1960-12-07

CANADA ELECTIONS ACT


Mr. M. W. Martin (Timmins) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-50, to amend the Canada Elections Act (election expenses).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Murdo William Martin: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to make political parties as honest as political candidates in regard to election expenses.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



STARRED QUESTIONS


UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE


Mr. Tardif: What was the amount paid by the federal government to each of the provinces under the Unemployment Assistance Act from January 1 to September 30, in each of the years, 1957, 1958, 1959 and 1960?


Hon. J. W. Monieiih (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, this question asks as to the amounts paid by the federal government to each of the provinces under the Unemployment Insurance Act from January 1 to September 30 in each of the years 1957, 1958, 1959 and 1960. A number of statistics had to be gathered for this answer, and I wonder whether the house would agree to my just laying it on the table or having it printed in Hansard.


Mr. Speaker:: Has the minister leave to have the answer incorporated in Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The answer referred to follows on page 576.1



FORESTRY DEPARTMENT

Mr. Pickersgill: 1.	On what date was the Department of Forestry
Act proclaimed?
2.	On what date was the Minister of Forestry appointed?
3.	What was the total number of employees in the office of the Minister of Forestry on November 17: 1960?
4.	What was the total number of employees in the Department of Forestry (apart from the minister's office), on November 17, 1960?
5.	On what date was the deputy minister of forestry appointed?
6.	How many other officers, clerks and employees have been appointed to the Department of Forestry under section 4(2) of the Department of Forestry Act?
7.	How many persons have been transferred to the Department of Forestry from (a) Department of Northern Affairs; (b) the Department of Agriculture, under section 4(3) of the Department of Forestry Act?


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: 1. The act was proclaimed on October 3, 1960, with effect from October 1.
2.	October 11, 1960.
3.	Five.
4.	The departmental establishment was under consideration at this date but had not been approved; therefore no persons had been appointed.
5.	November 26, 1960.
6.	No persons in addition to those transferred under section 4, subsection 3 of the forestry act have yet been appointed.
7.	(a), 512; (b), 418.



ROYAL COMMISSIONS SINCE 1957

Mr. Chevrier: 1.	Since July 1, 1957, how many royal commissions have been established by the government?
2.	What was the purpose of each such commission?
3.	What were its terms of reference?
4.	What were the names of the members, and the personnel of each commission, with their occupation?
5.	On what date was each such commission established?
6.	How many have completed their reports, and what progress has been accomplished by the others?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, as to the first part of the question, there have been 11 commissions appointed under part I of the Inquiries Act, commonly known as royal commissions. In addition there were some 12 routine inquiries into allegations of political partisanship of civil servants.
With respect to parts 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the question, these parts are best answered by tabling a file of the orders in council appointing the commissions and defining their terms of reference. This also applies to those personnel appointed by the governor in council to which part 4 is assumed to apply, but not the persons appointed by the commissioners.

Starred Questions



FEDERAL PAYMENTS TO THE PROVINCES UNDER UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE ACT FOR NINE MONTH PERIOD, JAN. 1ST TO SEPT. 30TH INCLUSIVE,

[Stage Direction]
Province Newfoundland 	FOR YEARS 1957, 1957 	
$1,392,729	1958, 1959, 1960. 1958 $ 1,599,737	1959 $ 2,935,792	1960 $ 2,640,038Prince Edward Island	.. 109,487	66,221	75,159	92,899Nova Scotia 	-	58,980	430,904	705,548New Brunswick	21,428	63,822	195,119	296,009Quebec 	-	-	-	10,188,527Ontario	-	5,633,968	8,360,691	9,059,621Manitoba 	805,375	849,336	2,385,032	2,157,019Saskatchewan	.. 393,427	643,991	973,572	1,901,951Alberta	-	-	2,217,774	1,769,731British Columbia	.. 1,921,504	3,038,464	5,247,821	6,236,683Yukon 	. . 	-	-	32,594Northwest Territories	-	-	39,329Total	$4,643,950	$11,954,518	$22,821,864	$35,119,950
Note 1. Under the provisions of the unemployment assistance agreements, the provinces may submit claims up to six months after the month in which assistance was given. Because of this the figures shown include in each case payments with respect to the previous six months. Through a further provision, claims may be submitted at any time for expenditures during a retroactive period of up to a year prior to the date on which the agreement was signed and some of the figures in the table contain such retroactive payments.
Note 2. All twelve provincial and territorial governments did not have claims submitted under the program until 1960. Participation as shown by submission of claims included six jurisdictions in 1957, eight in 1958, nine in 1959 and twelve in 1960.
Note 3. Payments to the province of Quebec equal 80 per cent of the amount claimed, pending completion of audits.
With respect to part 6 of the question, 16 commissions have completed their reports. The progress made by the others is not a matter on which ministers are able to report. With leave of the house, Mr. Speaker, I will table the various orders in council to which I have alluded. To place them on the record would simply be to place thereon unnecessary material.

Mr. Herridge: 1.	Has the Canadian Pacific Railway refused to provide normal and regular passenger service during the hours of darkness between Penticton and Nelson at the request of Kootenay chambers of commerce, trade unions and other organizations and persons?
2.	Is it the opinion of the company that under the present circumstances it is unsafe to operate passenger trains during the hours of darkness?
3.	Did the company operate a passenger train or trains during the hours of darkness for the convenience of United States tourists?
[Mr. Diefenbaker.l


Hon. Leon Balcer (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, with respect to part 1 of the question, I am advised by the board of transport commissioners that due to depredations on the Canadian Pacific Railway Company's property in the Nelson-Penticton area, it was decided by the railway company, after consultation between its management and the province of British Columbia, that the company should suspend all night passenger train operations in the area between Castlegar and Penticton in the interests of safety.
With respect to the second part of the question, the board has been advised by the C.P.R. that it is of the opinion it would be unsafe to operate passenger trains during the hours of darkness unless patrols and other protective measures are provided.
With regard to the third part of the question, the board has been advised by the C.P.R. that on August 29, 1960, a special train handling a tour party routed from U.S.A. points via Vancouver and the Kettle valley

route to lake Windermere and thence to Banff, Alberta, which was originally scheduled to move through this area during daylight hours, became delayed due to unforeseen circumstances. Special measures were taken by the company to protect the movement after dark by providing patrols in relays ahead of the train.



LAY-OFFS, H.M.C.S. DOCKYARD, ESQUIMALT, B.C.

Mr. Hellyer: 1.	Have any prevailing rate employees at H.M.C.S. Dockyard, Esquimalt, British Columbia, been laid off during the six months ending November 30, 1960? If so, how many?
2.	Have other employees at H.M.C.S. Dockyard, Esquimalt, British Columbia, been laid off during the six months ending November 30, 1960? If so, how many?


Hon. Pierre Sevigny (Associate Minister of National Defence):: The answers are as follows:
1.	A number of prevailing rate employees at H.M.C.S. Dockyard, Esquimalt, are hired on a casual basis to carry out specific ship repair projects. During the period referred to, 304 casual prevailing rate employees were laid off following completion of the work for which they were hired. During the same period other ship repair work required the employment of 238 prevailing rate workers, leaving a net reduction in the work force of 66.
2.	Following complement surveys carried out in conjunction with the civil service commission, 33 fireman-labourer positions and 11 telephone operator positions were abolished. It was possible to reassign some of the individual incumbents to other positions for which they were qualified, leaving a net lay-off of 33.



JAPANESE GRAIN SALES

Mr. Argue: 1.	How many bushels of (a) wheat; (b) other grains, have Japanese importers contracted for delivery since January 1, 1960?
2.	Have any of these sales been lost as a consequence of the recent grain handlers' strike in Vancouver?
3.	How many bushels of (a) wheat; (b) other grains, have been delivered during this period?


Mr. W. H. Jorgenson (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture):: The
answers are as follows:
1.	The Canadian wheat board, as a matter of policy, does not divulge during the current crop year commitments for the purchase of Canadian wheat by foreign countries. With regard to barley and rye, these commitments are entirely a matter between the private grain trade in Canada and Japan.
2.	It is impossible at this time to determine whether or not any sales of Canadian grain were lost because of the strike.
90205-6-37*
Starred Questions
3.	Basis official statistics, exports of Canadian wheat, rye and barley from Canada to Japan for the period January 1, 1960, to October 31, 1960, total 43,566,642 bushels of wheat, 84,364 bushels of rye, and no exports of barley.



ADDITIONAL FERRY SERVICE, NEWFOUNDLAND-MAINLAND

Mr. Carier: 1.	Has the government of Canada arrived at a decision to provide a second ferry between the province of Newfoundland and the mainland?
2.	If so, have the terminals also been selected and where are they located?


Léon Balcer: The answer to parts 1 and 2 is that the government has not arrived at any decision respecting a second ferry between the province of Newfoundland and the mainland.



PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTORS


Mr. Pickersgill: 1.	Has a circular been issued to public works contractors who have contracts with the federal government warning them to refrain from participation in political activity both federal and provincial?
2.	If so, what were the terms of the directive?
3.	If not, are public works contractors treated in a different way from mail contractors, and for what reason?


Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of Public Works):: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Yes, because they are not employees of the department.



TRADE WITH CHINA

Mr. Badanai: 1.	What was the amount of trade in dollar volume with China in each of the years, 1958, 1959, and from January to November, 1960?
2.	What is the principal product sold to that country?


Mr. E. L. Morris (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member in whose name this question stands does not say in his question which China he has in mind. Accordingly I shall answer for both.
The answer to question 1, exports to communist China, the value of Canadian exports to communist China has been as follows: calendar year 1958, $7,808,965; calendar year 1959, $1,720,733; January to October, 1960, $8,588,000. The export statistics for November are not yet available.
The answer to question 2 on exports to communist China, the principal products exported to communist China in each of these periods have been as follows: calendar year

Inquiries of the Ministry 1958, wheat; calendar year 1959, copper and chemical products; January to October, 1960, aluminum and chemical products.
Exports to Taiwan, Republic of China. The value of Canadian exports to Taiwan (Republic of China) has been as follows; calendar year 1958, $1,167,040; calendar year 1959, $1,705,918; January to October, 1960, $2,309,000. The export figures for November are not yet available.
The principal product exported to Taiwan (Republic of China) in all three periods has been wood pulp.



QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN


Mr. Murphy: 1.	How many international labour unions, with Canadian membership, have head offices in the United States or other foreign countries?
2.	What are the names of the international unions?
3.	What is the Canadian membership of the international unions?
4.	What is the amount in dollars and cents paid by the Canadian membership to the international unions in the years 1957, 1958 and 1959?



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier);: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Has the minister heard the report that a British subject was detained in Calgary for several days because he had left his passport behind in Chicago, and what explanation is there for this?


Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: I did hear this report and have asked for full particulars, but I might tell my hon. friend that the gentleman concerned said that they were the best four days he had spent since he landed in North America.



JOHN PALL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. D. Crestohl (Cartier):: I should like to address a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. My question is in two parts. The Globe and Mail this morning reports that a self-confessed nazi organizer and agitator named John Pall, a Hungarian-born naturalized Canadian, was ordered deported from the United States back to Canada. My question is this. Can the

minister state whether this man is readmissible into Canada, he having left to join the nazi party in another country? Since he agitates tyranny, sedition and breach of the bill of rights, can his Canadian citizenship be revoked, and can he in any event be deported from Canada?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, I am afraid I cannot give a complete answer to all those questions. We have been greatly concerned about this individual, who came to Canada nearly ten years ago, I believe and achieved his citizenship in January of 1957. He is therefore a Canadian citizen. Unless there are grounds for revocation of that citizenship, as the hon. member knows because of the debates which have taken place in this house in the last couple of years, he of course retains his Canadian citizenship; and such punishment as he may deserve by reason of his activities would be meted out to him just in the same way as it would be applied to any other Canadian citizen. However, when we enter into the possibility of revocation of that citizenship, it is of course an extremely complicated question and one which I could not possibly answer offhand.


Leon David Crestohl: I have a supplementary
question. I should like to ask the minister whether her department is giving this matter some study and the individual surveillance which would fall within the jurisdiction of her department?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The answer is yes, Mr. Speaker. I might add, however, that although this report appeared in the paper this morning, so far my department has not been notified by the United States authorities that deportation from that country is in fact being carried out.



CUBA-REPORTED INTENTION TO SEND DELEGATION TO CANADA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Can he give the house any information about a radio report to the effect that Fidel Castro has announced that a high powered delegation is coming to Canada for the purpose of expanding trade with Cuba?


Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I did not hear the report over the radio, but I heard about the matter. We are always glad to hear of people who wish to trade with Canada. I have heard that this delegation is on the way, but I have heard nothing further.

Inquiries of the Ministry
REQUEST FOR STATEMENT ON CANADIAN ATTITUDE	REPORTED STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT OF
TOWARD O.E.C.D.	TORONTO-DOMINION BANK
On the orders of the day:


Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs if he can tell us what Canada's attitude is toward the O.E.C.D., the organization for economic co-operation and development in Europe, particularly in the light of the growing importance of the European economic blocs in reference to Canadian trade.


Hon. Howard C. Green (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, a question of this type is not properly asked on orders of the day. I believe the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Trade and Commerce are going to Paris on Sunday to attend the conference which is being held in connection with the O.E.C.D.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the minister, in view of the statement he has just made that two ministers are going to Europe in connection with this organization, what is the attitude of the Canadian government, particularly in view of the statements made recently in London by the Canadian Minister of Finance?


An hon. Member:: Order paper.


Howard Charles Green: I understand, Mr. Speaker, that Canada will become a member of this new O.E.C.D. organization.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank McGee (York-Scarborough):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works and ask when the recent changes made in the National Housing Act will come into effect.


David James Walker: I thank the hon. member for York-Scarborough for the question, and I note that the hon. member for Peterborough had a similar question. The regulations relating to the National Housing Act lending terms were approved yesterday. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation is taking appropriate administrative steps through its regional and branch offices to make the new terms available to borrowers as soon as possible. You will appreciate that new forms and copies of the regulations must be distributed throughout the country. Local C.M.H.C. offices will be prepared to administer the new terms by the beginning of next week.
On the orders of the day:


Mr. J. R. Garland (Nipissing):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works and ask whether his attention has been drawn to a statement made by Mr. Ashforth, president of the Toronto-Dominion bank, as reported in today's press to the effect that Canada needs to consider today whether she is not building the wrong kind of houses for the wrong reasons, in the wrong places, designed for the wrong people, at the wrong time.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I thought the hon. member was going to ask a question instead of presenting the argument of a gentleman outside the house. If there is a question relating to the matter discussed by Mr. Ashforth it would be in order, provided it is not a policy question.


John Richard Garland: That is what I was going to ask, if I had been allowed to finish my question. Would the minister care to comment on this statement by a responsible individual?


Mr. Churchill:: Do you accept it yourself?


Mr. Speaker:: I question the propriety of the hon. member putting a question of that kind to the minister, because in effect what he is doing is setting out the opinion of someone outside the house-true, it is on a matter of public interest-and asking the minister then to comment on the statement of that person. As I understand it, the minister's responsibility is to answer for his administrative acts here. He can be questioned on those; if the question relates to that same subject matter it would be proper.


John Richard Garland: May I ask the minister a supplementary question. Has the minister had conversations with the chartered banks? If so, would he care to comment on the possibility of their participation in the next few months in the new housing program?


David James Walker: Mr. Speaker, although the hon. member for Nipissing did not give me notice of this question, nevertheless I am very happy to have the opportunity of answering it. I have read the remarks attributed by the Globe and Mail to Mr. Ashforth. While I do not for a moment question the sincerity of the Toronto-Dominion bank president, I do suggest that he would be well advised to check the facts before making a public statement on the impact of new amendments to the National Housing Act on the industry, the
580	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry economy and the people of Canada. I suggest further that Mr. Ashforth is guilty of four major misapprehensions.
In the first place, he is critical of what he terms "a fresh injection of easy credit into the housing market". He then reverses himself completely and proposes that this "easy credit" should include existing housing. In other words, Mr. Ashforth suggests on the one hand that the government is pouring too much money into housing and, on the other, that credit should be extended to the whole of Canada's housing stock.


Mr. Speaker:: If the minister will permit me to interrupt him, I objected to the question in the first instance because it injected the opinion of someone outside of the house rather than asking for factual information. It appears to me this also raises an argument about the validity of the opinion. It seems to me that since I did object to the question in that form, perhaps the minister might refrain from dealing with the opinions expressed by Mr. Ashforth and deal only with the supplementary question, which related to his communication with the banks.


John Richard Garland: In view of what the minister has said, would he consider answering my question? Has he had consultation with the banks, and will they be participating in the 1961 housing program?


David James Walker: The answer is that I have had no consultation with the banks, Mr. Speaker.
(Translation):



AIRPORTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolieile-L'Assomplion-Montcalm):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Could he tell us whether all signs and markings inside and outside the new air terminal soon to be inaugurated at Dorval will be entirely bilingual?


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, I am [DOT] happy to reply in the affirmative.
(Text):



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. H. McMillan (Welland):: I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Will the minister comment on a press report to the effect that the Secretary of State for the United States has issued an order prohibiting nations receiving financial aid from the United States


from spending this money for purchases in Canada and in some 17 other countries?


Howard Charles Green: The government has been very closely following the United States measures to protect their balance of payments. The measure announced yesterday, and to which I believe the hon. member is referring was to implement the President's earlier decision and relates only to off-shore purchases made by the international cooperation administration in the state department.
While Canada was listed among those countries which may not be eligible as a source of supply, the announcement also provided for certain exceptions. Our ambassador in Washington and his embassy staff have on several occasions drawn to the attention of the United States authorities, including Mr. Herter, the Secretary of State, the distinction between the Canadian balance of payments position and that of other countries, and we have indicated that we would expect the United States administration to take this distinction into account in the administration of their new regulations related to the President's directive. The measures announced yesterday relate only, as I have said, to purchases by the I.C.A. and do not extend to the field of defence procurement.


INQUIRY AS TO MEETING OF HEADS OF GOVERNMENT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Prime Minister arising out of a Canadian Press dispatch this morning in which the Prime Minister is quoted as saying in an interview that Canada is in favour of a meeting of the NATO heads of government. I wonder if the Prime Minister would bring parliament up to date on the government's attitude toward such an important meeting, and what steps Canada has taken to bring about such a meeting.
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime
Minister): Mr. Speaker, the observation I made in connection with a NATO meeting was this. Having regard to all the circumstances and the many problems and the ramifications of those problems, which have become apparent within the last few months, I expressed the hope that there would be a meeting of the heads of government, not immediately but after the necessary preparation and also a reasonable time after the new President of the United States has assumed office. I believe that such a meeting is of importance and is necessary to the NATO concept.

I expressed the hope that it might be held within the next months. Making due allowance for the preparations that must be made and the time which will be taken by the new President of the United States on assuming office to assume his general position with relation to the executive and to the legislative bodies of congress, such a meeting might be considered not before April or May, and indeed it might be later than that. If such a meeting were acceptable I know that Canadians as a whole would welcome the opportunity, if the nations were agreeable, of convening such a gathering in Canada.


Hazen Robert Argue: As a supplementary question may I ask the Prime Minister whether this important position that has been taken by Canada will be put forward at the forthcoming NATO meeting of defence ministers?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the ministerial meeting of the council of NATO will take place in Paris within the next ten days. I am sure this would be one of those questions that inevitably would arise at such a gathering.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, may I simply ask the Prime Minister in view of the importance of this matter and the understanding which we all have, of course, for his attendance at such a conference if he would assure us that steps will be taken to make sure that this summit meeting does not take place on May 15?


David James Walker: The hon. member means
January 9, 10 and 11.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I refer to the day
when the present railway strike arrangements end.


George Harris Hees: The hon. member had better get a new writer.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the suggestion of the hon. member and I know it will receive that consideration which all of his serious suggestions receive on occasion.


PUBLIC BUILDINGS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay Wesl):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Minister of Public Works. My question is inspired by a telegram I received from the mayor of Rossland this morning. In view of the fact that the city council of Rossland was advised that it was the intention of the department to commence a new post office building in Rossland in 1961, and in view of the
Inquiries of the Ministry serious unemployment situation prevailing, can the minister give the house the reasons for delaying the commencement of this project until 1962?


David James Walker: Mr. Speaker, the only undertaking given to the mayor was that it would be premature to make any commitment as to the commencement. In reply to the hon. member I would say that the original plan was to build an addition and renovate, but the cost proved excessive. I do not know why this is the case in my hon. friend's riding, but the costs are all very, very high. That is not entirely symbolic.
We are now planning a new building, and that should please my hon. friend. When the plans are completed, funds will be requested of parliament. Until then I can give no date for the commencement.


TRANSPORT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a supplementary question to the Minister of Transport. My question arises out of the minister's reply to my starred question which he gave a few minutes ago.
Has the minister received a letter from the president and local chairman of the brotherhood of railway and steamship clerks at Argentia, Newfoundland, with regard to the proposed east coast ferry and the question which it raises concerning the necessity for present employees to preserve their seniority? If so, can the minister indicate the nature of his reply?


Léon Balcer: I am sorry, Mr. Speaker; I do not remember receiving this letter, so I would not like to make any comment at the present time. I will investigate the matter in my department and answer the question at a later date.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Justice I wonder if I could direct a question to his departmental secretary and ask him whether he is in a position to report to the house the results of the investigation into the so-called Eccles divorce case, which was referred to the Department of Justice by the miscellaneous private bills committee.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Thomas M. Bell (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I am informed that the law officers of the crown, after a careful review of this case and all the facts as presented by the committee, have referred it to the department of the attorney general of Ontario for consideration as to possible action under the Criminal Code, particularly referring to perjury.
It has been referred to the provincial authorities because it is a matter concerning the administration of justice within a province.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Samuel Boulanger (Drummond-Artha-baska):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture, but in his absence I shall direct my question to the ex-minister of agriculture who is now the Minister of National Defence. Has a cost index calculated on an individual commodity basis been set for agricultural products, especially for wheat, as the minister of agriculture announced last year?


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Acting Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, I am not at all clear what the hon. member means by a cost index of individual products. There is an index which gives the cost of the goods and services used by farmers and which has frequently been quoted here in the house, but I am not aware of any index in connection with the cost of production or anything along that line relating to individual products.
There have been a number of studies carried on and more are under way at the present time as to the average cost of production for various commodities in different parts of the country, but that is not something on which an index can be based, I believe.



AIR TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport and ask whether he has seen a statement in the Winnipeg Free Press to the effect that although a western Canadian air line had earned a good profit in 1959, it would receive a substantial subsidy from his department. Has the minister any comment to make on that report?


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Laurier was kind enough to send me a copy of this Winnipeg Free Press article as I was taking my seat in the house. I have had an opportunity only to examine it quickly. As this article quotes some answers that I gave in writing to a newspaper reporter associated with the Winnipeg Free Press, I am taking the responsibility for that part of the article which quotes my answers, but I should not like to take responsibility for the rest of the article. Although it is extremely well written and interesting I have not had an opportunity to verify all the figures contained therein, so for the time being I should not like to comment on it.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the minister, to inquire whether or not the item in the supplementary estimates relating to the air transport board under his department in the amount of $125,000-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. May I remind the hon. member for Laurier that questions which are properly related to the estimates are not accepted before the orders of the day.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I agree with Your Honour's ruling. Perhaps I could reword my question and ask the minister whether this is the airline which is to receive from his department a subsidy of $125,000 for a full year.


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, I shall be pleased to answer this question when this estimate is before the house.


Paul Joseph James Martin: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, the question asked by my hon. friend-


Mr. Speaker:: Before the hon. member makes his point of order may I say that it is
I not permissible to comment either on the character of an answer or the absence of an answer. It is permissible to ask questions to elucidate an answer, but not to comment on the absence of an answer.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Transport. Does he not think thal this question should be answered now?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member's, supplementary question is more properly directed to the Chair and he knows it is not proper to ask questions of the Speaker. If I may say so again I think the inquiry really relates to matters to come before the house in the form of estimates, and therefore are not properly inquired into at this stage.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege, may I explain why 1 think the question is proper now?


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member disagrees with my view on the point of order which I have raised I shall be glad to hear him on that point, but the hon. member should not repeat the question.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We generally see eye to eye on most questions.


George Harris Hees: The hon. member never looks His Honour in the eye; that is the answer.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The importance of the question is this. The minister's estimates are now being discussed with the treasury board or with the Minister of Finance, and this is an item which I feel should be determined now. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Transport ought to know now whether or not this particular item is to be included.


Mr. Speaker:: I appreciate the hon. member's interest, but I can see no difference here with the usual procedure in the settling of government estimates. I therefore see no reason for allowing the question.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct your attention to the fact that I asked the minister this question some days ago. Your Honour allowed that question, and the minister answered that the amount of the subsidy was $25,000. Now I ask the minister what the subsidy is for twelve months. Surely that question ought to be in order if Your Honour allowed the former question.


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member's question relates to a subsidy that has been authorized or that has been paid, yes; but if it relates to a subsidy that has to come before this house to be authorized, then, no.


Lionel Chevrier: Well, it has been authorized because the minister already told the house in a prior answer that that was the amount going to this air line. Now I ask him if that subsidy will amount to $125,000 for the full year.


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, I answered a similar question in very clear terms the other day, and I think all the points in my hon. friend's present question were well covered by that answer.



VOCATIONAL TRAINING


Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour) moved: the second reading of Bill No. C-49, respecting technical and vocational training assistance.
Vocational Training
He said: The purpose of this legislation is to stimulate the development of technical and vocational training programs in Canada, and to broaden their scope. As I indicated last week at the resolution stage, there are many compelling reasons, Mr. Speaker, for increased training in Canada today. The government regards the development of skilled manpower as of prime importance in fostering national development.
In this new legislation the title of the bill is the Technical and Vocational Training Assistance Act. The title of the bill serves to emphasize the rapidly growing technical field below university level. The purpose of training-and this purpose is identified under this bill-is the preparation of any person for gainful employment in any primary or secondary industry, or in any service occupation, or for the purpose of increasing his skill or proficiency therein.
The definition extends training to several rapidly growing areas of employment below the university level. To implement the provisions of this bill, Mr. Speaker, the minister is to be authorized, with the approval of the governor in council, to enter into an agreement with any province for a period not exceeding six years. These federal-provincial agreements provide financial assistance for the costs incurred by the province in providing technical or vocational training programs for youths or adults who require this service in order to work at their full potential.
The groups of youths or adults for whom the federal government will share with the province in the cost of providing technical or vocational training include three additional groups not previously specified. The first grouping is persons who require training in the skills of science or technology to work as technicians; second, persons over the regular school leaving age who have left school and who require training to develop or increase their occupational skills. The third grouping is teachers or instructors, supervisors or administrators who are to carry out the technical or vocational training programs. These are the three additional groups which are included in this bill which had not been included previously.
The following programs provided for under the present act may be continued. These are, first, unemployed persons; second, students being trained in technical or vocational courses in secondary schools; third, apprentices; fourth, supervisors in industry; fifth, disabled persons.
In the field of technical and vocational training there is an urgent need for additional training facilities that is prevalent right across this country. On speaking with the representatives of some of the provinces in the

Vocational Training
educational field it has been stated to me that at least in some of the provinces their lack of this type of training is great. Recent estimates indicate that there should be a 50 per cent expansion of the training facilities in this country. To help meet this urgent and continuing need, the bill provides for a substantially increased federal contribution. What is contemplated and authorized by this bill is a federal sharing of capital costs for both new buildings and equipment needed to meet the requirements for increased training.
In order to facilitate and encourage the immediate construction of buildings and acquisition of equipment which will be required for a stepped-up training program, the bill provides that the federal contribution to the cost of these new facilities undertaken by the province, and this includes equipment, will be increased to 75 per cent of such costs up to March 31, 1963. This makes provision, I would point out, for a very much larger federal contribution to capital costs not only during the next two years but also after that date, when the bill provides for a 50 per cent share of such capital costs.
In the past the contributions were substantially less in a number of provinces. To illustrate this, Mr. Speaker, under the present agreements a sum of $25 million was provided over a period of five years, but this amount was allocated among the provinces on a population formula. In some provinces this has permitted a fifty-fifty sharing of capital costs, but in others the federal share has worked out to be much less.
Under the provisions of the bill and agreements to be entered into with the provinces thereunder, the only limitation on the federal contribution to capital costs for training facilities stipulated in the legislation in future will be the amount of money which parliament is prepared to authorize annually to enable the federal government to provide its contribution, either on a 50 per cent or 75 per cent basis, for approved projects for constructing and equipping new training facilities.
These new facilities include technical and vocational schools, technical institutes and trade schools. One of the attractive features of this new approach is that provision is made for assisting and facilitating the establishment of new facilities when and where they are needed.
With respect to the sharing of training costs for unemployed persons, we are now sharing these costs to the extent of 75 per cent, and in addition to the provision for expanded assistance in capital projects the bill carries forward the present provision for a federal contribution toward the training of unemployed persons. The terms under which federal contributions are to be made will be
set forth in the agreements with the provinces as approved by the governor in council.
Another new feature in the bill is the authorization of a full federal sharing on a 50 per cent basis with the provinces of operational costs, including student allowances, on approved training program conducted in trade or vocational schools or institutes, technical institutes or institutes of technology which are not part of the regular secondary school system. The programs of these institutions provide very important training for persons who have left the regular school system either before or after completion and who now require training to improve their occupational skill and employment opportunities. These institutions also provide the post-high school technical training to produce the technicians and technologists required in Canadian industries.
Provision is also made for the continuation by agreement with the provinces of the federal sharing of costs of training programs for apprentices, disabled persons and supervisors in industry. The success of any vocational or technical training program depends upon a supply of qualified instructors. It would be a great waste of public funds to provide extensive buildings without providing also for the training of the instructional, supervisory and administrative personnel. In order to carry out this expanded program of technical and vocational training, a new item makes provision for contributing 50 per cent of the provincial costs of training technical and vocational teachers, supervisors and administrative personnel. The bill also provides that financial assistance for the purpose of enabling a person to participate in such a program may be included as a shareable cost of training.
With respect to technical and vocational high schools, the provision in this case authorizes and envisages a continuation of the federal assistance that has been provided to date for the technical and vocational training programs which are part of the secondary school system. Under the agreements which are proposed in the bill a quota allotment is suggested to provide assistance for the training programs.
Under several of the provisions in the bill more active training programs can be developed within industry. These can take the form of (a) the standard apprenticeship training plans, (b) the utilization of training facilities in industrial establishments for the training of unemployed persons, (c) the enlargement of present programs for training instructors in industry, and (d) the introduction of new training programs by industry in co-operation with the provincial and federal governments for the upgrading of the skills

of employees to meet continuing manpower needs and changing occupational requirements.
I regard this aspect of training as highly important, particularly today when industry is increasingly faced with many new and important technological changes. I feel, moreover, that industry itself must accept a larger share of responsibility for, and develop a greater interest in, the establishment of suitable training programs to meet its needs.
As far as assistance to students is concerned, a limited amount of financial assistance is provided under the present act for university students. This assistance is provided for students who have a satisfactory standing and who without such assistance would be unable to continue their courses. The bill continues the assistance provided under the present act.
In the field of training for federal government departments, provision is made for the minister to undertake technical or vocational training programs for members of the armed forces or former members of the armed forces as well as for the training requested by another department or agency of the federal government. In these latter cases authority is provided for federal payment of up to 100 per cent of the costs of training. This is a continuation of the authority provided under the present act.
In the matter of research work, provision is made for carrying on a research program of wider scope in connection with the training programs and the development of standards on a national basis. It also provides for research for developing information about the changing needs for trained workers.
Then this bill provides for the establishment of a national technical vocational training advisory council to consist of 23 members, with one member to be appointed as chairman. The membership of this council will be made up of an equal number of representatives of employers and employees, along with representatives of provincial governments and other bodies or groups interested in vocational training. The bill thus carries forward, Mr. Speaker, the provisions of the present act under which the vocational training advisory council operates, with a membership of 23 instead of 21. It is provided also that the present Vocational Training Co-ordination Act be repealed.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, all hon. members in this house will support this bill, but in doing so I am sure no one will be under any illusion as to what the bill really does. This bill is brought forward at this juncture in our proceedings along with two or three other measures which the 90205-6-381
Vocational Training
government has declared or sought to imply represents its vigorous approach to the solution of the problem of unemployment, which undoubtedly continues at this time to be the foremost domestic problem in our country. The hon. member for Port Arthur (Mr. Fisher) yesterday said he was disappointed in the statement made by the Minister of Labour at the resolution stage of this bill. The hon. member is not in his seat today, and undoubtedly he is preoccupied constructively elsewhere, but I am sure if he were here at this moment he would join with those who have made some analysis of this bill in an expression of deep disappointment in the statement we have just heard from the Minister of Labour.
Although the bill provides for ways and means of accelerating and facilitating the training of unemployed persons, according to the minister's statement that certainly did not constitute one of the essential reasons for this measure. Clause 3 of the bill authorizes the minister to make contributions to the provinces on behalf of the government of Canada in respect of the costs incurred by the provinces in undertaking a program of technical and vocational training in the provinces to assist certain classes of persons, and the first class designated is unemployed persons. It is clear, therefore, that whatever may be the good intentions of the minister, whatever may prove to be the advantages of this legislation, it cannot in any way be regarded as an effective contribution at the moment to the solution of the problem that is of domestic concern in Canada in such an alarming way. I refer to the problem of unemployment. On the basis of the government's own statistics the unemployed number is increasing, and according to every available index we are going to be faced during the course of the coming winter with a level of unemployment that may exceed that of last year or any other year since this government came into office.
The minister made an announcement of his intention with regard to this measure last June, during the course of the last session of parliament. On that occasion I pointed out that the proposed measure of financial contribution by the federal government was not in accordance with the requests of the provinces, which had asked for increases away above the proposed increases now projected in this bill. This bill certainly will not satisfy the provinces, which likewise feel that something should be done not only in the long term but also in the short term to provide greater opportunities for the unemployed to take advantage of whatever employment exists in the country at this time.

Vocational Training
This is not a new measure. This measure, now before us in the form of a bill, should have come forward in the form of amendments to the existing vocational training act which was passed many years ago, when hon. members now sitting on the treasury benches did not have so much criticism to offer. This bill contains some commendable features, but is inadequate to deal with the present unemployment situation. These provisions should have been presented as amendments and not in the form of a new bill; because all the clauses and all the pages of this new bill give one the impression that the government is coming forward with something that is new in principle, something dynamic, something capable of meeting the current problem of unemployment. A clear analysis of the bill and an examination of the statement made by the minister indicate that what looks like a strong facade consists of nothing more than a few amendments to a measure, the basic concept of which was settled by this parliament many years ago at a time when we were not confronted, as we are now, with such a high level of unemployment.
But to the extent that this bill does deal with the short term problem, and to the extent that it does deal with the long term problem, we welcome it. We will not forget the speech made here shortly after his return to this house by the hon. member for Trinity (Mr. Hellyer), when we were discussing unemployment, urging the government of the day to recognize that one of the effective methods of dealing with unemployment was to provide greater training facilities for our unskilled workers so they could take advantage of whatever employment was offered them. Nor will we forget the speech made by the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Che-vrier) last session, when in dealing with the 25-point program of the Liberal party he reiterated what I had previously stated, that one of the things that should be undertaken to provide assistance to the unemployed was an accelerated program of training. Nor will it be forgotten that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill), in a further very important and valuable speech pointed out the need.
I have before me the report of that speech, delivered on July 29 last when we were discussing the minister's estimates, and the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate referred to the desirability of really bringing forward a vocational training program, particularly for the unemployed. Here is what the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate said, as reported at page 7244 of Hansard for that date:

I do not expect the federal government to provide the vocational schools but they can help provide them. I do not expect the government to run them. The government did not take over the universities or technical schools at the end of the war. I do say, however, that when you have a problem as big as this one and when it has developed to the degree it has in certain provinces that simply have not the provincial revenues to bear themselves all of the burden and that if they do provide the training for these people may find that the people leave the province to secure jobs in another province, it is a national task.
That is exactly what confronts us now, a national task which is not in any way being met by this measure. In no way does this bill represent the kind of vigorous assault on unemployment that we were told at the beginning of this session was going to be made by this and companion measures. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate went on to say that instead of paying 75 per cent the government should do as the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) and several other hon. members on this side have suggested over and over again. He said the government should take over the cost for all those persons who are unemployed and who are capable of benefiting from training of such a kind that would make them really employable. He did not say that the government should take over the vocational schools and technical schools. He was talking about the kind of assistance to that class of person referred to in subclause (a) of clause 3 of this bill, namely unemployed persons.
With regard to unemployed persons I would think this bill is deficient in the extent of the federal contribution. This bill will not encourage certain provinces to take advantage of the facilities afforded to train unemployed persons. Will this bill encourage the provinces of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, or the smaller provinces whose resources are limited, to take on a responsibility which, in the language of the Minister of Labour in this government, was at least a year ago looked upon as being primarily the responsibility of the federal government?
The government should have provided for a 100 per cent contribution to programs for unemployed persons. It should have provided contributions of 70 per cent for all other programs in order to encourage the provinces to accelerate their co-operation in this matter along with the federal government. This bill is deficient in that it does not provide for a 75 per cent contribution for the construction of schools and equipment, something which would mean, according to another provision in the bill, a 100 per cent contribution up to April 1, 1963 as is provided for in clause 4, subclause (b) of the bill.

If the government really want to do something to help the unemployed, not in ten years from now but today, they should undertake a greater direct responsibility in the matter of assisting the unemployed-I am not talking about the vocational schools-and that is something that can be done. The chairman of the unemployment insurance commission, Mr. Bisson, stated-and this is now a matter of record in the debates of this house-that out of every ten persons unemployed in Canada, only one was possessed of a skill which would qualify him for a job that might be put at his disposal at the present time. That was not a statement made by a member of the opposition groups. That was a statement made by the chairman of the unemployment insurance commission. That statement was made over two years ago.
That statement was part of the reason we kept prodding this government to do something about vocational training, particularly in the matter of the jobless. That statement was also confirmed by Dr. Fred McNally of Edmonton, who is chairman of the vocational training advisory council, a body set up by the government of Canada and which reports directly to the Minister of Labour. In 1958 Dr. McNally and his board pointed out to the Minister of Labour how inadequate the program then was to meet the demand which was represented by the fact that so many of our young people were unable to take advantage of whatever work was offered them at the present time.
I therefore say it is not overstating the case to say that for this government, on December 7, 1960-after we have had unemployment on such a high scale since 1957 and particularly since the fall of 1957-to bring in this measure now and only now, reflects on the approach this government has taken to the problem of unemployment during this period. Its attitude has been cavalier; it has been leisurely. There has been no dynamic approach on the part of this government in order to deal with this problem. Now all they bring forward is a whole series of sections of a bill purporting to be something more substantial than it is, when it contains nothing more than a few amendments to an act that was brought in by a Liberal government years ago and amended by a Liberal government in 1954.
I have in my hand a letter which I received from my own city of Windsor. I had written, as I write for dozens of individuals, trying to get work for people in a community in which we now have nearly 8,000 unemployed persons. I must say, as I have said many times previously, that the personnel in the unemployment insurance office in my city is
Vocational Training
of an extremely high standard, and I commend the minister for the excellence and efficiency of these persons. I have here a letter from the manager of that office, whom I had written on behalf of a particular individual. He replied to my letter on December 5 and stated as follows:
In reply to your letter of November 29, Mr. has now been In to see us regarding employment.
Prospects for him are not too promising at the moment due to the employment situation generally, and-
Listen to this statement, Mr. Speaker.
-also to the fact that he has no trade skills.
That statement applies to thousands of individuals in our country. This government will not be able to satisfy the majority of the people of Canada that it has taken a strong step in this regard by introducing at this late juncture in its history a measure so minute as this particular bill.
The bill is really an extension of the vocational training act of 1942, as amended in 1954; and the basic provision, apart from the slight increase in financial contributions, is the establishment of another advisory committee the membership of which has been increased from 21 to 23 persons. I am glad that some people are going to be employed as a result of this bill. Two new people are going to be added to the advisory council. Then there is a reference to the research endeavours that may be carried on by the council. However, that is not something new. The present vocational advisory council has authority and power to provide research programs just as is provided in clause 7 of this bill. The fact is, however, that this bill will not deal with the problem in a way which the government, in the context of the legislation that it has introduced in the last few days, seeks to establish in the public mind as a vigorous attack on the problem of unemployment.
I have before me here a report of the apprenticeship committee to the Minister of Labour. This report was given out on January 19, 1960. At the bottom of page 3 of this report the committee points out in the following language a situation that will be of interest to all hon. members with regard to this problem:
Looking at the occupational distribution of employment in Canada, the report shows that 25 per cent of all employment is in the skilled and professional occupations. (Eight per cent professional, 17 per cent skilled.) Other groups are as follows:	white collar, 29 per cent; semiskilled and unskilled, 31 per cent; other occupations, 15 per cent. The report states that professional, skilled and white collar occupations are the fastest growing groups, and that there are less and less jobs in the unskilled and semiskilled categories.

Vocational Training
Here is what the deputy minister of labour, Mr. Brown, said at the same meeting:
At the opening meeting, A. H. Brown, deputy minister of labour, expressed the opinion that more progress might be made toward solving unemployment from a long term point of view if a higher percentage of the youth entering elementary school were convinced to stay in school until they received sufficient education upon which training can be built.
I want to say to the Minister of Labour that he has an opportunity of doing something very substantial about that very matter. He could accept the proposal of the Liberal party, which resolved at the 1958 convention that in an effort to keep children at school family allowances should be paid from the ages of 16 to 18. That is something this government, if it really wants to do something to meet this kind of problem, could undertake.
Instead of that the minister comes forward with this bill, after the blare of trumpets that he indulged in during the last session of parliament, when he announced that the government was going to do something very drastic about accelerating vocational training in Canada, I am sure the minister will not deny -in fact he did not deny it today-that this is a serious problem. I looked over what he said during the course of his estimates last summer. He pointed out that many of our workers in Canada have had to obtain their training outside the country. He pointed out that in October of this year 15 per cent of the unskilled workers in Canada were unemployed. Mr. Speaker, this was three times the number unemployed in the rest of the whole labour force of our country.
Does anyone think that the minister, in coming forward with this bill today, is in any way addressing himself to the problem of transferring these men from the category of unskilled to the category of skilled? Does this program in any way represent the kind of attempt that is now being made in the United States as a result of the work of the Senator Eugene McCarthy commission, which examined the whole program of vocational training for the long term and for the short term?
Compare what this bill is now doing with the bill that is now before congress, providing an opportunity for training men and women now in the work force, not just those who are unskilled, for training men and women who are in universities and high schools and men and women who are now out working, men who have families and who have not the skills needed for a job.

There is a proposal now before congress which this government might well emulate, instead of bringing forward this particular bill which is not going to deal very substantially at all with the problem of unemployment in the short term. It can be done. Some hon. members will recall that when the Canadian pipe line was being built there was a shortage of skilled workers. What did the unemployment insurance commission do? It set up ad hoc training schools at once; it obtained individuals who acted as foremen on certain pipe line jobs, to act as teachers; it trained men on the job to do the particular job that we required.
That can be done now. We do not need to wait until the long term; we do not need to wait until next summer. If this government wants to tackle the problem of unemployment and provide the necessary training and skill for substantial numbers of those who are out of work, by a dynamic policy and with leadership, in co-operation with the provinces, in co-operation with industry and with labour, it can undertake effective, practical training programs right now, so that people who are now unemployed in many cities will be afforded the opportunity of obtaining work.
That is the kind of approach upon which we are asking this government to embark. It is difficult for me to understand this bill in the light of the fact that during the last session of parliament we were told by the minister that he was cutting out $1,100,000 of the amount for vocational and technical school assistance. There was a reduction in the actual vote proposed by the Minister of Labour in the matter of vocational and technical school assistance. Only a few months ago, in this very chamber, we were discussing that. The minister gave as the reason the fact that some provinces had not pushed their programs sufficiently ahead to take advantage of the moneys, which the federal government had put at their disposal.


An hon. Member:: That is right.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yet in the face of that, within six months the minister comes forward with this bill as though it were a charter for employment the like of which had never been presented by any legislature. Only six months ago he actually reduced his estimates by $1,100,000 in the matter of vocational and technical school assistance. I ask the Minister of Labour to recall his words which are reported at page 7302 of Hansard of last session. The minister said:

The information I have received is that we do not know, nor can we state, why certain provinces are not moving as rapidly in the direction of these schools as are other provinces. There may be various reasons. They may want to allot their funds to a different type of school in which we do not participate. However, most provinces with which we have agreements have been moving very well in this direction, and have been taking up in full the allotments that have been set aside for them.
I say that kind of reply, at this time of heavy unemployment in Canada, is not acceptable. This government should know the reasons, and it need not in any way interfere in jurisdictions or in respect of authority which under our constitution belong to other levels of government. The Minister of Labour said forthrightly as a private member of this house-and he later confirmed this as a member of the government-that the matter of unemployment in Canada was basically the responsibility of the federal government. Only at the end of last session did he in any way seek to refine that analysis of the allocation of responsibility. When the Prime Minister, following the Quebec elections, sought to recognize that there was a responsibility of the provincial governments, the Minister of Labour then began to modify the all-embracing statement he had made. He found that provincial governments were not afraid to assume their responsibility, a responsibility which they frankly acknowledged in the face of the assertion by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Labour in the first instance, when they were appealing to the Canadian people, that this was a responsibility of the federal government.
I say that this is a responsibility of all members of government. That has always been our position. But in Canada we are now face to face with a level of unemployment greater, on the basis of figures that were available to us last spring, than in any other country of the western world. I do not have the comparable figures for other countries in connection with the last reported period, but we have the report of Mr. Denton made to a committee in the other place that unemployment this year is going to be of very serious proportions.
In the face of that I call upon the Minister of Labour to improve this bill, to make more generous its financial positions, so as to encourage the provinces to take the initiative and embark upon co-operative schemes which will not only deal with the long term -and, of course, we must deal with the long term-but we must also have trained people on the job now. We must, of course, also deal with the short term, to provide work for thousands of men and women all over this country who have got the skills to assume
Vocational Training
jobs that are now available to them on the basis of advertisements put out by unemployment insurance offices all over the country.
This bill does not meet this assignment; this bill is not in conformity with the proud declarations made by the minister when he foreshadowed its introduction last spring. This bill, like most things this government has done in the matter of unemployment, not only reflects the inadequacy of the government's program but its incapacity to cope with that problem and an absolute lack of leadership in the whole matter of seeking to improve this serious situation of unemployment which confronts Canada at this time.


Mr. Aiken:: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: Did I understand in his speech that the hon. member was proposing that technical and vocational training be taken over by the federal government and, if so, does he consider this to be constitutional?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend knows I did not make any such proposal. I proposed that in the matter of the training of the unemployed this government assume full responsibility; with regard to technical schools, a responsibility for which rests and must continue to rest with the provinces, that the federal government's contribution be increased. That is what I said. I was dealing with clause 3(a), unemployed persons and I hope my hon. friend, whose industry and sincerity in these matters is well known, will join with us in prodding the government to do something about it.
(Translation) :


Mr. Paul Martineau (Poniiac-Temisca-mingue):: Mr. Speaker, may I say a few words in reply to the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) who is just leaving the house and who has suggested that the federal government assume exclusive responsibility for the rehabilitation of people who are now unemployed. I think the hon. member should recall the very words of the premier of the province of Quebec, who has repeatedly declared that unemployment is not the exclusive responsibility of the federal government, but rather a joint responsibility that is shared by the province, and that the province should do something about it to the same extent as the federal government.
Mr. Speaker, I think this bill raises the federal contribution for dealing with this problem to what I would describe as a maximum level. It provides very substantial assistance from the federal government, an assistance which in many fields is being raised by 50 per cent.

Vocational Training
On the other hand, the hon. member for Essex East has indicated that the measure put forward by the government is no Magna Carta for the solution of the serious unemployment problem. I do not think the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) or any other member of the government has claimed that this piece of legislation will by itself settle the problem, but it is a specific piece of legislation which will certainly alleviate the problem which the country is now facing, and which the government is doing its utmost to solve.
This is not the only bill that the government proposes to submit to the house, notwithstanding the opinion of the hon. member for Essex East. It is rather one of a series of measures. We are being presented, so to speak, with a crown adorned with a number of jewels. Now this bill is certainly one of those jewels and will certainly help improve the situation, despite the jeers of the hon. members on the opposite side and despite their obviously baseless criticism. In fact,' the first words spoken by the hon. member for Essex East were precisely to the effect that the members of his party would approve the bill.


Mr. Habel:: For lack of something better. We have no choice.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Mr. Speaker, the hon.
member for Essex East also stated that the people hit by unemployment were mainly those who lacked vocational and technical training, and that is certainly quite true. He indicated that among the unemployed, one out of ten cannot fill the jobs now available. Here again, I agree with the hon. member, because only yesterday, I think, the head of the dominion bureau of statistics, Mr. Denton, said he had made a survey of the classes of people who are usually unemployed, and according to his figures, 19 per cent of those who have not completed elementary school are unemployed; 8 per cent of those who have completed elementary school but have not completed high school are also unemployed, while only 3 per cent of those who have completed high school are unemployed, as against a general average, for all people, of 9 per cent.
Those figures represent the unemployment rate in relation to the degree of schooling of people unemployed and in search of employment, with reference to civilian labour, for the week of February 20, 1960.
The present bill goes to the root of the problem, its purpose being to provide, in co-operation with the provinces, for increased
[Mr. Martineau.l
technical and vocational training for our people. In fact, the purpose of this act is to authorize the Minister of Labour to enter into agreements with the provincial governments in order, (a) to encourage technical and vocational training; (b) to share in the costs of training programs, including capital costs; (c) to undertake technical training programs designed for specific categories and (d) to set up an advisory council whose task will be to promote technical training.
So far, the Department of Labour's activity in this field came under the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, which is being repealed.
In the bill before us, "technical and vocational training"
-means any form of instruction, the purpose of which is to prepare a person for gainful employment in any primary or secondary industry or in any service occupation or to increase his skill or proficiency therein, and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, includes instruction for that purpose in relation to any of the following industries or occupations:
(i)	agriculture
(ii)	fishing
(iii)	forestry
(iv)	mining
(v)	commerce
(vi)	construction
(vii)	manufacturing
(viii)	transportation or communication, or
(ix)	generally, any primary or secondary industry or service occupation requiring an understanding of the principles of science or technology and the application thereof, except where such instruction is designed for university credit;
It can be seen that quite a large field is covered by this legislation. The bill provides specifically for the training of the specialists and technicians needed in this era of specialization.
We have now reached the age that is currently known as "the age of automation". Now automation has been defined in several ways. Some people consider it merely an extension of the industrial era which started with the discovery of the steam engine and gained impetus during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Indeed, that is the view taken by many industrialists and to name only one, I might mention that Henry Ford II said that automation was merely a practical label for an already long established economic phenomenon.
To others, automation represents a drastic new way of carrying out industrial transformations. That is the opinion held particularly by Mr. J. Diebold who defined automation in his treatise entitled "Automation, Practical Approach", in the following terms-

Automation means much more than the technique of retroaction. It differs from mechanization in the specific way it faces production problems. Automation requires that production be looked upon as an integrated system and not as a series of separate processes determined by the economic distribution of human skills or of machines. Automation is a way of thinking, a way of looking at production. It has methods of its own, and a specific technology. It is above all a certain state of mind; a philosophy of production, much more than a definite technology. It is a powerful ideology, which is, in its own way, as revolutionary as Ford's concept of the production line.
Now, for a third group, automation means carrying out with the help of machines, tasks which, up to now, had been entrusted to men. It therefore involves intellectual operations carried out by means of electronic devices. It will entail a progressive elimination of direct work. Finally, automation means automatic control. It is an historical turning point comparable to the first industrial revolution.
Andre Siegfried, the French writer, said that when man reached the era of industrial revolution, he leaped forward as far as he had when he changed from the nomadic to the sedentary period. Today, when we are facing the tremendous advance of automation, man is taking another leap forward which is quite as spectacular.
Therefore, automation which, in its true form, is only just starting, will operate a radical transformation, not only with regard to the labour force and the tasks which the workers will henceforth be called upon to carry out, but also with regard to the way of life of all our people and, indeed, of the whole universe. That is precisely what we must keep in mind when dealing with this matter.
The government certainly did a very commendable job when it introduced this legislation. They proved that they understand this extremely important problem, a problem perhaps even more important than the struggle between the great ideologies and they are preparing the workers for their responsibilities in the world of tomorrow.
And what do the workers think of such transformation which, as a matter of fact, will keep increasing in the years to come? What do the workers think of such a change? May I quote a French union member who stated that automation was an excellent thing. This is what he said:
Automation appeals, in its practical achievements, to the highest level of intelligence, and to the highest grade technical ability. It is therefore an excellent thing. It is the expression of man's supremacy over matter, it is the triumph of intelligence over inert substance.
Vocational Training
This person, Mr. Jacques Levard, is a French trade unionist who took part in discussions among Catholic French intellectuals recently. He states in conclusion:
It is our duty to develop automation as much as possible in our economy.
But he adds:
It must be done "wisely".
Now, are we, in Canada, to set back the clock of time? Can we refuse the implications of that new technology?
True, it may cause some unemployment described as technological unemployment, due to the fact that some workers lose their jobs because of continuing technological development. Are we, for that reason, to turn down automation? Certainly not.
In the first place, it should be remembered that science is not showing the way. When a discovery is made by the human mind, it is never forgotten. We want to be of our times. We require that the most modern techniques be put to work to supply more comfort, and become the very expression of the highest standard of living. Everyone recognizes this, and it would be unreasonable to deny it.
On the other hand, among the disadvantages that may result from such a development, there is a certain amount of technological unemployment.
We want to remedy the effects of technological unemployment. There is only one way of doing this, and that is to promote technical and vocational training.
We live under a federal system. The hon. member for Essex East has contended that the federal government should contribute the full cost of such training.
That, in my opinion, is a wrong approach to the situation. That is a wrong interpretation of federalism and of the Canadian constitution which has set apart as a matter of exclusive provincial jurisdiction the entire field of education.
Without in the least interfering in that field of jurisdiction, the federal government may enter into agreements with provincial governments. This is what it plans to do. Its aim is to promote technical and vocational training and prepare workers to hold their own in the face of modern technological development by learning modern skills. The aim is not only to offer better wages, but a better standard of living. The effect of this will be a revaluation of labour.
We shall thus take our place among modern, industrialized nations through bold measures that will make such a change possible. As far as I am concerned, this legislation is one of those bold measures. Otherwise, we shall undergo a setback. Not only shall

Vocational Training
we lag behind great industrial nations that have been heading world production for decades, but we may also fall behind the emergent nations, the underdeveloped nations.
I mention this, because it does not seem at all impossible that these underdeveloped nations might go directly from their primitive conditions, from their agricultural and handicraft economy to the world of automation and computers, to the world of electronics, in short the whole world of modern technology.
Workers have everything to gain from such improvement courses. Over the past few years, the unemployed have been registering for technical and vocational training courses in increasing numbers. Last year, the number of unemployed registered for such courses went up 30 per cent, and the trend is continuing.
The government does not claim it has done everything in this field, but my contention is that this bill provides benefits that were not provided under the former act, that is a substantial improvement over the old act of 1952, as amended here in 1954. It is a step in the right direction.
That attitude proves that the Canadian government is conscious of its responsibilities. This is only one of several measures which have been passed by the government or will be passed within the next few days to restore the buoyancy which our economy has lost.
The reason why it lost its buoyancy is that for several years we were simply told that everything was going fine under cloudless Liberal skies.


Lionel Chevrier: Everything is going to pot at the moment.


Paul Raymond Martineau: The former prime minister of this country would complacently repeat, on television and elsewhere: things are going fine-


Lionel Chevrier: Everything is going to pot right now.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Yes, they said things were going fine. However, behind those brave declarations, the germ of decay was at work, a germ bred in the lack of foresight of the former administration, which had failed to adjust itself to changing times in the manner of Canada's neighbouring countries.
That was one of the great mistakes of the former Liberal leadership; yet today, such people as the hon. member for Essex East have the gall to rise and say we are not doing enough.


Lionel Chevrier: You are doing nothing at all.


Paul Raymond Martineau: The member for Essex East has the gall to denounce the bill, but he says his party will support it. He attacks the bill because it does not solve the unemployment problem at one stroke; yet for years at a time when those in power should have shown some foresight, nothing was done. They preferred to lull the people, to let things go their merry way, and to say everything was just fine. However, it is a principle of life that there is always a day of reckoning, and now we have to pay for past mistakes.
I shall conclude my remarks, Mr. Speaker, by saying that we have here an excellent bill, a legislation which goes to the bottom of the problem and is going to be a significant contribution to the modernization of our economy. And it is with this modern economy, resting on a sound basis, that we, in this country, shall overcome unemployment while continuing to enjoy the high level of prosperity which the people of Canada-


Lionel Chevrier: -had been accustomed to under Liberal rule.


Paul Raymond Martineau: -will enjoy under our administration. We have no apologies to offer, Mr. Speaker, nor have we any reason for defending our action. We are today introducing effective and beneficial legislation which will have everybody's support in this house. And we trust that this legislation will attack the deep causes of this evil. Our government today, is determined to go right to its very roots.


An hon. Member:: It is high time it did.


Paul Raymond Martineau: Not only will this legislation help restore prosperity tomorrow, but it will, to a high degree, benefit our children and the coming generations. In particular it will do much for our modern world with all its technology and automation. It will carry our country to the first rank among progressive nations. And we shall attain our goal by looking forward, not by looking backward or criticizing. This bill is indeed a co-operative measure, because it calls for joint action at all levels of authority and government which will contribute in a realistic way to do away with unemployment, that is to say technological unemployment.


An hon. Member:: You had better act right away, because you have not much longer to go.


Mr. Adrien Meunier (Papineau):: Mr. Speaker, I have a few remarks to make about this bill. The hon. member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue (Mr. Martineau) who has just resumed his seat said that we should

make up for lost time, since the former Liberal administration had not foreseen our present economic situation. May I remind the hon. member that at the end of the Liberal administration, we had prosperity and high employment in this country. If his government in its three years in power has done nothing he cannot blame the previous administration for, according to the Prime Minister, the situation has been difficult only since September 21 last. Therefore, it took the Conservatives three years to find that out. May I suggest to my hon. friend that instead of blaming the former administration for the situation in which we are today, he should blame his own government for doing nothing in three years in spite of the warnings it had received from the opposition.
In his speech, the minister clearly gave the reasons for which we must train more skilled workers, by means of organized and accelerated programs.
This bill is an extension of the vocational training co-ordination act passed a few years ago by the Liberal government. The same act is now called the technical and vocational training assistance act.
Mr. Speaker, all the agreements concerning technical and vocational training originated in 1937 during the depression, when the government of the day agreed with the provinces to set up schools to train unemployed workers so that they might be in a better position to earn their living in a period of unemployment.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: May I have the pleasure of asking the hon. member a question?


Adrien Meunier: When I have concluded my remarks.
We find today that technological progress requires higher skill on the part of the workers and a higher level of education. I do not want to repeat the arguments put forward by the hon. member for Essex East with regard to this program, or the suggestions he offered to make the bill more effective.
This measure, we are told, will help reduce unemployment by providing new jobs. There is no doubt that it will improve the situation of many people. My only one regret is that it comes a bit late.
If the minister has found that 35 per cent of our skilled workers were recruited among the immigrants, he should have come forward with this bill before now.
Vocational Training
Under this bill, continuing studies will be sponsored in Canada by the vocational training advisory council, which will include representatives of management and labour and of other agencies as well as representatives of the provinces. Also under this bill, there will be set up a research council for teacher training and program planning.
In view of the fact that the minister has indicated that this council of technical and vocational schools will include representatives of the provinces and that the provinces have always co-operated in this field of training and that he is now considering a much more active and effective partnership,
I hope the province of Quebec will join in wholeheartedly, as it has done recently in other fields, for the welfare of its people.
The province of Quebec, which has more unemployed people than any other province, including a great many young people, will no doubt benefit from this legislation.
Thus, Mr. Speaker, the province of Quebec has been neglected in the past under the vocational training co-ordination act. It will be recalled that in 1954, that province did not enter into new agreements with the central government on the subject of youth training, after having received $1,626,610 from 1942 to 1954.
In 1957, that province did not sign any new agreement under the item "assistance to vocational schools", after having	received
$10,599,642.44 from 1945 to 1957.
As far as the item "apprenticeship" is concerned, the province of Quebec participated in that program during four years only, that is in 1951, 1952, 1953 and 1954, and received approximately $58,000, but it has refused any contribution for the periods 1942-1950 and 1955-1960.
Last year, the minister told a J.O.C. delegation from the province of Quebec, which had come to urge him to speed up the skilled labour training program, that he had contacted the government of the province of Quebec in this regard, and that he had not yet received any reply. A few weeks later, I asked him in this house if he had received any reply from the province of Quebec concerning technical and vocational training. Once again he answered that he had received none. Therefore, when he rises to speak at the end of this debate, I hope he will tell me if the province of Quebec has decided to take part in this program of technical and

Vocational Training
vocational training. I would like to know what progress has been made in the negotiations because, as was said a while ago, Mr. Speaker, under the so-called autonomist government which we had in the province of Quebec until last July, our province has been very much neglected.
(Text):


Mr. W. M. Howe (Wellinglon-Huron):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a few words on this very important piece of legislation that was introduced today by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr), Bill No. C-49, an act respecting technical and vocational training assistance. In my opinion, this legislation is a further indication of the fact our government is accepting the challenge that is presented by the unemployment figures in Canada today. There has been some criticism of the fact that our program has not been a crash program, that it has been a long range program. I ask those critics just why we extended the housing program in order to make it possible for builders who want to build houses during this year? This building program, of course, will have an effect on the electrical appliance industry as well as the house furnishing industries and all those organizations that provide the things which make a house into a home.
Our next piece of legislation of importance in that connection was the one extending loans to small businesses. These loans will help the small businessman extend his premises and provide better facilities for displaying his wares. Both of these pieces of legislation are measures that will have an immediate effect. We have the extension of our winter works program which will be of great assistance in putting many of the unemployed back to work.
In this legislation we have an indication of the long range program of the government, an indication of a government with a vision, a government that is interested in things that are to come and not the things that are happening at the present time. This program is important because we have a great many people today, as indicated by the minister and by many editorials in our newspapers, who are unemployed, not because there are not jobs for them but because they have not the particular skills or vocations which will enable them to accept positions now vacant. There are many positions today that are being left open because workers with the requisite skills are not available. I should like to read a portion of an editorial 
that appeared in Toronto Saturday Night for December 10, 1960, entitled, "Apprenticeship and Profits" and which reads:
In a brief to the committee on unemployment recently, the Canadian Construction Association told the Prime Minister that a large number of the unemployed in this country are also the unskilled.
The Canadian Legion echoed the sentiments of the Canadian Construction Association and also called for an intensive program of academic and trades training similar to that which was so freely given to. and so well used by, the returning veterans of world war II.
The Department of Labour in a press release after a recent meeting of the apprenticeship training advisory committee also emphasized that there are "not enough apprentices ... being trained at the present time to meet normal losses in industry through retirement, up-grading and similar factors, let alone to provide for future needs."
Yes, Mr. Speaker, this is a program that is long overdue. As the hon. member for York-Humber (Miss Aitken) indicated yesterday, had this program been expanded ten years ago to the extent we are expanding it today we would not be short of the people to take the jobs that are now vacant.
In speaking about this particular piece of legislation I should like to mention two groups. The first group I should like to mention is the more mature worker who, as a result of automation and the development of new factory techniques or as a result of the discontinuance of railway services, finds that the demand for the particular skill which has provided him with housing and all the requirements of life for so many years has disappeared and he is unable to find employment. He goes to the employment office and goes to the man hiring workers but he finds that the industrialists feel that, owing to the age that he has attained, they do not wish to spend the money or the time on training this particular type of worker owing to the fact that they feel that his years of service with them will not compensate them for the money and the time they will be obliged to spend on his training. The result is that they turn to younger men to train in this particular organization. The result is that there is, as I say, a field of workers of a more mature age who are finding it extremely difficult to find employment.
This particular question is mentioned by the Canadian chamber of commerce in their "Policy Declarations" of 1960-1961. Under the heading of "Human Resources" they state as follows:
The chamber recognizes that the essential elements for sound education include:
(e) Institutions such as universities, technical schools, vocational schools and collegiates do important service in providing opportunities for

adults to further their education through extension and correspondence courses and night classes. The chamber believes that this work should be encouraged and expanded wherever possible.
They also go on to indicate that businessmen actively support adult education and in particular encourage their own employees at all levels to use available opportunities for self employment. I feel that this piece of legislation will be of assistance to people of this type. It will return to them their self respect and the realization of the possibility that they once again can be productive, useful Canadians.
Of course, the second group that could be referred to is the one that has been referred to so often in the last two days in this house, namely the group of young people who feel that high school education or academic high school education has no longer anything to offer them. They do not feel that they are assimilating it and hence they leave school before they are ready to take their places in a permanent way in our society. That group has been augmented in the last few years owing to the fact that our young people have been able to leave school and to obtain fairly high wages in industrial and construction work. They created a trend owing to the fact that they were able to obtain certain indications of prosperity such as a car or a hot rod, wear a black leather jacket and be, as they thought, important members of society. As I say, they created a trend among many of our young people who were attending high school and who should have continued in high school until such time as they had obtained a proper education or a proper vocation in order to fit them for permanent work in our society.
However, no matter how good this legislation is, and even though the federal government has given leadership by providing additional funds for provinces and universities in order to give this better training to our young people so that they may take their places in our world today, I feel that there are other organizations which must help. I should just like to quote a small part of an editorial which appeared in the Ottawa Journal of November 22. It stated in part as follows:
The provinces are jealous of their authority over education and it would be for them to say whether compulsory education should be extended. They should, however, consider without delay whether aimless, untrained, unemployed youths should be compelled to continue their education in the training schools. Unless there is some kind of firm direction we fear that the training program will be both costly and ineffective.
The objective will be achieved not alone through the leadership of our federal government through the provision of additional funds, the provision of improved teaching
Vocational Training
facilities and through the provision of better training for our teachers. There must be increased guidance programs in our high schools. Our home and school clubs could do a great deal to assist in those programs.
Last but not least, the parents of our young people in Canada should be inspired with the necessity of guiding their children or of indicating to their children the importance of getting increased education so that they may go out in this world and be able to produce and to do the things that are so necessary to be done in our society.
We talk about our great natural resources of iron, steel, nickel, uranium and our great soil from which we get such wonderful agricultural products, but after all the young people about whom I am talking and who in the years to come will mould these materials into the products that will be used by the people of Canada and will be sold on the market to the world are the most important resources that we have and they are the ones who are going to be assisted by this fine piece of legislation.
Coming as I do from a riding which is primarily rural in character, with only a few urban centres, I feel that it is now going to be possible to have this type of training which has been available, to a certain extent, in our larger urban centres. I was rather surprised when the Minister of Labour in presenting this legislation at the resolution stage indicated that there were only approximately 8,000 students enrolled last year in our technical and vocational schools in Canada.
I am quite interested in this program. I sincerely hope that the facilities indicated in this bill will be effective. An editorial in the Globe and Mail of yesterday entitled "Uneducated-Unemployed" had this to say in the last paragraph:
The big cities have fairly complete programs for all types of pupils but our provincial departments of education have been far from aggressive in assisting smaller centres or rural areas in this field. The conditions revealed in the Denton report are urgent, and the school authorities on all levels are charged with an immediate responsibility to get plans under way.
Leadership has been given, Mr. Speaker. We hope that this leadership will be followed up by support, as I said, at all levels of government, by educational facilities, home and school clubs and parents, in order that this increased vocational training and guidance will be a success in Canada.


Leon David Crestohl: Mr. Speaker, prior to the opening of this session, when we heard from the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefen-baker) that he had ready legislation that would solve the unemployment problem in

Vocational Training
Canada, we sat with almost bated breath in order to hear what this electrifying type of legislation would be like.


George Harris Hees: Will the hon. member permit a question?


Leon David Crestohl: Yes.


George Harris Hees: Can he give the actual quotation in which the Prime Minister said or is supposed to have said that he had legislation that would solve the unemployment problem?


Leon David Crestohl: No, I have not that quotation.


George Harris Hees: What the hon. member is saying is obviously untrue.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: It was on September 21 on television.


George Harris Hees: Will the hon. member please quote what the Prime Minister said?


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: If the minister will get his text he will see it.


George Harris Hees: I would ask the hon. member to get it. All we want is the truth.


Leon David Crestohl: Does the hon. member say that the Prime Minister did not state that he had such legislation ready?


George Harris Hees: I asked the hon. member if he would produce the quotation wherein the Prime Minister said he had legislation which would solve the unemployment problem.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: Get the text of what he said on T.V.


Leon David Crestohl: If I understood correctly, Mr. Speaker, I am under the impression-and I do not want to misquote the Prime Minister intentionally, not at all-that he did say he has legislation ready to deal with the unemployment problem.


George Harris Hees: Right. That is a whole lot different.


Leon David Crestohl: It may be it is a whole lot different to the minister. If that is interpreted by the minister and his party to mean that it is merely to deal with it and it will not solve the unemployment situation, I will accept that. I will accept that if it was merely a statement that it would deal with the unemployment problem, because that might be equivalent to saying that it would deal with it but certainly would not solve it. That might be more truthful than saying it would solve it. I hope I have not done the Prime Minister an injustice in misquoting him. I can say that I certainly had no evil intention. That is the way I interpreted it.


George Harris Hees: I do not think even the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) or the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) would

try to claim that they, by any act or speech, could solve any problem of such importance.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: He has the floor.


Leon David Crestohl: When they assume the role of government-


George Harris Hees: They will not.


Leon David Crestohl: -they will make their statements.


An hon. Member:: It will be a long time.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: You will get a surprise one day.


Leon David Crestohl: Mr. Speaker, if this is one of those fantastic pieces of legislation that the Prime Minister had in mind to deal with unemployment, let us look at it from that viewpoint.
It is my respectful submission that this piece of legislation is nothing more than what we go through in this house year after year when we deal with vocational training. At every session we go through the motions of merely approving support by the federal government to provincial vocational schools. As I said, to me that is just a perfunctory move and nothing else.
In my respectful submission it does not meet the needs of the times and the program suggested by this measure is completely without imagination and is nothing new. It has been said, quite properly, that the time of unskilled labour is fading, and we have this fact abundantly supported by the annual report of the Department of Labour for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1960. The department recognizes it. I will now quote from page 71, at the bottom of the page.
There has been a growing demand for this program because of the decrease in demand for unskilled workers and the consequent difficulty encountered by untrained and inexperienced persons in securing employment.
The government recognizes that fact; modern times recognize that fact. Let us see whether this measure grapples with that situation. Certainly modern technology, automation, and expanding industry presuppose less and less need for ordinary unskilled labour. I have heard it described that the industrial pyramid, formerly based on the broad base of ordinary unskilled labour, is now completely reversed. The pyramid is now standing the other way. The base for unskilled labour is not wide, is not broad any more. Really the base for the industrial pyramid is now recognized as being skilled labour, trained labour. Only this kind of knowledgeable workman can today obtain employment.
As a matter of fact, in days of strife and unemployment the first one to lose his job is the unskilled worker, the uneducated worker. Therefore we realize today-as the

government also realizes-that there is a need for practically very little unskilled labour, that modern machines require not only skilled manpower but also theoretical preparation for skilled manpower.
The vocational training program of the country is, in my judgment, as essential to its industrial life as are universities to its intellectual and scientific life. We were told-I think it was this afternoon-that 15 per cent of the unemployed people in Canada today are those who are classified as unskilled labour. When we realize the number of unemployed people in Canada we realize the vast number of unskilled and untrained people we have in this country.
That is something that should certainly frighten a responsible government. Merely to come before the house and say, "We are asking you again to authorize, or approve the contracts that we are making with the provinces to give them financial aid", to me is not grappling with this problem as seriously as we should. The minister should come forward and suggest something drastic to meet the situation.
Merely to ask us to approve financial support for the provincial governments-which have certainly not produced the kind of results in vocational training that this country needs-is certainly not applying any imagination, vision or serious assault upon a serious problem.
If the minister were to come before the house and say, "The government will call upon the provinces to grant free training at vocational training schools, with no tuition fees, and we will supply all the equipment that is necessary; we want our people to acquire vocational training", to me that would be something drastic, something realistic to meet the situation. The minister comes with no such thing. Other countries have an overabundance of skilled and trained labour, so much so that they have these people in their thousands to export to other countries. Imagine a country having thousands of skilled and trained workers, enough to export them to other countries. These other countries have an overabundance of such workers.
Let us just see from the department's record what it has achieved in this last year. We find this passage concerning the training of unemployed persons in the whole of our country. This is a quotation from the report of the department:
During the year, training was provided for 4,638 unemployed persons-2,377 men and 2,261 women-
Vocational Training
What a great achievement for any country, to be able to say that 4,638 unemployed persons were given vocational training. In another section the department states:
Training in primary industries and in homemaking, Total enrolment under this program was 4,461 during the year.
That is another quotation from page 72. Another great achievement for a country such as ours. Then in connection with student aid the department says, and I am quoting from the same page:
During the year, 4,033 university students and nurses-in-training were awarded outright grants-
Another achievement of which anyone can be proud. Certainly to me it is a sad reflection upon the achievements of our country. Then there were an additional 1,600 persons who received training under the supervisory training plan. One hundred private citizens and 142 members of the armed forces received vocational training through vocational correspondence courses. These are the figures from the minister's report. What a sad report it is. We have a population of roughly 17 million people. Making a rapid calculation on the basis of 15 per cent unemployed surely there must be at least 600,000 who are without employment in the untrained class. If my mathematics is wrong it can be corrected.


Mr. Speakman:: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. gentleman permit a question?


Leon David Crestohl: Would the hon. member permit me to continue? I will be pleased to answer questions later. We have many unemployed people who require vocational training and training in trades. It is shocking to realize on the basis of this report that the fantastically small figure of 8,000 people-in round figures-received some kind of training in a vocation or trade. If I were the Minister of Labour I would be embarrassed at bringing in a report like that especially at a time such as this when the government itself acknowledges the importance of training the unemployed.
If the minister had come forward and said that the government is urging the erection in Canada of a chain of vocational training schools, if he had said the government is coming to grips with this problem on as large a scale as possible through co-operation with the provinces and vigorously attacking the problem of providing these schools, I would say a statement of that nature reflected determination, vigour, vision and would represent a serious intention on the part of the government to grapple with this serious problem. But no, the minister has come forward with a perfunctory bill asking parliament to do what it has done year in and year out, approve the contracts and agreements with the

Vocational Training
provinces and to give them a little more money. In my opinion that falls far short of meeting a situation as serious as this which we thought would be met by some mysterious legislation which we were perhaps led to believe would be forthcoming. If the minister came forward and proposed that the government would subsidize trade schools and that it was co-operating with industry in the provision of scholarships, bursaries and fellowships it would represent a step in the right direction.
Let me read from a letter to the editor written by the Alpha Engineering Company and published in the Montreal Star of November 23. It reads in part:
Our office has employed a relatively large number of draftsmen, designers, engineers and technicians. We have found in the process of interviewing literally thousands of men and women that Canadian-born persons who have managed to qualify had gone through a series of chaotic experiences and usually a series of jobs. At no time was there-nor is there at present-a conscious program set down for developing Canadians into skilled planners and workers. Canadians develop into skilled craftsmen by sheer chance or through unnecessary sacrifices.
The need is here and is growing. The desire among Canadian youth and even among older people who missed such an opportunity in their youth, is, in our experience, intense and frustrating. I have seen many devoting day and night to study, receiving little or no guidance from superiors on the job.


Mr. Brunsden:: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. member permit a question?


Leon David Crestohl: 
Some hon. Members:: Vote against it.


James Stanley Speakman: Will the hon. gentleman take my question now?


Leon David Crestohl: Yes.


James Stanley Speakman: The hon. gentleman made much of the very sad record of the people who were trained last year. He quoted figures. Will the hon. member quote comparable figures for the years 1956 and 1957?


Leon David Crestohl: I will not look at the figures but I will say this. Let us assume they were bad figures; let us assume that they did not achieve much-


An hon. Member:: They achieved nothing; let us face it.


Leon David Crestohl: All right, they achieved nothing. If that is so, then they achieved-


An hon. Member:: Answer the question.


Leon David Crestohl: I will answer the question. Then, they achieved exactly what the Minister of Labour has achieved to date, but that does not cure our problems today. This minister has come before the house with a proposal that he thinks will solve the problem of unemployment in this country. If the others did not, this certainly will not. Two wrongs do not make a right.


Edwin William Brunsden: The hon. member-


Michael Starr: I have never heard such nonsense in the eight years I have been here.


Edwin William Brunsden: The hon. member received a letter deploring the lack of technical training among young Canadians. He has endeavoured to make a case out of that letter. In view of his apparent interest in the training of young Canadians, why does he oppose this legislation?


Leon David Crestohl: I beg your pardon; I am not opposing this legislation at all, nor is anybody. We are just pointing out how inadequate it is, how inept it is, how useless it is, and how much it lacks.
Vocational Training


Mr. Ricard:: You should not vote for it, then.


Michael Starr: You are opposing it.


Leon David Crestohl: Too little and too late.


Mr. O. W. Weichel (Waterloo Norlh):: Mr. Speaker, in speaking on the bill I am reminded of the words expressed by our esteemed Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) when he spoke on the resolution when he said, as reported at page 231 of Hansard:
This resolution introduces legislation to stimulate technical and vocational training and broaden its scope throughout Canada. It is designed to undergird the government's program to increase employment and foster national development.
These remarks have a very progressive meaning. I think we all agree that Canada has never trained enough manpower to meet the needs of its industry. I believe that many of our unemployed, as well as our younger people, will appreciate and welcome such a move by our government.
It would be difficult, Mr. Speaker, to overemphasize the importance of the measure now before us. Vocational and technical programs have been in effect in this country for some years. They have had the support of members on all sides of the house; they have had the co-operation of the provinces. However, in recent years there has been a growing sense of uneasiness that what we are doing is not enough. More-and much more-is required. I commend the Minister of Labour and the government on taking the initiative in this matter. Recently the government undertook to pay 75 per cent of the cost of training unemployed workers. It is my sincere hope that the provinces will take full advantage of that proposal also.
In the past few days we have had another discussion carried on in a committee of the other place, which is renewed evidence of the fact that the unskilled worker today is the forgotten man in the labour market. In the unemployment picture the unskilled worker bulks as one of the largest components. This is natural, as every effort is being made by industry to meet international competition and to cut costs by bringing in new processes and technology. Modern industry, as we all realize, has to have skilled workers and, Mr. Speaker, you will find very few skilled workers thrown into the labour market.
Another reason why this step is so important is the fact that, in my opinion, we must step up our technological advance in order to keep pace with progress in other countries, and more particularly in the Soviet union. It is therefore obvious that Canada cannot afford to lag behind the advances being made in other parts of the world. I do

Vocational Training
not mean, of course, that we should immediately implement automation whenever we can. Automation must be brought in with due and careful consideration of the effect on the men and women concerned. After all, regardless of the machine age, the most priceless component of our industrial complex is the men and women who make it up.
As I understand the proposed legislation, the government is asking this house for authorization to pay to the provinces 75 per cent of the cost of all new facilities and equipment, including vocational and technical training schools. I understand that today we have some 300 of those schools now operating. To meet our needs over the next number of years alone will require an increase of 50 per cent in that number. The schools now operating are providing vocational and technical training directly and through correspondence and evening classes to some 240,000 students across Canada. In the natural course of events these would be students who for one reason or another would not have the advantage of or the opportunity to acquire higher education. If this type of assistance were not provided these young people would remain in the class of unskilled workers and as such would have difficulty in finding employment. I understand that many industries in Canada have training programs of their own. This is very noticeable in my own riding of Waterloo North. I would very much like to see this extended. I would like to see industry-wide programs in cooperation with provincial and federal authorities.
Clause 3 of this bill, under which the minister may, with the approval of the governor in council, enter into an agreement with any province, for a period not exceeding six years, to provide for the payment by Canada to the province of contributions in respect of the cost incurred by the province in undertaking the program of technical and vocational training in the province, is outstanding in its purpose. It mentions a group of people well deserving of every consideration, especially our unemployed persons; the training of those over the regular school leaving age; the disabled persons, whom we are obligated at all times to assist in every way possible; and, last but not least, our men serving in the naval, army or air forces of Canada, including any person who formerly served in such forces. This vocational and technical program would greatly benefit the people mentioned in clauses 3 and 8 of this bill.
One provision that pleases me very much in the present legislation is that the 75 per cent grants will be paid up to March 31, 1963. This provides every incentive for

the provinces to get moving on this work right now at a time when construction of schools will provide employment. After the period in question the grant reverts to 50 per cent. That is the incentive provision.
We all agree that education is one of the most important assets in our modern times. Science holds the key to the future. The advances of the past 50 years have been phenomenal. They have been due in large measure to the increase in scientific knowledge. Anything that we can do in this parliament to advance the opportunities of knowledge must commend itself to all members. In Canada of all countries, with its vast resources and small population, we must make science and technical skill do the major work of development. Coming from a highly industrialized riding as I do I strongly commend the government for this measure.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, owing to what I hope is a temporary vocal disability-


Edwin William Brunsden: We don't.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: -I am going to be quite brief in speaking on second reading of the bill. However, before proceeding to give the house the few words of wisdom that I intend to put forward on this occasion, I want to take issue with the hon. member for Waterloo North (Mr. Weichel) who expressed the opinion that while automation is coming we must not let it come so fast that it is going to put people out of work and must see that it comes very gradually.
I want to point out to the hon. member, and I speak as a democratic socialist, a pragmatic one at that, that he is overlooking the realities of capitalism. Automation is introduced by the owners of industry whenever it is necessary to increase production or to lower costs as a result of competition. You cannot blame them as individuals because they are forced to do it. Where we in this group differ from the hon. member, who wants automation introduced as slowly as possible, is that we believe in using all the machinery possible to lighten the labour of man and we also believe in planning and providing satisfactory employment for those workers who are displaced from certain operations as the result of automation.
I do not blame the individual owners of industries who are concerned with the operation of the capitalist system. We in this group on the whole have no hard feelings against them as individuals. Occasionally you run into one who is rather unpleasant but on the whole these people are performing a function in society and doing the best they can having regard for the circumstances under which they are working. In view of the competition that

exists under capitalism within and without nations profits must come first regardless of the welfare of human beings and regardless, shall I say, of the hope of the hon. member for Waterloo North that these harsh realities should be tempered. They cannot be tempered in the light of the increasing tempo of competition that exists in the world today as between nations trading with one another and companies competing with one another. Therefore we say that we must face the fact of automation but make certain that we make provision in other essential occupations and by the reduction of hours for those whose services are not required as the result of automation.
To the dismay of some of my colleagues on my left, I presume, I find that my voice has improved somewhat since I commenced speaking. However, I am going to be very brief. The members of this group expressed their support for the principle and purpose of this legislation at the resolution stage although we are quite anxious to make certain that the legislation will be comprehensive enough to meet the need. I think we all recognize that the legislation does not provide a solution to unemployment. To suggest that it is a solution to unemployment is in my opinion to view the question improperly. This is an approach to one segment of the problem that faces us today, the need to provide training for the unskilled in Canada.
The question of meeting the problem of unemployment invokes other measures that we look forward to the government introducing. I for one would not suggest for a moment that under present world conditions and our present society there is any quick or easy solution to many of these difficult economic problems. We recognize the need.
I am not aware of what target the minister has in mind. You know, Mr. Speaker, in my mind I often look upon him as the minister of internal disarmament because he is so genial and courteous when you go to see him. He is so industrious and so patient with the criticism of the opposition-


Edwin William Brunsden: He is a Conservative.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: -that one finds it very difficult indeed on occasions to work up a head of steam of indignation in his case. However, I suggest, having given some thought to the matter, that we must have a target. Suppose we are going to retrain 100,000 young Canadians; even the retraining of 100,000 imposes quite a task. These things are not done simply. I note that the bill provides for assistance for buildings. You have to have buildings before you can
Vocational Training
educate people. You have to instal equipment related to many types of employment. The bill provides for the training of instructors which cannot be done overnight. It also provides for further research into this problem, which the members of this group think is most necessary, but the conclusions from that research are not going to be reached overnight. We are very glad to see that the bill also provides allowances to students. It also provides for an advisory council.
This is not a simple or short term problem. It is going to take long term planning and that is what we in this group hope will be done as a result of this legislation and co-operation between the federal and provincial governments and industry and labour.
I venture to say that only experience as the result of months and years of the administration of this measure will prove whether the legislation is adequate, sufficient or satisfactory. It is going to take a spirit of cooperation. The people of the country have got to have some understanding of this legislation and its purpose.
I make one particular suggestion. In order to stimulate the public imagination I suggest that the minister should at least establish short term targets at which we are aiming. I referred to a figure of 100,000 which would be an average of 10,000 to a province although actually more in some provinces than others. Let the public understand what we are aiming at. Then, let the public understand, shall I say, the nature of the problem. You do not build buildings, equip them, and provide instructors overnight. Let the public understand that it will take time to produce results. People are not trained in a month or two months or, in many cases, even six months. It is going to take time for this legislation, if it is comprehensive enough, to have an impact on the problem we are facing today.
Now, Mr. Speaker, that is all I am going to say at this time. Other members of this group may wish to say a few words when we come to the committee stage. I admit we have some doubts as to certain clauses of the bill. I hope we have some constructive suggestions. So far as I am concerned, I will leave the rest of what I have to say until we are dealing with the bill in committee.
(Translation):


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Speaker, coming from a centre which is well known, both within the province of Quebec, and outside the province, for its educational institutions, I would like to make a few remarks in connection with this bill.

Vocational Training
Indeed St. Hyacinthe has educational establishments which have been of great service. To point out only a few of them, there are two classical colleges, three normal schools, two secondary schools, a school of veterinary medicine and a textile institute, not to mention 15 or 20 primary schools.
I am convinced that the legislation introduced by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) will be favourably received by our educators, as it is bound to be very beneficial, more particularly to our working class.
On reading the bill, we find that it affects almost every field of our economy. For those who want to add to their knowledge, or to better their position, it will be easy from now on to do so. It is recognized, Mr. Speaker, that the number of unemployed is equal to the number of unskilled workers. My hon. friend, the member for Pontiac-Temiscamingue (Mr. Martineau) gave significant figures a moment ago. The bill should encourage those who are anxious to improve their situation to take advantage of the facilities it offers for obtaining better training.
You do not need much experience in any industry to find out that when lay-offs occur, the worker with the most training is laid off last.
Furthermore, industries are looking for the ablest workers. Unfortunately those who would most deserve protection due to a lack of technical skill are often those who are less protected.
Allow me to quote for the record a recent statement by Mr. Georges Moore, director of the textile institute of the province of Quebec, at St. Hyacinthe. That industry has been under frequent discussion lately and has had the sympathy of several localities. Mr. Moore states that:
In the textile Industry, unemployment does not affect technicians and skilled workers.
Speaking before the chamber of commerce of Plessisville, he said that on the contrary, all technicians who graduate from the provincial institute are absorbed by the industry, which needs them urgently. And he went on to say:
Since the opening of the textile institute in 1945, 277 students have graduated and most of them have found jobs in the industry, where many of them now fill important technical positions.
I fully agree with my colleague from Pontiac-Temiscamingue when he says that we now have to face the consequences of the lack of foresight of our predecessors.

I wish to refer to the statement which the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge) has just made to the effect that a measure cannot be expected to give results overnight.
If our predecessors had taken the steps that are being taken today by the Minister of Labour; if they had shown some foresight five or ten years ago, we would have more technicians today, and there would be that much less unemployment.
I should like to refer briefly to the statement made a moment ago by the hon. member for Papineau (Mr. Meunier). He made quite a fuss over the prosperity that prevailed under the former Liberal administration. He forgot to mention that the Liberals were in power during the war and in the post-war period, at a time when European countries saw their industrial empires completely destroyed and turned to us for all their needs. Today, their industries have been restored and are competing with ours. This explains the fact that in some sectors of our industry, there is unemployment, perhaps a little more than there should be.
I also wish to dispel the impression that he may have created when he said that nothing had been done in the province of Quebec until a few months ago. According to official reports, before 1946, there were only four technical schools and a few handicraft training centres in the province of Quebec. From 1946 to 1960, the number of technical schools in the province of Quebec went up to ten. Nine specialized schools, 37 trade schools were established, and today it is estimated that about 13,000 students attend day classes in those various schools, while about 18,000 attend night classes.
Frankly, Mr. Speaker, it is quite wrong to suggest that the need for technical training has appeared only recently in the province of Quebec.
The bill under study commands the cooperation and good will of all. I hope the Quebec authorities will avail themselves of this legislation which is bound to materially help the promotion and improvement of our workers of all categories and in every field.
In conclusion, I want to say that I find it hard to account for the attitude taken by my colleague, the member for Cartier (Mr. Crestohl) who tells us that he is going to support the measure, after saying that it will do nothing. He probably wants to show his willingness to co-operate. So, I beg of him to ask the Quebec authorities to do likewise.

(Text):


Chesley William Carter: Along with other hon. members who have spoken, Mr. Speaker, I should like to indicate my support for the principle of this bill. We of the Liberal party have little choice but to support this bill because it involves a principle which we ourselves embodied in legislation a good many years ago, as the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) has already pointed out. The extensions of the principle included in this bill are those which we have been advocating on this side of the house for the past three years.
As a long range measure this bill has many admirable features which should produce many beneficial effects as far as our industries are concerned. It should go a long way toward diminishing if not eliminating that rather high proportion of our work force and particularly of our unemployed which is without skills and without trades training. It should also increase our industrial efficiency and our industrial output and should possibly help to develop new industries. However, I feel that this bill must not be judged solely on its educational value but rather as one of the means which the government plans to use at this time in order to combat the unemployment problem with which we are now faced. In that context we must ask ourselves this question. How effective will this bill be in enabling the several hundred thousand people now out of work to acquire the new skills and training which will enable them to get jobs?
One feature of this bill which I find to be quite disappointing is the fact that it still retains the old fifty-fifty cost sharing formula. The effectiveness of this bill as an instrument to offset unemployment must depend upon the financial ability of the provinces to take advantage of it. Although 50 per cent as provided for in the fifty-fifty formula may seem to be a reasonable proportion, nevertheless it cannot provide much assistance to those provinces which cannot afford that other 50 per cent or even, in some cases, the 25 per cent.
I would have preferred to see this particular formula dispensed with altogether and to have provision for the cost sharing arrangement to be worked out on a basis of need. Any mathematical formula that we might devise would, in my opinion, still have the disadvantage of providing more for the ones who need it least and less for those who need it most. For example, in my own province of Newfoundland last winter 30 per cent of our work force were out of work; and the indications are that we shall have a similar proportion or perhaps even more out of work this winter.
Vocational Training


Michael Starr: They do not fish in the wintertime.


Chesley William Carter: I did not hear what the minister said.


Michael Starr: I said that they do not fish in the wintertime.


Chesley William Carter: Vocational Training
included among the industries listed in this bill. In Newfoundland we have conducted, on a small scale, some kind of extension courses, including navigation, care of fisheries, motor mechanics and even cooking. I hope it will be possible to extend that program when this legislation comes into effect.
I hope it will be possible for our university, which has now set up an extension department, to take advantage of this legislation and conduct vocational or extension courses for Newfoundland fishermen similar to that which was carried out by the University of British Columbia in 1956.
I listened with great interest while the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Her-ridge) took issue with my friend the hon. member for Waterloo North (Mr. Weichel) about the effects of automation. While I agree with him that industries will take advantage of automation just as fast as their finances will permit, that they will be more or less forced to do so to keep abreast of competition, yet I think there is one important difference between the effects of automation and mechanization in general.
In the past, when new machines or new techniques have been developed, it is true that people have been put out of work. But most of those people have found employment later on in the operation of these machines, their servicing or even in the making of them. But when it comes to automation we have quite a different situation, because automation is such a complicated business that the ordinary run of the mill person, the average worker, does not possess the high level of intelligence required to absorb the scientific theory necessary before he can be employed either in the servicing or the production of automation machines. That was never true before. It means we will not require people to run the machines anymore, because that is what the automatic machine will do. With that exception I think this is an excellent long range measure for the development of a program of technical training for those who are now in school.
But as a short range, emergency measure to combat the unemployment problem which is facing us at the present time, I think the government would have been better advised to develop a crash program copied somewhat
after the program for training veterans at the end of world war II. Under that program 137,000 veterans received either university or vocational training at a cost of only $195 million, which worked out to a little over $1,400 per veteran. Taxation statistics have shown that this has been a remarkably good investment for Canada, because many of these veterans are now in a position to pay that amount in income tax every year. I think we must look upon this measure in very much the same way as a good commercial investment in the future of Canada, but I feel the government should have made itself responsible for the full cost of training the unemployed.
I would hope that the government might also, even at this late date, give some thought to finding a way to make better utilization of the industrial facilities for on-job training. I know that this bill makes provision for apprenticeship training, but I think that with the industrial facilities now available, and particularly the unused facilities that we have, we could do much more than is suggested in this bill.


Murdo William Martin: Mr. Speaker, as it is so close to six o'clock, I wonder if I might call it six o'clock.


Mr. Speaker:: Agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow being private members' day, may I inquire what we will be doing on Friday; and perhaps we could get some indication of the work for Monday.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, on Friday we will continue this debate on second reading of the bill now before us. If that is concluded, we will deal with the resolution concerning a national productivity council. If that should be finished, then we will deal with the resolution on veterans' pensions. I will try to give the business for Monday and succeeding days to the house on Thursday evening.


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

Question

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

Mr. Robichaud: 1.	Have any clerks been recently demoted at the No. 5 equipment depot, Moncton, New Brunswick, and, if so, (a) by whom have they been replaced; (b) what was the reason for such action?
2.	What was the total number of (a) civilians; (b) Royal Canadian Air Force employees at No. 5 equipment depot on the following dates: November 1, 1958, 1959 and 1960?
3.	Has any action been taken by the department to increase the percentage of service employees as compared with the civilian employees at this particular equipment depot?
Answer by: Hon. Pierre Sevigny (Associate Minister of National Defence):
1.	No.
2.	The department does not maintain statistics relating to individual establishments for the exact dates requested. However, personnel strengths are available for the following dates:
(a)	Civilian strength (b)
(including the sub- Service depot at Debert) strength Sept. 30,	1958	564	164Sept. 30,	1959	573	173Sept. 30,	1960	506	1703.	The reduction in civilian staff at 5 supply depot between September 30, 1959 and September 30, 1960 was due chiefly to the closing down of the Debert sub-depot. While this action was taken in the interests of economy and efficiency, it did result in an increase in the percentage of service compared with civilian personnel at the Moncton depot.
Thursday, December 8, 1960