themselves? We should neglect nothing to improve the lot of humanity as a whole and to apply scientific progress to peaceful purposes. The Conservative government, as recently as last year, first by way of more generous social security legislation

for Canadians and then by way of increased gifts of wheat and other commodities to underdeveloped nations has demonstrated its concern in this regard.
As for other social security benefits put forward by the government, such as family allowances, I wish to go on record as agreeing with the hon. member for Matapedia-Matane (Mr. Belzile) who last week asked that these be increased in proportion to the higher cost of living.
The speech from the throne also mentions the improvement in the economic situation. I should like to draw to your attention the fact that trade should be encouraged, not only with commonwealth countries but also with all countries in the world, to the extent where it would not jeopardize the best interests and the security of Canada.
With regard to public works, I must of course begin by thanking the government for projects already carried out. I take advantage of this opportunity to thank the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) for the works that have already been carried out in my constituency and I would like to ask him to take under serious consideration requests for public works that will be made to him by various localities of my constituency which covers a vast territory.
Efficient steps will have to be taken to guarantee the very survival of one of the main industries of my constituency, the common metals mines, which would incidentally be of assistance to the whole Canadian economy.
As was suggested in this house, a one year additional tax exemption for any new mine would perhaps be a good solution but, in my humble opinion, the speech from the throne proposes a much more lasting solution which would promote the prosperity of our mining industry.
In fact, the house will be asked to approve a research program on the use and processing of our natural resources in Canada.
In my riding, Mr. Speaker, at lake Mat-tagami, a large commercial deposit of zinc, copper, silver and gold has been located recently. It will be necessary before long to build a new railway branch line running from the new Beattyville-Chibougamau line which started operating last year, and which would extend, I hope as far as James bay, still within the limits of the constituency of Chapleau. Mineral deposits already explored in this area
The Address-Mr. Martel seem to indicate that the lake Mattagami discovery will rank with that of Pine Point in the Northwest Territory where the present government proposes-and with good reason -to construct a railway line.
A project such as this, in the north of my constituency, would lay open to the sense of initiative and enterprise not only of the people of the Chapleau riding, but also of all Canadians, a vast and rich territory, most of which is thickly wooded. Canada's future lies northward, and opportunities await the young and venturesome who will go out and settle there.
As far as unemployment insurance is concerned, the speech from the throne proposes a few amendments to the act. We have already enacted several measures to improve the situation; however, a more urgent need would be to open employment and unemployment insurance offices in my constituency, where there are no such offices. Requests to that effect have already been submitted to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr). The steps already taken by this parliament and those that will be introduced by the Conservative government, in order to improve the Unemployment Insurance Act, will be heartily welcomed in my constituency. In fact, they are absolutely essential, in view of the character of the valiant working population there who, more often than not, can only get seasonal jobs, or else have to travel very long distances, or to go outside the limits of the constituency, to find work. At present, there is neither employment nor unemployment office in Chapleau. Yet it has been repeatedly requested from the former Liberal government, but the matter has always been shelved, and that is perhaps why our people often have to seek jobs far afield, whereas if there were an employment office on the spot, our workers could always hope to find jobs closer to home. I think the situation deserves special consideration, and in view of the government's intention to improve the act, I hope that the requests repeatedly made by the people of my riding will be heard at last.
The speech from the throne also announces an important small homes loan program. I want again to thank the government for all it has done so far and to ask that particular attention be given to the manner in which small individual loans are processed by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation in

The Address-Mr. Martel the more remote districts, far from the large centres, where requirements should really be less strict.
We want to favour the development of the northern areas. Therefore we must think of the families who are already living there, and want to find accommodation, or of the young people who want to settle in that part of the country and of families who are going north with the future of their children in mind.
The pioneers of our area have put up with great hardship to establish themselves in a new district. Even today they are still doing so in several parishes of the constituency of Chapleau.
There was another matter in the throne speech which attracted my notice. That was the policy with regard to the construction of new airports and the opening of new airways across Canada. There is absolute need of an airport in my constituency and I am sure that the Minister of Transport, having had the opportunity of visiting my constituency upon the opening of the Chibougamau railway, will give this matter particular attention. On this occasion he had to land at the single airport we have, even if it had not yet been licensed by the Department of Transport. He realized that we greatly needed one for the development of the north.
As far as the regulating of television and radio broadcasting in Canada, the speech from the throne indicates that improvements will be made to the relevant statute. On this point, I believe this government would be well advised to pay particular attention to remote areas such as my constituency where people are scattered over a large territory. Those Canadians often feel very far away from their fellow citizens. More powerful radio stations, low frequency relay transmitters, or satellite television stations would often take them out of their isolation at little cost.
I also hope that the amendments to be made to the Canadian Broadcasting Act will provide for ridding the national networks of some so-called neutral commentators or those commentators whose tendencies, if not communist, are at least questionable.
I have also taken note with satisfaction of the amendments which the government proposes to bring to the Agricultural Stabilization Act. Besides the many products already covered by that legislation which will be of great benefit to the farmers of the constituency of Chapleau, I understand that a minimum price will be set for pulpwood. This is very important for a large part of


my riding. I hope therefore that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness) will require his departmental experts to take into account the report on commercial restrictive practices -under the Combines Investigation Act-in connection with the purchase of pulpwood in certain areas of eastern Canada, a report was submitted on March 31, 1958, by the hon. Minister of Justice (Mr. Fulton) and filed with the Clerk of the house on Wednesday May 14 last. In view of certain restrictive and I daresay at times illegal practices on the part of some of the companies buying pulpwood not only in my area but also in the whole province and eastern Canada, I believe that in the setting of a base price or a support price for pulpwood, account must be taken of the information contained in the report from the Minister of Justice. In all fairness, I must add that buyers of wood or lumber companies are not all involved in this investigation and that some of them, in fact, were paying reasonable prices, if not each year, at least some years. It is to be noted also that price fixing on pulpwood occurred during a Liberal administration.
However, in the field of agriculture, which is of particular interest to the residents of jny constituency, the majority of whom derive their living from that industry, and in view of the huge agricultural possibilities north of Chapleau, and even in the parishes already in existence, I should like to direct once again a request to the Minister of Agriculture. Our district, and the whole northeastern Quebec area for that matter, has a great need for an experimental farm, since at present, our farmers have to travel over 300 miles in some cases to obtain information or services from an experimental farm located in northern Ontario. Not that the employees of that particular farm are inefficient or unwilling to co-operate with our farmers, but the fact remains that our farmers find the present service definitely inadequate.
It was also proposed in the speech from the throne that amendments be made to the Canadian Farm Loan Act. Well, here again, I earnestly trust that special account will be taken of the requests made by farmers of remote areas, and that the relevant rules shall be improved or relaxed, so that the farmers of the northern areas, from whom income guarantees are often asked as if their farms were located near large cities like Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto, may obtain those loans with less difficulty. Our farmers are an honest and hard-working group. They have often proved it in the past, more

particularly in the province of Quebec, where the government of the Hon. Mr. Duplessis put his trust in them as soon as he came into power in 1936. I am therefore confident that our government will trust them still further and continue to introduce legislation to help them. As a matter of fact, I am sure that such action will in the long run benefit the whole Canadian people.
I also read in the speech from the throne that the government intends to establish within the administrative machinery of the government a small business section. This legislation would be of great help to secondary industries located away from the larger centres in remote towns or villages. There again, Mr. Speaker, I am very confident that the new government will see to it that our industry is decentralized, particularly our war industries, which action has been entirely neglected by the former centralizing governments who preceded the Conservatives at the helm for the past years. This will, I am sure, promote the future development of our wealthy land, while making our country less vulnerable in the event of war.
I fully approve the government's decision to consider amendments to the Citizenship and Immigration Act. As to the Indian Act, I shall merely say that it contains some unfair provisions with regard to this group of people. The northern part of my constituency has a number of Indian residents. In spite of the somewhat tardy efforts of the former Liberal government, amendments brought to the act do not seem to have filled the present needs of the Indians who are, in fact, the original inhabitants of this country. I am sure that the new government will set this matter right, not only in the constituency of Chapleau but everywhere in Canada where there are Indians. As a matter of fact the Conservative government has already indicated its good intention in this regard by appointing an Indian to the Senate. This is the first time this has happened in the history of this country.
With regard to amending and extending the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act, I might say that this is a matter of particular interest to northwestern Quebec and to several other mining areas in Canada. For my part, I am sincerely convinced that this question must be solved once and for all. I therefore suggest that the official price of gold be doubled and raised to $70 an ounce, whatever our neighbours to the south may think of it. In the long run, this measure will be necessary not only in Canada but also in the United States where the value of the dollar is deteriorating more rapidly than in Canada. An official increase in the price of gold
The Address-Mr. Martel in Canada would undoubtedly stimulate the development of northern Canada and bring about an unprecedented rush to the north. We would thus give practical form to the future development of Canada and make sure of the expansion of the rich areas of the north for several generations to come. If we do so as early as possible, we will prevent an economic depression which, under the present system, will follow sooner or later. The more we delay, the less effect will such a measure have.
There are no gold mines yet in production in the constituency of Chapleau. However, whenever the price of gold is raised, several prospective mines will be opened, and the same will happen in many areas of Canada, which will help the Canadian economy. Mr. Speaker, I wish to quote a paragraph from the mining paper called Northern Miner, which has long been in favour of an official raising in the price of gold.
(Text):
Mr. Speaker, I should like the Canadian government to do all in its power to increase the official price of gold to $70 an ounce. This will help the development of the north country more than anything else. In 1933, the official price of gold was increased from $20 to $35 an ounce, and this action was taken only in the light of the 1929 prices. The price has been fixed at $35 ever since. I should like to mention in this connection an editorial in the Northern Miner, a prominent mining newspaper which had this to say about the question:
The big monetary change of the past 20 years has been a growing reliance on American paper of various kinds. When, in the days of the old gold standard, a country got into financial straits it could not dare to lose its gold reserves and fought to maintain them. It put a ban on imports of goods, worked at low wages and long hours to build up exports in order to restore the gold position. Nowadays a country in difficulties simply borrows from the fund or elsewhere, and the borrowings are in the form of U.S. dollars, like the recent ones of Britain and France. Such a state of affairs has weakened the foreign case for an increase in the international price of gold. If you don't play along with the American ideas on gold you don't get a loan.
In the past these monopolies in paper money have ended disastrously. I believe we should put ourselves on record as advocating an increase to $70 an ounce in the price of gold right now if we want to prevent a repetition of the 1929 depression.
(Translation):
Now, Mr. Speaker, I have been impressed by another matter in the speech from the throne; it has to do with amendments to the Transport Act. I believe that there could be a great deal of work done in that field. A

The Address-Mr. Michaud complete revision of our transport systems in Canada is necessary so as to give the best possible service.
The program put forward by the new Conservative government is truly a strong program. There can be no doubt that the Canadian economy which has already felt the beneficial effects of the program initiated last year will benefit still more from it this year.
I am happy to approve in full the proposed program. Indeed, it is a well known fact that it has been endorsed by the people of Canada from the Atlantic to the Pacific. This was shown particularly-and it is an interesting fact-by the people of the province of Quebec. I am proud to be from the province of Quebec because we too, from Quebec, wish to be associated with the future development of our country.
(Text):


Mr. H. J. Michaud (Kent, N.B.):: My first words will be of congratulation to Mr. Speaker upon his reappointment to the high office he now holds. The unanimous approval with which his appointment was received by all members of the house speaks eloquently of the high qualities which he brings to the position he now occupies.
(Translation):
My congratulations to you also, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on your appointment to the post you are now holding.
(Text):
I also wish to be associated with all the speakers who have preceded me in congratulating the mover and seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne for the able manner in which they discharged the responsibilities which were assigned to them.
New parliaments are invariably accompanied by new characteristics. Irrespective of political alliances, new members are greeted with the accompaniment of sincere good wishes, and former members no longer present are missed with equal sincerity. I wish to say I was particularly pleased at the opening of this new parliament to meet an old classmate of the 1934 St. Joseph's University alumni. I refer to the hon. member for lies de-la-Madeleine (Mr. Keays). To me, the hon. member is even more than a classmate; he is an old teacher. Indeed, the hon. member has the privilege of having taught me everything I know in the fine art of plain-chant. Hence, therefore, the foundation of my reputation for rendering with remarkable aptitude the so-called "silent notes" when joining in sing-songs, or otherwise. I do wish to say, however, that I am not alto-

gether disconcerted, for all that. Indeed, when such circumstances arrive, I endeavour to draw comfort from the old saying that there is always a silver lining to every cloud. And when I consider the political mantle with which the hon. member for Iles-de-la-Madeleine is now endowed, I cannot help but say: "What would have happened, had he been instead my teacher in political science". I shall not pursue further this matter, Mr. Speaker, knowing fully well that your duty would compel you to call me to order.
I have followed with deep interest, the speeches made by the different members from the maritime provinces in the course of this debate and should like to comment upon some aspects of their statements. I was particularly interested listening to the speech made on May 20 by the hon. member for Westmorland (Mr. Creaghan). Being my first neighbour, geographically, I hope he will permit me the few observations I am about to make. I should like to note that the description he gave of his riding, if accurate in as far as it went, nevertheless was very incomplete in one other important way. While it was of significance to describe the southern and eastern boundaries of his riding, I submit that it remains of still greater significance to state that Westmorland is bounded on the north by the county of Kent, which I represent. In a facetious way, of course, might I indicate that following the result of last June 10 election in Cumberland county, Nova Scotia, and following the result of March 31 election in Westmorland county, the neighbourhood of Kent county, today is Westmorland county's greatest claim to distinction. This being said, I hasten to congratulate the hon. member for the effort and success of his maiden speech. I do hope, however, that the hon. member does not expect that I share all the views he has expressed. I would remind him, particularly, that his appraisal of the economic conditions in his area is far from depicting a true picture of the situation.
Referring to the slogan "We never had it so good," the hon. member was quite emphatic in asserting that the term during past years was not applicable to the conditions of his constituency. Following this enunciation he then proceeded to enumerate what he considers the real economic assets of his own city of Moncton. Besides the Canadian National Railways shops and offices, which are both establishments of long standing, mention was made of the other federal agencies located in his riding comprising the Department of Fisheries, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Transport, the civil service commission, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the local and maritime regional offices of the unemployment insurance commission, all of which account

for a considerable number of employees contributing to the economy of his constituency. Not mentioned by the hon. member was the construction in 1951-52 of a large federal building serving as headquarters for the Post Office Department and other federal agencies, the establishment of an R.C.A.F. supply depot and of the important Lakeburn airport.
All these establishments in the Moncton district and other parts of the constituency- and this was not mentioned by the hon. gentleman-were made under the former Liberal administration and at a time when the constituency of Westmorland, according to the hon. member's own words, "Did not have it so good". In the pursuance of his speech the hon. member then referred to the present Canadian National Railways lay-offs which spelled great hardship for so many citizens of the area and he omitted to mention also that an unprecedented number of unemployed at this time were registered at the local or regional unemployment offices. The point I now wish to make is the following: In view of this recent and sudden change in the general economy of Westmorland constituency, which incidentally also affects conditions in my own county, would the hon. member be prepared to say now, "We never had it so good?"
The hon. member for Westmorland of course was not the only one to share these optimistic views concerning the maritime economy. Practically every hon. member from the maritimes who has spoken in this debate has sounded the same confident note. Confidence, of course, should not be shoved aside at any time. Some will say, and rightly so, that it is the cornerstone of success in every endeavour. And contrary to what is often said no one, I submit, wishes to be a prophet of doom; but the essence of confidence and of optimism in the future does not lie in presumption nor does it exclude true realism when realism needs to be exercised. Many resounding words were spoken during this debate, such as:
The long-awaited recognition of maritime needs.
The maritimes-a body of land submerged under the waters of Liberal indifference.
There is a new spirit abroad in the old provinces by the sea.
These are truly noble words, paying true lip service to a common cause; but how far from the true picture of the actual economic conditions in the maritimes today. In spite of all these glowing words, if ever the maritimes deserved to be described as a depressed area, it is now. The pulp industry is at a stalemate. Potato farmers are faced with faltering markets. Our labour class in increasing number is faced with the grim prospect of being unable to find work for the coming season. If hon. members opposite have any doubt as
The Address-Mr. Michaud to the accuracy of this statement I would merely refer them back to what the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska (Mr. Van Horne) said in this house on May 20, as reported at page 298 of Hansard:
I hasten to speak, not without sorrow, of a most urgent problem affecting most severely over 8,000 men in my riding and more than 600,000 people in Canada. There is more unemployment and more suffering due to unemployment in my riding today than at any time since the darkest days of the depression. I regard it as my duty to tell this house that if it were not for unemployment insurance, family allowances and pensions-
At this point an hon. member interjected, "Liberal measures." The hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska continued:
-many people in my constituency would be close to insurrection.
What does the present government propose to do at this time to solve the unemployment problem now crippling our national economy? We are told through the medium of the speech from the throne that a huge public works program is proposed as a remedy. Much has been said about the adequacy of this program and I shall not pursue further the discussion on this matter.
But I shall make one suggestion in regard to a project of great importance to the maritimes. I refer to the proposed Chignecto canal. May I mention that I noticed with pleasure that numerous speakers from the maritimes referred to this project in the course of their remarks. In speaking on behalf of this project today one is fortified by the words of the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) who, speaking in the city of Saint John on May 3, 1957, as reported in the Saint John Telegraph of that date, had this to say:
-a Conservative government at Ottawa would . . . carry out a complete investigation into the feasibility of the decades-old proposal for a Chignecto canal to link the bay of Fundy with Northumberland strait.
The survey would determine "whether the dream of past generations can become the reality of the future" in the Chignecto isthmus linking New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
Surely the Prime Minister will now wish to give substance to his promise made on that particular occasion by recommending, as he then said, a complete investigation into the feasibility of this proposal.
Furthermore, new developments in the industrial field of the maritimes strengthens the claim for the building now of the Chignecto canal. In this regard I wish to quote from a recent study published by the Financial Post, May 3 edition. Briefly the main points outlined in this study are as follows:
There is increasing speculation that another serious look at the costly project-estimated at more than $100 million-will be taken soon, now that work has started on the Irving Refinery
506	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Michaud
(capacity:	about 40,000 bbls. daily); and New
Brunswick plans to proceed with construction of a $16 million thermal power plant.
The chief advantages would be that it would shorten the water route between bay of Fundy, Atlantic and St. Lawrence ports. It would provide incentive to industrial development in the bay of Fundy region. The same study further states that the Atlantic provinces economic council takes the stand that the Chignecto canal should be regarded as part and parcel of the St. Lawrence seaway. This view was recently endorsed by the New Brunswick federation of labour which said in a brief to the federal government that the canal would be essential to the survival of the maritime shipping industry after the opening of the St. Lawrence seaway.
The proposed canal would make it possible for shipping out of any of the Fundy ports to proceed through the strait of Northumberland without having to go all the way around the elongated peninsula that is Nova Scotia.-This, it is argued, would knit the economies of the three maritime provinces more closely together. For example, it would bring Charlottetown more than 600 miles closer to Saint John; Yarmouth would be almost 500 miles closer to Newcastle, New Brunswick. Furthermore, the sea route from Prince Edward Island to Boston and other large centres of population in the New England states would be almost 500 miles shorter, and it would bring the Fundy ports of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick between 400 and '600 miles closer to Gaspe, Quebec and Montreal.
Spurred on by the approaching development of even more costly projects, businessmen and labour leaders in Saint John, Moncton, Truro, Amherst and a dozen other neighbouring towns are arguing, plotting and campaigning for the canal. For these and the other aforesaid reasons, I would urge the present government to give serious and immediate consideration to the construction of the Chignecto canal.
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I wish now to make a few remarks on French radio and television in the maritimes provinces. First I want to pay tribute to the work accomplished by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. For the past twenty years, the C.B.C. has supplied us with a series of recreative and cultural programs of high standard; it has helped the various parts of our country to know each other better and it has been largely instrumental in the creation of a Canadian spirit. The comparison of that production with that of a number of private stations in Canada and abroad shows beyond any doubt, the high
IMr. Michaud.]

quality of our present system of government control in Canada, for radio-broadcasting as well as television.
However, criticisms are often heard from owners of private stations against the so-called monopoly of the C.B.C.; they request the establishment of a commission or a superior organization which could study their grievances. Without in any way minimizing the great usefulness and good intentions of most of those people, I think that if it is considered appropriate to adopt new measures, these measures should not in any way disturb the present system, but be based on the general and higher interests of the Canadian public rather than on particular commercial interests.
The French-speaking population of the maritime provinces is following with interest the tremendous progress made in the last few years to extend radio-broadcasting to all parts of Canada. We must pay tribute to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for having established CBAF station in Moncton, New Brunswick. During the few years it has been operating, this station has acquired a good audience. It not only broadcasts programs of the French network, but produces its own local programs and exerts a considerable influence over the whole area.
The population has also followed with equal interest the efforts made in view of developing a parallel T.V. system in the maritime provinces. Moncton, St. John, Charlottetown and Halifax are already transmitting English programs produced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Everyone is happy about such progress. May I point out however that close to 300,000 French-speaking people in the maritime provinces are awaiting with great anxiety the establishment in their areas of some services in the field of television as well as radio on the part of the C.B.C. It is not my intention to underline the necessity of radio and television in our national life. The fact is recognized and has already been amply stressed by the report of the Massey Commission. The fundamental principles are not lacking. The first objective of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is-and I quote:
To diversify and enrich the life of Canadians of all classes in all parts of the country.
This was an extract from "The National Radio and Television Objectives of the C.B.C., February 24 1956". About the needs of the maritime provinces in particular, the report of the Massey Commission suggested:
The establishment of a French radio station to serve the French-speaking population of the maritime provinces.
The same recommendation is made for television. Elsewhere, this same report points out that:

If we want a more abundant and better cultural nourishment, we must pay the price.
As has already been said, part of the recommendations of the Massey Commission have been implemented and there is in Moncton, since a few years, a C.B.C. station linked with the French network. There is however but one radio station to serve the Frenchspeaking population of the maritimes and that gives rise to technical difficulties. The station already gives invaluable service, but it cannot reach the whole population. That is why we would be glad to see the establishment of relay stations, which would extend its coverage at low cost. Such relay stations are already numerous in Canada. In New Brunswick, there are two already serving the English-speaking population of Edmundston and Grand Sault. That is a service the utility of which nobody would question. If the principle is good in these particular cases, it is only fair to ask that it be applied to other groups which are more numerous and even more destitute. In saying this I am thinking in particular of the community of St. Mary's Bay in Nova Scotia, about 25,000 strong, whose every day language is French.
There are some less numerous, but still more isolated groups in St. John, New Brunswick for instance, where more than 7,000 French-speaking people are living, and in the mining centres of Nova Scotia, which have over 10,000 French-speaking persons. There is, too, the case of Fredericton, where the French population is not so large, but where in fact, special circumstances call for the building of a relay station. I refer to the university and to the normal school of the province and to the presence of a group of intellectuals who would benefit from French broadcasts-not to mention the establishment of an important military camp where several thousand French-Canadians will be stationed. There is no doubt that even though they may be far from their native province, they still wish to take their part of the French life of this country, a thing which they could do were they to have a French network relay station at that point.
As far as the establishment of a French language television station in the maritime provinces is concerned, that is a point which is acquiring vital significance for the Frenchspeaking people of the area. It should be recalled that the Massey commission had also recommended the establishment of a French language station in the maritimes. This has not been done to date. While recognizing the technical difficulties involved, we are still hoping that this will soon be done. The C.B.C. is so intent on repeating that its "function is to ensure that all Canadians, wherever they
The Address-Mr. Michaud may be, shall be as well served by public stations as by private stations" that we cannot bring ourselves to believe that a French language television service will not be extended to a large number of our people. The principle involved in the establishment of a basic French network radio station in Moncton applies with equal force to the establishment of a French language television station in the same area.
Mr. Speaker, I have attempted to put forward some need with regard to radio as well as to television. These are real needs and the C.B.C. is in a position to fill them. To do so, however, it will need the necessary funds. We feel that only a system like the C.B.C. is in a position to provide the Canadian people as a whole, French-speaking as well as English-speaking with a truly national radio and television service, a factor of Canadian culture. That is why any change which would make it more difficult for the C.B.C. to carry on would be highly prejudicial to the various groups in the national family.
I might add that the needs I have mentioned, which had originally been recognized by the Massey commission, were subsequently recognized by the Fowler royal commission on Broadcasting in 1957. In chapter 10 of the report published in that year, the following passage may be found:
Although the need for broadcasting in the two main Canadian languages adds to a number of facilities and programmes to be created and thus increases the complexity of the financial problem, the fundamentals of broadcasting are the same in both languages.
These are Canadian problems, rather than English-Canadian or French-Canadian problems.
And further in the same chapter, the following can be read about French television in the maritime provinces:
Another forceful and almost universal request formulated in the maritime French-language briefs was for a television station linked to the French network and the concensus pointed to Moncton, N.B., as the most favourable spot for that station. Coming from a geographical area of Canada where Canadians of French speech bulk so large-38 per cent in the case of New Brunswick-the request does not seem unreasonable. A study of the matter should be made at an early date.
Mr. Speaker, I shall conclude by a statement taken from the brief submitted to this same commission by the Conseil de la vie franpaise:
Canada is officially a bilingual and bicultural country. Indeed, one third of its population is of French origin. That third lives mainly in the province of Quebec. However, one million Frenchspeaking Canadians live in other provinces of Canada, 300,000 of them in the maritime provinces. Radio and television broadcasting, even private broadcasting, being in the service of the public must take into account this situation of right and of fact.

The Address-Mr. Hanbidge
Mr. Speaker, I would not like to close my speech without thanking sincerely the faithful electors of the constituency of Kent, New Brunswick, for the support they gave me on March 31 last. The confidence they have shown me so generously on this occasion now gives me the privilege and the honour of representing them for the third time in this house. I appreciate this honour and I thank them most sincerely. I undertake today as in the past to serve faithfully all the electors of the constituency of Kent.
(Text):


Mr. R. L. Hanbidge (Kindersley):: Mr. Speaker, one of the nice little stories that came out of the recent election campaign originated in Calgary. As I understand it, when the speaker at a service club meeting was called upon to deliver his oration he got up and said, "Mr. Chairman and fellow Conservatives." Surrounded as I am in this corner of the house by so many fellow Conservatives, Mr. Speaker, if I should blurt out "brother Conservatives" or "fellow Conservatives" I hope you will not have the Sergeant-at-Arms throw me out of the house.
The days of holding Conservative conventions in the province of Saskatchewan in a telephone booth are at an end and I trust for a long time to come. We in Saskatchewan have been kidded as being the whooping cranes. I hope that rare bird will multiply in numbers like the Progressive Conservative
members in the house at the present time under the dynamic leadership of our distinguished Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker).
My first words in the house should be to congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, on your election to the responsible office that you hold. You did not have the advantage of being born in either Bruce county or Saskatchewan, but I understand that in that quiet, convincing and persuasive way of yours you did the next best thing and saw the light of day in the province of Alberta. 1 understand that you persuaded interested parties in your family to see to it that your first and important decision along that line should be carried out. You have also had a very distinguished career in the public service before you entered this chamber and we, the 50, 60 or 70 distant relatives of yours-I am not sure of the exact number-are very proud of the honour that has been worthily bestowed on you. On behalf of the brothers-in-law I congratulate you on being elevated to the position of highest honour in the gift of this house.
May I call it ten o'clock, Mr. Speaker?



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

John Whitney Pickersgill: May I ask the leader what the business is for tomorrow?


Howard Charles Green: We shall continue with this debate tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.


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

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

Mr. Chevrier: 1.	When was the geological survey of Canada established?
2.	What is its purpose?
3.	How many university students were employed in this survey since its establishment, giving the number separately for each year?
4.	What are the duties of the students?
5.	How long does this work last?
6.	What remuneration do the students receive?
7.	What are the rates and allowances for 1957?
8.	Is it intended to expand the program in 1958?
9.	What is the cost of this program per year?
Answer by: Hon. Paul Comlois (Minisler of
Mines and Technical Surveys):
1.	1842.
2.	The main objectives of the survey are twofold:
(i)	To study, map and report on the geology of Canada and thereby: (a) determine the nation's potential mineral resources; (b) provide industry with the data required for the discovery and exploration of the nation's mineral deposits; (c) assist planning and development by providing fundamental data concerning engineering projects, water supply, and other factors affecting land use; and (d) contribute to the science of geology.
(ii)	To carry on other research that will contribute to the knowledge of how and when the rocks of the earth's crust and their contained mineral deposits were formed, thereby contributing to the growth of the science and enhancing the ability of geologists to map and explain the geology of Canada.
3.	Information available only since 1948, as follows:
Student
Year	assistants	Graduates1948	113	731949	111	901950	120	1011951	79	911952	101	661953	101	611954	112	561955	107	601956	125	491957	113	491958	156	774.	Most students are attached to geological field parties where, under the supervision of a staff geologist, they assist in collecting and
Questions
compiling geological data, and undertake various routine duties required for the operation and maintenance of the parties in the field.
5.	The length of the field season varies according to locality, type of project, and other factors, but averages between three and four months.
6 and 7. The salary range in effect in 1957 and unchanged in 1958 for university undergraduates is from $245 to $305 per month, based on educational qualifications and relevant experience.
In addition to the above, a student assistant, who is in responsible charge of a survey party, may receive a bonus of $25 per month, and one in charge of a survey sub-party, a bonus of $15 per month.
The graduate students are ordinarily paid anywhere from $4,200 to $5,730 dependent on qualifications and experience.
Subsistence is provided while in the field and transportation to and from university to the place from which the field party will operate.
8.	It is planned to expand the 1958 field program by the seasonal employment of up to 50 additional persons, mainly students. Accordingly, seven additional six-man parties have been organized, bringing the anticipated total field parties for 1958 to 79.
9.	The estimated cost of the complete geological branch program for the 1957-58 fiscal year was $2,690,000. This amount includes the cost of all field, office and laboratory activities.


CIVIL DEFENCE
Mr. Martin (Essex East): 1.	Has there been a meeting of the federal-provincial advisory committee on civil defence since July 1, 1957? If not, when will the next meeting be held?
2.	Have representations been made since July 1, 1957, by any provincial government to the government of Canada for the enactment of a civil defence act?
3.	Was the resignation of the civil defence director for the metropolitan area of Toronto discussed with federal civil defence authorities?
Answer by: Hon. J. W. Monleilh (Minisler of
National Health and Welfare):
1.	An invitation to hold such a meeting is at present in the hands of all provincial ministers and it is expected that a firm date for the meeting will be fixed as soon as replies have been received from the provincial ministers concerned.
2.	No.
3.	No.

Questions


LES MECHINS, GASPE COUNTY-WHARF
Mr. Bourgel: 1.	Did the Department of Public Works do any work on the wharf of Les Mechins, county of Gaspe, Quebec, during 1957?
2.	If so, what are the names of those employed on this work, and what amount was paid to each?
3.	What are the names of those who supplied material, and what amount was paid to each?
Answer by: Hon, Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works):
1.	Yes, wharf repairs undertaken by day
labour.
2. Names of those	Amounts	paid
employed	to each
Yvon Verreault	$191.57
Vianney Verreault	 111.61
Pierre Miville	 30.00
2.	Names of those	Amounts	paid
employed	to each
Guy Verreault	 7.52
Jean Marc Imbeault	 7.52
Gervais Verreault	 45.06
Loreyn St. Gelais	 56.34
Francois Letourneau	 14.96
Antonio Tardif	 7.52
Octave Denis	 82.64
J. Arthur Boivin	 71.36
J. Antoine Boucher	 33.78
Roland Courcy	 22.50
Aurele Landry	 14.96
Amounts paid
3. Names of suppliers	to each
Arthur Pelletier	$461.70
Phillipe Keable	 233.60
Adrien Savard	 28.00

Tuesday, May 27, 1958