1960-07-22

Mr. N. L. Spencer (Essex West):: Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a question of privilege. Yesterday, following the taking of a vote of the house, your attention was directed by the hon. member for Ottawa West (Mr. Mc-Ilraith) to the fact that one of the members of the house had left the chamber during the taking of the vote. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) identified him as chairman of the bill of rights committee, and indicated that he was leaving for the purpose of attending a meeting of that committee.
May I be permitted to say, in mitigation of the offence, that I was not leaving for any such purpose but that I had arranged to accept a long distance call at twenty minutes after two and left for the purpose of receiving that call. At the time it was arranged I had no idea that the division bells were going to ring so long that it would not be possible for me to register my vote on that motion and also accept that long distance call.
I extend to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the house my apologies for offending against this rule of the house, and I hope that my apologies will be accepted by the members of the opposition in that respect.


Mr. Speaker:: I thank the hon. member for his explanation and apology.



MISCELLANEOUS PRIVATE BILLS

[Stage Direction]
Nineteenth report of standing committee on miscellaneous private bills-Mr. Mandziuk.

Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to announce that in accordance with the requirements of the Agricultural Stabilization Act, which provides a mandatory stabilization or prescribed price at a minimum of 80 per cent of the base price for Ontario wheat, oats and barley, the agricultural stabilization board has established the base price for these commodities for the crop year July 1, 1960 to June 30, 1961.
The stabilization board has been authorized to provide a support price of $1.39 per bushel for Ontario wheat No. 2 Canada eastern grade or better quality, sold for milling or export purposes, basis on track at Ontario shipping points. This is the same prescribed price for Ontario wheat as last year, but is at approximately 82 per cent of the 10-year average or base price, which has been established as $1.70 per bushel, on track basis. The board, however, is authorized to determine the amount of any payments to producers on the basis of sales delivered at Ontario elevators, as was requested by the producers' association.
The 10-year average or base price for oats has been established at 71 cents per bushel, No. 2 Canada eastern grade or better quality, on track at Ontario shipping points. The prescribed price for the 1960-61 crop year will be at the 80 per cent mandatory level, which is 57 cents per bushel.
The 10-year average or base price for barley has been established at 99 cents per bushel, No. 2 Canada eastern grade or better quality, on track at Ontario shipping points. The prescribed price for the 1960-61 crop year will be at the 80 per cent mandatory level, which is 79 cents per bushel.


Hon. Paul Marlin (Essex East):: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture will recall that several times during the past six weeks he has been asked when he would be in a position to announce these prices under the Agricultural Prices Stabilization Act. The Ontario wheat farmers, through their appropriate agency, have been negotiating a price with concerned parties. On this account, it may have been the view of the minister that the announcement should not take place while such negotiations were under way. I am not aware that these negotiations have been completed.
In any event, the price of $1.39 for Ontario wheat, the prescribed price which the minister says is the same as last year, does not represent the price asked by the Ontario wheat grower. That price, I think, was in the neighbourhood of $1.60. There were certain other requests made by the Ontario wheat growers with which the minister has not dealt. However, if these negotiations are not complete one may draw the conclusion that the figure of $1.39 as compared with the asked price is not one calculated to assist the negotiations which are under way.

Proposed Legislation NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD ACT



AMENDMENT TO INCORPORATE SECTION 273 OF RAILWAY ACT

Mr. W. H. A. Thomas (Middlesex West) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-87, to amend the National Energy Board Act (drainage works).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


William Howell Arthur Thomas: Mr. Speaker, this bill seeks to amend the National Energy Board Act by incorporating into it section 273 of the Railway Act. When the National Energy Board Act was passed in 1959, sections 207 to 246 and section 248 of the Railway Act, which deal with the acquisition and expropriation of land for purposes of right of way, were included in the National Energy Board Act, but section 273 of the Railway Act which dealt with drainage was not included.
This amendment would make pipe lines operating under federal charter subject to provincial drainage laws in the same way as pipe lines which operate under provincial charter. Pipe lines involved in municipal drainage schemes would be treated like those of any other property owner. They would be subject to assessment for benefit, cost and damage like other properties, and their owners would enjoy the right of appeal to county or district courts for adjustment in such assessments. Owners of pipe lines would be made responsible for any added cost to a municipal drainage scheme caused by their presence.
The provisions contained in the proposed amendment were incorporated into the Railway Act in 1903 after an extended debate in parliament. It is suggested that the arguments which were valid and successful in connection with drainage problems caused by the railways in 1903 are equally valid today in connection with pipe lines.
This amendment is requested by Adelaide township in the constituency of Middlesex West. It is endorsed by Middlesex county council and by the Ontario association of land surveyors.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The motion is not debatable. The hon. member was asked simply to explain the bill, but it seems to me he is prolonging this information to the point where it has become a debate. Perhaps he is about to finish.


William Howell Arthur Thomas: I have one more statement to make. This amendment would be of substantial assistance to individual farmers and to municipal drainage authorities in the solution of drainage problems caused by pipe lines.

Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Mr. Speaker:: When shall this bill be read the second time?


Mr. Pickersgill:: Now.


Mr. Speaker:: Next sitting of the house.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Joseph James Martin: May I ask
the Secretary of State for External Affairs if it is a fact that Canada has been asked to send a specialized group of Canadian armed forces from the United Nations emergency force in the Middle East to join the United Nations force in Africa and, if consideration has been given to such an invitation, it is the intention to confine the Canadian contingent to specialized forces.


Hon. Howard C. Green (Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):: There has been a suggestion that Canada should send a specialized signal force, and discussions are still going on in that regard.


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr,
Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs on behalf of this group. We are very pleased to know that he has chosen our party colours in connection with this program.
In view of news reports over the C.B.C. this morning to the effect that Soviet personnel will be employed in the Congo under United Nations auspices, will the minister now state whether the government has made a firm offer to the United Nations to supply up to the equivalent of a battalion of French speaking or bilingual forces for service in the Congo?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, there has been no request from the secretary general for a combat unit from Canada. He has asked whether we could provide aircraft and supporting personnel for an airlift between Pisa and Leopoldville. The United Nations has established a staging area at Pisa for handling the supplies and equipment of the force in the Congo. It is considered necessary, at least for an emergency period of 30 days, to establish a shuttle airlift between Pisa and Leopoldville in order to give logistic support to the force.
At the same time there has developed an emergency need for the movement of food supplies into and within the Congo, and the United Nations again appealed to Canada to

provide aircraft. The house will be aware that four R.C.A.F. North Stars have arrived in Leopoldville carrying the gift of foodstuffs announced by the government on June 18. Some of this food is urgently required upcountry. As well, there is an immediate problem of transporting food supplies from Uganda to the Congo.
To meet this kind of requirement for aircraft the government has decided to put the four North Stars now in the area at the disposal of the United Nations for a period of 30 days. The necessary aircraft, crews and maintenance personnel will be provided to maintain four active aircraft for the purposes specified. A senior R.C.A.F. officer is being sent to Leopoldville to co-ordinate these activities.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: May I address a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs on another aspect of this matter. In view of various reports over the C.B.C. this morning to the effect that Prime Minister Lumumba of the Congo may soon be coming to Montreal to try to recruit French speaking technicians for employment in the Congo, will the minister assure the house that every assistance will be given by the government to this endeavour by the Congolese authorities?


Howard Charles Green: The Canadian government has received no communication from Mr. Lumumba, nor has it received any message on his behalf concerning a possible visit to Canada.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: wish to address a question to the Minister of Labour. I apologize for not having sent notice. I ask this question because I have received a telegram from Mr. J. W. Fradley, business agent of the painters' union in Vancouver. Has the minister's attention been drawn to the importation of painters from the United States to do painting at the Vancouver general hospital for the Rust Engineering Company? In view of the serious unemployment among painters in British Columbia, would he find out who issued the work permits and why?


Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, this is news to me. In view of what the hon. member has given me as information I shall make a complete investigation at once.
Inquiries of the Ministry



ALGOMA-INQUIRY AS TO PURCHASE OF , STANROCK CONTRACTS BY RIO TINTO

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition):: May I ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce whether the government has approved of the purchase by Rio Tinto Limited of the uranium contracts of Stan-rock Uranium Mines Limited?


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Not yet, Mr. Speaker.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether he is in a position now to make a statement about the proposed meeting with the liaison committee of the western grain producers which he said he would be able to make early last week.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I hoped when I gave the earlier answer that I would have been in a position before now to make that statement, but I am not yet finally in that position.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hubert Badanai (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Would the minister indicate to the house whether the closing of the superintendent's office at Fort William is under consideration by the Canadian National Railways, and if that is true can the minister say to what extent the office staff will be affected?


Mr. Speaker:: Has the minister had notice?


Mr. Hees:: Yes.


Mr. Speaker:: The question is one which would normally be appropriate for the order paper.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has given me notice of his intention to ask this question, for which I thank him. The management of Canadian National Railways advise me that no consideration is being given at this time to closing the superintendent's office at Fort William.

Inquiries of the Ministry TRADE AND COMMERCE



REQUEST FOR TABLING OF SURVEY OF CAPITAL SPENDING INTENTIONS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. J. Mcllrailh (Ottawa West):: Mr. Speaker I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce based on a news item which appeared in the Winnipeg Free Press of July 20 under the heading, "Recession, New Deficit Foreseen". The article makes reference to a June survey of capital spending intentions issued this week by the Department of Trade and Commerce, which is supposed to have shown a drop from earlier expectations. My question is this. Will the minister table the survey and make copies available to hon. members of the house?


Gordon Minto Churchill: It has not been the practice in the past to table this mid-term review, Mr. Speaker, but I shall be pleased to do that.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE SUGGESTED ATTENDANCE OF MINISTER OF LABOUR

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, in view of the very general concern all across the country over the question of unemployment, and in view of the statement made by the Minister of Labour the other day that he would not be a member of the federal delegation at the federal-provincial conference, I wonder if the Prime Minister does not think it would be advisable to have the Minister of Labour in attendance.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, that is a question that naturally has to be considered, and I see no reason why the answer should not be in the affirmative.



NATIONAL PARKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Bow River):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources in reference to the national parks. There have been two serious incidents in which tourists in the parks, namely Banff and Glacier, have been badly mauled by bears, one incident where they were fishing at Spray lake and another incident at Glacier park. I was wondering whether the department had looked into the matter and whether any consideration is being given to changing

the regulations so that reliable people might carry firearms to protect themselves in situations of this kind.


Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I am glad in a way that the hon. member for Bow River has raised the question of bears in the parks, because recently an increasing numbers of letters have been reaching my desk and the desk of the hon. member for Calgary South and other park members.
I should like to make it clear that under the National Parks Act it is my responsibility to protect the bears and in so doing we have worked out a policy under which we warn all the people who go into the parks about the danger of feeding bears. Since the tragic incident in 1958 in Jasper park we have established a new set of regulations for the treatment of bears in the parks. At the present time if any bear becomes too friendly along the highways we trap the animal and remove him to a very distant spot, and paint his rear end red. If this bear with the red posterior reappears in the settled areas where people are visiting the parks, then he is trapped a second time and removed permanently. This program was in effect in 1958 and 1959 and is in effect again this year, and quite a number of bears have been removed permanently.
I should like to make this one plea to those people who are interested in this matter. It is a very serious matter to those who attend the parks that the greatest culprits in these matters are those people who feed the bears and do not look after their garbage properly, because they are the ones who encourage the bears to come around human habitation which leads in the main to these tragedies.
In regard to the grizzly bears, which do not come near human habitation, they are not a real problem in Canada because they are quite remote. In the United States the grizzly bears are almost extinct, and the parks services are making a real effort to try to save the grizzly bears for the future. Therefore, in answer to the hon. member's question about the change in regulations, we have put into operation the regulations which I have described. Since we put them into operation there has been no serious or fatal accident in the parks.
As to the change in regulations concerning rifles, no consideration is being given to that at the present time.


Mr. Arthur Smith (Calgary South):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the difficulty of persuading the public not to encourage these attacks, I wonder whether the minister would consider thinning out the bear population before it thins out our population.



INQUIRY FOR RETURN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Acting Secretary of State about an order for return made on July 13. It has to do with the national capital commission property transaction. The estimates of the commission are now before the house, and I and several other members would very much appreciate having this return today, if it is available. I should like to ask him if he will see whether that can be done.


Hon. Leon Balcer (Acting Secretary of State):: I shall look after it right away.


John Whitney Pickersgill: May I ask a supplementary question. Is the minister yet in a position to furnish the house with the list of returns that have not yet been made, as he undertook to do some days ago?


Léon Balcer: The last time the request was for the production of the list before the end of the session, and that is our intention.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think if the minister will look at Hansard he will find that is not quite accurate. I hope it will be done as early as possible.


Léon Balcer: Oh, yes. There are so few returns that are behind that it will be a very short list.



CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Douglas Mason Fisher: I should like to ask the Minister of National Revenue whether it would be possible for members of the committee to have copies of the report of the board of broadcast governors before the first meeting of the broadcasting committee.


Mr. M. J. A. Lambert (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue):: I am advised that these will be placed in the mail boxes as soon as available. There was some difficulty in connection with the preparation of one particular report, but sufficient copies were made available to table in the house according to the statute. The others will be forthcoming very shortly.
Inquiries of the Ministry



REPORTED COLLAPSE OF CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH NEWS EDITORS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. T. Richard (Ottawa East):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Revenue based on a press release which states that contract negotiations between the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and some 145 news editors collapsed today when it was learned that the federal government had vetoed any salary increases for C.B.C. employees. Is the minister ready to confirm this statement?


Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minisier of National Revenue):: I have no knowledge of this matter whatever, Mr. Speaker, and certainly the government did not veto any salary increases.



MINES AND TECHNICAL SURVEYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Comtois (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Mackenzie River asked me a question about two female employees of my department believed drowned in Great Bear Lake. I am sorry the hon. member is not in the house this morning because of serious illness, and I am sure everybody in this house wishes him a prompt recovery.
This is the report I have received. The girls, two geographers, Miss Joan Goodfellow, 27, and Miss Anne-Marie Kroeger, 35, were employed on a joint project of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys and the Arctic Institute of North America to investigate the raised beaches and related features of Great Bear lake as an aid to interpreting the glacial history of the region. Miss Kroeger had obtained a grant from the Arctic Institute of North America and had been authorized by the institute to undertake the survey. They were flown in to Great Bear lake from Edmonton on June 25 last. They were equipped with a 17-foot rugged freighter canoe, the regular issue for the type of country in which they were working. With it they had two outboard motors, a five horsepower and a ten horsepower, one serving as a spare. The survival equipment issued by the department included a fish net and a rifle.
The search was started when Mackenzie Air Services, which were to keep check on the party and resupply it if necessary, failed to make contact on two scheduled rendezvous. The upturned canoe used by the girls was found floating on the northwest shore of Good Hope bay, on Great Bear lake, on July

Inquiries oj the Ministry 19. The search is being continued by air and by ground by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Departmental officials point out the possibility, from information available to them, that the canoe may have drifted away while the girls were working on the shore of the lake, and for this reason all hope is not abandoned.
Miss Kroeger was born in Hamburg, Germany. She was experienced in bush travel, having worked on the same project for the Arctic institute in 1958. Miss Goodfellow is a native of Plaster Rock, New Brunswick.
In answer to the supplementary question, I must say that it is not the practice of the department to encourage women to undertake field work, particularly in remote areas. However, women scientists of proven technical or professional qualifications, for example geologists or geographers, are occasionally assigned to field operations when physically fit to undertake such tasks. The two missing girls are the only female scientists on field parties of our department in remote areas.
Whether it be for male or female employees, the department makes every possible effort to ensure the safety of its field officers while in the bush. The precautionary measures include prearranged contacts by commercial air services, radio communications where possible, outfitting the parties with extra accessories such as outboard motors, training in first aid and the provision of a means for living off the land from game and fish if temporarily stranded. With an average of nearly 2,000 employees in our field operations each summer, including our hydrographic operations, there is always a risk of some casualties.
Mr. Speaker, in addressing myself to the families of the two missing girls I wish to say how much we share their anxiety and their sorrow. I should like to assure them that all that is possible is being done to find the missing girls if, perchance, they are still alive.



MEDICINE HAT STAMPEDE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. W. Brunsden (Medicine Hat):: should like to address a question to the Minister of Transport and ask him to accept my apologies for having given no notice, although he may wish to take this as notice. The question is, is it true that the minister, at the opening of the Medicine Hat stampede yesterday, lost a race to the mayor; and if so why, since he obviously had the better horse?


George Harris Hees: I had the exciting and unique experience yesterday of racing on horseback against Mayor Viner of Medicine Hat. I am afraid my persuasive powers with the horse were not quite sufficient to assure victory.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. R. Garland (Nipissing):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence, about which I was in touch with his office earlier in the day. In view of the reactivation of the Bomarc program, can the minister make any comment concerning what progress has been made to date with respect to the construction of 200 housing units in the urban military housing project in the North Bay area?


Hon. G. R. Pearkes (Minister of National Defence):: No construction work has started. Investigations are being carried out with respect to suitable locations.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Rea in the chair.



NATIONAL CAPITAL COMMISSION

[Stage Direction]
314. Administration, and operation and maintenance of parks, parkways and grounds adjoining government buildings at Ottawa and Hull, $1,860,320.
The Deputy Chairman:: This item will be found at page 61 of. the blue book, with the details on page 421.


George James McIlraith: In dealing with the estimates of the national capital commission I would point out that the last report available to hon. members-


Charles Edward Rea: Order. I wonder if hon. members walking out of the chamber will please lower their voices in talking to those they meet in passing so that we may hear the hon. member who is speaking.


George James McIlraith: The last annual report
available to hon. members is the report for the year ended December 31, 1958, following the new legislation which, among other things, changed the name of the federal district commission to the national capital commission. The annual report is now on the same fiscal year basis as are the government accounts, namely a fiscal year ending March 31 in each year. The annual report for the 15-month period covering the whole of the calendar year 1959 and extending to March

31, 1960 has been prepared and was tabled in the house on July 14 of this year.
In view of the fact that it covers this long period and is really the first annual report of the commission as at present constituted under the new act, it is to be regretted that it was not made available to the members of the house before the estimates are discussed. However, I presume there is some good reason why it was not available. If there is not some good reason, I presume the minister will have to bear the responsibility for the failure to make it available to members.


Mr. Walker:: It is in the hands of the printer, and I hope to have it in both English and French very shortly.


George James McIlraith: It is unfortunate that it was not made available to the members.


David James Walker: Yes, it is unfortunate.


George James McIlraith: In any event, I do not want to pursue that subject further at the moment. I want to ask the minister a question as to the chairmanship of the commission, and I hope it will not be embarrassing to the acting chairman, for whom I have the highest regard. On April 12 a question was asked in the House of Commons on this subject and, as will be found at page 3137 of Hansard, the minister indicated that Mr. Alan Hay had been appointed chairman of the national capital commission for a temporary period. Then he indicated that the temporary period was two months. I understand that further action has been taken since that time and some public information has come out about it, but not in any clear fashion. I wonder whether the minister could clear up just what the status is now.


David James Walker: As to the acting chairmanship, the period has been extended to October 16. As can be appreciated, Mr. Alan Hay has double duties here.


Charles Edward Rea: Order. I must once more ask hon. members at the back of the chamber to please lower their voices. It is almost impossible to hear the hon. member who has the floor.


David James Walker: Mr. Alan Hay was good enough to accept the chairmanship on a temporary basis, and the period has been extended to October 16. Of course in the meantime he continues to act as general manager, and the situation is working out very satisfactorily. However, in time we shall be obliged to get someone to take on the position of chairman permanently. We are delighted, of course, with the services of Mr. Hay.
Supply-Public Works


George James McIlraith: I thank the minister for the answer. I would hope that it might be possible to continue Mr. Hay in this position if he desires it. I say that for two main reasons. One is that I think he is very well qualified for the position, and the other is the importance to the country of having the vast experience of Mr. Hay available to the commission. The commission is largely comprised now of new members with very little background of experience in this particular activity, and-and I say this with deference to them, and I hope this remark will not be misunderstood-with little detailed knowledge of the history of the work done by this commission and its predecessors in office. I would therefore hope that the continuity of historical knowledge and experience, in a detailed and practical way, of the activities of the commission and its predecessors would be retained for the benefit of this commission and the government.
I have always taken a great interest in the important work of this commission in developing the national capital area in relation to the whole of the country. I think that view has been shared by all prime ministers since the scheme was first started in the 1890's, or perhaps I shoud say the scheme and its predecessors. I believe all prime ministers in the intervening years have attached that importance to it.
I want to raise one matter of some criticism of the minister. It is meant more in the nature of a critical warning than in any other way. This commission was always answerable to the prime minister of the country and in that way was removed from the vicissitudes, shall I say, of party warfare, because of the high interest of the current prime minister in those activities.


Mr. Bell (Carleton):: Will the hon. member permit a question?


George James McIlraith: Yes.


Richard Albert Bell: Is it not true that until 1945 the federal district commission reported to the Minister of Finance?


George James McIlraith: Perhaps that is technically correct. I would not want to answer that question offhand. What I wanted to indicate rather was that down through the years the prime ministers have taken a direct and great interest in this commission.


Richard Albert Bell: With that statement I agree entirely.


George James McIlraith: If the hon. member allows me, I think he will agree with the point I am seeking to make.

Supply-Public Works


Richard Albert Bell: And the present Prime Minister will continue to do so, undoubtedly.


George James McIlraith: Perhaps the hon. member for Carleton will just bear with me for a moment until I make the point. That may be the answer to the point and it may not be the answer; I do not know. However, I want to deal with this subject matter. That has been the history of this commission over the years. It has been kept remarkably free from the vicissitudes of party warfare. I think all hon. members will agree that has been the fact, and that has been in general the concept in approaching this commission and problems relating to it.
The minister made answerable in the House of Commons for the activities of the commission is now the Minister of Public Works. I think the examination of the estimates of that department over the last few days of this session and over every session as far as the records go back since confederation will indicate that this department has been notorious for the fact that it has not been removed from the vicissitudes of party warfare. I find a real danger in the fact that this commission has been made answerable to the Minister of Public Works, the danger being that it may in the course of time be brought into the area of the ordinary activities of the Minister of Public Works.
I hope that will not be the case. I am not in any way referring to the competence of the present Minister of Public Works in relation to his duties with respect to the commission, nor to that of any preceding or succeeding minister in that respect. I for one rather regret that the commission was assigned to the Minister of Public Works and is to be answerable to him from time to time. That remark, as the minister will appreciate, refers to the continuing office of minister as opposed to anything having to do with the person holding that office at any given time. But there is a danger there which I think the committee should be aware of, and I hope the government, including the Minister of Public Works, will bear that in mind.
That brings me directly to the point which I think should be mentioned at this time. It concerns the method of hiring casual labour in the year 1960. A practice was used in the method of hiring this year which was, to say the least, very shocking to anyone who had followed the activities of this commission over the years. Whether or not it was caused by certain employees acting without authority I do not know, but there was an apparent requirement that anyone applying for work when the summer employees were being taken on had to produce a letter

either from certain members of parliament or from certain political associations which had worked on behalf of the present government before they could be interviewed for employment. I am quite sure that is not the wish of any member of this House of Commons, and I say without fear of contradiction that that has certainly never been the approach to this problem over the last several decades.
When this matter arose I immediately drew it to the attention of the Minister of Public Works. He disclaimed all knowledge of it but said he would look into it, and that if this practice did exist and was being carried on it would be immediately stopped. I must out of fairness say that he was very quick to take that stand and to make his position quite clear and unequivocal.


David James Walker: May I ask the hon. member a question? The hon. member for Ottawa West did mention that to me some months ago and I asked him if there was any proof of any kind which he could give me, but he did not have any proof except that someone had told him. I investigated through Mr. Hay and other sources and found that there was absolutely no truth whatever in such an allegation.
However, we do give preference to married men, and it is an amazing thing in many jobs how the casual labour do bring in letters from all sorts of people, including letters from the hon. member for Ottawa West. That is perfectly natural. The casual labourer who is not well known needs to have some indication of his bona fides and he should go to his member of parliament, whoever he may be, whether the hon. member for Ottawa West or somebody else. But we have so many applicants for casual labour jobs that we are able to employ only a few of them; but I can assure the hon. member that neither the Prime Minister nor myself would ever want the national capital commission to be a subject of party politics, and I am very distressed to think that the hon. member would even suggest that it might be. There is no reason whatever for making such a statement, and we are very proud of the national capital commission.


Charles Edward Rea: Order. The hon. minister asked if he could ask a question. The hon. member for Ottawa West has the floor.


George James McIlraith: The minister in his eagerness to give an answer rose on the excuse of asking a question, and I made way for him. If the minister had just forborne a little I think he would have been in a little better position to make an effective answer when he asked his question. His question took

a curious form for one so experienced and so very capable in asking questions.
The point I was making was that I immediately drew the matter to the attention of the minister, and I think I accurately stated the position he took; that he had no knowledge of it whatever but he would look into it immediately and if there was any such practice he would correct it at once. The summer hiring of labour terminated at about that point, and I have had no further complaint since that time.
However, the minister went a bit further in his so-called question and made certain allegations about letters from me. I brought the two letters I wrote, and I am quite prepared to place them on record if the committee wants them, but they involve names of individuals who are perfectly innocent and I ask the committee to consider that fact.
The point in regard to the letters turns on this, that there was a practice at that time requiring a man to have a letter from a member before he was able to obtain employment from the commission, and I will be happy to give the minister the letters. The other letter says that the man in question had been advised by one of the employees of the commission that if he had a letter from a member he could obtain employment with the commission. That will be seen quite clearly if the minister reads these letters, so the minister was put on the spot as to whether this was a new practice or not.
My complaint here is in the nature of a warning to the minister, if I may use that term, not to let this practice creep into the national capital commission. If, as I suspect, it was being done by some overzealous new employees on their own authority, it should be checked into, and if corrective action is required it should be taken; because I think the minister will readily agree that it is an approach that is highly undesirable. I am quite sure that if he looks up the record he will find where the present Prime Minister took that view on a previous occasion when discussing matters of the commission.


David James Walker: May I make this interjection. I am glad to have any criticism from the hon. member, but surely at the moment he is tilting at windmills. I invited him months ago to produce evidence, but he has not seen fit to do so. I am not blaming him for it, but he should not warn me about something which does not exist and which cannot exist as long as I am minister and as long as I am reporting to our Prime Minister. I keep the Prime Minister in touch with everything we do. He has an enormous variety of tasks, but I try to keep him posted and give him an outline of what we are doing.
79951-0-425
Supply-Public Works
Surely my hon. friend wants to be fair about this. I do not suggest that the hon. member had knowledge of this situation under the previous administration, because I do not know whether or not such goings on occurred. I do not know whether it made him suspicious that they might be going on under our administration, but with the greatest of respect there is no evidence whatever that they are. We have gone through it with a fine-tooth comb to find any employee who ever gave such advice to any applicant.


Mr.   Mc@: I had better tell the minister what the facts of life are if he persists in the practice of interrupting improperly in the course of debate when a matter is being raised, I think perfectly fairly.


Mr. Bigg:: It is a matter of opinion.


David James Walker: I will not interrupt again, but you do not mind my saying that, do you?


Mr.   Mc@: The minister is taking the offensive in a case like this; it is a very good court tactic, but he knows that if I disclose the names of these men who were able to get the letters they would be hounded by other employees, and he and others responsible for the national capital commission would never find out about it or know why those men had been fired.
Let the minister not go on with that nonsense. He will recall that I told him earlier that I feared there would be rioting while these applications were being considered. On two or three mornings while these letters were being demanded before prospective employees were admitted for interviews the situation was very rough indeed. Fortunately the practice does not seem to have been continued, because I have not received any further complaints. But the situation was very rough, and if the minister thinks I am going to disclose the names of employees who were fortunate enough to take the necessary measures and get interviews in order to be taken on, he has another thought coming. He surely knows, from his administrative experience, that employees at a junior level have ways of spiking other employees and obtaining their dismissal without senior officials in the commission knowing anything about it.
If the minister will read my remarks carefully he will see I was very careful not to attribute blame to him in regard to this matter and I was careful, also, not to attribute blame to the commission itself or to the senior employees of the commision. That is exactly the situation. I place the matter on record so that the minister may be forewarned and able to deal with it again if it arises.
6744	HOUSE OF
Supply-Public Works


Mr. Bell (Carleion):: Mr. Chairman, my views and opinions on national capital planning have been expressed publicly with such frequency and regularity that their reiteration now is perhaps a work of supererogation. Therefore I shall detain the committee only very briefly.
The past year has been notable for two of the most significant achievements of all time in national capital planning. The first was that at long last the plan of railway relocation has been adopted by the national capital commission and the government. Within a short time I hope the first steps will have been taken in this project which spells such a significant advance for the national capital. Second, I call attention to the fact that the green belt purchases have now reached more than the halfway mark. This great national project has involved many growing pains; there are still serious problems of valuation to be settled, but its impact will be profound for generations.
One of the immediate results of the green belt development may already be seen in the fine new campus-type industrial development of the Northern Electric Company now taking shape at Crystal bay. My hope is that the green belt acquisitions may be completed in the near future on a basis fair and equitable to the individual land owners and to the government of Canada.
This word of caution I utter. It is vital, in my view, that the development outside the green belt be a planned development, a zoned development, concentrated into self-contained hamlets and not merely an ugly un-coordinated suburban sprawl which has simply leapfrogged the green belt. The national capital commission should attach the highest priority to assistance to the area municipalities in the development of proper satellite communities on the perimeter of the green belt.
What of the future? Effective and adequate liaison between the national capital commission and the area municipalities must be achieved. There is no real problem here, but I venture to submit to the present chairman, in whose competence and good judgment I have the most complete confidence, that he can make in this field the greatest contribution of his already distinguished career. Effective collaboration, strengthened co-operation between national capital commission and the area municipalities; I believe those should be the watchwords of the Minister of Public Works and the watchwords of Mr. Alan K. Hay during his term as chairman of the commission.
Among the new projects to be undertaken, I believe the Ottawa river parkway takes highest priority. Properly designed, it will be


an almost revolutionary addition to our parkway system. To the whole capital it will give new character, added personality and distinction. No other project can have such immediate significance.
The year 1967, the centennial year of confederation, ought to be establishsed now as the target date for the completion of the present phases of the national capital plan. Completion of the physical aspects of the plan during the next seven years will enable the central celebration of our hundredth anniversary to be in a capital which has achieved a cultural, intellectual and spiritual maturity as well as physical beauty and geographic unity.
This city has certain basic physical requirements if it is to achieve the cultural purposes, the national purposes, which ought to be the objectives of a capital city. May I mention three which we alone of the great capitals, lack. First, we need a large and impressive conference or assembly hall in which great events of national and international importance might take place; second, a national theatre and music hall in which a national festival of the arts could be held which might attract the outstanding theatrical, musical, artistic and cultural events of the day; and third, we need a large sports stadium and arena.
We have just seven years before the centennial of confederation to achieve these essential attributes of a national capital. Not for a moment do I suggest that these projects are the sole responsibility of the federal government. They must be achieved through effective collaboration, and in that I hope and believe that my old friend, the Minister of Public Works, will give effective and dynamic leadership.
This I emphasize, that the time to plan and prepare these projects is now. Only if we have them by 1967 can we have what one of our most mature and articulate journalists- Mr. I. Norman Smith of the Ottawa Journal- described as "a mature capital, a live capital, an exciting capital, that stirs patriotism and pride" or, to use another phrase of his in the same distinguished front page editorial one filled "with vision, beauty, learning, the arts, the nation's character".
One further matter. A number of the most basic and far-reaching advances in national capital planning have been achieved under the guidance of the present Prime Minister. The right hon. gentleman developed a profound interest in this community, an imaginative concept of its future similar to the interest of three of his great predecessors, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Sir Robert Borden and Mr. W. L. Mackenzie King, the three earlier prime ministers who were the principal

architects of the national capital. While I know the Prime Minister's deep interest will continue, I would like on behalf of the national capital area to express warm appreciation of his vital accomplishments during the time he was the minister responsible for the national capital commission. He has blazed an exciting trail for my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works, whose accomplishments in the next 12 months the committee will confidently anticipate.


Jean-Thomas Richard: Mr. Chairman, I will not speak as eloquently as the hon. member for Carleton, though my feelings as to the deeds of those who created the federal district commission and the national capital commission are just as profound. I believe that	history	will reveal	that	theGreber plan	was a	great vision,	one	that
has been brought forward and accomplished in part. To that extent I suppose the present Prime Minister will have a part in that vision.
I am not rising to criticize any feature of the national	capital	commission.	On	thecontrary, I and the citizens of Ottawa appreciate the	work	accomplished	by	the
federal district commission and the national capital commission. One of my criticisms is not even directed to the work of the national capital commission, but rather to the failure of the federal government to do anything with respect to the Expropriation Act. I am not going to reiterate the story, because I have frequently outlined it in this chamber since 1945. I expected that after the throne speech debate this year we would have had an opportunity to examine a new Expropriation Act, but this has not developed.
I am not complaining of the fact that the recent judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada relieved the national capital commission and the government with respect to those lands which have already been expropriated. Any other ruling would have created vast confusion. However, I do ask the minister in his capacity as Minister of Public Works as well as spokesman for the national capital commission to take a deep interest in bringing in amendments to the Expropriation Act. I say we need a new act. I suspect that anything that might have been brought before us at this session would have been useless in the light of present day thinking, in the year 1960, with respect to the expropriation of land by the government.
The provincial government of Ontario has established a committee to investigate land expropriation. Some time ago I advised the Minister of Justice about this and asked him 79951-0-4251
Supply-Public Works
to have his officials attend those meetings to gather information and learn the opinions of those appearing before committee, with a view to bringing in a better expropriation act. It is absolutely unfair to operate under an act that is almost 100 years old and which gives the government power to impinge on civil rights. Surely in this so-called free world in 1960 civil rights should be properly protected under the Expropriation Act. Civil rights are not a matter that should be lightly touched upon by a federal government, because they involve provincial jurisdiction. The late premier of the province of Quebec did not hesitate to say so, and I agree with him in that respect. In the past the taking over of land for the purposes of roads and parks in connection with the federal district commission was outside the powers of this parliament and beyond its jurisdiction without some agreement being made with the provincial governments concerned.
Before the time of the present minister, governments in the past went lightly about expropriating land on this side of the river, but acted a little more cautiously on the other side of the river. In this God-fearing, law-abiding province on this side of the river the government expropriated everything it wanted. As a result we had two approaches in relation to expropriation. On the other side of the river a piece of land brought the price it should have commanded, and on this side it brought whatever the government offered for it. This condition cannot continue. The courts cannot do anything about it. They do not lean toward the government, but they must operate under the act as it stands. In its present form the act does not provide for fair value to the owner and does not take into consideration all the factors that should be considered when land and property rights are taken from an individual for other than essential services of the government.
I have always accepted the old theory of expropriation, that the government should be permitted to take land for essential government works such as a railway, a post office, a defence establishment, a building for national revenue, etc. When it comes to giving the same power of expropriation to crown corporations or as in this case to the federal district commission and later the national capital commission I take a different attitude. The Expropriation Act should be amended to allow more generous promises in estimating the value of the land.
There is much to be said about the matter of expropriation under the National Capital Act. I believe I am right in saying that any land expropriated may be sold. I understand

Supply-Public Works this will happen in time; the land which has been bought will be resold in the future. Understandably it is being leased now in accordance with the powers given to the federal district commission. A profit will be made at a future time when the land is resold. The land was not required for the purpose for which it was expropriated in the first place. That is a good reason why in such cases the act should make it possible for fairer treatment to be given to the party whose land is expropriated. Without going into further detail the minister will understand this problem which is of concern to the citizens of Ottawa and surrounding area.
Again I urge the minister to request his colleague the Minister of Justice, to send his officials to observe the proceedings of the Ontario government's land expropriation committee, which is doing an excellent job. If this were done, and particularly if the Minister of Public Works were also to send his officials to that committee, he would be in a position to assist the Minister of Justice and perhaps make him more aware of the problems that the Minister of Public Works will face in the near future when confronted with further expropriations.
With respect to Ottawa East, I urge the minister to do something about improving Sussex drive, which should be selected as the site of important public buildings. There is no point in neglecting this attractive area on which so much money has been spent, nor is there any point in making additional improvements if we leave a few decrepit old brick residences and shabby temporary buildings like those which house the income tax offices to mar its beauty.
Some years ago it was proposed that the national museum or perhaps a building for the Department of External Affairs would be erected on the south side of Sussex drive facing the river. There is no more beautiful site in Ottawa. I spoke to the minister about this some time ago. I am hoping he will take action in this regard. Surely he and the officials of his department have as keen eyes as do the local residents, tourists and others who pass by. If it were not for the French embassy and Earnscliffe there would be no building of beauty there. It is one of the finest locations in the city. It has Rideau falls and is a fine scenic drive. I hope that some time in the future there will also be an interprovincial bridge there. This is a beautiful site for some substantial government buildings.
I have another matter I should like to bring to the attention of the minister. It has to do with King Edward avenue, which was at one time a beautiful avenue. It has a centre boulevard with trees and lawns. I was

surprised to be told some years ago in the committee which dealt with the federal district commission that the commission had no interest in this avenue and no responsibility for it. Could it not co-operate with the city of Ottawa, which I am sure would be glad to do so, and take over this avenue and beautify it? It is the avenue which leads from Sussex drive, from the Governor General's residence and from the two bridges over the Rideau river. The federal district commission should take an interest in King Edward avenue. If it does not, this avenue will be turned into a commercial street.
These are the two matters that I wished to bring to the attention of the minister at this time. I could mention many others, but I hope the minister will take a second look at these two matters in the constituency of Ottawa East, and when he visits his good friend the Prime Minister or the Governor General, not simply proceed down Sussex drive with his eyes looking straight ahead but look around and see whether he can do something about this, and whether he should have some great public buildings placed on this most beautiful site.


Mr. Howard:: Mr. Chairman, my remarks on this item will be few. Of course my appreciation of the structure and functions of the national capital commission, formerly the federal district commission, is not so extensive as that of the hon. member for Carleton or the two hon. members from Ottawa who have been in the house for several years representing this area.
I say without hesitation that there are some beautiful parks in Ottawa. I understand that the national capital commission or its predecessor had quite a bit to do in developing such places as the driveway, but as one who does not come from Ottawa I say there are some parts of the city that I am extremely disappointed with. I do not think they add flavour to the capital of Canada.
I have noticed that we have at the moment an excellent capital city in a glass case on Sparks street. I believe this is what Ottawa is supposed to look like some years hence. There are some parts of the city itself that I think many visitors to Ottawa are disappointed with, and I refer to tourists particularly and those who come from other parts of the country and are here for short periods of time on some sort of business.
During the springtime particularly the thing which really irks me is to see this annual patchwork program that is carried out on some of the streets or roads of Ottawa. I do not know whether this comes under the national capital commission or whether the

hon. member for Russell has anything to do with the building and maintenance of the roads. I may say, Mr. Chairman, that in the interior part of my constituency in northern British Columbia we have quite an experience with potholes in the spring, when the frost is coming out of the ground and frost boils are developing. Consequently our deep holes in the road are nothing but bottomless pits of mud. Yet we do not go quite to the extent that they go to here, namely running annual contests as to who can find the largest pothole in the city. It seems sort of odd that a city which has been in existence for so many years should have such difficulties with its streets every spring. This is certainly something that does not endear the city to visitors when they see this sort of thing going on. A fair amount of effort should be exerted to get this question cleared up.
As I said, I do not know whether my hon. friend from Russell has any jurisdiction over this or whether it comes within the field of the national capital commission. I understand that this commission in developing the national capital is working more along the lines of a co-operative venture among the three levels of government rather than one level of government having the entire jurisdiction.
I suggest that many years ago we should have started on an extensive program of slum clearance in areas which are not too far from this very building. In this area housing conditions are not good. On occasions other hon. members besides myself, who do not come from Ottawa or live here for any extended time, have spoken on this matter. They have gained their knowledge after having travelled extensively within the city limits.
There seems to be an inordinately high number of decrepit buildings or fire traps or slum areas that should be eliminated, not only for the sake of beautifying the city but for the sake of providing a decent environment for the people who have to live in those particular areas. There is much to do that has not yet been done. I am not being critical of what was done before, but I am sure the federal district commission, the national capital commission, the city of Ottawa and the Ontario government have concerned themselves with some areas, and excellent strides have been made in beautifying the city in an endeavour to approach the reality that exists in the glass case down on Sparks street.
Yet there appears to be so much to do, and surely we could engage in an extensive crash program not only on roads, which is only one item, but on slum clearance, the elimination
Supply-Public Works of fire traps and the development of all other fields that need to be developed in order that this may become a beautiful capital city.


Mr. Tardif:: Mr. Chairman, first of all I wish to congratulate the Minister of Public Works on the chairman he has selected for this commission. I am sorry that the appointment is only a temporary one, because I doubt whether there is another man in Canada who has the qualifications necessary for doing the job that has to be done, if he were given sufficient time.
I listened with a great deal of attention to the well prepared speech of the hon. member for Carleton, who submitted many suggestions to the national capital commission which would be not only profitable to the city of Ottawa but are necessary for the capital of the nation. I can say that I agree with him most thoroughly. The only thing I do not agree with is the suggestion he made that part of these things which are for the benefit of the nation should be paid for by some of the municipalities, who are going to benefit by reason of having the buildings within their boundaries. I am sure my hon. friend knows that the municipality of Ottawa and the adjoining municipalities are suffering enough now from the contributions they are making toward a national capital. They should not be called upon to contribute any more money toward buildings which are going to be for the benefit of all Canadians. I am sure it would be easy enough to convince my hon. friend from Carleton if we were to have a short conversation and I were to show him the figures of the contributions made by more than one municipality, but particularly the city of Ottawa.


Richard Albert Bell: I think the hon. gentleman misinterpreted what I said.


Paul Tardif: Perhaps I did, and if that is so I think that is all the more reason why we should have the conference I suggested. I would not want the hon. member for Carleton to lead the Canadian people to believe that the provision of such buildings as he proposes, and which are necessary for a national capital, should not be the responsibility of the people of Canada as a whole rather than the responsibility of the citizens of Ottawa.
Actually, it is time the program to establish the national capital was accelerated. I am not saying this in any way as criticism of the present administration or the national capital commission, but rather as a means of encouraging the minister to realize that the national capital is actually a Canadian city for the benefit of all Canadians. The program for the erection of these buildings that will be necessary should be accelerated so that.

Supply-Public Works as my hon. friend suggested, during our centennial celebration in 1967 we will have a capital city of which all Canadians can be proud. I know the Minister of Public Works will make his contribution toward making this possible.
There are several things that should be attended to by the national capital commission. As the result of conversations I have had with members of the commission, I think there is a possibility of reaching agreement on the national capital commission making some contribution toward the extension of services through land owned by the commission, where the land on both sides of the capital commission land is fully developed. I am of the opinion that since the national capital commission create the problem, they should be responsible for the extension of the services through the land they own. As a result of their failure to do this they are putting an additional burden on the taxpayers of the city of Ottawa.
Let me say at once that the city of Ottawa is treated considerably better now so far as grants in lieu of taxes are concerned than it has been for some years. For a number of years the city of Ottawa was neglected in this respect and the citizens made a more than reasonable contribution toward the establishment of the national capital. It is not too late for the Department of Public Works to make recommendations to remedy this situation, providing that the number of years during which the city of Ottawa paid for the development of the national capital should be taken into consideration. One manner in which this could be accomplished would' be for the Department of Public Works to accept the charges for local improvements extended through land owned by the national capital commission where the adjacent land is fully developed.
There is another small problem to which I should like to refer, and that is the price paid for land expropriated in the green belt. I think all the citizens of Ottawa and the surrounding area agree that a green belt is necessary if we are to have a properly planned capital city. I presume that the price paid for land expropriated by the national capital commission for the green belt is set by the commission's valuators. However, in my opinion the price is too low when compared with the price paid for land adjacent to the green belt which has been sold to private individuals.
I believe also that whatever land is going to be purchased for the green belt should be purchased immediately. I do not believe the people who are to have their property expropriated should be kept waiting longer than is reasonable after expropriation to have a

settlement made. Many people who are living in the green belt, and whose property is to be expropriated, intend to relocate somewhere else. Some system should be established whereby the process of expropriation could be speeded up, thus avoiding injustice to these people and enabling them to relocate as soon as possible.


David James Walker: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Paul Tardif: Yes.


David James Walker: Is he aware that 98 per cent of the property taken over for the green belt has been purchased as the result of friendly agreement, and only 2 per cent by expropriation? I was wondering what his suggestion was.


Paul Tardif: I know it has been done in that manner. I did not know what the percentage was, but I am glad to hear the minister say that it was 98 per cent. I have no reason to doubt that.


David James Walker: We thought the hon. member might ask the question, so we looked up the answer in advance.


Paul Tardif: Actually, many people in the green belt suffer from the fear that their property is going to be expropriated. They fear that they are going to be kept waiting a year or two afterwards before a settlement is arrived at. I agree that many of these fears are based on rumours, but it would be better if settlements could be arrived at without expropriation. I know that neither the minister nor the national capital commission would want these people to suffer any injustice.
I was rather sorry to hear that the hon. member for Skeena does not like the city of Ottawa. Perhaps his dislike results from the fact that he has been here longer than he expected to be.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Not as long as I expect to be.


Paul Tardif: I meant longer this session than he expected to be. This makes it easier for him to see the things that are wrong with the city of Ottawa. Like all cities we have a patching program for the roads, but that is not the responsibility of the government or the national capital commission; it is the responsibility of the city of Ottawa. The reason the patching is not done as efficiently or as speedily as the hon. member would like is the same reason I mentioned earlier, that the dominion government has not at any time accepted responsibility for paying its full share of the cost of city services. This condition has existed for a long time and is not entirely the responsibility of this government, because it also existed under previous governments.

Even today the dominion government does not make payment on the basis of the city of Ottawa assessment but rather on the basis of the dominion government's assessment, and the result is that the grant in lieu of taxes is made on a lower basis than that upon which private residents or commercial users pay for these services.
There is another reason for the condition of the roads in the city of Ottawa. The weather here is much more severe than in British Columbia, and the resultant damage to the roads is much greater. I have not been in British Columbia for a long time, but when I was there I was not greatly impressed by the condition of the roads. However, I did not make any remarks publicly about that matter because I realized that whenever there is work to be done there is a financial problem connected with it. We in the Liberal party realize that the financial question sometimes becomes a very important part of the problem to be solved.


Charles Benjamin Howard: You are comparing two different things.


Paul Tardif: This is not done for the purpose of creating confusion. I have been comparing the roads in British Columbia and the roads in Ottawa. I am not comparing two different things; I am comparing two different roads in connection with the same problem.
Then I noted that the hon. member said he felt badly about the radio and press competition that took place in connection with the pothole situation in Ottawa. This competition probably resulted from the fact that during January, February and March the dominion government did not do much, so there was a lack of news. The news media want to create news, and the first thing they noticed was the potholes. Actually if the hon. member for Skeena and my hon. friend had been more active at that time I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that there would have been a great deal more news and they would not have noticed the potholes in the city of Ottawa.
There has been some criticism about some parts of Ottawa having poor housing. It is no excuse for the city of Ottawa, but I think other cities have the same problem and that the solution to it is urban renewal. Urban renewal is considerably complicated, because people who own houses that should be demolished in any section that should be due for urban renewal put a great deal of value on their houses, thus creating a great deal of cost and making the problem more difficult to solve. As to our present program, with the preparations the capital city is making in favour of urban renewal, I am
Supply-Public Works sure it will not be too long before some real progress is made and is apparent.
It was also suggested that the city of Ottawa, with the help of the dominion government if they would take their full responsibility for the tax roll, could have a crash program. At present, however when the city of Ottawa draws its taxes from real estate only and the contribution from the present government is not sufficient to pay for the services which are extended by the city of Ottawa, crash programs for financial reasons are impossible.


Richard Albert Bell: So there will be no misunderstanding between the hon. member for Russell and myself may I just say that, in respect of some of the projects of which I spoke earlier, I recognize community responsibility as distinct from municipal responsibility.
(Translation):


Mr. Campeau:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make a suggestion to the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Walker).
First, I should like to commend the government, the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefen-baker) and the Minister of Public Works for always taking great interest in the development of the national capital. I would also ask the Minister of Public Works to consider setting up an advisory town planning committee, composed of town planners from across Canada, with members from every province and perhaps also from the large metropolitan centres. There now exists in Canada an institute of professional town planners, and in almost every province there is a professional town planners' society. The proposed committee could help the national capital commission work out a general policy designed to give the national capital a distinctive Canadian character reflecting the unity of the Canadian nation in its diverse aspects. In that way, the committee might help promote what some of my colleagues have called for, namely that special distinctive character which would be a characteristic and lasting feature of the national capital.
Thus, with the co-operation of town planners across Canada, the development of the national capital could become a common endeavour shared in by the best town planning authorities in Canada. We could thus achieve the purpose we all have in mind, making our national capital one of the most beautiful cities in the world.


Mr. Leduc:: Mr. Chairman, I should like, first of all, to commend the Minister of Public Works very sincerely for his excellent choice

Supply-Public Works in appointing Mr. Hay as chairman of the national capital commission. I know there is no man more interested in the planning of the capital nor more able to take care of that significant task. I hope that the government will have the wisdom to keep him a long time as head of the national capital commission.
I would also ask the minister to see to the continued development of Gatineau park. The house knows surely that Gatineau park is part of the national capital planning, and also that it is the only national park in the province of Quebec. The commission has already done a great deal of work in this park and, quite recently, or rather last fall, a section of road connecting Gatineau park with Gamelin boulevard was opened to the public. People can now travel a distance of some 15 miles from Hull to the centre of Gatineau park. I suggest to hon. members, while they are here in Ottawa, to take a drive on that road and see the work that has been done in that area of my riding.
I would also ask the minister to approach the provincial government for the settlement of two problems, one of which has to do with land that belongs to the province of Quebec and is part of Gatineau park. I know that attempts were made in the past by the commission to settle the matter with the former provincial government but no agreement was reached. But on the other hand, as there has been a change of government, it should now be possible to settle the problem. In addition, I should like to ask the minister to try and solve the problem of a second road between Hull and the town of Aylmer.
At the present time, the commission has title to the right of way which used to belong to the Hull Electric Company, of Hull and Aylmer. Now, because of extremely heavy traffic on Aylmer road, a second road between Hull and Aylmer has become a necessity. I therefore ask the minister to take this up with the Quebec minister of highways, so that some agreement might be reached with regard to those two projects.
I would also ask the minister to follow up the town of Aylmer's request for a public beach at Aylmer, on the Ottawa river.
I am very happy to note the progress made in the national capital development.
The progress made on certain important projects is indeed remarkable. Furthermore, I am very glad that the commission had decided to relocate the railways. That, I believe, is the key to the whole development


project in the national capital and I know that, four or five years from now, when the tracks will have been removed from the city of Ottawa, when the station will occupy a new site, it will transform the downtown area of the national capital.
I am convinced that the commission is doing excellent work and I urge it to keep it up so that, by the time we celebrate the centennial of confederation, we will have a capital worthy of the magnificent country which is Canada.
(Text):


George James McIlraith: There are two points I want to raise. While they may trench on other items, since they relate to general policy perhaps they could best be raised on this first item. One has to do with acquisition of land in the green belt, and I think in this good progress is being made by the commission. But the point is this, that the policy has been to acquire land in the green belt by negotiation. I have no quarrel with that; however, the situation is now developing that certain owners in the green belt, because of the amount of time which has elapsed since the announcement that the green belt was being taken over by the government, have had some family circumstance occur, as for instance the death of the one operating the property, the husband in most cases, and have found themselves unable to continue their ordinary activity with their land. For all practical purposes, although there are no legal restrictions against it, they cannot borrow money on mortgage, and if they do borrow money on mortgage the rate of interest is 7 per cent.
These people are left in an awkward position where they cannot effectively deal with their land because of the announcement that it is being taken over by the government for green belt purposes, but they have not the rights acquired by one whose land is being expropriated; and indeed those remedies are not quite satisfactory to meet their problem. There is in a few cases very real hardship created by reason of the awkward position in which these people find themselves. They are neither persons whose property has been expropriated nor persons who are free to deal with their land as they see fit.
I draw this matter to the attention of the minister because in those cases it is not possible under the law, while negotiations are pending, for the commission to make an advance to them by way of compensation. I think he will agree that the commission does not have such a right under the law. I point

this out to the minister so he will be aware of it and will try to see that whatever action can be taken within the law is taken to meet those very few but very difficult situations.
The second point I want to raise has to do with another matter, and perhaps if I ask the minister a simple question it would elucidate the problem. Under item 315, covering interest charges on outstanding loans made for the purpose of acquiring property in the national capital region, could the minister indicate what rate of interest is paid to the finance department for the advances made?


David James Walker: Five and three quarters per cent.


George James McIlraith: When expropriation proceedings are taken or a settlement is arrived at with the commission, there is provision in the option agreement whereby, if there is a delay beyond a reasonable time which is not due to any action on the part of the person whose property is being taken over, interest will be paid by the commission at the rate of 5 per cent per annum.
In the great majority of cases the settlement is completed well within the time indicated, and indeed in recent months the minister has done some very effective work in speeding up completion of the transactions and payment after settlement is made. But in these few cases where for some reason or other there is delay in obtaining approval from the government or where there is unusual delay for some other reason, the crown pays less interest to the person whose property is expropriated than the commission itself is charged by the finance department, and indeed much less than the person whose property is being taken over has to pay.
In a few cases that can work quite severe hardship, as the minister will readily appreciate, and I ask him to give his views to the committee and to seek to have that situation remedied so that the interest rate paid by the national capital commission in those cases where there is unreasonable delay, not due to any fault of the person whose property is being taken, is raised in keeping with the current rate on borrowed money.


Frederick Johnstone (Jack) Bigg: Mr. Chairman, first of all I would like to add my support to the fine speech by the hon. member for Carleton on our national capital. Ottawa, as everyone knows, belongs to our whole country and people even as far away as Athabasca take a great interest in its future.
I also want to speak about parking because I have an intimate knowledge of this problem, having directed parking on this hill back in 1947 and I have not seen very much 79951-0-426
Supply-Public Works improvement since. We have an excellent spot down on the river bank where we could park thousands of automobiles if we had the proper accommodation. Another reason why I think this is a good place for parking is that it would require very little rock excavation which, as you know, is very expensive on the hill. The cost of some of our government buildings has gone well beyond the original appropriation because of the rock cuts. Down along the river bank we could build these spiral ramps down into a big parking lot, and the original cost would not be excessive because if properly planned it could be built in sections. You could provide facilities for 1,500 cars in the first plan and then expand it to perhaps 3,000 or 4,000 cars.
This need not interfere with the beauty of the site, as several hon. members have mentioned, because it could be blended with the natural beauty of the river bank; and I think in any plans for Ottawa the beauty of our capital is something we should all bear in mind. I should like to see something done about this well before 1967.
I would also like to back the idea of a proper theatre or assembly hall. In Alberta they built two such buildings which have added greatly to the cultural and civic life of that province, and I am sure our nation can afford buildings of the same beauty and magnitude. I think it is appropriate to go on with them at this time when unemployment is still one of our serious problems, and to go ahead with the beautification of Ottawa is something which I am sure hon. members from all over Canada would heartily approve.


Mr. Peters:: Mr. Chairman, I think we have done considerable in relation to parkways and improvements on national capital commission land, but I am surprised that consideration has not been given to some relationship between the city of Ottawa and the commission to try to eliminate, when we clear the slums of Ottawa, industrial development in the city proper. It seems to me that the growth of government department building is continuing, because if we go to places like Hog's Back we can find six or seven buildings in various stages of completion. This is a considerable distance from the other buildings which were built years ago, such as the supreme court building and the Confederation building, and as we continue to push outward from the centre of the capital we should take into consideration where the industrial part of Ottawa is going to be, if there is going to be one.
In determining the location of industrial sites we should take into account the experience of Washington, D.C., the capital city of

Supply-Veterans Affairs the United States, where the city itself is free of industry and those people who are working as civil servants do not have to compete with the wages paid in a highly industrialized metropolis. I think the commission should work, in co-operation with the city of Ottawa itself, toward the development of a national capital that will be as free as possible of industrial development. The two lines of development should be kept separate, both for the sake of those who work in the federal civil service and in the interest of the completed capital.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Chown):: That
concludes the estimates of the Department of Public Works and the other estimates for which the minister is responsible.



DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
457. Departmental administration, $2,367,981.
Hon. A. J. Brooks (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: May I say at the outset that after waiting a long, long time, I am very pleased to get my estimates before the committee. Last year when the estimates of my department were submitted to this committee I gave a rather comprehensive review of the work of the department and of the Canadian pension commission. I do not think I need again re-examine the background of the veterans legislation and show the progress made over the years. I propose to confine my present remarks to a brief review of what has happened during the fiscal year just ended and to provide some general information on a number of items in these estimates.
My department has enjoyed a satisfactory year of accomplishment and looks forward to further progress during the current year in the care of our veteran population. Although 15 years have now passed since the conclusion of hostilities in world war II and over 40 years have elapsed since world war I was brought to a successful termination, the many veterans who participated in these and earlier struggles and in the action in Korea still have many disabilities and problems which are properly referred to my department. We have found, indeed, that many of the difficulties which veterans are now experiencing require continuing, skilled attention.
As hon. members know, the main estimates of the department, the Canadian pension commission and the war veterans allowance board, which are now before you, were referred to the standing committee on veterans affairs. They were thoroughly reviewed by that committee and have been

subject to close scrutiny and questioning by its members, who have shown creditable knowledge of our affairs. I wish to express my thanks to the standing committee for the interest they took during their detailed study. I wish particularly to express my appreciation to the hon. member for Victoria-Carleton who performed unusually well the exacting duties of chairman.
The veterans welfare services have continued to provide much assistance in the welfare field, including counselling, but their major contribution is the assistance they give in the processing and implementation of awards made under the War Veterans Allowance Act, the assistance fund, W.V.A., and the regulations. The facilities of the veterans welfare services branch meet increasing demands due to the progressive impairment of the capacities of veterans because of the ageing process, particularly as it applies to world war I veterans.
The Children of War Dead (Education Assistance) Act continues in its scope to exceed our original expectations. The number of children approved for assistance under the act from its inception in 1953 to March 31, 1959 was 1,406. During the last fiscal year there were 362 new children approved. The number actively pursuing courses of education as of March 31 of this year was 858. Many of the students assisted under this act have told us that this opportunity enabled them to complete a university education which would otherwise have been impossible.
The Returned Soldiers Insurance Act and the Veterans Insurance Act now provide a combined total of $114 million in life insurance protection. These measures have enabled many veterans and widows to provide for themselves an estate which otherwise would not have been possible through life insurance because of disabilities which rendered them uninsurable commercially. Eligibility to contract for veterans insurance was reopened in 1958, and I am pleased to say that in the fiscal year 1959-60 there were 2,320 new policies issued for a total face amount of $8,558,000, making a total of 4,528 policies with a face value of about $16 million which have been issued since the act was amended.
The remaining re-establishment credits available under the provisions of the War Service Grants Act are being made available in increasing amounts as the remaining period during which they will be available becomes shorter. We estimate that this statutory item will, during the present year, amount to some $2,500,000. Active efforts are being pursued in order to ensure that all veterans with outstanding credits are approached in order that they may make the

most satisfactory use of their remaining credits. A study is being made of the trends noticed in the administration of our welfare services with a view to future planning, in order that the intended welfare functions may be adequately maintained and foreseen.
I now come to the treatment services provided by the department. All hon. members are aware that the institutions operated by this branch of the department are held in high regard, and their reputation for providing first class treatment is being well maintained. The doctors and nursing staff continue to provide professional service of a high order. We are particularly appreciative of those doctors on whom the department calls on a part time basis. These consultants deserve our warmest thanks. We continue to have difficulty in finding adequate numbers of trained nursing staff. However, the problem, which is not confined to the department, was relieved somewhat for us by the salary increases granted to nurses some eight months ago.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, do we have a quorum?


Some hon. Members:: We have.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: This is the height of the dinner hour. The administrative cost of running our hospitals will increase somewhat this year over the actual expenditure we made in the year 1959-60, increasing from about $55,900,000 to some $57,367,000. Of that total cost, however, we expect to recover some $12,730,000. These recoveries are increasing, due largely to payments from the provinces for treatment given to patients having entitlement under provincial hospital insurance plans.
I should mention that our hospital construction program is proceeding satisfactorily. The replacement of obsolete accommodation at Shaughnessy hospital, Vancouver, is now nearing completion and the patients have been moved into this new accommodation. A similar replacement project has been started at Westminster hospital, London. Architects' plans are being prepared for the construction of a veterans pavillion in connection with the general hospital in St. John's, Newfoundland, and preliminary planning is now being done in the department for extensive alterations to Queen Mary veterans hospital, Montreal, and Ste. Anne's hospital at Ste. Anne de Bellevue.
As an instance of the lively interest taken by the members of the standing committee on veterans affairs in our hospital facilities I should mention that last year the committee visited Sunnybrook hospital, Toronto, and this year they expressed a wish to inspect 79951-0-426J
Supply-Veterans Affairs older accommodation in order that they might appreciate the problems faced by the department in providing treatment in obsolescent accommodation. Accordingly, on Wednesday May 25 the committee visited Queen Mary veterans hospital at Montreal and our institution at Ste. Anne de Bellevue. I understand they considered their visit most informative, as they got valuable firsthand information on the difficulties of providing first class modern treatment under somewhat difficult conditions.
The amount we expect to spend this year on hospital construction and improvements and equipment has been estimated at $4,937,000. The medical research and education features of our treatment services are expected to continue at the same level as last year, as are the prosthetic services offered by the department.
I should now like to say a few words with respect to the Veterans Land Act. As hon. members know, this act was amended last year. We now have some indication of the effects of the improvements in this legislation which the amendments brought about. These amendments increased the maximum amounts available to full time farmers to $20,000 and to small holders to $10,000, and in part II of the act housing assistance was raised to $10,000.
The greatest impact on the administration has been created by the amendments respecting full-time farmers. These will considerably increase the work load during the current year. It has been found necessary to make the staff fully familiar with the farm appraisal and loan principles which must be followed in order that the increased amounts may be invested wisely for the basic purposes for which they were intended, the acquisition or development of economic family farm units. The estimated cost of administration this year is nevertheless almost exactly the same as the total allotment for last year.
We found that after a slow start there was an increase of more than 25 per cent in the number of farm loans approved in the last nine months of 1959-60 over the previous year, and that financial assistance to small holders and commercial fishermen showed an increase in number of about 20 per cent over that experienced before the amendments. House construction continues at a fairly high level, with 1,436 new houses commenced, a slight reduction compared to the previous year, due in the main to veterans deferring their plans until after the amendments became effective. Our total investment last year for the purchase of land, buildings, livestock and farm machinery was about $2.5 million greater than in 1958-59. Our estimate for this item
6754	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs for the current year, some $28,625,000, is the same as for last year, part of which, however, remained unexpended at the end of the year. We anticipate that this year the total expenditure will increase.
A number of developments in the organization of the veterans land administration have occurred as a result of the establishment of the farm credit corporation, which is authorized to make arrangements with the director of the veterans land administration for the utilization of his staff in the administration of the Farm Credit Act. We are glad to be able to assist the corporation with our trained and experienced staff in handling its increased work load. As the Farm Credit Act and the Veterans Land Act have basically similar purposes and provisions, it has been found desirable that loaning principles and policies of both organizations should be closely related and consistent. Arrangements have accordingly been made for the joint use of the credit advisers on the strength of the veterans land administration and the corporation. The arrangement is working out very satisfactorily. Close and friendly liaison and co-operation of these staffs will continue to provide good service to the farmers of this country.
Hon. members will notice from the estimates that the total amount of money required for pensions under the Pension Act will be slightly less for the current year than the total expended last year. We expect that total pensions will amount to some $148,940,000, whereas we spent last year about $149,650,000. This small reduction does not indicate, of course, any change in the policy of the commission, who continue to maintain their high tradition for thoroughness and consistency in their interpretation of the Pension Act. The number of pensions in payment on March 31 of this year was 188,626, which showed a small reduction of 1,686 from the number in payment a year earlier.
This reduction is largely due to a decline in the number of pensions payable for service in world war I, whose veterans now find the years taking their toll of both pensioners and their widows. The world war II liability continues to increase but as yet at a slower rate than the world war I liability is declining. The estimate for the administration expenses of the commission, $2,496,000, represents a slight decrease compared to the administration expenses met with during the year just ended, although the volume of work even with the decline in the total number of pensions has not shown a corresponding reduction.
I now come to the operations of the war veterans allowance board. It is interesting to note that the total amount of allowances


expected to be paid during this year, $62,079,000, is over $4 million greater than was spent in the year 1959-60. The total number of recipients of allowances has continued to increase rather rapidly. For example, the number in payment on December 31, 1959 was 67,534 as compared with 64,125 one year earlier. Of the 1959 total, 47,393 were in payment to veterans, and the remainder to widows, orphans and dependants.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would point out that with respect to all these estimates combined, the administrative expenses of the department, of the Canadian pension commission and of the war veterans allowance board are tending to decrease, as the estimated total for 1960-61 of about $63,950,000 is less by $1,830,000 than the provision for 1959-60. The group of expenditures which can be classified as payments under legislation or regulation, and which total nearly $222 million, are expected in the present year to show an increase of some $4,200,000 over those we now estimate as having been made during the year just ended.
We should shortly be going over these estimates item by item, Mr. Chairman, and I shall be very pleased at any time to give more detailed information to the committee.


Mr. Carter:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to begin by thanking the minister for the concise and lucid statement of the activities of his department for the year under review which he has just given us. As the minister has said, these estimates were thoroughly discussed in committee, where an exhaustive inquiry was made into every item and departmental officials were available and supplied detailed answers to all our questions.
The estimates of the Department of Veterans Affairs are always non-controversial; there is no item that we disagree with. We only wish that some of them could be higher, because we all want the best for our veterans, no matter on what side of the house we happen to sit, and in that respect we are reflecting the wishes of the people of Canada as a whole. Therefore I see no reason why the discussion of these estimates in this committtee should be prolonged, and I think the minister can expect that they will get a fairly swift passage.
The evidence produced in the committee revealed that the average age of the world war I veteran is now around 69 and that of the world war II veteran around 46, which means that world war I veterans are now reaching the end of their active working lives, while the veterans of world war II are now beginning to face the problems of middle age. This situation, of course, has very important implications for the minister's department.



I960

[Stage Direction]
Illnesses, accidents, emergencies together with impairment of physical capacities due to ageing, will all tend to increase the demands upon the facilities and services of this department. Therefore the $1 million reduction in this year's estimates is not likely to be repeated in the estimates of future years.
As a member of the committee on veterans affairs I was impressed, as I am sure all hon. members were, with the general efficiency of the department and the high quality and capability of the various departmental officials. In this respect I want to pay tribute not only to the officials of the department here in Ottawa but also to those in the regional office in my province.
We were told, I think by the deputy minister, that although there had not been any basic change in departmental administration there had been a measure of reorganization carried out which had resulted in a reduction in the administrative staff of about 33 persons. That, I take it, accounts for the fact that the vote for departmental administration this year is approximately the same as that of last year. We were very pleased to learn that those 33 persons were not turned loose on the world to fend for themselves but had been absorbed in other branches of the department, and are mainly in the treatment services division, which apparently has a shortage of staff.
I am sure hon. members were gratified, as I was, to learn of the measure of success which has been achieved in integrating the personnel and duties of the staff of the Veterans' Land Act administration with that of the administration of the farm credit council. I was also pleased to learn in the committee that the new division on methods and inspection had been organized, and that as a result there had been improvement in the methods of handling various cases.
I am also very grateful to learn from the minister about the special effort that is being made to get in touch with veterans who still have unused rehabilitation credits. As a result of this effort every veteran should now be informed of the cut-off date for eligibility for this credit, which I think is in 1962, and the possibility of using those rehabilitation credits as payment on life insurance policies. I was very interested in the figure which the minister gave us of $114 million now in force in life insurance protection, and particularly of the 2,320 new policies which had resulted, I think, in an additional $8.5 million of life insurance in the current fiscal year. The vote for rehabilitation credits I understand reflects an increase of $900,000 which it is expected will be needed this year owing to this special effort to provide veterans with this particular information.
Supply-Veterans Affairs
I was glad also to see the increase of $450,000 in the assistance fund which is used for monthly supplementation to recipients of war veterans allowance who have reached the maximum under the War Veterans Allowance Act. This little extra assistance is based on need, and I have personal knowledge that it has been very helpful in many instances and has meant all the difference between hardship and a measure of enjoyment of the small amenities of life.
I was very sorry to see the reduction of $2.5 million in the vote for disability pensions. I am sure all hon. members are disappointed that the Pension Act has not been revised this session to bring about an increase in basic pensions, which is very badly needed in some cases and which has been requested by practically all veterans organizations. As far as I am concerned personally, it was a double disappointment that this amendment to the Pension Act was not carried out, because it means a prolongation of the delay in the recognition and confirmation of the status of Newfoundland veterans.
The minister has explained to us that this decrease is due to the fact that deaths of world war I pensioners have more than offset the increased eligibility of world war II veterans in the past year. The evidence brought before the committee showed that the pensioners of world war I had decreased to 185,536 in 1959 as against 195,635 in 1950. This indicates a reduction of approximately
10,000	in nine years, and that is in line with the figures which I believe the minister gave a few minutes ago, indicating a decrease of 1,686 in the last fiscal year. If anything, that last figure the minister supplied indicates that the rate of decrease in world war I pensioners is being accelerated as the years go by.
We learned also in the committee that world war II pensioners had increased from 88,235 in 1947 to 123,296 in 1959, and that their dependent children had increased from 54,759 to 176,409. This indicates that while there has been a reduction in expenditure there has been an increase in the paper work of the department and in the number of cases handled. In view of the fact that the staff has decreased from 540 to 404, I feel that this reflects the great measure of efficiency with which this work is being carried out.
I should like to express the hope that the war veterans legislation will be amended at the next session of parliament; not only that the Pension Act will be amended to permit increases in the basic pensions and to confirm and regularize the status of Newfoundland veterans, but that other veterans legislation will be amended so that the Newfoundland
6756	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs forestry units of world war II, the merchant navy and the members of the rescue tug service can all be brought under the veterans charter.
I should like also to see a policy adopted of extending for one year the pensions of deceased pensioners to the widows in cases where the pension is over 50 per cent. I believe this measure had the approval of all members of the committee, and I recommend it to the minister and the government for their consideration. I think it would be a fine thing, also, if the pensions of deceased pensioners who were receiving less than 50 per cent disability could also be continued to their widows.
Now, Mr. Chairman, there are many other things I might say on this occasion, but there will be other opportunities to speak on the various items. I should like to close by expressing my support for the representations made by the Canadian Legion and by other veterans organizations in connection with the suggestions I have just made.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, the committee is carrying on under some difficulties, with no recess for lunch and members having to bob in and out to get something to eat as I did just prior to the opening of these estimates. Some members also have to leave for duty on committees that are still sitting. Then, too, with the very long hours we are sitting, members have to return to their offices to deal with correspondence.
I am sure, however, regardless of that, there is no one who does not consider that these are very important estimates which should receive very careful and considered attention by the committee. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that if we all co-operate and work hard at these estimates we could give them substantial attention and get through by six o'clock tomorrow evening. I just make that as a suggestion, and appeal to all members to co-operate on that basis.
I am sure the introduction of these estimates always brings back memories to many of the old codgers amongst the veterans in the house, memories of common service and comradeship in previous wars. To all those who served in any of the wars in which the armed forces of Canada have participated this brings back memories; to some of Ypres, the Somme, Vimy; to others of D-day, Normandy, Italy and of other areas in the world and on the seas and Korea. I believe that the veterans amongst the members of this house, regardless of the party to which they belong, reflect that spirit of comradeship in their concern for the problems of veterans and their dependents. I am sure that members of the house get a common satisfaction out of


dealing with legislation that is for the benefit of veterans and their dependents, and all of us derive some happiness in dealing with the personal problems that are brought to our attention and then brought to the attention of the minister or the appropriate officials. I feel there is a particular satisfaction in doing something for the men who served this country, and their dependents.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I want to say that the members of this group appreciate the attention the minister gives to correspondence, to complaints and problems brought to his attention by members. He is very prompt in attending to them within the ambit of the law and regulations-I have had several experiences in this connection-does what he can to solve the problem or satisfy the complaint. I should like to express also the same note of appreciation of the deputy minister, the senior officials in Ottawa and the district officials throughout Canada, and also my appreciation to the members of the Canadian pension commission. I am sure some of them who are present will be fully conscious of the fact that I land my problems on their doorstep and say, "Now, it is up to you." I have found their assistance very helpful. These remarks apply also to the members of the war veterans allowance board and the staff in general throughout the country.
At this time, Mr. Chairman, I wrote, on behalf of this group, to mention the fact that Colonel Garneau, the chairman of the war veterans allowance board, has retired. He first became a member of the board in 1930, and has been its chairman since 1945. We appreciate the service he has rendered to the war veterans and their dependents in his position as a member of the war veterans allowance board and in his position as chairman of that board. On behalf of this group I wish him a long, healthy and happy retirement.
I now want to say a few words about the standing committee on veterans affairs. I send the minutes of proceedings of the standing committee on veterans affairs to Legion branches, to the secretaries of ladies' auxiliaries and to other interested persons in my constituency and across Canada. They are read very closely by the secretaries of Legion branches, and various tidbits are brought to the attention of members at meetings. However, I find they are read even more closely by the members of the ladies' auxiliaries, who follow things up very carefully indeed, and by others. Some have made a point of picking out a number of matters in the minutes which have come to their notice between meetings; they are read to the meetings, and there are

various conversations and debates on the questions and sometimes they produce resolutions.
I often address ladies' auxiliaries. As a matter of fact I am rather fond of addressing the Legion ladies' auxiliaries. I now have a standard lecture that I give once a year. It is entitled "The Law With Respect to Veterans and the Men Behind the Scenes". They are always interested in the law and changes in the law and the regulations, and they are interested in knowing about the men behind the scenes. I have spent many an hour at meetings of ladies' auxiliaries describing the various officials, including the ministers and deputy ministers, parliamentary assistants- particularly in recent years-members of the Canadian pension commission and others. I should like to say this. In the language of modern advertising I have done my best to build up a glamorous image of the men behind the scenes, and I trust they will appreciate what I have done. After that I usually have an interesting question period. All this procedure adds to their knowledge of the legislation and their understanding of what the department and the officials are trying to do.
I must say that all the members of the committee were satisfied indeed with the work of the chairman. He was most fair in dealing with the problems that came before the steering committee and any problems that came before the committee itself. I was a member of the steering committee and I must say, and I do so willingly, that I found him to be most objective in dealing with the problems that come before the chairman of a committee such as the standing committee on veterans affairs.
I might say that in mentioning the various officers I forgot to mention the parliamentary secretary. I intended to say about the parliamentary secretary the same kind things that I said about the other persons during my brief remarks.
I am a great admirer of a group that comes to Ottawa once a year, namely the representatives of the Canadian non-pensioned veterans widows. Most of the members are admirers of this fine group. Four or five of them come here every year and put on a national show, as it were. They stay here for a few days and visit the minister, his parliamentary secretary and various officials. The previous parliamentary secretary took a great interest in the problems of widows. In replying to the letters they write I always say this: I advise you to write to the hon. member for Brandon, the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, who I know
Supply-Veterans Affairs will be particularly delighted to deal with any problems that widows may bring to his attention.
The committee did very well this year in a detailed examination of the estimates, and I presume it will not be necessary for this committee to go into another detailed examination of the mechanics of the department today. I am sure hon. members will have questions that arise from problems in their constituency or from some lack of understanding of the administration of the department. However, there was a good examination of the estimates and we heard from the various senior officials, from the deputy minister down, as to the administration of the department in all sections of Canada and in all its aspects and phases. I have no hesitation in saying that the people of Canada have every right to be proud of the Department of Veterans Affairs as a department with a heart administering excellent legislation.
Before passing on I want to deal just briefly with the second report of the committee to the house, in which it was mentioned that representations and briefs were heard and received from the following organizations:	Canadian non-pensioned veterans'
widows association; Canadian chiropractic association; war amputations of Canada-dominion council; Newfoundland overseas forestry association; Canadian war disability pensioners' association; Canadian corps association-dominion command; national council of veterans associations in Canada. I now quote one paragraph from this report. That paragraph reads as follows:
The value of the existence of a standing committee on veterans affairs was once again demonstrated by the continued interest shown by veterans' organizations in the submission of briefs, and the appearance before the committee of delegates who put forth their organizations' views . ..
The views of these organizations as expressed to the committee now form a part of the printed record, and your committee is confident that they will be of valuable assistance to the government in its review of policies affecting veterans legislation.
First of all, I say again that there is no question but that the Legion branches, veterans organizations, ladies auxiliaries and all those interested in veterans problems recognize the value of the standing committee on veterans affairs. I trust the government and the minister particularly will have read the representations made to the committee by the organizations I have mentioned, as we are confident they will be of valuable assistance in assessing the need for amendment of the legislation under the veterans charter.
The position of the C.C.F. party during the years has been this with respect to

Supply-Veterans Affairs veterans legislation. We have always been of the opinion that national veterans organizations in close contact with veterans problems are the ones that should best understand the needs of veterans and their dependents and the type of amendments best suited to meet that need. Therefore, in so far as legislation relating to the veterans charter is concerned, the C.C.F. has always taken the position that it supported the representations of the Legion, the national council of veterans and any other national veterans organization in Canada for improvements to the veterans charter and all legislation that comes under it.
Quite recently a convention of the Canadian Legion was held in Windsor. I believe it was the 35th convention. On occasion the minister has referred to Legion conventions as the veterans parliament, and it is recognized as such. It is a large gathering of representatives of Legion branches throughout Canada. I was able to attend the last convention for a couple of days. Keen disappointment was expressed, by the delegates and in resolutions, at the failure of the government to amend the Pension Act, particularly, and the War Veterans Allowance Act. Evidence of that disappointment was found in the resolutions adopted by the convention, where for the first time within my knowledge, in reading convention resolutions, the Legion instead of using the word "request" uses the word "demand". Following the preamble, the resolution of the Legion goes on to say this:
Be it resolved that this convention expresses its displeasure at the lack of action on the part of the government, and demands that the Canadian Pension Act be amended at the present session of parliament in accordance with Legion representations.
That is the first time in Canadian history to my knowledge, or in the history of the Legion, that the word "request" has been replaced by the word "demand". I am not going to deal at length with this question. We shall have something to say on the items as they come before the committee. We all know that the minister's heart is in the right place, and I am sure no one in this house was more disappointed than the minister when he found it was not possible to secure government agreement to an amendment of the Pension Act. I am sure he was disappointed at the check rein put on expenditures of this department by, no doubt, the treasury board and the Minister of Finance which prevented him from introducing amendments to the Pension Act which he believes are necessary.
The representations made by the organizations I have mentioned before the standing


committee on veterans affairs, and the resolutions passed at the national convention of the Canadian Legion which are included in the July issue of The Legionary clearly indicate that the Legion recognizes the need for certain amendments to veterans legislation, and I think this is also indicated by the conversations and correspondence I have had with a good many veterans and their dependants.
Before I conclude I want to put this important question into focus. The government of Canada is called upon to spend a great deal of money on behalf of many important sections of the Canadian people. It has spent very large sums of money in assisting a good number of other people, and rightly so. But we must not forget that a very great responsibility is owed to the veterans of Canada and their dependants, and in order to focus attention on their position in the Canadian scheme of things I wish to quote briefly from an address by Colonel C. P. Stacey, the official historian of the Canadian army, to a gathering of veterans some three or four years ago. I quote his remarks because what he has to say is not very generally known or appreciated in these days when there is an inclination to forget what these men have done on behalf of our country. He said this, in part:
I think most of them would be willing to admit that those who really won for Canada her new position in the commonwealth was the Canadian fighting man. The statesmen have simply consolidated the ground he took. It was the deeds of the old Canadian corps that put strength into Sir Robert Borden's arm that enabled him to insist on a new national status for this country, in the days of the Paris peace conference. It was the men who fought under Byng and Currie who set Canada's feet on the road that led to the statute of Westminster and future independence within the commonwealth.
Future generations of Canadians, if they read their history aright, will count these men among the founding fathers of this country.
In addition to that, in the light of recent events I would say that those who in the second world war served in Europe and other theatres of war, on the high seas and in the air, and more recently in Korea, and more recently still with the United Nations expeditionary force in the Middle East, have also made their contribution toward establishing Canada's place as a country of importance in the world, and also have laid the foundation for Canada's voice in international affairs being listened to with greater and greater respect at the United Nations and other organizations. I just mention these facts so that we all may realize the debt we owe these veterans and their dependants

on account of the services rendered in the armed forces of this country throughout the years.
When the minister was introducing his estimates he gave an interesting review of some of the work and developments of his department. I listened to this with interest because my ear is always attuned to catch that hint of the future, of things to come. Although I was disappointed and saddened by the recent failure of the government to respond to the representations of the Canadian Legion, I was somewhat heartened when I heard the minister say that he looked forward to a year of progress. I trust, Mr. Chairman, that this means the representations of the Canadian Legion and other veterans organizations are going to receive favourable consideration by this government at the coming session of parliament.
Before completing my remarks on this item I must also express the support of this group for the representations made on behalf of the Newfoundland forestry unit. We urge this government to recognize the members of this unit as veterans in every sense of the word and according to the terms of the veterans charter, even if it has to be slightly amended to do so. The Canadian Legion at its biennial convention in Windsor quite recently discussed this question thoroughly. A committee studied it, and finally a resolution was adopted entitling these men to membership in the Canadian Legion as veterans. I support wholeheartedly the representations of the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo on behalf of this forestry unit, and I trust that the government's decision will be influenced by the action of the Canadian Legion.
Mr. Chairman, that is all I have to say at this time. I want to bring up some other matters under particular items and deal in detail with some of the things I have lightly touched upon in my few remarks under this main item, but I again appeal to the committee to give close attention to the estimates of the minister so that we can conclude our consideration of them by 6 p.m. tomorrow evening.


Mr. Smith (Lincoln):: Mr. Chairman, I would like at this time to bring to the attention of the minister a problem which concerns a small group of first world war British imperial veterans who I think should be given special consideration at this time. I do not want to appear critical in any way, and far be it from me to be that way, but I do think that with my association with British imperial veterans over the years I can bring to the minister and his staff our sincere thanks and appreciation for the splendid way they have
Supply-Veterans Affairs been treated here by the Department of Veterans Affairs. They are almost as well treated as the Canadian veteran, more especially as far as veterans allowances are concerned.
The problem of those veterans about which I wish to speak has been brought before the standing committee on veterans affairs by way of a resolution from Canadian corps association in March, 1958. At that time the appeal made on their behalf was not approved. However, I have accumulated considerable correspondence in connection with the matter, and I was hoping to have the opportunity to present it to the veterans affairs committee again this year. Unfortunately I have not yet been able to become a member of that very select group. I am still hoping that perhaps in a year or so I shall be able to graduate to membership in the veterans committee.
There are perhaps less than 50 of these veterans in the whole of Canada at the present time and I know of only three cases in southern Ontario, so this is a small matter financially as far as the government is concerned. However, it is a very important and vexing matter for the veterans who are affected. The veterans to whom I refer served with the British imperial army during 1914-19 on the northwest frontier of India and on the Afghanistan frontier. They did not receive the British victory medal, and according to the existing regulations they are not entitled to the Canadian war veterans allowance. That is the crux of the whole problem.
I should like to state the case of one of these veterans, or at least that of his widow, because the veteran is dead. I have collected considerable correspondence in connection with this case, including the deceased veteran's discharge certificate. The certificate says that he enlisted in the Somerset Light Infantry in London in October, 1907. He served on active service from 1914 to 1919 and was discharged in 1920 after 12 years of service. After that he served for nine years in the reserve army. He was awarded the British war medal, the Indian general service medal and the Afghanistan frontier medal. He was awarded the red chevron for active service in 1914 and five blue chevrons for the years 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918 and 1919. However, for some reason he did not receive the victory medal and his wife is now not entitled to the war veterans widow's allowance.
I have a considerable amount of information here in the form of British army regulations relating to what were considered to be theatres of war and the names of British regiments which saw active service on the Indian frontier and in the Persian gulf area.

Supply-Veterans Affairs It would appear that areas all around the Afghanistan frontier were considered theatres of war; however, service on the Afghan border was considered to be an affair of border skirmishes only. Here is the case of a veteran leaving behind him a discharge certificate showing 12 years' service in the armed forces and nine years of service in the reserve. This man saw active service overseas from 1914 to 1919; he received the general service medal, the Indian general service medal and the Afghanistan frontier medal and all the active service chevrons it was possible for him to receive in the first war, but his widow, though now in need of dependant's allowance is unable to get it and has to accept welfare assistance.
I should like to read into the record a letter I have received from Mr. H. Cutler, secretary to the Earl of Home, chief commonwealth relations officer, London, England:
I am directed by the Earl of Home to refer to your letter received by the army medal office on September 28, 1959 and to enclose a schedule giving details (from the limited information now available) of British army units regarded as having qualified by operational service in the frontier regions of India for (a) the 1914-15 star and (b) the victory medal, which has been received from the army medal office who have mentioned, however, that for want of original records, it cannot be stated as being authoritative.
It is regretted that comprehensive particulars of the Indian army units who served in frontier areas in India are not available.
I am to point out that the definition "Theatres of War'' since the 5th August 1914, includes all operations in those areas set out in the published army orders, etc., relating to the grant of the 1914-15 star and the victory medal.
With regard to operational service on the N. W. frontier of India from May 1919, I am to say that these were punitive operations directed against the Afghan tribes, and the various expeditions in the regions concerned were not officially described as service in a theatre of war; but the names of the individuals who took part were included in the orders of battle and they were awarded the India general service medal with relative clasp (s).
A copy of army instruction (India) No. 795 of 1920 concerning the grant of the India general service medal with clasp for operational service against Afghanistan in 1919 is also enclosed for your information.
Parts of this letter clearly indicate that there were irregularities, and a lack of service records could have prevented certain British veterans from getting full credit for their services. I wish to draw to the attention of the committee to such passages as:
However that for want of original records it cannot be stated as being authoritative.
It is regretted that comprehensive particulars of the Indian army units who served in frontier areas in India are not available.
Then the letter goes on to say:
I am to say that these were punitive operations directed against the Afghan tribes. .. but the names of the individuals who took part were
[Mr. Smith (Lincoln) .1

included in the orders of battle and they were awarded the India general service medal with relative clasp.

but no victory medal. Those troops who went to the Indian frontier had to travel long distances in troopships in submarine-infested waters; they were subjected to malaria and dysentery, which are just as destructive to human life as shellfire, and for all that is left of them now here in Canada we might very well make an exception of some kind and give them or their dependants the benefits of the War Veterans Allowance Act.
I have no record of the number of casualties suffered by those British troops who served on the north west Indian and Afghanistan frontiers. However, as indicated by the large number of clearing and stationary hospitals and field ambulance units which were in that theatre of war, the casualties must have been heavy, and I note that at the outpost held by the Somerset Light Infantry there was an infantry battalion, one armoured car unit, one mechanical transport company, three combined field ambulances and one stationary hospital. It was just fate that put veterans like those I have described, who were in the regular British army prior to 1914, on the Indian frontier rather than in France, Belgium or Italy, and the same set of facts apply to those who enlisted during the war and were sent to India.
According to the records there were rather strange decisions made. Some British soldiers who served in India from 1914-1919 received the victory medal while others received the Indian general service medal. Those who served on the Afghanistan frontier were among those who got the Indian general service medal. Surely an apparent error of judgment made some 40 years ago should not now deprive those veterans or their dependants of the benefits of the war veterans allowance. I strongly recommend to the minister that the 1914-19 award of the Indian general service medal be accepted as entitlement to the war veterans allowance as well as the victory medal.
I have a large file on this subject, in which I have taken a keen interest. I feel it is a matter that is deserving of sympathetic consideration. I do not expect there will be an attempt made to change the regulations as far as the British government is concerned in trying to get those fellows a victory medal, but the award of the Indian general service medal should be accepted as entitlement for war veterans allowance.

I have had a long association with British imperial veterans. They appreciate everything that is done for them by the Canadian government. It is a matter of regret to me that there are not many left now who served in world war I. I hope the minister will give this question his sympathetic, favourable consideration.


Mr. Batten:: Mr. Chairman, it is not my wish to delay the minister's estimates, but I should like to make one or two comments. As a member of the committee on veterans affairs I have always been particularly impressed with the way the officials of the department have informed themselves as to what goes on within the department. They take great pains to ensure that the members of that committee are given full explanations during the examination of the estimates. From the way this is done one can only conclude that they must arm themselves with the necessary information about the entire department. In correspondence with the officials of the department they show the same diligence and desire to serve the veterans of Canada as they show in the committee. The estimates of this department were thoroughly investigated in the committee, and I for one feel there is no need for any extended examination in the committee of supply.
I was impressed by the recommendations made by the Canadian Legion for amendments to the War Veterans Allowance Act. These recommendations are well known to hon. members of the committee and to veterans all across the country, and there is no need to repeat them here. However, I should like to support the recommendations, and I hope that in the next session of parliament careful attention will be given to them by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
With further reference to the War Veterans Allowance Act, I would hope, too, that further consideration would be given to those veterans of world war I who did not see service in an active theatre and who are now disqualified because of the time limit of 365 days before the end of hostilities. Further consideration should be given to this regulation in respect of many cases. I hope that in time the necessary consideration will be given to this matter. It was no fault of these men that they were not old enough to volunteer before they did. When they volunteered they were prepared to go anywhere they were sent. Of course no soldier can decide where he wants to go. If their service was confined to England for some reason or
Supply-Veterans Affairs other, it should not deprive them of consideration. They deserve consideration over and above what has already been given to them.
Some of us were concerned that no amendments to the Pension Act were introduced. We hope that during the next session of parliament the minister will be able to give consideration to this important matter.
During the meetings of the committee I was impressed with the brief presented on behalf of the forestry units of Newfoundland. I shall not deal with the points raised in the brief, but I do feel that these men are deserving of more consideration than they received up to this time. I read their brief carefully after the committee meeting was over and also examined various documents which were not presented in the committee. They were very convincing to me. I hope that during the meetings of the committee next year and in the consideration which the minister will give to veterans affairs, the position of the Newfoundland forestry units will be given the attention it deserves. To the requests made respecting the forestry units of Newfoundland I should like to couple the requests made on behalf of the merchant navy. This group of men should be given further consideration.
It was a great pleasure earlier in the year to go with the committee to visit Queen Mary hospital at Montreal and the institution fat Ste. Anne de Bellevue. I was extremely impressed with the work done in these institutions and by the devotion of the officials there to their tasks. It was a new experience for me because I had not been in a veterans hospital before. The visit provided me with a much greater insight into the problems of the department with respect to veterans hospitals and the work done there.
While hon. members of parliament may not be able to travel far from Ottawa while the house is in session, I do suggest to the minister and his deputy that hon. members who are not members of the committee on veterans affairs and who have not visited a veterans hospital should be encouraged to go to Montreal to visit the Queen Mary hospital and see at first hand the type of work done there. I am sure if they did they would come back, as I did, with a greater respect for the problems which the department has to solve and for the contribution which the officials of the department are making to the welfare of the Canadian veteran.


Mr. Weichel:: Mr. Chairman, it is a real privilege for me to take part in the discussion of the veterans affairs estimates for the first time since becoming a member of this house. As a disabled veteran of the first great war I

Supply-Veterans Affairs have not had the opportunity of expressing my thanks and appreciation to the federal government for the assistance I have received.
The Minister of Veterans Affairs, his secretary, deputy and members of his department, along with the Canadian Legion, the war amputations association of Canada, the Polish legion, the Canadian pension commission, the army, navy and air force association and other organizations have made many deserving contributions to the welfare of all veterans. Their efforts have given the veteran in most cases the incentive to carry on and take his place in everyday life with those more fortunate.
Canada is proud of her courageous men and women who left all that was dear to them, endured hardships and faced danger on many occasions. Many years of international tension have intervened. Much still remains with us of the deep feeling, the sorrow, the thankfulness and pride we knew when we first began to commemorate Remembrance day. Let us always keep faith with those who paid the price. I well remember those wonderful words written by Canon Scott of Montreal, chaplain of the 1st Canadian division of the first great war:
Over the broken dead, over the trenches and wire,
Bugles of God rang out-"Cease fire".
Woe to those nations of men who in their heat of desire,
Break that stern order of God, "Cease fire".
I met this great man going over the top with the infantry at Amiens, and he said to me at that time, "Son, this is a great day for Canada." Our continued obligations to the needy veteran, his dependants, the silver cross women whose husbands, sons and daughters died in the course of duty and selfsacrifice, are more important today than ever before. Yes, every year since 1918 has brought greater problems to our needy comrades still suffering from the effects of war. They will carry their scars to the grave.
First, we are reminded of the silver cross women. I have always been impressed with their desire to carry on in spite of their lives saddened by the loss of their loved ones. Some time ago I had the privilege of attending the war amputations convention in Ottawa. This is an outstanding gathering of war amps, the blind and paraplegic cases. Our president, the Reverend Colonel Sidney Lambert, O.B.E., has been in office since the organization was formed over 25 years ago. This is perhaps the only organization in the world which has never had a past president. Recently I was honoured by being awarded life membership in the war amps of Canada. In this group was also the blind colonel, Eddie Baker, a great man who feels it is a real privilege to visit and speak to the veterans in hospital

and give them every encouragement. Mr. Chairman, just imagine a blind veteran overlooking his own terrific disability in order to inspire others with less suffering. I am sure it can be agreed that we have always admired the wonderful spirit of our blind comrades.
Will we ever forget the terrific hardships endured by our prisoners of war, especially at Hong Kong, and the difficulties these men have had in re-establishing their living conditions, both physically and mentally, as we enjoy them in our daily routine? Some time ago I had the honour of entertaining the battle fatigue patients in Westminster hospital in London, Ontario. This was an experience I shall never forget, and I made the remark at that time, "I shall never let them down as long as it is humanly possible to assist them".
Our continued sympathetic care means so much to these unfortunate veterans. I understand that great medical strides have been made concerning such cases. We will always remember the thoughtful care we received from our nurses and doctors, many of whom paid the supreme sacrifice in carrying out their humanitarian services. Many of the nurses and doctors who survived are still serving today.
We know that improvements can always be made in our many hospitals across Canada, Mr. Chairman. However, I should like to congratulate our minister, his hospital administration department and the staff in all hospitals for their kind consideration and assistance extended to all those in need of medical attention. Letters of appreciation from some of those veterans have been received by me.
Finally, we think of those who came back without a scratch, as the old veteran would express himself. Some of those are still having a very difficult time re-establishing themselves in civilian life. Let us not be impatient with them. After all, they were part of a great organization who gave their best for King and country. We agree that most veterans, along with our pensioners, through their own initiative have re-established themselves in civilian life in a very admirable way. A great deal of this success is attributed to their wives who, throughout the years, studied and understood their problems.
Perhaps I could mention one or two points that have given me much concern, Mr. Chairman. In the case of the death of a pensioner disabled to the extent of 50 per cent or more, the widow finds herself with a greatly reduced pension, and during a crucial and emotional period finds that she

is suddenly thrust into a financial crisis which seems to have no solution. With this condition so prevalent in most of those cases, may I suggest to the government and to our Minister of Veterans Affairs that every consideration be given to the widow whereby she may receive a full pension for one year following the death of her husband.
The pensioner's lot has improved much since 1918. However, when pension adjustments are forthcoming let us make sure that this veteran will not have any financial difficulties added to his physical handicap.
My second point refers to continuation of the allowance after the death of a pensioner in receipt of a pension of less than 50 per cent. The present legislation states:
In the case of those in receipt of less than 50 per cent at the time of death and whose death is not established as due to pensionable disabilities, no pension or allowance is paid.
In order to grant financial protection to the dependants of such pensioners, may I recommend to the Minister of Veterans Affairs that the allowance in respect of wife and dependants being paid to those pensioned at less than 50 per cent at the time of death be continued to the widow and such dependants so long as they remain eligible as otherwise provided under the act. Such legislation would avoid many hardships.
As the Minister of Veterans Affairs previously mentioned, our government has brought about many changes. In 1957 and 1958 amendments to the Pension Act and the War Veterans Allowance Act were passed which were very beneficial. In 1958 the soldiers insurance, veterans insurance, and the children of war dead, education assistance, acts were reviewed and amended, while in 1959 the Veterans' Land Act and the War Service Grants Acts were brought up to date and greatly improved.
In closing my remarks, Mr. Chairman, may I say I was pleased to note that Bill No. C-71, to amend the War Veterans Allowance Act has been passed in this house. As I said during the course of the discussion of the bill in the house, it will be a great boon to those veterans who find it necessary for reason of health, and in some cases family ties, to live outside Canada.
The amendment providing for equal priv-iliges under the act to the allied veterans of world war II was of special interest to my constituents. This has been warmly received by the Polish legion branches in Kitchener and other places. Among the membership of this branch there are many who served with distinction.
The efforts and sincerity of our Minister of Veterans Affairs, his parliamentary secretary
Supply-Veterans Affairs and his deputy minister as well as the officials of his department, have long been recognized. However, Mr. Speaker, I hope my remarks will produce a still greater understanding of the problems involved, and that we may continue to realize that with changing conditions it is our duty and privilege to improve the lot of all needy veterans and their dependants, who gave their all at a time when their country was in urgent need of their loyalty and devotion to duty.


Mr. Regier:: I hope, Mr. Chairman, that in a limited number of words I can add my appreciation to those who have already been spoken with regard to the very courteous and efficient way in which our representations to the minister and his officers have been handled. I believe this is one of the finest departments of government in this regard. I should like to place before the minister also a few questions, and I hope he will answer them either when he replies on the first item or later during the discussion of the detailed items.
I had on my list the very point to which reference has been made by the hon. member for Waterloo North, and that is the plight of the widow of a disability pensioner whose husband, when he was alive, was receiving a disability pension of less than 50 per cent. I believe that much cruelty is needlessly being endured by what I am sure must be a limited number of individuals in Canada. A man may have a disability, but if he dies as the result of a heart attack it is often difficult or impossible to prove that the heart attack was primarily caused by his war disability. The widow, under those conditions, is not entitled to the pension.
I should like to bring to the minister's attention the fact that in my opinion the cases of war veterans allowance widows receive far more consideration than do the cases of the widows of disability pensioners. I believe that without adding much to the expenditures of the government, we might be able to allow a little more leeway so that a limited number of widows would be eligible to continue receiving this pension for as long as there was need of it, or for as long as they lived as widows.
I do want to register one complaint which I believe has not yet been adequately dealt with, and that is the complaint of the veterans living on small holdings, which small holdings have since become absorbed in the sprawling, rapid growth of our larger metropolitan areas. What I have particular reference to is the rapidly mounting assessment levels that these veterans have to endure. The minister may well reply that this is a responsibility of either the municipal or provincial authorities.
6764	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs I have carried on considerable correspondence with municipal and provincial authorities in this regard, and I know that to a certain extent the minister is right when he says this is outside the field of his responsibility.
However, when the veterans agreed to the terms respecting their small holdings, the intention of the government and the intention of the veterans was that these small holdings would remain and be operated as small holdings. However, for reasons entirely beyond the control of these veterans, they often find the assessors moving in and deciding that a veteran is holding a couple of acres while all the land around him has been carved up into lots. Then he is assessed according to the number of lots the acreage may contain. The veteran, under his agreement with the government, loses a considerable advantage if he carves up his land into lots before the expiration of the agreement. There have been cases in which the taxes have increased by as much as 800 per cent in a single year.
I feel there is a moral obligation on the part of this government toward the veterans. I suppose all the minister can do is exert his influence with the provincial governments to see that the spirit of the agreement entered into by these veterans with small holdings is not broken as a result of the actions of another level of government. I feel that our provincial governments, to the extent they can do anything about it, as well as our municipal governments, are breaking that agreement which was reached between the veterans and the national authorities.
I should like to ask the minister whether any progress has been made on another matter. Does the government accept any responsibility for what may have been a wrong medical classification at the time of enlistment? It has always been my contention that if on the basis of an examination by the medical staff attached to the armed forces we classify a man as being in first class physical shape, and if the country has a right to demand of him the supreme sacrifice, then it is pretty small of the nation to say at some later date, "We are sorry, but we made a mistake when we first gave you a class A rating, and because your present difficulty is of preenlistment origin you cannot have a pension". I know that, again, not too many people are involved, but many of those who are involved feel that the government of Canada has not kept faith with them.
I know very well there may be cases where the enlisted man deliberately hid his disability at the time of enlistment in his desire or eagerness to be placed in the top medical category. However, I believe the nation assumes responsibility for a man's health at that


time, and we ought not to sneak out from under that responsibility afterwards by saying "We are very sorry, but we believe now that you had this disability before you were accepted into the armed forces".
In so far as the failure of the government to increase the disability pension in particular at this session of parliament is concerned, may I recall to the minister that in the blue book of estimates there is indication of an increase this year over last year in the estimates of the Minister of Finance to the extent of $176,319,026. In the Department of National Health and Welfare there is an increase in old age security payments of almost $12,400,000. In the category of family allowances we note an increase of $13 million. As a matter of fact, this year in family allowances we expect to be spending $508 million, and in the field of old age security payments, $590 million. Yet when I turn to the estimates of the minister I find there is actually a decrease in the over-all estimates, as compared to one year ago, of $1,901,012.
I know that the first war veterans may be dying off rapidly these days. However, I would assume that as our nation becomes wealthier and as we show that we can pay more money for many other purposes, worth while as most of them may well be, it should be possible to do something at such a time when the Canadian Legion presents such an excellent case pointing out that they today, in relation to the income of wage earners, are in a less equitable position than they were almost right after the first world war, when our veterans legislation was first begun. All they are asking is that they be granted by comparison, the measure of equity now that they had shortly after the end of the first world war.
I know the government is always faced with demands for more money, but I was greatly surprised to note an actual decrease in the amount being spent in this department as compared to one year ago. I know the minister has been in the House of Commons for many years and has made many moving arguments and speeches on behalf of this principle for which I am now pleading. He has called repeatedly, especially when he was in opposition, for the restoration of at least that equity for the veteran that he received vis-a-vis the income of the wage earner.
Over in the United Kingdom when a minister is in serious disagreement with the government it is usually the custom for that minister to submit his resignation and thereby call public attention to the rightfulness of his position as he understands it. In Canada

we are not quite so anxious to resign our particular offices. However, if last winter the minister did not see fit to push his conviction to the point of a possible resignation from the cabinet, may I say this. Knowing the minister as well as I do, I have every confidence that he is not going to sit for many more years as a member of the cabinet without gaining for our veterans the concession for which he pleaded so earnestly over so many years.


Mr. Rogers:: As one of the members of the standing committee on veterans affairs, it is not my intention to prolong this debate. However, I think there is one important factor that is worthy of mention, and it can be covered in a few words. We have a dedicated minister. In consequence this dedication is carried throughout every branch of the department across Canada. There is nothing unusual about this situation. After all, when one examines the training and experience of veterans as a whole we find that it means simply this. We unite. Veterans have a language of their own. They can discuss matters, but when the chips are down they all get together for a common purpose.
As will be observed, the minister pointed out that the Pension Act is to be reviewed during this coming session. That is all to the good. I should just like to leave one thought with this committee, and it is this. While I have no axe to grind in connection with the review of the whole pension plan, I think the time has arrived when we should examine carefully certain areas covered by the Pension Act and in particular by the War Veterans Allowance Act. In connection with pensioners there are cases in which I do not think an over-all increase is required. After all, I for one want to have this money go where it will do the most good. I repeat that the time has arrived when we must segregate certain sections and see to it that any increases in pensions or war veterans allowances are made where they will do the most good.


Mr. Granger:: There are just three points with which I should like to deal briefly. They have already been covered really by the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo and the hon. member for Humber-St. George's, whose remarks I should like to endorse. I should like to associate myself with the speeches made by those two hon. members.
However, I should like to mention particularly those members of the Royal Newfoundland regiment who did not serve in a theatre of war but who did go overseas to England in the first world war. I hope the Minister of Veterans Affairs or his department will so modify their legislation that
Supply-Veterans Affairs these men will come under the veterans charter. I should also like to mention the brief of the Newfoundland forestry association. The members of the Newfoundland forestry unit in world war II, along with the merchant navy and the rescue tug service, should be brought within the scope of the veterans legislation.
I should like to support the brief presented to the standing committee on veterans affairs by the Canadian Legion. I hope that during the coming year the Minister of Veterans Affairs and his department will bring in the necessary legislation to implement the requests contained in that brief.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I just want to answer as briefly as I can some of the questions that were asked by hon. members. Personally I thank all hon. members for their kind remarks about the Department of Veterans Affairs and the staff. I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that I join wholeheartedly in what has been said about the staff. As minister, I am extremely proud of my staff in the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The hon. member for Burin-Burgeo spoke about the reduction in the estimates. May I point out that the reduction is in the administration of the department this year, and that there is no reduction with regard to pensions, war veterans allowances, treatment or other branches of the department.
The hon. member also raised the question of the Newfoundland forestry unit which went overseas in the last war. This is a matter which will have to receive very careful consideration when a review is made of the Pension Act or the war veterans allowances. These were not enlisted men. They went over as civilians and signed an agreement as civilians to perform certain duties in England, and were not recognized by the imperial defence department as veterans.
That is the problem which we will have to solve one way or the other. It is now 20 years since the beginning of the second world war, when these men went overseas, and it seems to me that if something needed to be done it should have been done long ago. Of course that is no reason for saying that because they were neglected in the past they should be neglected now. I have had a lot of experience in past years with organizations such as this.
Mention was made of the merchant marine. I can remember committee after committee for the last 15 or 20 years dealing with the merchant marine, and I have felt that if there were any group of men who really deserved consideration such as that recommended this afternoon it was the merchant marine, because those men really did suffer hardships
6766	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs in their work. For instance, on convoys of ships on the North sea run up through the Arctic circle their ships were torpedoed and they suffered all sorts of hardships. Then there were the fire fighters in London during the blitz. Actually it was after the real blitz when they arrived, but they were under constant danger. I do not want to make comparisons, but we can hardly compare the men who went over with the forestry unit with these men. As I said a moment ago, committees of this house considered the merchant marine and the fire fighters on many occasions, but they could not see their way clear to regard them as belonging to the armed forces. However, that is just the history I am giving the hon. member, which I am sure he knows very well.
The hon. member for Kootenay West will recognize some of the information I have been giving, because he has sat on veterans affairs committees for many years and is very familiar with the work of past committees. I want to thank him for the very kind words he uttered about the department and also about the standing committee on veterans affairs. I heartily agree with him that this committee has justified its existence. Hon. members will recall that when I was in opposition I was very anxious to have a standing committee on veterans affairs, and I am very pleased indeed with the work the committee has been doing not only in reviewing legislation but also the very careful and exhaustive survey it makes of the estimates of this department.
The hon. member for Waterloo North in an excellent address this afternoon had practical statements to make about hospitalization. The hon. member is himself a disabled pensioner, and when he speaks about our hospitals he is speaking from a personal point of view because he has spent considerable time in our hospitals. He mentioned pensioners with 50 per cent disability or less, and recommended that the widow of a pensioner who had 50 per cent pension or less should receive a pension the same as the widow of a pensioner who had over 50 per cent. This is another matter which will have to be considered by the committee and the department when the Pension Act comes under review.
The hon. member for Lincoln had his problem of the imperial veterans. May I say that I think the imperial veterans in Canada are very appreciative, as they should be, of what the Department of Veterans Affairs and the government of Canada have done for them. The particular case he brought before us today had to do with imperial veterans who served in Afghanistan. Afghanistan has not been recognized as a theatre of war, and as 	;J1

a result these men have not qualified for war veterans allowances. The hon. member felt that some change should be made in the regulations.
I would like to point out in connection with the veterans of allied forces, whether they be imperial, whether they come from France, Italy, the United States, or any other country, that our department has to take the definition of "service in a theatre of war" as it is given to us by the particular country concerned. As far as ex-imperials are concerned, the definition of service in a theatre of war is as follows: ex-imperials who served in world war I are eligible where the applicant engaged in any of the operations outlined in army order 391-1922, and as a result was issued with a victory medal. Unfortunately these men were not issued with a victory medal, so they are not considered as eligible for war veterans allowance in this country. We might make representations to the British government asking that their definition be changed. I would be very pleased to do that, and if they do change the definition then it will be possible for us to act.
The hon. member for Humber-St. George's recommended that we carry out the recommendations contained in the Legion brief with regard to war veterans allowances, and that consideration should be given to those who did not have 365 days, for instance, in Great Britain. I am not going to debate that matter extensively this afternoon; it has been debated extensively in this house and in committees in the past.
The whole basis of war veterans allowances has been changed. When war veterans allowances were first granted they were granted as compensation to men who had spent many months in the trenches in France. That was the original idea. A man who went through the suffering and hardships experienced by men in the trenches must have aged ten years, and it was thought by parliament and veterans organizations of those days that they should be considered for war veterans allowance as a form of social security when they were 60 years of age.
As I say, there have been many changes. The last change was made a few years ago, in 1957, when the government, I might say on the recommendation of the Canadian Legion, considered that the men who had spent time in England should receive war veterans allowances. It was not considered then that men who came to England in the last few months of the war had suffered to any great extent, to any extent in fact, and for that reason it was not considered that they should be eligible for the war veterans allowance. There have been many changes.



[Stage Direction]
That is the reason it is put at 365 days. History tells us there were between 35,000 and
40,000	men who arrived in England within the last six months of the war, and they were not all volunteers; most of them were not. But that is another matter.
The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam also recommended that widows of pensioners whose pension was less than 50 per cent should receive a pension. Of course, if the disability pensioner dies from his disabilities the widow receives the full amount of the pension. If he does not die from his disability he would be eligible for war veterans allowance, his wife would also be eligible for war veterans allowance if she met the requirements. The allowance would amount to $70 plus $20, which is $90. If she has children she could receive up to $145 a month provided, again, she met the requirements.
The hon. member also mentioned men living on small holdings obtained under the Veterans Land Act in areas where both population and land values have greatly increased. He felt it unfair that there should be increased assessments in respect of these small holdings. This is, of course, as the hon. member recognized a matter for the local municipalities or local governments. They would have the responsibility of assessing the tax in such cases. I might point out that we have found that the value of small holdings near large towns has greatly increased and very often when the time comes for the men who have acquired such holdings under the act to purchase the land after ten years they have a property which has greatly increased in value. I, personally, would like to see cities and provincial governments give special consideration to these veterans and not increase their taxes during this 10-year period but that, as I say, is something over which the federal government has no control.
The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam also brought up an old problem, one which has bedevilled us for the last 40 years, namely responsibility for the wrong medical classification. I know this causes the pension commission considerable worry; but there is a principle under which they have to operate and in the pre-enlistment condition if certain conditions although congenital are not manifest at the time of enlistment, when the condition manifests itself during or after service the commission may pension for service aggravation only. That is the regulation, and it is also the law, and that is what the pension commission has been doing. If there is any change that can be considered later when the Pension Act is being reviewed.
The hon. member made a comparison between old age security benefits under the
Supply-Veterans Affairs Department of National Health and Welfare and payments made under the War Veterans Allowance Act. Naturally there is a lot more money being spent by the Department of Health and Welfare. By comparison, the number of recipients of allowances administered by this department is very limited, limited, of course, to returned members of the armed forces, while the other applies to all people in this country who are 70 years of age or more. Under the Old Age Security Act the pension amounts to $55 a month and it is granted when the pensioner reaches the age of 70, unless, of course, he comes under the other act which grants it at 65 years of age under a means test. The recipient of war veterans allowance, if he is a married man, can and usually does receive $145 a month. A pensioner in receipt of an old age security pension receives $55 a month at the age of 70; the recipient of war veterans allowance receives his pension at 60 years of age.
The hon. member went on to talk about the widows of recipients of war veterans allowance. The widow, if she qualifies, can also receive an allowance which, for a single person, amounts to $70 and which, again, in most cases is usually raised to $90 a month. Thus, really, the comparison is very much in favour of the recipient of war veterans allowance as compared with the recipient of old age security allowance.
The hon. member for Red Deer has had a lot of experience with veterans affairs. At one time he was a very valuable employee of the department. He talks about a means test, though perhaps I should not call it a means test, because that is a word which is not very popular. Nevertheless, it would in effect be a means test, and that is something which I do not think we could get the veterans organizations to accept. I do not think it would be popular. A disability pension is given in respect of the disability which a man has incurred. If a man has lost a leg or an arm he receives a pension without regard to his personal property or personal income, and all men who have suffered a loss of this kind are treated in the same way. It has often been said, and I repeat here, that we cannot call it compensation for loss because no amount of money can compensate a man for the loss of an arm, leg or his sight. However, it is an idea and it is something I am sure the hon. member will be pleased to present to the committee at such time as the Pension Act is again considered.
The hon. member for Grand Falls-White Bay-Labrador endorsed the recommendations of his colleagues from Newfoundland. We have been very happy to improve the situation of Newfoundland veterans. Many problems
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Veterans Affairs existed in this area when Newfoundland entered confederation. The question of the Royal Newfoundland regiment is one which must receive consideration when the Pension Act is reviewed.
I have spoken about the problem of the forestry unit. The hon. member for Burin-Burgeo did not mention the hospital this time and I take it he is well satisfied with the plans we are making for looking after Newfoundland veterans with respect to hospitalization. We are hoping to get construction of the pavilion well under way this year.
I do not think there was anything further brought out during the remarks of hon. gentlemen but if there are any more questions I shall be pleased to answer them.
Chesley William Carter: Mr. Chairman, I should like to repair an omission in my earlier remarks and support the very kind tribute paid to the chairman of the standing committee on veterans affairs. I do not recall serving on any committee that had a more considerate and conscientious chairman. I believe it is a great credit to the hon. gentleman that the work of the committee was conducted so smoothly.
I gathered from the minister's reaction when I mentioned that I wished to repair an omission that he thought it was the one to which he referred with respect to the hospital. I do not think there is much to be gained by flogging a dead horse. The die has been cast.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Do not call it a dead horse. It is going to be a live hospital.


Mr.   Carier@: A pavilion is going to be erected for the veterans in Newfounland. I was reserving my remarks on that subject for another item because I thought it would be to the minister's advantage to get off the first item as quickly as possible, but since the minister himself has raised the point I shall deal with it. While we appreciate what is being done we would have been much happier if the minister could have seen his way clear *to providing us with the same facilities provided in other provinces. It is -true that this will improve the services to our veterans but there will still be many disadvantages. The veterans pavilion will still be administered by the general hospital and will not have a separate administration. In some respects present inconveniences will still be retained.
One important cause of inconvenience is the length of time it takes to get medical reports back concerning veterans who are sent for diagnosis. I understand that these reports are sometimes four, five or six months late in coming. If these people were referred to our own institution we would hope that this could be done much more rapidly.


I know all the arguments the department raises because I have explored this situation on a number of occasions. The department says the provincial authorities can exert pressure and get out the reports much faster and that it is in their hands if they want to use their power; but it is not easy to do that because most doctors in the provincial administration are private doctors who are busy people. Perhaps the provincial authorities pay them a retaining fee but it is difficult these days to put pressure on them to supply these reports as rapidly as we need them for the ready processing of the case of our pensioners.
We also hoped that the veterans hospital would house all the local offices of the minister's department so the veteran would not have to go from building to building in different parts of the city. The decision has been made and the plans drawn up to go ahead with this pavilion so we can only thank the minister for what is being done, although we express the hope that even yet it might be possible to overcome some of the difficulties I have outlined.
I wish to say a further word about the Newfoundland foresters in response to the minister's reply. It is true that these people were recruited and sent overseas as civilian units but I should like to point out that this was a decision imposed upon us by another government. At that time Newfoundland did not have representative government. We were governed by a dictatorship at that time, a benevolent one, it is true, but still we had no voice whatever in running our own affairs. That decision was taken for us by the British government in London. It undertook to decide that these foresters had to be recruited on a civilian basis and I may say they were paid on a very niggardly scale. I presume that was done to protect the United Kingdom taxpayer.
There is no doubt in my mind that if we had been running our own affairs at that time the forestry units of world war II would have been recruited in exactly the same way as were the forestry units of world war I. That is the only difference between the units of the two great wars. They did the same work exactly, underwent the same disciplinary measures and were subject to the same regulations.
The British government was in a hurry to get these foresters. It wanted them quickly. They were rushed overseas. Even had they been treated as military units it is unlikely they would have gone overseas with uniforms -because they could work better in civilian clothes than in uniform-and they would not have been held in Newfoundland long enough to have the uniforms made up. They

were rushed over in response to an urgent demand. We are now asking the minister to relieve them of a disadvantage caused by the imposition of another government which certainly did not reflect the wishes of the people of my province.
1 have received many letters from these people. Many contracted tuberculosis and have been invalids for years. Others sustained severe accidents and became incapacitated. In world war I we were running our own affairs and the units were recruited on a military basis but in world war II the situation was different. Those who suffered injuries in world war II cannot achieve recognition for their services. They want the same treatment that is accorded to the units of world war I and other veterans in Canada.
The minister had something to say about the 365 days limit of service in the United Kingdom to become eligible for the benefits of the War Veterans Allowance Act. That was certainly a move in the right direction. We are grateful for that but still you have the same border line and it makes a difference to us in Newfoundland, because prior to confederation any Newfoundlander who was in any branch of the armed services achieved overseas status the minute he left the shores of our island. Once he got out on the high seas he was deemed to be in a theatre of war, and I think rightly so, because the ocean at that time was not free from military hazard. I refer to the early part of 1918. I maintain that our people could not get to England without passing through a theatre of war. I think that same argument applies to the case brought up by the hon. member for Lincoln who made his plea on behalf of the British Canadian who served in the northwest frontiers of India and in Afghanistan. I have had some correspondence from those veterans and I think they have some basis for their request for consideration.
The minister and the department have chosen in their wisdom to accept as a criterion of elibibility the fact whether these veterans were issued with a victory medal. I point out to the minister that that is a very poor basis because the actual basis should be, did he serve in a theatre of war?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: May I point out to the hon. member that I inherited the acceptance; it was not my acceptance at all; it was accepted long before I became minister.


Chesley William Carter: The minister is over there because he undertook to change a lot of things. Now he has the opportunity to do it and we are reminding him of it. Apart from that, if we are going to be reasonable about this, the true basis should be, did he
Supply-Veterans Affairs serve in a theatre of war? Although many of those veterans did not get the victory medal, they did get discharged with a certificate certifying that they had served overseas in a theatre of war. I am asking the minister to accept that certificate as the basis of recognition instead of the victory medal. I think it is a fair request. If the minister will do it he will go a long way toward meeting the wishes of those people who, in any case, are very few in number.
I do not think it is so much for the veterans themselves. They have been in Canada a good many years. Like the rest of us, they are getting along in years. The average of the world war I veteran is 69 and I think they are worried more about their widows than themselves. It is my belief that the people of Canada want their veterans to be treated a little differently from other people. After all, they did-not all of them voluntarily but most of them-offer their services and did serve to the best of their ability and to the extent that their condition, their age and other factors would permit them to. I think it would be a very fine gesture on the part of the Canadian government if it accepted the claims of those people, and I would say it would contrast greatly with the treatment afforded to our foresters in the second world war.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I thought the minister in his remarks was going to say something to the effect that consideration was to be given to raising pensions and veterans allowances. I am surprised that some of the organizations, including the Canadian Legion, have been as kind and as considerate of the government and of the department as they have been in the matter of increases in pensions and allowances. A few moments ago I drew a parallel between pensions as they were originally developed and the wages of the pick and shovel labourer. I pointed out the increases that had taken place in the wages of the common labourer and in pensions. At that time the minister rose and said that it was not correct. I had hoped that eventually he would say why it was not correct because I have discussed it with the Legion who originally published the article, and they told me that it is correct and that they are willing to stand behind it. The article has been reproduced in a number of other veterans papers since that time.
I came to the conclusion, at least from my own point of view, that it does probably bear some relationship to what was really intended in Canada. In my opinion in the past we have been able to tell the people of Canada that we in Canada have done as much for our veterans as has any other country in the world. It has always been

Supply-Veterans Affairs the proud boast of the Canadian government, no matter which party was in power, that their treatment has always been impartial; that there have been no political influences in veterans affairs. As a veteran and a member of several veterans organizations I have believed this to be true but, Mr. Chairman, when we take a look at the rates of pensions today and compare them with the cost of living alone-and I would like to use one index, namely the index of wages-we find that the rate of increase in veterans allowances and veterans pensions is about only half the rate of increase in wages of the Canadian people. If we are to maintain our position, and I think we can, to be fair it would seem to me that we should give our veterans the treatment they deserve. We will not go into the reasons why they deserve it. If we are to do this, then we have to maintain the pension in relation to the cost of living. The cost of living is rising a great deal more rapidly than the pension rates.
The minister said that this matter is going to be reviewed. I sympathize with him because I know the Minister of Finance. It is not easy to increase anything in relation to social services these days because money is not easy to come by. The minister did say that it is going to be revised. This affects not only money. There are other ways in which improvements can be made. The minister could stand up and say he cannot increase the pension or the allowance but he is going to try to convince the country that these things should be a part of our social security program, whether veterans affairs or other social security measures.
There are a number of other things, that have already been mentioned. I believe, as a result of the few meetings I was able to attend that most members of the committee were in agreement with the presentations made by most of the organizations, and most of the suggestions made were reasonable. There were representations made by the Canadian non-pension veterans widows, a group of elderly ladies who are few in number and decreasing very rapidly because of their age. I think it was generally conceded by the committee that these elderly ladies should be given some consideration. They had been given the support of the minister and the committee in years gone by, and I would have expected something to happen as a result of that report. Otherwise, what is the point of having a veterans affairs committee every year?
I would suggest that the Legion is not going to be so easy next year. You will have noted, of course, that the Legion did not bother to come to parliament this year.
[Mr. Peters.l


An hon. Member:: Yes, they did.


William Arnold Peters: They made no presentation this year of which I am aware.


An hon. Member:: Yes, they did.


William Arnold Peters: Perhaps they did. Over the years the Canadian Legion has made a broad presentation to the government in which they have requested quite a number of improvements in the act. They have done this conscientiously over the years. This year they did not make that presentation. They came before parliament, it is true, in relation to specific amendments that were made to the veterans act this year, but to the best of my knowledge they did not make their usual presentation.
I attended a number of veterans meetings in my own area, and it was generally conceded that unless something was done they were going to have to adopt other methods for obtaining these increases. If these increases were not justified, then an argument could be made against them. However, the veterans are not asking for increased pensions in order to improve their standard of living, they are asking for increased pensions in order to maintain the standard of living which was granted to them right after the war in terms of the cost of living of that day. I feel they are completely justified in coming to Ottawa and requesting that that standard of living be maintained. I feel that very little can be said against the maintenance of that standard of living. Frankly, I do not know what the promise would be worth, but I had expected the minister to say he would consider a complete review of the pension situation before the next session. This promise was not forthcoming.
I believe we are doing ourselves in Canada a disservice, and we are doing a disservice to the veterans across this country. As a result of the meetings of the veterans affairs committee I have attended in the last few years I would say that I consider the presentations made to that committee were reasonable and just. I believe we have an obligation to the Canadian people who believe that the promises made to the veterans on their behalf in 1945 are being carried out, and we should inform the Canadian people that they are not being carried out. The pensions were set at a certain level in 1945, but the cost of living has climbed tremendously since that time, wages have risen greatly, but the pensions, while they have increased a small amount, have not increased in proportion to these other things and therefore the standard of living of the veteran has fallen below the standard set in 1945.

I do not want to say any more about this. I do not believe you can get blood out of a stone, and it may be impossible to get money at this time from our treasury. It may be that we are in a position where we cannot afford to continue to maintain war veterans pensions. If we are, Mr. Chairman, then I think it is time we took a look at the situation and tried to raise other moneys to accomplish this purpose. I think it is stupid in the extreme to maintain armed services today, to maintain a defence structure in this country at a cost of billions of dollars, and at the same time not be able to pay a fair and reasonable pension to the veterans of this country. It is not proper to ask the people in the armed services now to serve under these circumstances. I feel we have an obligation to these people to at least ensure them a decent standard of living. Many of them are not able to maintain a proper standard of living on the pension they now receive.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: There is one point I wish to correct. The hon. member mentioned the basis on which pensions are granted and he referred to my statement that the Legion brief did not make what I considered to be a correct comparison. I have no quarrel with the brief. As a matter of fact, I have worked with the Legion as long as anyone in this house. There was a comparison made between the pension of a single veteran and a married common labourer. I said the comparison should have been between a married veteran and the common labourer because 96 per cent of our veterans are married men.
In comparing the single veteran with the married common labourer, the single veteran's pension was put at $1,800 while the common labourer received $3,000. As a matter of fact, since 96 per cent of the veterans are married they should have said that the veteran would receive $1,800 full pension, plus $600 for his wife, which would be $2,400. As I pointed out the average veteran's family consists of about three children. As a matter of fact, I believe our records show it is nearer four, but we will take three. The first child receives $20 a month, the second $15 and the third $12. This brings the amount which a full pensioner would receive up to around $3,000 which would be in the vicinity of what the Legion says a common labourer receives.
I should like to emphasize that I am not using this as an argument for no increase in pension because that has never been my argument. These veterans have other advantages. The widow of a veteran receives a pension, if his disability was over 50 per cent, $115 a month, while the widow of the common labourer receives nothing. Then
Supply-Veterans Affairs if the veteran leaves children the allowance the children receive is doubled and instead of $20 for the first child, the first child receives $40; the second $30 and the third $24. Of course, if the common labourer dies, as I say, his wife does not receive any pension and his children only receive the family allowance. Of course, the pensioner also receives the family allowance for his children. These are just some of the other benefits which the pensioner has.
If he is a blind pensioner or a helpless pensioner, he receives what is known as the helplessness allowance. This allowance for a completely helpless veteran is $1,800 a year over and above his pension. That is the maximum. It ranges from $600 a year up to $1,800 a year. Then again if the pensioner has not an additional amount, if he has a small pension and is unable to work, he becomes eligible for the war veterans allowance. If he is a married man, he will receive $145 a month. This is something, of course, to which the common labourer cannot look forward and to which he has no reason or right to look forward.
Then there is the matter of hospitalization. If a war veterans allowance recipient even in a small amount is hospitalized, all his hospital bills will be paid. In the matter of the civil service, the pensioner has the first preference in every civil service job. I might say that my department and, I believe, most of the departments of government are filled with pensioners who have, besides their pension, the civil service jobs which no labourer has any right or reason to expect.
There is special insurance for a man who would not receive insurance otherwise. Besides all that, and to the great credit of our veterans be it said, when they came back to this country, whether they were disabled or not, I would say that 90 per cent of them at once sought jobs and obtained them. Besides their pensions they have their other occupations.
Those are the simple facts which I have stated and which I think are correct. May I repeat that I did not use them here this afternoon, nor have I ever done so, as an argument against increasing pensions.
I have been in the House of Commons for 25 years. I have been on every veterans affairs committee that we have had in the House of Commons during that time. As my friend the hon. member for Kootenay West will know, I was chairman of the opposition committee and we worked with the government and with the other members of the committee for the increasing of pensions. Pensions are not increased every year. I should just like to point out to my hon.

Supply-Veterans Affairs friend the starting point of increases in veterans pensions. He may not altogether agree with it but the parliament of Canada in its wisdom carried it through in this manner.
In 1920 the pension of a single veteran was $900 and that for a married veteran, $1,200. There was no increase in the pension from 1920 until 1947, a period of 27 years. Our pensions were increased in 1957, just three years ago. For 27 years there was no increase in pensions, from 1920 to 1927. In 1947 there was an increase from $1,200 to $1,500. It was five years before there was another increase. Between 1951 and 1957 there was no increase. From 1920 to 1957, a period of 37 years, there were only three increases in pensions in this country.
I mentioned to the Legion that I plan to review the legislation. I do not make any particular argument here in this connection. As a matter of fact, I planned to review the whole veterans charter. That was one of the pieces work that was outlined for the committee, namely to review the veterans charter, to take first those legislative acts which most needed review and we did that. We took the childrens allowance act because, as I have said, children do not wait; they grow older. We wanted to make sure that those children were not going to miss the education to which they were entitled. Veterans insurance ran out in 1957. We wanted to see to it that no veteran lost his chance of getting further insurance, with the result that between 4,000 and 5,000 veterans now have insurance who otherwise would not have it. It represents some $16 million of insurance.
As to the Veterans Land Act, we were obliged to make it conform with the farm credit act. It was necessary for us to do that action. I said that I planned to review the Pension Act as soon as possible. I plan to do that. We plan to review the War Veterans Allowance Act. We cannot do all these things at once, and we never intended to do them all at once. It would not have been possible for the committee to do that. However, we took first the acts which we considered needed priority attention.
I do not think there is anything further I need to say in that connection. I am simply pointing out to hon. members that these matters have not been overlooked.


William Arnold Peters: I do not agree with the conclusion drawn by the minister. While he pointed out that there were certain things on the side of the veterans, times have changed. A guy digging in a ditch is no longer really digging in the ditch. He may be a common labourer but he has compensation and he has group insurance.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: May I point out that I am using the language of the veterans brief?


William Arnold Peters: I agree. But times have changed. But originally the labourer was referred to as a pick and shovel man. The pick and shovel man now gets very large sums of money because there are few people who will do that kind of work. Even the clean-up men around cement work get $1.50 or so an hour. I do not think this is a proper method of comparing the two groups. Certain things have been added on the side of the veteran and we are grateful for that fact, because I think they should be added. But there are things that have also been added to the labour side of the picture such as, for example, compensation, group insurance, sick and accident benefits, hospital insurance. There are many considerations that make his money more valuable than the $3,000 which is assumed to be the labour wage at the present time. If we keep adding all the benefits on there, I think the situation will look even worse as far as comparisons are concerned.
All we are saying is that we believe the veterans pension, whether it be war veterans allowance or veterans pension, must be tied to or kept in relation with the cost of living. I think there is no excuse to look back into history and say that from 1920 to 1946 there were no increases. There was a time I think when the pension was increased because the standard of living and the cost of living had dropped rapidly in Canada and the pension may have looked fairly good in 1931, 1932 and 1933. But by 1946 there were a large number of new veterans and the situation had completely changed.
I do not think it Is any argument to say that we should wait for these periods to go by before we make a change. It is my opinion that the change must be made and that followup must continue as the cost of living rises. I am sure the minister will agree that we are interested in maintaining a fair and reasonable relationship, no matter what we compare it to, and one of the comparisons we would have to use is the cost of living.
I just want to point out that while I sympathize with the minister I do not agree in the comparison he drew as between the veteran and the labourer in 1920. He left out some of the things that would have to be added if we are going to make a comparison today between a labourer and a veteran and. there would have to be certain considerations given there. I think that the difference between the two would have increased almost as rapidly as is indicated by the particular letter in the Legionary.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Treatment services-
460. Operation of hospitals and administration including authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year for hospital and related services, $44,634,594.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: This is a very important item so far as veterans are concerned and is a branch of the department which renders great service to veterans, particularly as they grow older. I repeatedly receive favourable comment from veterans in my constituency concerning the treatment they have received under this branch when in residence at Shaughnessy hospital and other institutions.
I had an illustration of that recently when someone wrote to me and told me a close friend of mine was quite ill and quite depressed, and a padre in Shaughnessy who happened to be in my platoon in the first world war wrote and told me how depressed and ill he was. Then two or three days ago I heard that he had been there a month and had greatly improved in health and that his sense of depression had gone as the result of the excellent treatment and consideration he had received at the hospital.
I should like to urge the minister to give consideration to the resolution adopted by the Canadian Legion with respect to the use of chiropractic services. The chiropractic association of Canada made representations before the committee and the matter was also discussed at the recent convention of the Canadian Legion and a resolution was adopted urging that the Legion should strongly urge the government of Canada to make available the services of registered chiropractors. I have received in recent years many requests that the department consider the use of chiropractors. When I was in the provincial house in the forties the same representations were made to the provincial government to use chiropractors in connection with the administration of the workmen's compensation board and a few years later those requests were recognized and chiropractors are now used by the workmen's compensation board and have been found in many cases to do beneficial work.
So I urge consideration be given to these representations, particularly the representations made at the convention of the Canadian Legion which spring from the requests of the branches and knowledge of the good work the chiropractors have done for organizations such as workmen's compensation boards and so on.
I would also urge the minister to give very serious consideration to the 20 resolutions passed at the last convention of the Canadian Legion which dealt with amendments to the act or the regulations concerned with the treatmenl of veterans.
Supply-Veterans Affairs


Gordon Campbell Chown: For
the purposes of the record the hon. member was speaking on item 460, item 459 having been passed by the committee. Shall the item carry?


Mr. White:: I just want to say a word or two on this item. Westminster hospital in London, Ontario, is located in my constituency and consequently I feel considerable interest in the problems of the veterans. First of all I want to pay tribute to the sympathetic understanding of the minister of the problems of veterans. I also want to pay tribute to the excellent staff of doctors and nurses at Westminster hospital. All over my riding I hear compliments from time to time about the great work they are doing at that hospital for our disabled veterans.
Having said that there are other questions which arise from time to time. It was brought to my attention during the winter months that of the over 800 trees in the grounds some 413 were diseased or had scale or some other problem and were to be removed. I have received more complaints regarding the proposed removal of these trees than about any other thing which has been done in the area. I am glad to hear that the destruction of these trees has been delayed and that the Ontario department of forestry was going to make a survey of these trees. It is interesting to note that a company in the city received in 1955 almost $1,500 for spraying, pruning and fertilizing these trees, and in 1956 they received $1,497. But when we come to 1960 it is discovered that almost half of these trees are earmarked for destruction.
I am concerned about this because not only the hospital authorities but also the provincial highways department and the county organizations have developed a tree butchery campaign, and when you realize it takes a lifetime to grow these beautiful trees, we should hesitate before they are removed. I do not object to the removal of those trees which become dangerous. They should be removed. But I doubt if there is one tree in all the forests of Canada on which you cannot find a bug, a scale or a disease of some kind. Consequently the argument that these trees are all diseased does not hold water as far as I am concerned, and I hope that before a large number of them are removed provision will be made for young trees to be planted before the older ones are removed.
I also want to say a word or two on item 462, but before I sit down I want to ask the minister what progress is being made on the new building at Westminster hospital? (Translation):


Mr. Bissonnelie:: Mr. Chairman, while we are on these estimates I should like to say

Supply-Veterans Affairs a few words to the minister (Mr. Brooks) with regard to the veterans' hospital, on Laurier boulevard in Ste. Foy.
On several occasions, I have had occasion to appreciate the devotion and skill of departmental physicians and nurses in caring for the sick who are confined to that hospital and whom I personally have had the occasion to treat in civilian life.
I can therefore have but the highest praise for those doctors and nurses, and for the way they are taking care of their patients. I want to commend them to the minister, because they deserve our praises in every respect.
I must take this opportunity of pointing out to the minister that that hospital is not only a centre for the care of veterans, but also a place where Laval medical students receive part of their medical training. There again, the hospital staff is most co-operative in providing medical training for our students. Therefore, in addition to its primary function, that of caring for veterans, this hospital plays an important part in the training of Laval University medical students. We are quite pleased about it, and I consider it a pleasure to commend the minister and his department for providing us with that hospital in Quebec city.
(Text):


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I just want to make a short statement in reply to the hon. member for Middlesex East. I can understand his concern about the destruction of trees around the Westminster hospital, because that is one of the most beautiful places I have seen anywhere. We have called in the provincial forestry people and we are doing everything we can to save these trees. We have had to destroy 100, but we hope to save many of the rest.


George Stanley White: Will the minister comment on the progress of the new building at Westminster?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: We are making good progress now. We have begun to excavate and we are getting well started. There has been a lot of rain and it has been a little difficult, but we are getting along well now.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
462. Hospital construction, improvements, equipment, and acquisition of land, $4,937,000.
Chesley William Carter: Would the minister give a break-down of this item with respect to hos-
[Mr. Bissonnette.l
pital construction and tell us if there is anything in this vote for the Queen Mary veterans hospital at Montreal?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: For the Queen Mary hospital we have $290,000 for the modernization of the power plant, $10,000 for an electrical substation and for the new wing and services, $150,000. We are planning to go ahead with very extensive construction at Queen Mary and Ste. Anne.


Harold Edward Winch: This is the only opportunity I can see to ask a question which has been suggested to me by one who is well known in this House of Commons. I refer to Mr. Angus Maclnnis for a great many years hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway. He wrote a letter to me requesting me to put a question to the minister with regard to something he could not understand. It has to do with laundry at veterans' hospitals. Why is it that although veterans' hospitals are completely equipped with laundry machinery and facilities a contract should be given to outside firms to operate those laundry facilities. The situation at Shaughnessy hospital has been drawn to my attention and I know about the laundry there because, strange as it may seem, I was one of the electricians who wired that laundry many years ago. As a complete installation exists, and I point out that this is one of the biggest hospitals in Canada, why should an outside concern be given a contract to operate it?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I am very glad to answer any questions asked by the hon. member and also by my very dear friend, Angus Maclnnis whom I knew for many years in this house. We have no laundry at Shaughnessy hospital in Vancouver, though we have laundries in some of our other hospitals across Canada. It has been the policy of the government to construct such laundries. We have a laundry at Saint John Lancaster hospital in New Brunswick; we have a laundry connected with our hospital in St. Anne-it is out of date now, but we are building a new one. We have a very large laundry at Sunnybrook in Toronto, and another at Westminster and another in Calgary. It is the policy of the department to establish such laundries as quickly as we can. We started a few years ago, and it is proving very satisfactory. However, there is no laundry at the present time at Shaughnessy.


Harold Edward Winch: At any rate, provision was made on the electrical supply system for a laundry at Shaughnessy. Am I correct with regard to that? I am certain I am.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: There is no laundry as yet. There would have to be a building constructed.


Harold Edward Winch: Provision was made on the electrical supply system, that I do know. Am I to understand, then, that in connection with one of the largest hospitals in Canada no provision is made for a laundry service on the premises, and all the laundry is done by outside contract?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: That is so.


Harold Edward Winch: Why?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Because there is no laundry there.


Harold Edward Winch: No what?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Because there has not been, a laundry constructed. As I say, we are building laundries at hospitals across Canada but in connection with Shaughnessy there was some objection years ago and the laundry was not built. We hope that situation may be corrected.


Harold Edward Winch: Can the minister tell the committee why there was an objection to putting in a laundry?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: It was a matter which was considered long before I came to this department, and I really do not have the information.


Harold Edward Winch: Is it the minister's intention to instal this laundry equipment at Shaughnessy or will the present arrangement be continued?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: We are investigating the possibility. This question is under consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
465. War veterans allowance board-administration, $155,960.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Item 465, and I think this time I am right on the dot. During the sittings of the committee representations were made by the national council of veterans and some other veterans organizations for amendments to the War Veterans Allowance Act. At a recent convention of the Canadian Legion some 22 resolutions were passed urging amendments to the War Veterans Allowance Act. I will not take the time of the committee to read the 22 resolutions but I will read the first three which are first because of their importance in the thinking of the delegates at this convention. They read as follows:
Whereas the Canadian government has not yet implemented any of the following recommendations contained in these briefs:
That the rate payable under the War Veterans Allowance Act be increased to at least $140 per month married.
That the ceilings on total permissible Incomes under the War Veterans Allowance Act be increased to $1,200 per year for the single recipient and $2,000 for the married recipient.
79951-0-427
Supply-Veterans Affairs
That where all other requirements are met the war veterans allowance board be empowered to declare as eligible widows who would be qualified had the veteran made application during his lifetime.
These are of particular concern and importance although the others are important too. The subjects of the first two resolutions have often been raised in the committee and the subject of the third, requiring an amendment to the act, is of concern to me because of examples that have come to my attention throughout the years of injustices obtaining in relation to these widows.
The hon. member for Lincoln stated in explicit terms the case for veterans of the Indian and Afghanistan frontier wars. It has been placed on the record and I need not repeat it. The hon. member for Burin-Burgeo also supported him. I endorse what they said.
I have had correspondence with the director of the federation of British veterans. I am sure the minister has heard from this comrade on a number of occasions. I was glad to hear the minister say he will take up the matter with the appropriate British authorities to see if their classification cannot be changed. If this cannot be done consideration should be given to granting these few remaining men the war veterans allowance on the basis of the discharge certificate.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous payments-
471. Grant to Canadian Legion, $9,000.
Oscar William Weichel: Mr. Chairman, I am sure we all agree about the wonderful contribution that the 250,000 members of the Canadian Legion have made ever since the organization was formed. I would hope to have the minister give every consideration to increasing this grant.


Harold Edward Winch: On that same subject, Mr. Chairman, there are two veterans organizations in Canada which are doing a wonderful job on behalf of veterans. We grant assistance to the Canadian Legion. In view of the wonderful benevolent work done by the army, navy and air force veterans organization why is some assistance not granted to them? I have the honour of being a member of both organizations. Why is a grant made to one and not the other? I will not discriminate between the work of the two. My experience is in the city of Vancouver, of course. The army, navy and air force veterans clubs of British Columbia, and particularly those in Vancouver, are doing a wonderful job for veterans. I agree with the previous speaker that we should give more to the Canadian Legion but should we not also give something to the other organization?
6776	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Mr. Chairman, I agree with the hon. member in what he said about the splendid work done by the army, navy and air force veterans organization. We are well aware of the excellent work they do. The reason they have not received a grant is because they have never asked for one and I suppose the reason they have not made such a request is because they have no office here in Ottawa. The Legion has an office in Ottawa and grants are given to them. Frankly I do not think the army, navy and air force veterans organization would accept grants if they were offered because they finance their own work and are very happy and proud to do so.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, does that answer also apply to the national council of war veterans association? If so, it raises a problem. When Colonel Lambert came to parliament this year he suggested they were going into politics to form a new political organization to represent the interests of veterans all over the world and make Canada into a neutral zone, with which I agree. What is the view of the government toward supporting this organization which represents eight associations and 130,000 veterans?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The basis of these payments, of course, is the service given in assisting in pension work. The Legion has a service bureau which takes up a veteran's case, investigates it, prepares it and helps present it before our commission and also before the appeal board. These other organizations do not do that. Besides, they have not asked for assistance, and I do not think the treasury board would like me to rim after them and ask them to accept money.


Harold Edward Winch: We grant $9,000 to the Canadian Legion and nothing to the army, navy and air force veterans organization. In view of the magnificent work they do the government should take the responsibility of assisting them with a grant. I assure the minister, from my personal knowledge, they are doing a terrific job on behalf of the veterans. Is the minister satisfied that $9,000 is a proper recognition of the terrific job they are doing on behalf of veterans and their dependants? If he cannot do it now, will the minister not give consideration to making representations to the Minister of Finance for a greater recognition of the marvellous work that these two organizations are doing?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I will take that into consideration.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I must say I have a little sympathy for the minister when he is accused of shuffling off his responsibility because he


has not given a grant to a private organization which has not asked for it. It must be a rare experience for a minister to be accused of that, but I did not rise for this purpose but to add my voice to those which have already been raised in tribute to and praise of the work that the Legion has been doing over the years.


Harold Edward Winch: And the army, navy and air force veterans organizations.


Lester Bowles Pearson: And the army, navy and air force veterans, and the other veterans organizations in this country. We are very fortunate in Canada that the interests of our veterans have been so steadily, continuously and responsibly advanced by veterans organizations. They have made requests, of course, to the government but those requests have always been made with a sense of responsibility and without the kind of pressurized lobbying which goes on perhaps more across the line than we are accustomed to in this country. Therefore, I thought this would be a suitable opportunity for me to add my voice to those which have been raised in praise of the Legion-


Harold Edward Winch: And the army, navy and air force veterans organizations.


Lester Bowles Pearson: And the army, navy and air force veterans organizations-I am most grateful to my hon. friend-and every other veterans organization in this country, including the imperial veterans whose case has been raised today, and with which I have a particular sympathy because I served with the imperial army for three years or so in the first war.
I have not participated in the discussion of those estimates previously and I do not desire to prolong the discussion-for one thing, I am a veteran suffering at the moment from a civilian form of battle fatigue for which we are not compensated-but I should like to pay my tribute also to the work of the department and, indeed, if I may, without being misunderstood, to the work of the minister. It was suggested by someone on my right earlier in the afternoon that the minister might perhaps be resigning one of these days if some of the things he is advocating are not done by the government. I do not like to associate myself with that suggestion because while I am doing my best to see that one day he will have to resign, as long as the government is in power I hope the minister will continue to function as Minister of Veterans Affairs in the way in which he has been functioning and, of course, that certainly goes for the department as well. All I can say about the department is that the requests I have had to make to them

on behalf of veterans in my constituency have been received and acted on in exactly the same courteous and efficient way now as they were when I was a minister of the crown.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian pension commission-
472. Administration expenses, $2,496,755.
Chesley William Carter: Earlier today reference was
made to the reduction of $2,500,000 in pensions. The minister explained that that was due to the fact that the savings from world war I pensioners who are deceased offset the additional pensions for world war II veterans; but there might be another factor in this, however slight an influence it might have. I refer to what I consider to be legitimate complaints on the part of many veterans who feel they are not getting the benefit of doubt. If those veterans were getting the benefit of doubt perhaps this reduction would not be quite as large.
I can understand the pension commission's position when a medical examiner has arrived at a verdict and they have to accept it. No doubt there are many cases where the medical practitioner who examines the veteran can be certain that the pensioner's condition is not related to his military service, or was not aggravated during his military service. When it comes to assessing the amount of aggravation that a veteran may suffer because of his war service I find it very difficult to understand, with all due respect to the medical profession, how they can be certain in some cases that no aggravation actually occurred during service. We all know of cases which have been turned down with the diagnosis that a veteran has a certain condition; that it was pre-enlistment and not aggravated.
The more advances we make in medical science the more we understand how little we really know about the human body and diseases and the physical effects of work, stress and strain. Therefore, the less certain we should be about cases like this. Where a veteran had a certain condition before he enlisted and it troubles him later on in life, the assumption must be that the work and duties performed by the veteran while in the service would have had the same effect on his physical being as the civilian duties which he would have been doing had he not been in the service. We all know that argument does not stand up because veterans, or people who are in the armed services, have to undergo severe training. They have to do sentry duty; they have 79951-0-427J
Supply-Veterans Affairs to do long route marches and very often they undergo exposure which is not experienced in civilian life.
Some of those people are taken into the service with physical disabilities such as one foot shorter than the other, or one leg longer than the other, and they all underwent that sort of training, performed those duties, and endured certain hardships. The duties they performed while in the service certainly must have a different effect upon the body from those the veteran would have experienced had he just lived a normal life and just attended to his every day duties, perhaps sitting in an office or just doing routine work, at which he could take care of himself and rest when his condition required it, and where he certainly would not be subject to the same exposure. I am not satisfied that the pension commission or the medical practitioners who examine veterans who apply for pensions are giving the applicants the full benefit of doubt in this type of case.
I refer to the type of case where the veteran had the condition previous to his enlistment. I do not believe any person in this world can be certain, in many cases, that no aggravation actually took place during his service, and that is the basis upon which the pension is granted. I should like to ask the commissioners to take a little more lenient attitude when they are processing these cases which concern the aggravation of a pre-enlistment condition during service.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I rise briefly to say a word or two on this item and to support the remarks made by the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo with respect to this very difficult problem. It has been before the pension commission for years and has come before the veterans affairs committee over a number of years. I think any fair-minded person realizes that it is a difficult problem with many obscure facets, as it were. However, I think it is one that has to be given more consideration than has been given in the past if the commission is going to render judgments which in the opinion of the many who are making applications consider just.
I should like to say a brief word or two on the representations made to the committee by a number of veterans organizations and the discussions that took place in the convention of the Canadian Legion with respect to the amendments to the Canadian Pension Act. Of course, the primary one was the raising by 33J per cent of the disability pension. This matter of the amendment of the Canadian Pension Act and the necessity for a review of it is of such importance and
6778	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs of such concern to veterans generally across Canada that the convention passed 13 resolutions dealing with amendments to the Canadian Pension Act. The minister, no doubt, has read the resolutions since they were adopted and he will hear later representations from the Canadian Legion, I trust prior to Remembrance day. No doubt, the Canadian Legion will appear before the veterans affairs committee next year. I am not going to take the time of the committee to deal with these resolutions in detail. I simply urge upon the minister and the government the necessity for giving very serious consideration to these representations which reflect the views of the parliament of veterans in Canada, so that when the next session arrives we can look forward to a satisfactory adjustment of the problems that still remain.


Mr. Fleming (Okanagan-Revelsloke):: I
should like to support what the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo said as well as the hon. member for Kootenay West, and the suggestions they have made with respect to the benefit of the doubt being given during consideration of applications for pensions by veterans of both wars. I do so because I have had very close connection with two cases over a period of seven years now where no pen-sionability has been established and no pension has been granted. In the one case there has been a continuous history of illness and disability since 1919, and in the other case a history of illness almost continuous since 1943.
I recognize that in both of these cases, as in most cases of this kind, it is extremely difficult to establish a direct connection between war service and the man's health or disability at the present time. This is particularly true of cases arising from the first world war because medical records do not exist in relation to the exact condition from which the veteran now suffers. The only possibility of relief is that his present condition dates from his war service, and that his illness has been consistent for something more than 40 years. At the time of discharge in one case, the veteran was 19 years of age and there was no prior history of illness such as that from which he has suffered since his war service. It seems to me that the only possibility of providing the veteran in this case with any kind of just recompense is to consider the history of his illness rather than the exact origin of it.
I feel that this is a difficult problem with which the pension commission is faced, a most complex problem. Perhaps if a further extension of the benefit is not going to meet the situation the pension commission, on the


basis of its years of experience in dealing with such cases, could make recommendations to the minister through the standing committee on veterans affairs for providing an alternative method of dealing with such cases as I have in mind. I agree that a strict relationship between the war service and the veteran's condition is perhaps not establishable, but the fact of the matter is that the illness has been persistent and continuous since the completion of his service. This is true of the other case which I have in mind, and I know there must be many others. Some form of assistance for veterans who find themselves in this situation is essential and there are no provisions in our veterans legislation now covering these particular difficulties.
I should like also to mention very briefly the reference which was made this afternoon to the fact that our veterans legislation is part of our over-all social legislative program. I hope we never get to the point where we consider veterans legislation as simply an adjunct to social welfare legislation. Veterans legislation, in my opinion, came into being as the result of the discharge of a specific duty to specific individuals for services rendered. I hope that the government will always be motivated by the realization that veterans legislation is the result of a discharge of a duty for services rendered, and not simply an adjunct to social welfare legislation.


Mr. McFarlane:: I should like to add a word at this point on this item. I should like also to support the previous speakers in connection with this matter. I am a little disturbed by the receipt of so many letters from veterans who are suffering from physical disabilities. The latest one I received was this morning and I should like to refer to part of it. He says he has received treatment at numerous civilian hospitals and also army hospitals without any satisfactory results. During August, 1959 he had an unsuccessful operation on his feet at Shaughnessy hospital, as well as treatment at other hospitals. At the present time he is receiving a pension of $22.50 per month, which is certainly insufficient to give him a living. He is unable to walk and as a result of the difficulty is unable to handle any work.
I realize that investigation of matters of this nature is more than necessary. I feel that the department is handling veterans pensions well, within the limits of the act, but I should like to suggest to the minister that some action be taken in connection with matters of this nature. I have received quite a number of letters since I have been a member, and most of them have come from veterans who are physically unable to accept work. Their pensions are very small and in view of the high

cost of living these days I do not see how they can possibly even manage to exist. This is especially true of the pension of $22.50 per month I just mentioned. There is a large number of these pensioners who are just getting by and not maintaining any kind of a standard of living. I should like to have the minister give this matter serious consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
474. Gallantry awards-world war II and special force, $21,000.
Lester Bowles Pearson: I wonder if the minister would explain what this item is? I suppose I should know, but I should like to know particularly whether or not it includes awards made to holders of the Victoria Cross.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Yes, the Victoria Cross winners of the second world war receive $300 a year, and those of the first world war receive an award from the imperial government. The amount was $60 prior to a short time ago. By order in council it was increased to $300. I think that is included as a supplementary estimate.


Lester Bowles Pearson: It is a fact, then, that Canadian holders of the Victoria Cross in the first world war still get their awards from the United Kingdom?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Yes.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I know this procedure has been going on for a long time, and I am not making this suggestion in any controversial or political sense. However, does the minister not think it would probably be a more dignified position for Canada to adopt if she were to pay the award made to Canadians who have won the Victoria Cross in the Canadian army rather than have them continue to be paid by the United Kingdom government?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Yes, I think that is correct. I was greatly surprised that the former government, when it decided to take on the costs of gallantry awards for the second world war, did not at that time make arrangements to take on the awards that were being paid by the imperial government for world war I. There have been negotiations with the imperial government toward the end of having this matter adjusted. The matter is under consideration now and I hope that it may be finalized at a not too distant date in the future.


Lester Bowles Pearson: When the change mentioned by the minister was made I think there were discussions with the United Kingdom, as he has suggested. I am glad they are continuing. I may be wrong but I believe at that time
Supply-Veterans Affairs the United Kingdom showed some reluctance to giving up this responsibility. They felt they had accepted it at the beginning. The Canadian forces in world war I were under British military control. For that reason and perhaps others they wished to continue to discharge that responsibility. But if that responsibility could be taken over by us at this date in 1960, I think it would be a useful thing to do.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I might point out to the Leader of the Opposition that there is still a reluctance on the part of the British government; and what applies to Canada applies to every other part of the commonwealth. The matter will require a great deal of adjustment. Two years ago when I was in London I took the matter up with the minister of pensions there. We both agreed that it was a splendid thing to have accomplished but at that time we just did not see how it could be done. However, we have carried on correspondence since then and I hope some solution may be found.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Soldier settlement and Veterans' Land Act-
475. Administration of Veterans' Land Act; soldier settlement and British family settlement, $5,152,000.
Harold Edward Winch: I wonder whether I could ask your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, and the minister's in order that 1 may raise a matter on this vote. I apologize for not being here during discussion of item one but as a member of the steering committee I had certain responsibilities. However, 1 received a letter dated February 7 and under the circumstances I cannot see any way at all before the minister's estimates are through except under matters which concern soldier settlements and so on. Therefore, if I have your permission, Mr. Chairman, I should like to read this letter because it concerns the settlement not of a veteran but of the wife of a veteran. I hope also that I may be allowed say "Mrs. X" and "Mrs. Y", although if required to do so, I will give a copy of the letter to the minister. This is a letter I received from Vancouver under date of February 7. It states as follows:
I am writing to you directly on behalf of two Sidney friends of mine .. . and indirectly on behalf of perhaps scores of other Canadian women who lost their husbands while on active service with the Canadian army.
When Mrs. X's husband died in Korea, she was left enough money to pay off accrued debts, and to make a $700 down payment on a very modest house. She has been making payments for the past six years, and has two years to go before she is finished. Because of the small amount she had for a down payment, the only place she could get was one directly under the path of planes landing and taking off from Patricia bay airport.
6780	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs
It seems unjust that, while perfectly fit men, upon their discharge, can get housing assistance, these women, both of whom have families, are forced to provide their own. Their pensions, while better than those received by many persons, are not large enough to allow them to live properly without outside work or assistance of some kind.
Neither woman asks for the gift of a house, but only for the right to the same borrowing privileges as received by male veterans. They also feel that they should be entitled to the same health services for themselves and for their famines.
He concludes in this way, Mr. Chairman:
If you think these requests have merit, and if you are able to do anything about them, your efforts will be very much appreciated.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, through you may I ask the minister this question? Can anything be done for the widows of men who died overseas? This letter refers, of course, to two widows whose husbands died in Korea and to the fact that they have the responsibility and that they have not the same privilege on down payments in the purchase of a house as has, in the language of the letter, a fit male person who returned. I promised that I would draw this matter to the minister's attention and ask for his consideration and his comments. Is there anything he can say with regard to this specific problem?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I should be pleased if the hon. member would send me a copy of the letter, and I will look into the matter. I understand that the party in question is a pensioner, a widow who is receiving a pension and the hon. member is saying that she should come under the Veterans' Land Act, one of the provisions for the construction of a home. Unfortunately, she does not come under the Veterans' Land Act.


Harold Edward Winch: Is that not provided for?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: She does not come under this plan.


Harold Edward Winch: That is the principle which has been brought to my attention. I admit I did not know of this matter previously. I did not understand that the widow of a veteran with responsibilities of a family could not receive the same accommodation with respect to payments on a home. The point is this. Is consideration being given to a situation of this type or will it be given consideration?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Yes.


Harold Edward Winch: It will be given consideration?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: It will be looked into.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I should like to make a few brief observations on this item because it is of considerable importance and concern to a good number of veterans whom I have the honour to represent. The minister's officials


know that for years veterans in the Koote-nays have been urging reduction of the small holding acreage to half an acre because of the terrain and the difficulty in obtaining enough land for small holdings. The requirement is now 1.6 acres, the cost to be not less than $500 an acre or to be valued at that. I brought this matter before the house for a number of years and before the committee on veterans affairs repeatedly. I did so during the last meeting of the committee. The matter is of such great importance that it was discussed at the last dominion convention of the Canadian Legion and the convention adopted a resolution urging the government to reduce the acreage of small holdings to half an acre. It not only affects veterans in Kootenay West but must affect veterans in other parts of Canada too because it received unanimous support.
I was very pleased during the consideration of this item when the standing committee was meeting to find out that the director of the Veterans' Land Act administration was visiting British Columbia and he said that if possible he would go to the Kootenays. I immediately alerted the 11 branches of the Canadian Legion to be prepared and all of them had a reception committee ready to take the director around their district. I have been informed since that although he did attend certain meetings in Trail and Rossland with Mr. Ozard of Vancouver, the superintendent, and the local representative of the administration in Nelson, unfortunately he only had about 12 hours and was not able to drive around the district to see the opportunities for settlement for farming and small holdings, which many members of the branches I represent had hoped for and who anticipated his visit with great interest.
I was very surprised to receive a letter about the matter of the reduction of the acreage to half an acre. Apparently some of the members discussed this with the director and one of the officials expressed the opinion that the reduction of the acreage to half an acre as a qualifying area was quite unlikely and that the extension of the qualifying period of September 30, 1962 was also unlikely.
However, I understand now that Mr. Ozard is looking into this further question and also that the secretary of the west Kootenay and central farmers institute will meet the director and travel with him around the district to look at the land opportunities. This is one question I am very concerned about and I intend to attend a zone meeting in the fall at which all branches of the Legion will be represented and discussed. We have felt throughout the years, with some justification,

that the officials representing this branch with headquarters in Kelowna have not realized the opportunities for settlement in the west Kootenay district.
I am supported in my contention by a large number of veterans in the district who have discussed this matter with me. I do not expect the district director to have a lot of time to spend in each case, although arrangements were made to drive him around a couple of hundred miles to various veteran farmers. Those he was unable to visit were somewhat disappointed; but as I say one can understand the director has insufficient time to spend, but possibly the superintendent has, and I hope that Mr. Ozard, the district superintendent of British Columbia, will visit our district and make a careful examination of the opportunities there.
I should like to draw the attention of the minister to some correspondence I have received in connection with settlement in my district. I received a letter from Trail which in part is as follows:
From conversations entered into and between the three men, it appears that the Vancouver district and the Okanagan district have been well served by the department. However, they appear to be reluctant to initiate anything in the west Kootenays excepting a piece of property currently under consideration at Kinnaird. Mr. Morgan-
He is the district representative at Nelson.
-visited the Castlegar-Robson branch meeting on June 7. Basically the proposition was this: the department was interested in developing a block of land, not at the request of the Legion, consisting of 25 lots at 1.6 acres each. Costing $1,600 per lot with approximately an additional $400 for water service per lot, this plus the repayment of the re-establishment credits and the percentages required under the act could run as high as $3,600 on an average.
That was for 1.6 acres upon which it was proposed to settle a veteran under the small holdings section of the act.
Objection was taken to this on the ground that the cost of $3,600 for a veteran who was raising a family was a lot of money to pay for a homesite; second, it was in a corporate district with a water frontage tax and this would result in high taxes for the development; third, the buildings over and above the house were liable for taxes in a corporate district; and lastly, only a half inch line for water from outside to supply the house was allowed and I feel that a half inch water line is hardly sufficient to supply the house and would be insufficient to develop 1.6 acres of cultivatable land, as required under present regulations.
I have not any personal knowledge of this development because it is a great proposal, but when I return I will look into the proposal. But I do say that this is another
Private Bills
illustration of the necessity for the reduction of the acreage to half an acre. Apparently, if my information is correct, these veterans are being asked to pay $3,600 for 1.6 acres. Mind you, there is some very valuable land in that area at the present time, but when you add the cost of building a home it does become an expensive business. There are a number of veterans in the area who were their own contractors and have lovely homes. I just indicate that to underline the need for the reduction to half an acre.


Charles Edward Rea: Order. It being five o'clock it is my duty pursuant to section 3 of standing order 15 to leave the chair in order to permit the house to proceed to the consideration of private and public bills.
Progress reported.



DEFENCE EXPENDITURES


Mr. G. E. Halpenny (London):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could have consent of the house to revert to the presenting of reports by standing and special committees?


Mr. Speaker:: Has the hon. member leave to revert to routine proceedings to present a report of a standing or special committee?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


George Ernest Halpenny: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the second report of the special committee on defence expenditures.



PRIVATE BILLS

Mr. Speaker:: It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to the consideration of private and public bills, the former having precedence, pursuant to section 3 of standing order 15.


Mr. R. J. McCleave (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, I think there is an agreement which has been reached between all parties that the orders standing on the order paper under this section numbered from 2 to 5 for second reading be given second reading, and the house revert to the business just interrupted.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the house agreed that items Nos. 2 to 5, second reading of divorce bills Nos. SD-488 to SD-499 inclusive, be taken in priority to the other orders standing for consideration at this time?


Robert Jardine McCleave: I think it was also agreed that item No. 6, second reading of Bill No. SD-492, be also included.
6782	HOUSE OF
Supply-Veterans Affairs


Mr. Speaker:: Yes, that is a divorce bill. Is the house agreeable to that course being followed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that this group of bills be taken in one motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



SECOND READINGS-SENATE BILLS

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. SD-488, for the relief of Elizabeth Fairnington Gaul.

Mr. McCleave.
Bill No. SD-489, for the relief of Rolande Mercier Perreault.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill No. SD-490, for the relief of France Andree Joly Smith.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill No. SD-491, for the relief of Marcelle Schipper Brian.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill No. SD-492, for the relief of Norman Edward Fulford.-Mr. Mandziuk.
Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that the house waive the balance of the period for private and public bills and revert to the business which was interrupted at five o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: The house will now revert to the business which was interrupted at five o'clock.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Rea in the chair.



VETERANS AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
475. Administration of Veterans' Land Act; soldiers' settlement and British family settlement, $5,152,000.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: When the committee rose briefly a few minutes ago I was speaking on the question of the reduction of the acreage to half an acre and advocating the settling of more small holders in the Koote-nays, and giving an example of a proposed development.
I would urge a thorough examination of the opportunities in this district. Ours is a district which produces enormous wealth. If the minister looks at the record of repayments in the Kootenays he will find that it is an excellent record indeed, different from some other areas which depend on one crop. In the Kootenays there is a diversification of opportunity. Some small holders work as logging contractors, others work for the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company. Some veterans keep as many as 3,000 head of poultry in their spare time, and in the spare time of their wives and their children. Other small holders who are doing very well indeed work in the mines. I bring this matter


to the minister's attention because I have had a number of letters on the subject recently. I wish to underline the wealth of the area, the stability of the area and the record of credit in the area, not only in the repayment of loans. Let the minister go to the banks, and he will find this out.
It is a very stable economy, and one which produces in the neighbourhood of $250 million annually. An economy of this kind is one which is sound from an investment point of view, to put it in the lowest terms. The administration has little to fear provided the proper land is acquired and they know the veteran is qualified and capable. On the lowest terms, this is, then, a good investment. Second, veterans of the Kootenay West area who are willing to go into the smaller places and earn their living in the more isolated sections of this country are entitled to the same consideration as those who live in the larger centres, and so I would urge that the British Columbia district superintendent and the local representative be asked to make a survey of the opportunities which exist in co-operation with the local Legion branches and that consideration should be given to the reduction of the acreage to half an acre.
When this resolution was discussed at the convention of the Legion it was obvious that it had strong support as it was carried unanimously. Afterwards I talked with delegates from various parts of Canada who supported the proposal because they had experienced difficulties similar to those experienced in my constituency.
When I go home I am going to impress every chamber of commerce, every branch of the Canadian Legion, every trade union, all the farmers institutes and all the women's institutes; I am going to mobilize the people's support in an effort to make sure that the department soon recognizes the settlement opportunities in Kootenay West and that the minister recognizes the great demand which exists for the reduction of the acreage to half an acre.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I cannot say I have not been warned by the hon. member of what might be my fate if I went out to Kootenay West and this had not happened.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: You would get a good reception.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I know. This matter has been before the committee and before the house on many occasions. More than anything, it is a local problem for Kootenay West; it affects that area more than any other place in Canada. I have heard the hon. member discuss this subject on previous occasions.

I shall be very pleased to have my officials go to Kootenay West and make an investigation as requested.
I am rather surprised, though, that when the Veterans' Land Act was being amended last year and discussed in committee it was not brought to the attention of the committee-


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: It was.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Or, if it was, why they did not take it as seriously as the hon. member does. However, this is a matter which can well be looked into.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I suggest that if the minister gets his officials to make a survey they should contact the zone commander who is the chairman of the land committee. He is an employee of Consolidated but is quite willing to take two or three days off to take Mr. Ozard around the whole district to visit the various areas about which I have been chatting.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The director of Veterans' Land Act was in British Columbia not long ago and he and Mr. Ozard did go through this district.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Ozard is the superintendent in Vancouver.


Chesley William Carter: I think the point raised by the hon. member for Kootenay West is worthy of consideration. It has the support of the Legion and it will no doubt be of considerable benefit to a number of veterans, particularly in provinces where land is not as plentiful as it is on the prairies. I come from a province where we do not have a great deal of agricultural land and, if this reduction is made, some veterans at least may be able to take advantage of the act, veterans who would otherwise be deprived of its assistance.
I rise mainly to place on record my tribute to the administration of the Veterans' Land Act which I think is perhaps a model of administration for an organization of this kind. We hear so much about the problems of the small farmers in their effort to survive, and I think no greater tribute could be paid to the officials who administer this act than to point out the success which they have had in enabling these veterans to earn a living from small holdings. The former director has gone to the farm credit association, and there is now a very close bond between the two associations, one which is, no doubt, working out to their mutual benefit. So I would like to place on record my appreciation of the efficient manner in which the Veterans' Land Act from its very inception has been administered.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I understand from the hon. member for Kootenay West that the minister
79951-0-428
Supply-Veterans Affairs has indicated to him that there was only pressure in the Kootenay area for the reduction of holdings to half an acre.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I only said it was a special problem there. I know it arises in other areas.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I was going to point out that a reduction in the size of the holdings in our area would be much appreciated. One of the main reasons for desiring this in our area is the suburbanization of areas adjacent to our towns and the movement of subdivision type development into rural areas. I just wanted to indicate that this difficulty is not confined to the Kootenay area and that a change would be appreciated in my part of the country also.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
479. Reduction of indebtedness to the director of soldier settlement of a settler in respect of a property in his possession, the title of which is held by the director, or such soldier settler loans which are administered by the Indian affairs branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, by an amount which will reduce his indebtedness to an amount in keeping with the productive capacity of the property or his ability to repay his indebtedness under regulations approved by the governor in council, $1,000.
Harris George Rogers: Mr. Chairman, as a matter of interest I should like to ask the minister how many soldier settlers are still without their title.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: There are very few, Mr. Chairman, just 17.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
482. Repayments under subsection (3) of section 12 of the Veterans Rehabilitation Act, $15,000.
Douglas Mason Fisher: I wish to raise one question brought to my attention by people who could not take advantage of the educational aspects of this after the last war and who since then have had opportunities for further education develop and who find they are no longer eligible for assistance under D.V.A. For example, I refer to people who switched to teaching and who now want summer courses but who are no longer eligible. Is the way open for these people to use the old credits once available to them?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: As the hon. member must appreciate this was a rehabilitation program Of course, we cannot maintain a rehabilitation program indefinitely. Many of these people are now in their late forties. There is a program for disability pensioners but that is the only program we have at the present time.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Northern Affairs

[Stage Direction]
265. Departmental administration, $986,595.
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Chairman, I think it would be useful if I made a few comments at the commencement of my estimates. By way of illustration I should like to point out that during the past five years the estimates of this department have more than doubled from roughly $34 million to $77 million. Hon. members will also notice that even in spite of the fact that there has been a big increase over the past five years, this year there is a decrease of some $10 million over the amount provided for last year. This is accounted for primarily because of the completion of several major projects in northern Canada and, in part, by the postponement of several large capital expenditures particularly in the national parks. It is accounted for, partially, by budgetary reasons as well.
Another contributing reason I should like to suggest is that there has been some increase in efficiency resulting from an administrative reorganization during the past year or so.
In terms of personnel there has been an increase of 322 in the number of full-time positions provided for. With a total strength of a little over 3,100 full-time employees the department could not be considered as a large one. But in terms of quality I know that no organization could have a more loyal or efficient group of employees than I have in the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. I would like to take this opportunity to express publicly my appreciation of the dedicated efforts of the whole department from the deputy minister and senior officers right down to the rank and file of the department's employees. Their record of service is one to which I think any minister can point to with great pride.
Last year the committee on mines, forests and waters, under the chairmanship of the hon. member for Lambton West, examined the department's estimates in detail and in his report the following sentence can be found:
While the committee fully supports and agrees with the importance of northern development, it would like to see equal emphasis and sense of urgency accorded to some of the other functions of the department. It has in mind particularly those of the forestry branch and the Canadian government travel bureau-Your committee recommends for the future that consideration be given to greater appropriations and extended operations for the forestry branch and the travel bureau, to reflect more adequately the needs and the economic significance of these industries.


In this connection I would call attention to the fact that notwithstanding the over-all decrease in the department's total estimates for the coming year, increases have been provided for both of these branches. In the case of the forestry branch, of course, hon. members will know that we recently gave third reading to the bill to establish a full-time Department of Forestry.
Present plans contemplate substantial increases in the staffs of the forest research division and the forest products laboratories division of the forestry branch during the five-year period commencing in the fiscal year 1960-61. More specifically, it is hoped that it will be possible to provide for an increase in the staff of the forest research division of 159 positions, including 63 professional officers, and to increase the staff of the forest products laboratories by 62 positions, including 28 professional officers during the period. The first step in implementing this plan appears in my current estimates which provide for an increase in the branch staff of 64 positions, including 20 officers.
The total increase which has been visualized for the forestry branch in the five-year period is in the order of 44 per cent, but it is expected that the corresponding increase in efficiency of research work will be closer to 100 per cent. This result can be expected because a number of the existing units of the forestry branch are simply too small to work with maximum efficiency. At the same time the existing number of units cannot be reduced because of the responsibilities of the branch for conducting research work in many different locations in this large country.
I referred earlier to the increase in appropriations for the Canadian government travel bureau. Hon. members will note that the increase amounts to $367,000 which, on a budget of roughly $2,300,000, is a very significant amount. In working out priorities for getting the most value for the dollars spent it has been decided to lay emphasis this year on increased direct advertising in the United States and on information material for distribution such as the new booklet "Invitation to Canada" which is being so well received.
Suggestions were made by the committee on mines, forests and waters last year that in addition to the very successful travel offices in New York and Chicago, new offices might be established in certain other United States cities. Hon. members have asked about San Francisco and abroad. I can assure hon. members that these suggestions are not being ignored nor are the possibilities of setting up a travel office in Europe for travel promotion.
As a matter of fact, the director of the travel bureau has just returned from an extended trip in Europe where he made a survey

of the feasibility of increasing Canada's travel income from that area. Meanwhile, we should not overlook the very excellent travel information work now being done by the Canadian consulates in various United States cities, by the high commissioner's office in London and by our embassies in various European countries. We are also stepping up our participation in international travel organizations in order to keep abreast of changing trends in travel spending and travel markets.
The committee will be pleased to know that we are beginning at last to have a welcome reversal in the trend of our long standing deficit on travel account with the United States. According to preliminary figures from the bureau of statistics, residents of the United States spent a record $351 million in Canada in 1959, up $42 million over 1958. Canadian spending south of the border last year increased $32 million, reaching $445 million in 1959, as compared with $413 million in 1958. The resulting 1959 deficit of $94 million in the travel account with the United States was a drop of $10 million below the 1958 figure of $104 million.
In so far as European countries are concerned, the picture at the present time is not so bright. Spending in Canada by residents of overseas countries rose to $42 million last year from the $40 million recorded in 1958. On the other hand, a more sizeable increase was shown in Canadian spending on overseas travel in 1959, when the total reached $148 million, an increase of $19 million over the $129 million figure spent in 1958.
The over-all deficit on travel account with all countries which rose $7 million last year to reach the new high of $200 million, can be directly attributed to the higher spending by Canadians on overseas travel, which I have noted.
I should like to turn now to a new activity of the department, and it is one in which I have a very keen personal interest. I refer to the preparations for the resources for tomorrow's conference which are now under way. Hon. members will see in the estimates this year at page 372 an item of $80,000. Hon. members will recall that in February of 1958, the Prime Minister issued a call for the holding of a national conservation conference. Representatives of 10 provinces came to Ottawa late in 1958, and again met with us in 1959, to set the frame-work of this conference and to define its scope. It was agreed that the conference would be limited to those resources which were renewable, such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, water, wildlife and recreation.
As our discussions with the provinces progressed it became evident that there was
79951-0-4284
Supply-Northern Affairs a remarkable unanimity in desire to do something about conservation in its very broadest sense. It became evident that many forwardlooking authorities in the various fields at all levels of government viewed the problem in positive and imaginative terms. It became apparent, too, that the word "conservation" itself was not sufficiently broad to describe what we all had in mind, and so we have decided to emphasize that the definition of "conservation" is good management for wise use of our renewable resources, with particular emphasis on the multiple use concept.
At the 1959 meeting with the provinces the suggestion was made that the name of the conference might be changed to "resources for tomorrow". Since a wide variety of interpretations have been given to the word "conservation" over the years it was agreed that this name "resources for tomorrow" might more effectively convey our basic idea of wise resource management.
During 1959 we recruited at the federal level a staff to form the secretariat of the conference. This secretariat has already done a good deal of the ground work and made preparations for the conference next year. In this connection I might point out that the budget of the conference will come from two sources. First, the federal government will provide $80,000, as in the estimates before us now; second, the provinces will provide $40,000. This arrangement is an indication of how seriously and how co-operatively the provinces are working with us in this understanding. I might say also in addition the provinces are making available to us free of cost the personnel they have in their own departments for the preparation of many of the background papers that we have to have for the conference and assisting in other ways as well.
It has been decided that the conference will be in Montreal in October of 1961. In anticipation of this we are now busy having the technical papers prepared on the various resource fields that will be before the conference. I am satisfied that this great national undertaking will have far-reaching effects in focusing attention on the need for wise resource management and broadening our perspective in this very important area.
In the field of resource management, Mr. Chairman, one of the major development programs introduced by the present government has been the program of roads to resources. This was an offer by the federal government that we would share 50-50 with the provinces on a program of opening up new resource areas up to a maximum of $15 million over the length of the agreement. When my estimates were before the committee last year a great deal of discussion
6786	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs took place on the fact that those agreements had not been signed. I pointed out at that time that even though the agreements had not been signed every province was going ahead with its program. Therefore, at this time I am very pleased to be able to say that agreements have now been signed with all nine participating provinces and that the province of Quebec is seriously working out with us a proposal to join with us in this roads to resources program.
The negotiations leading to the agreements were very long and complicated as will be evident from the thousands of documents which have been or will be tabled in this house in response to motions for the production of papers put forward by hon. members. Although those negotiations have been long, complicated and protracted, I do think I should say at this time the provinces should be commended on the co-operative and constructive spirit they displayed all during the negotiations, and that they should also be complimented on the soundness of the programs they have advanced.
Another important area of federal-provincial co-operation for this department is in the construction of camp grounds and picnic sites for which the federal government provides 50 per cent of the cost. This program has operated the last three winters, and even though one of the purposes is to provide winter employment, it is helping the provinces provide very badly needed camp grounds and picnic sites, not only to facilitate the tourist industry, of outsiders coming into their provinces, but to make more amenable the standard of travel of their own citizens.
Eight provinces are now participating in this program, and I think I would be prepared, during the consideration of my estimates, to give a detailed break-down of what has been done in each province. At this time I feel it would be sufficient if I were to give the total for this year. We estimate that the federal contribution for the period November 1, 1959 to May 31, 1960 will amount to about $1,755,000. The total payments for the three winters the program has been in operation amount to approximately $4,300,000. It is estimated that this program has provided nearly 20,000 man-months of employment. I feel that the committee will be appreciative, therefore, of the fact that this program has received tremendous commendation from all the people who travel across the various provinces and who have used the facilities provided through this scheme. In addition, the scheme has helped in the provision of work at a time when, in our country, it is difficult for some to find work.
In addition to the winter works program we have the camp ground and picnic site program


along the trans-Canada highway. Under this program the federal government has offered to pay one half the cost, up to a maximum contribution for all provinces of $2 million. The funds to be allocated to the various provinces on the basis of the total mileage of highway in each province.
Unlike the winter works program, the camp ground and picnic site program work can be done at any time during the year. When it is completed there will be roughly 100 picnic areas across Canada at intervals of 50 miles and there will be approximately 50 camp grounds at intervals of 100 miles. It will be possible, in view of the fact that Ontario and Quebec are considering coming into the scheme, to travel from one end of this country to the other and to assure yourself that at least every 50 miles there will be some form of public accommodation available.
On the resources side, a very important unit of the department is the water resources branch. As hon. members know, the work of the branch was given a very thorough examination in the standing committee on mines, forests and waters this year. I should like to pay a compliment, if I may, to the chairman of that committee, the hon. member for Comox-Alberni, who directed the deliberations of the committee with great skill. This was not a partisan committee, Mr. Chairman. The aim of this committee was to give all hon. members an opportunity of understanding the importance of water to our resources in Canada, and at the same time begin to visualize the tremendous number of problems that will be confronting us in the near future and upon which hon. members will be asked to make decisions. It is obvious from the committee's review that there is a need for more staff at the federal level if we are to continue to discharge our important responsibilities in this field. I do feel that the recent salary revisions for professional people in the civil service will make it easier for us to recruit the type of civil servant that we need in this very technical field. I might add that these remarks also apply to the forestry branch, the national museum and other professional areas within the government service.
I should like to make it very clear that I am not suggesting there is any inadequacy in the quality of our present staff of the water resources branch. This branch of my department has been under very heavy pressure. I think some of those who know something of the work they are doing at the moment will appreciate the wonderful work they have done. The recommendation from the standing committee, as I understand it, is simply that the staff of this department should be increased to handle the great tasks before us.

One subject of interest to hon. members is the national parks. If you will pay me the honour of listening for a moment or two to this discussion I think it should be made clear that the keynote of the national parks program this year is planning for the future. In the last year for which we have complete records the number of people who visited the national parks and national historic parks of Canada totalled nearly 5i million. Over the past 10 years there has been a threefold increase, and there is every reason to expect a continued growth in visitor use of the parks in future years. In fact, the projection of our estimates in the future for the next 20 years makes those of us responsible for park planning shudder at the responsibility that will be placed upon this branch.
The task of planning to meet these increased needs for services is an immense one, and the development work that is undertaken today will set the pattern for the future. Two years ago the department set up a planning section within the national parks branch which could be freed from administrative worries and could sit down and plan ahead for a quarter of a century in order to set guide lines for the development of our national parks. We have been aided in this planning by the work of the group of people we set up last year to study the administration of the townsites of Banff, Jasper and Waterton. This was done by the institute of local government at Queen's University. Until this planning period is over, and these studies are completed, a number of construction projects which the parks department would have been ready to go ahead with this year have been held in abeyance. The reason for this, of course, is obvious. We do not want to start on something that will not fit in with the plans we are making for the next 20 or 30 years.
In so far as highways within the parks are concerned, during the past year the program has been heavily emphasized. Upon completion of the program the major highways through the parks will total 500 miles of pavement, through some of the most difficult terrain in North America. Along with these highways, of course, we have been building the camp grounds and picnic areas which the provinces are building in their areas.
I do not intend to take the time now to discuss the very important work done by the national historic parks and sites branch of the department. However, I will be prepared to answer questions on it.
In so far as the museum is concerned, we have plans for the establishment of a national aviation museum and the refurbishing of the national war museum which will become a
Supply-Northern Affairs part of the national museum of Canada. In so far as the national museum is concerned, hon. members will notice that the present estimates provide for a modest increase in appropriations. For the first time since its construction more than half a century ago, the Victoria museum building will be completely at the disposal of the national museum of Canada. Now that the national gallery and the geological survey have moved to their own quarters, it will be possible to carry out the necessary redeployment so that the museum's extensive collection of specimens can be suitably displayed. The additional space now available for museum purposes will also make it possible to expand and extend the research and educational activities of the national museum.
I come now to the conclusion of my remarks. At this time I had intended to welcome back to the house the hon. member for Mackenzie River who has been absent a good deal of the time during this session and who just returned a few weeks ago. In view of the illness from which he is suffering at the present time, I should like to tell the committee how very sorry 1 am that he is not here to listen to the next part of my report. As a result, I am going to cut out certain parts of it in which he was particularly interested, but I shall be prepared to provide this information to him personally at any time.


Mr. Godin:: Can the minister give it to the committee?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I can if it is
requested, yes.
The estimates now before the committee for northern administration provide for the continued expansion of the department's work in northern Canada. While the $31,937,000 requested for the northern administration branch is a reduction of approximately $4,912,000 from 1959-60, the reduction lies entirely in the construction field where we have completed several of our major school and hostel projects. The estimates do provide for a substantial increase in the scale of continuing operations. A total staff for the branch of 1,187 is requested for 1960-61, representing an increase of 131 positions. Of these 83 are slated for the field which will permit expansion in the education program, in the welfare services, in the development of resource harvesting projects and in the supporting engineering and administrative services in the northern communities.
During the detailed review of the northern administration branch estimates for 1959-60 before the standing committee last year the department outlined its plans for

Supply-Northern Affairs reorganizing the branch and decentralizing operations to the greatest possilbe extent. Over the past year this reorganization has been going ahead and, while it is not scheduled for completion until 1962, considerable progress has already been made. It is on this point that I knew the hon. member for Mackenzie River would have liked to speak.
Hon. members will be interested in the construction vote. The proposed appropriation for educational construction is reduced by $3,089,000. This reduction simply reflects the completion of the major school and hostels at Inuvik, and the completion of the Fort Simpson school and hostels which will come into operation in September, 1960. The construction estimates for 1960-61 are concentrated on the development of additional schools and classrooms at a number of small locations in the north, particularly in the Arctic areas. We hope to bring education to all residents of the Northwest Territories, and to the Eskimos of northern Quebec by 1968 by adding an average of from 20 to 25 classrooms per year.


Harold Edward Winch: By when?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: By 1968. The
program for this year is simply part of that eight-year program. May I also say that I fully expect the level of appropriation for this purpose will have to go up before too long. The reason for that is that our students are now coming to the stage where they can go on and do high school work and this will mean higher expense on the part of the educational services of the department. 1 am sure that hon. members will agree that this extra cost, in view of the purpose of it, will be welcome to the people of Canada.
In the Yukon construction vote there is a reduction of some $665,000. The total requested still stands, however, at more than $3,700,000 and will provide for a substantial program in 1960-61. Much of this amount will be spent on the roads program. The amount requested is in line with our best assessment of the physical progress that can be made in the current fiscal year.
In the Northwest Territories the construction program-I will not give all the details -is mainly a completion of the Mackenzie highway to Yellowknife. I will list the other roads if I am requested to do so. Our engineering division I think deserves a word at this stage. They have devoted a great deal of energy during the last year or so in trying to make more efficient and economic designs for small projects. They do this by using prefabrication, new materials and so on. While it is too early to be certain of the results of
IMr. Hamilton (Qu'Appelle).]

this work, I have great hopes that we shall be able to achieve substantial savings.
As hon. members are aware, new regulations for the administration of Canadian oil and gas resources within the jurisdiction of the federal government were promulgated on April 13, 1960. It is expected that these will result in a substantial expansion of exploration for oil and gas in northern Canada. Consequently the estimates of my department for 1960-61 show increases in my staff to administer the new regulations.
The substance of the new regulations was announced to the house some weeks ago. They provide for a longer period for exploration in the high Arctic to reflect the logistic problems involved in working in the area, and the tremendous distance from supply bases. The regulations also establish an administrative framework to provide for oil and gas exploration in the territorial waters of Canada. This provision was made necessary by recent international agreements confirming that Canada has the right to the resources under the seas off our coast. This right extends to the limit of the continental shelf and beyond that as far as exploitation is possible. It pertains to the littoral state.


Charles Edward Rea: Order. I must inform the hon. member that his time has expired.


Some hon. Members:: Carry on.


Charles Edward Rea: Does the committee give unanimous consent for the minister to continue?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I thank the committee very much. Then one that has caused considerable comment is this one relating to Canadian participation in the development. The relevant sections are intended to ensure to Canadians an opportunity to participate in the realization of this great potential source of wealth. This is the first part of the government's over-all plan to build up Canadian ownership of resources.
As hon. members are aware from the answers which I have given to questions asked in the house, applications for permits were received over the past year while the regulations were under consideration. These applications covered about 140 million acres in the Arctic islands. During the few weeks which have elapsed since the new regulations were promulgated priority holders have already converted their priorities into exploration permits covering 44 to 45 million acres.
I have also announced revised mining regulations for the Northwest Territories

which are designed to ensure maximum benefit to Canadian interests and to cover lands lying under territorial waters which are within federal jurisdiction.
The government's purpose in revising the Northwest Territories quartz mining regulations-now called the Canada mining regulations-is the same as with the changes in the regulations applying to oil and gas.
First, the revised regulations make provision for disposition of mining exploration and development rights on federal lands underlying territorial waters of Canada. Regulations covering lands not forming part of any province or territory have not existed in the past, presumably because the exploitation of offshore deposits has not been considered important until now. In this respect the present regulations do for minerals what the Canada oil and gas regulations do for the fossil fuels.
The second purpose of the revised regulations is to embody another step which the government is taking to assure Canadians a full opportunity to participate in resources development.
Officers of my department have for a considerable time been working on a general revision of the mining regulations with the objective of bringing them into line with modern prospecting and mine development techniques. During the next few months I will be holding conferences with representatives of the mining industry. Before the end of the present fiscal year I expect to formulate a completely new set of regulations suitable for modern times. For those who have expressed some concern about the possible effect of the Canadian participation clauses on exploration for minerals financed by foreign capital, I might say that it is my present intention to provide in the new regulations for a system similar to that now contained in the recently revised oil and gas regulations. This will make a clear distinction between the exploration and exploitation phases of mineral development, and provide that Canadians must be given an opportunity to participate at the latter stage.


Osias.-J. Godin: I, too, Mr. Chairman join with the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources in regretting the fact that the hon. member for Mackenzie River is not in his seat today. Were he here I am sure he would be the first member of the opposition taking part in the discussion of the estimates of the minister. However, we know that last night a sudden illness made it necessary that he go to hospital. I join the minister and also the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys who made reference to this matter this morning, in wishing him a prompt and complete recovery.
Supply-Northern Affairs
The hon. member for Mackenzie River has rendered many services to this committee, especially when discussing the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. His knowledge of the people of northern Canada and of the actual geographical situation up there gave him the capacity to inform the committee on many matters relating to northern Canada. For this reason he was a valuable member of the committee.
I should like to say a few words of admiration for the persons working in the department of northern affairs. If there is in Canada, which is a young country with large resources and wide dimensions, a department whose personnel are preoccupied with the growing pains suffered by the department, with new problems every day, it is the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. I am sure the loyalty shown by the employees of the deputy minister is of great value to the progress which all members on both sides of the house would like to see achieved in Canada, augmented day by day and year by year.
After hearing the minister I feel I cannot leave certain remarks of his unchallenged, especially where he has expressed certain views about the functions of his department and some of the policies he referred to. He started off by making quite a lengthy reference to the problem of travel between people of foreign nations coming to Canada and Canadians travelling abroad. The tourist endeavour of our country is a worth while one and something we are proud of. We have much to offer visitors and an expansion in that field is welcome, although I regret, and I feel also the minister regrets, the deficit in the travel position between other countries and ourselves which is growing at an alarming rate; the minister mentioned the figure for last year of $200 million. I realize there are many reasons for that, but it clearly indicates that our efforts to extend the facilities of this country to other nations and their people who visit us are not sufficient to meet the publicity of other nations. Perhaps if we took pains to consider the money spent by Canadians in other countries, countries which may have small populations and are small in area, you would find we do not compare with the opportunities they offer.
I also wish to make reference to the statement the minister made about the change in the estimates which produced a reduction of some $10 million. During the study of estimates in general in this committee we often appreciate a reduction because it may indicate a certain saving; but if there is a department which should have two sheets

Supply-Northern Affairs in the estimates to be studied it is the department of northern affairs, especially where money is spent for capital expansion in Canada.
I am surprised to find in reviewing the estimates of the minister that while he boasts of a reduction of $10 million this decrease is in the field of capital projects which the department has undertaken each year. He has given the reason for this that some of them were completed; but if Canada is to be a growing country and is to do the things it proposes to do in extending its resources, because of the present unemployment in this country capital expenditure should be the amount promised by the government.
I realize, of course, that savings cannot always be made; but if savings are made here they should be made in administration. I am sure we all remember how the present government before they took office criticized the foolish spending which was going on, and I am amazed when I realize that all the items concerning administration of this department have increased. I admit there are good reasons for that but I would ask the minister to explain how it is we find that capital projects have been greatly decreased.
The minister has mentioned that the winter works program has been reduced by nearly $1 million, and I understand that the roads to resources were reduced by $1 million in the present budget. They are matters of surprise about which the opposition would like to obtain details.
The hon. minister spoke at great length on what he stated to be a very important matter, the policies laid out by his department under his leadership concerning the possibility of developing the resources of Canada in a manner which he has stated-


Charles Edward Rea: Order, it being six o'clock I do now leave the chair.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 8 p.m.
Osias.-J. Godin: As the committee of the whole house had occasion to adjourn at six o'clock I was just beginning to discuss one of the statements made by the minister after I had occasion to make certain remarks on other matters he brought up in a statement which he had just previously had occasion to give the committee.
When a backbencher brings up questions concerning the development of our northern resources he is faced with the fact that he is discussing the northern vision of the


Conservative party which was on so many occasions expressed during the last two elections, and on this score the minister of northern affairs had occasion to tell the committee a few moments ago that the policies which he had occasion to bring about in the course of his functions in the last two or three years were about to be amended. All hon. members of the committee will recall that the minister often had occasion to make statements concerning the policy of the Conservative party and concerning the expansion and exploitation of our resources in the great north, and I find that the minister today possibly reminds me of a pair of trousers on a windy clothesline-there is a lot of vehement movement but it remains in the same position.
I call the attention of the committee to certain of the statements made as to the policies entertained by the minister of northern affairs, and what has become of them. The committee still realizes that those statements were numerous and the enunciations of policy were numerous, but this great vision of the Prime Minister and the minister of northern affairs has become a mere mirage and now we come to the third year since this government took office and the mirage is going away from us as we go on.
The hon. minister will agree with me that it is advisable to consider these problems in the same light as he asked members of the committee on mines and forests to do when last year he had occasion to present a report to that committee, at which time he set out his policies and gave us the bases on which the formula of this government should be based. I read from page 2 of that report. The minister will remember the report I am reading. He said this:
The government has two bases for its policies toward northern resources. We want firstly, to encourage their early exploration, later their development, and eventually their exploitation; and secondly we are determined to protect the public interest in them. Our policy in northern oil and gas should be judged on these bases. Let me give you some thoughts which illustrate how our policy meets this criteria.
I wish to discuss the policies of this government on these very same bases-how we are going to develop the north, and the measures we are going to take to develop our resources. Second, how are we going to protect the public interest of the Canadian people as far as our resources are concerned.
How were they expanded in the course of the operations of the minister of northern affairs? We were told that there was a great move, that there was an invitation for exploration accorded, and one read very recently after the expiration, after the minister

had extended the terms for these applications, an account of what happened. I should like to read a quotation to substantiate the position of this great promise of expansion by the Prime Minister and the minister of northern affairs. Here is what I read in the Financial Times of July 8 of this year. It is quite recent. The heading is "Arctic Reserves Sales Disappoint".
The final count of applications for oil and gas exploration permits in the Arctic islands turned out to have fizzled to barely a quarter of the sensational volume of acreage taken under temporary allocation a year and a half ago.
The devastating admission was made by Hon. Alvin Hamilton, Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources after the June 25 deadline for filing of formal applications for permits involving definite expenditures.
It is obvious from such a report that the promises made in this house and elsewhere by the minister of northern affairs do not live up to expectations. It was said that this government had begun, and was about to fulfil, a program of expansion of our resources as never before. I had occasion to check some of the figures in the estimates presented by the minister. I have indicated earlier some of the facts relating to the diminishing of the capital expenditure included in these estimates and also the rise in the cost of the administration. Now the minister could not possibly have told the committee how he had achieved the increase which the promise had indicated to the Canadian people. I should like to quote, to indicate the expansion suggested by the minister of northern affairs, an article which appeared in the Financial Post of July 9 of this year, which is also a recent article. This goes over the estimates which we are now about to discuss. It is comparing the dollars spent by the department with regard to what the previous government had occasion to introduce in its estimates with the amount spent by the present administration. The article is written by one Leslie Wilson, and it states:
The northern "vision", as defined by the Conservatives, was a big issue in the election of March, 1958, which gave the present government an overwhelming majority.
Do any differences in emphasis on northern development show up in the northern affairs budgets of the two governments? Here are the figures:
From 1953-54-the budget before the re-baptism-
That has reference of course to the fact that during the St. Laurent regime in 1954 the department of resources and development was made into the present department. The article continues:
-to the present, the department spending has increased by a cumulative annual 22.3 per cent.
For the Liberal, budgets, the growth rate is 26 per cent, for the'Conservative budgets, 16 per cent.
Supply-Northern Affairs
The committee surely will realize from these figures that the growth of the department was not under the Conservative government from what it had been since 1953 under the Liberal government.
The second statement the minister made was to the effect that this government had done something to reserve for Canadians their natural resources and to ensure Canadian participation in their exploitation. The minister made much fuss about the fact that he had taken action to ensure Canadian participation in the development of our natural resources. In a release issued by the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources over the signature of the minister we find a statement to the effect that the regulations remain largely the same in detail but the two important clauses concerning Canadian participation have been added at the lease stage.
This is an admission on the part of the minister that the regulations except for the two additions to which he had reference have not been changed in any substantial way. His statement indicates that participation is only at the lease stage. Any company interested in exploration must first take out a permit. There is no protection provided to people interested in the exploitation of our resources.
The minister announced in the Canada Gazette in May, 1960 new regulations for mining and on June 22, 1960 he announced in that same publication new regulations concerning gas and oil leases. I will read the clause to which the minister referred, which provides that no lease shall be given to a company unless certain conditions are met. There are many clauses listed but the important one is at the end. It is contained in clause 32, subclause 2, paragraph 2. It provides that to obtain a lease the company must see to it that the shares of the corporation are listed on a recognized Canadian stock exchange and that Canadians will have an opportunity of participating in the ownership of the corporation.
The only way to obtain ownership in a corporation is to buy shares. To state that a company incorporated in Canada is to have its shares offered on the market means practically nothing to the people who are prepared to finance projects. To me this has about as much significance as would a regulation introduced by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, who I see is in the chamber this evening, to the effect that the government would be prepared to give a person full Canadian citizenship with all the attendant privileges if he were prepared to wear a Canadian-made suit. This regulation has roughly the same application.
6792	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs
I have not made a survey of all the companies that have bought leases covering the resources of Canada. The minister a few weeks ago was kind enough to make a statement in this chamber concerning certain companies that had such an interest. I will take one of these companies as an example and I intend my remarks to be no reflection on the company which is doing the best it can to explore and exploit resources in Canada. We in the opposition agree with this practice.	.
For the purposes of my illustration I will take the Cree Oil of Canada Limited. I will not take the smallest holder. The company has obtained 4,500,000 acres in a given project. According to the long list furnished by the minister it is the second largest holder. I attempted to ascertain who were the Cree Oil company and in what way it could be considered as a Canadian company. I did research in the book entitled, "Survey of Oils-1960" published by the Financial Post. This is a document of great interest and importance and is most complete. I looked up the Cree Oil company and found a notation to the effect that this company was formed in 1956 with all assets acquired by North Star Oil Limited effective December 15, 1958.
In order to discover the true situation and who has obtained leases on Canadian natural resources we go to the listing for North Star Oil Limited. It was a company formed in Canada, incorporated in 1919, according to this indisputably reliable report. The report indicates that Shell Oil acquired control in 1960 of class A and common shares of North Star Oil Limited held by the estate of the late F. C. Manning. These were purchased by Shell Oil Company of Canada Limited. The acquisition represented majority control in the company.
The minister indicated that this was a Canadian company but we find it is now owned by the Shell Oil Company. Is this a Canadian company? I do not know all the particulars. 1 realize that perhaps people in many parts of the world invest in Shell Oil Company. However, I suggest to the minister that he would do well to agree with statements made by the Secretary of State for External Affairs, his colleague.
On July 4, 1960 the hon. member for Laurier directed a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs, as reported at page 5655 of Hansard of that date, inquiring whether Canada had made any protest against the confiscation of the Shell Oil refinery in Cuba. On that occasion the following exchange occurred between the hon. member for Laurier and the Secretary of State for External Affairs:


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, there has been no


protest made. It so happens that the real ownership of this refinery is in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands.


Mr. Chevrier:: Mr. Speaker, the information I have is that the particular company referred to in the Friday morning press is a Canadian company with a subsidiary in Cuba.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, evidently this is a holding company registered in Canada which is owned in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The hon. member will realize that the Shell interests are essentially British and Dutch.
Surely this committee is entitled to ask in what way can the new regulations introduced by the minister be construed as a protection for Canadians or a guarantee of effective participation by Canadians in the exploitation of our natural resources when two ministers of the cabinet do not agree as to the position of a company which leased, we were informed by the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, 4,500,000 acres of a natural resources project in Canada.
Another feature of the minister's statement is that it is only at the lease stage that this protection, is given and the participation ensured. It is not so with respect to permits. It is difficult to conceive that a company would spend many thousands of dollars trying to explore and obtain knowledge of our resources under a permit when it knows in advance that it could not obtain the required lease to proceed to exploit the assets it has found.
At many stages in the development of our country external capital has assisted us. It is a very good thing to invite the Canadian people to participate in the exploitation of our resources. Surely, however, it is difficult to believe that under this system a company must, at the lease stage, prove itself to be truly Canadian. I submit that would be a most difficult thing to do.
We all realize that there are mining areas in Canada which are under the jurisdiction and control of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, and therefore under the control of the federal government. If we go back to the regulation which I read out we will find that the regulations which are placed on the mining operations of companies in that area are exactly the same as the regulations which were placed a month earlier on the gas and oil operations. For these reasons I feel it is very difficult to believe that companies would not know that they had to fulfil a formula and take out permits.
I should like to refer the minister to an article which appeared in the Hamilton Spectator, and which reads in part as follows:
We are still in a less fortunate position than our American partners.

This has to do with the position of companies which realize they must fulfil certain obligations if they are to exploit the resources. I say that our companies should be placed in the same position as United States companies operating in the United States, and we do not find that that is so. This article indicates clearly that as far as deductions for income tax purposes are concerned large United States companies can write off acquisition costs of unproductive property against other income. This is not permitted in Canada. If the minister is ambitious he would make sure that the government made rules and regulations accordingly and amend if necessary the Income Tax Act as it applies to corporations to that effect. I quote from the article of April 18, 1960:
We are still in a less fortunate position than our American partners. Under the United States tax law the American can write off acquisition costs of unproductive property against other income; the Canadian can do it only in the case of lease payments. The American still receives a more favourable tax exemption on account of depletion, particularly large companies with wide integrated interests.
I had occasion to remark to the minister it is unfortunate that with all these items in his estimates which would create jobs, capital expenditures provided by the department of northern affairs, that the jobs promised by the Prime Minister when he asked the Canadian people to look north have not been forthcoming. Surely there must be a reason for this and the minister is duty bound to explain to the committee why, in the face of all these problems, these capital expenditures have not been provided for in 1960. Furthermore, he should explain why the items which pertain to the cost of administration, in the face of the remarks made by the minister and the Prime Minister that the previous government was spending money where it should not be spent, have increased greatly. I am sure that the other hon. members besides me will have many questions to ask on the items as they come up.


Mr. Martin (Timmins):: Mr. Chairman, I should like to add my voice to that of others who have expressed regret that the hon. member for Mackenzie River is not able to be present here tonight to deal with these estimates. We are all well aware of the terrific interest he has in this department, in addition to the vast knowledge he has of the area he represents. It is unfortunate that he should have to return from an illness and come back into the house at a time such as now when we are sitting a minimum of 12 hours a day, as well as carrying on other duties. I am sure this is not conducive to the return to health of any hon. member. In
Supply-Northern Affairs fact, he possibly could be classified as a casualty of this usual annual rush to accommodate a few hon. members.
It is not my intention to deal too extensively with the estimates at this stage. I shall probably be having something further to say as the estimates move along, but there are one or two matters that I should like to deal with briefly tonight. One, which is of a more local nature, has to do with something the minister said when he presented his estimates in regard to the roads to resources program of this department.
We may recall that just a year ago this time when the minister was bringing in his estimates he revealed some of the roads on which an agreement has been reached with the Ontario government and the federal government, with the federal government paying 50 per cent of the cost. One of the roads that he referred to at that time was the road linking up Foleyet and Chapleau which would link up the fabulously rich gold mining camp of the Porcupine with Ste. Marie, which would for the first time bring the gold mining areas of the north country into the field of tourist trade.
Up until now, because of the fact that this area has been at the end of a spur line, so to speak, they have never been able to take advantage of the tourist trade that is enjoyed by other communities further south, because it is a well known fact that tourists will not go back over the same road they came in on. When they look at their road maps and see that they can make a loop, going in by one road and coming out by another, they plan their holidays accordingly. Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, while we had a great deal of at least verbal activity in the area in regard to this particular road last year, it has died down and we have heard nothing about it from last year to this outside of efforts being made in regard to the road by locally interested groups in the municipality.
Of course, we all realize that a provincial election was held last year and, as is the well known custom in this country, all these plans about roads, and so forth, died down as soon as the election was over, and we may have to wait until the next election comes along, regardless of how long that may be.
I should like to urge the minister to use his good offices to attempt to bring home to the Ontario government the importance of completing this road toward which the federal government has already agreed to pay 50 per cent of the cost for the following reasons. The federal government has quite a keen interest in this area for two or three reasons. One, of course, is, as has been mentioned previously,

Supply-Northern Affairs the federal government's stake in the gold mining industry through the $12 million a year subsidy it pays to that industry. Second, we have seen a couple of danger signals up there this year in the fact that two mines in the Kirkland Lake area and one in the Timmins area, the Coniaurum mine, have announced they are going to close down, that they have reached the end of the ore in their claims. This is going to throw another 500 of the employees of Kirkland Lake out of work and about 200 in Timmins.
Of course, as we well know, when 200 employees of a basic industry like this are thrown out of work, the number of people affected is a great deal more than the actual number of employees. When we realize that competent authorities have estimated that the tourist trade in that area could conceivably amount to something like $5 million a year upon completion of this road then I believe all hon. members can see how important it is to the area and also what a stake this federal government has, both directly and indirectly, in getting this road completed. As I said before, I should like to ask the minister to use his good offices to ensure that we do not have to wait another three years for the completion of this 40 miles of road that has to be built through this area.
This year the committee which deals with the estimates of this department spent the major portion of its time in studying flood control, erosion, water pollution and problems of that nature. I must say that the committee did an excellent job. We had driven home to us the vastness of the problems with which we are faced in this country, and the fact that it is going to take years of work and millions of dollars to repair the damage that has been done by flash floods, by virtue of erosion, and related problems. The problem of water pollution was presented to us, and we were shown how this problem has been building up over the years but has never been faced as yet in this country. I think there is one thing that is significant, and I wonder how many hon. members realize it. These problems are the legacy we have been left by some of the big timber barons and so forth in previous years.
Last week end I had the opportunity of attending a gold conference in the Timmins area. I listened to a man who is possibly well known to many hon. members. He is the district director of the united steelworkers of America, Mr. Larry Sefton. He was speaking about another problem, the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act. I should like to quote a few of his words to illustrate how well they apply to this problem which I have just outlined. He said:
We have justified our silence-


He is talking about their silence with reference to the gold mining problems, the problem of emergency gold mining assistance, and so forth.
We have justified our silence and our fear by believing that, through some strange miracle, the mine owners would pass on at least part of the boodle to those of us who are supposed to be the beneficiaries.
We should have known better. Millionaires don't become millionaires by being socially responsible. They become millionaires and stay millionaires by being socially rapacious. To them both the taxpayers who pay over their money because they think it is going to help Canada's northland communities and those of us who silently support the swindle are but two forms of the same sucker.
I submit that those remarks have a close relationship to the problems which were outlined to our committee this year. The taxpayers who originally owned these resources, and who are now faced with the ruin of them left after somebody used these resources, are in much the same boat. If we were to try in one year to repair the damage that has been done by these irresponsible people exploiting our natural resources it would take more than the whole budget, in fact it would take more than the gross national product of this country. Furthermore, it is a job that could not be done in a year. It will take many years to repair some of this damage that has been done. I submit, that this is a real condemnation of the society to which we subscribe.
The minister went on to point out that the federal government has realized something must be done in this field. He pointed out that in this year's estimates they have set aside an amount of $80,000 to look into this particular problem of conservation. He added that there would be an additional $40,000 from the provinces making a total of $120,000. This may seem like a considerable amount of money if we say it quickly. However, if we realize that there are 10 provinces in this country, it only works out to an average of $12,000 per province. I submit that is not a very rosy picture, certainly not as rosy as it first appeared when the minister painted it to this committee. The worst part of all, Mr. Chairman, is that the system I have mentioned is still being followed. This rape of our natural resources is still continuing and the resultant problems are increasing. We are not even catching up on the problems that have been handed down to us throughout the years; there are more problems being created all the time, certainly more than this amount of $12,000 per province will ever be able to take care of.
A few weeks ago I heard the hon. member for Kootenay West describe to this committee how a tract of timber which has been owned by his family for well over half a

century has been exploited every year, and yet today has more timber on it than when they started. I say, that it is time responsible common sense replaced the rapacious greed and irresponsibility with which the natural resources of this country have been considered. I should like to point out to the minister that no matter how good a job he may think he has done nor how good a job his department is trying to do, we are a long way from beating these problems. The responsibility for them rests on the minister's shoulders because his is the department responsible to the Canadian taxpayers for these problems in our country.


Arthur Smith: I should like to take a minute or two of the time of the committee to discuss one or two subjects which come within the jurisdiction of the department of northern affairs. First, I should like to tell the minister and his officials that nowhere in the government service have I met a group of people who are more cooperative or who have been so prepared to assist us on a variety of problems. I should like to place this tribute to him, his deputy and their staff on the record, because I know this is the feeling of every hon. member on this side of the house. In a moment I am going to make certain remarks which might be construed as criticism, but I am sure the minister will accept them in the spirit in which they are given. I say to him that no one has had a more difficult job in resurrecting a department and putting into effect basic regulations which for the first time in some years are benefiting the people of Canada. I wish him all success because I believe he had done more than any other minister of northern affairs in the recent history of this country in regard to the administration of his department.
I should like to congratulate him, with particular reference to the problem of encouraging tourists to come to Canada, in that at long last we are no longer depicted in the various publications as being purely a country offering the attractions of a vast wilderness; we are no longer depicted as a country which only produces mounted policemen, cold weather and ducks. He has done much to present a better image, one which shows the advantages of our resources, the advantages of our industries without, of course, underplaying the many tourist areas in Canada.
Of all those areas about which perhaps I might say something to him where I believe there is still room for improvement, and I take up at that point where an opposition spokesman left off, and I refer to Canadian oil and gas regulations which were a short time ago promulgated. I concur with the
Supply-Northern Affairs minister's sentiments in that there is certainly a need for establishing greater Canadian participation in these resources. On how we achieve this end there may be some small difference; and only the next three to five-year period will show whether the second of the paragraphs of the clauses contained in these regulations will in effect encourage Canadian participation.
The offending section which conceivably may cause some problem is that referred to as 32 and I refer to subparagraph 3 which prohibits the granting of a lease except to certain classes of people or corporate entities unless they are incorporated in Canada. I repeat my desire that Canadians should have the first right in the development of their natural resources. But I ask the minister to consider a situation where in the development of the Arotic islands in particular, which come under these regulations, and to a large degree the Northwest Territories, whether he had adequately considered the problem associated with northern development recognizing that it may take up to 18 months to prepare for an expedition or an exploration team to carry out the initial work; recognizing that the cost of the operation will be several times that of areas in the more populated areas of Alberta or Saskatchewan.
While he acknowledged what he describes as the logistic problem and has given I think proper consideration to the time element necessary for the oil companies to carry out development in the north, I wonder whether he would not agree that the greater the number of companies developing these resources this is the factor which in itself is going to reduce the cost of operation, not only to those foreign companies but to the Canadian operator. We must keep in mind that the companies have gone from lease to permit, have now a three-year period and at a relatively small price of five cents per acre. We still do not have any real appreciation of the number of companies or the amount of acreage which will be worked or developed.
What I ask the minister is whether we have made the regulations so restrictive in terms that it is going to deter in any way the flow of foreign capital in developing these resources; whether because we have made certain clauses of the regulations retroactive, is this going to place penalties on those companies who were already in the field before the regulations were promulgated; whether we have in any way discouraged capital from Canadian sources from entering the north
6798	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs under circumstances of high risk development. If so, are we then encouraging Canadian participation to the extent that we should like to see it?
I do not think the minister or his officials know the answer to this question and I am certain that I cannot forecast the outcome. I suggest that we shall only know this answer after the three-year period has elapsed and when it is determined how many of these companies are prepared to put up a greater volume of capital and to assume greater risks after they have examined the analysis of their exploration activities. But I ask him and his officials to give more than a casual glance, not only to the companies which are assuming the right to go into the north but also to take a more careful look at the regulations and to see that they are not so restrictive and thus have the effect of discouraging Canadian companies from participating in the exploration of the Arctic islands and the Northwest Territories for oil resources.
I say to him also that he and the cabinet, as a result of this activity, will still have to face their problems for we have read recently of new attempts to separate the Athabasca tar sands, and the quantity of oils that could be made available for the Canadian markets would be substantial. We know of course of the high hopes of his department that we will eventually find oil in the north. We also know that the Canadian oil production today is depressed to the extent where we are able to sell only something under 50 per cent of our ability to produce. This, of course, becomes a combined problem for a number of his colleagues. But I hope in the near future that the minister and his colleagues will make some declaration of policy on how best we are going to be able to market the already established oil reserves. I do not want to prejudge the decision of the government but I hope that soon or later we shall recognize the need for establishing quotas within Canada for exactly the same reasons that the United States established them, namely the need for encouraging oil development and selling more oil within our own boundaries.
I want to say something about a different subject which is not unfamiliar to a number of hon. members, especially the hon. member for Bow River and those from western Canada, and that is the possibility of Canada obtaining the 1968 winter Olympic games. I know this is a matter very close to the heart of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources.


Mr. Drysdale:: Garibaldi.


Arthur Smith: Fortunately he is not responsible nor are his colleagues for the selection of the site. But the day will come when the Canadian Olympic Association after making a feasibility study may come to him and say that Banff-Lake Louise is the only area than can qualify under the circumstances because it has all the necessary facilities. It has not only the Olympic village but it has the slopes approved by the international ski association; unlike the interesting but undeveloped areas on the west coast.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Garibaldi.


Arthur Smith: I say when that associaiton responsible for making the decision is ready to act, the Canadian Olympic Association will, I am sure select Banff-Lake Louise. Newfoundland does not have a bid in. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillin-gate will perhaps change this and indicate to us later what the situation is. I hope when the time does come for action, the minister will ask his parks officials to give us the co-operation which will permit us to proceed with the development of the facilities required for staging these Olympic games. I say this in all seriousness because I know something of the philosophy of the minister. He states that first and foremost he wants to maintain the parks in their natural state. He insists that they be retained-and I think rightfully so-for the majority of Canadians to a point where they lose nothing of their aesthetic quality. I only say to him that I hope he does not, in seeking to maintain their aesthetic quality, leave them for the bears and a few people adjoining the parks but rather that they are made completely accessible to all Canadian people. I am not going to suggest for a moment that he has not done this. But nevertheless there is a risk involved that our policy may make the parks too exclusive. The degree to which you allow facilities to be built up in them, whether you should permit certain basic constructions to carry on is indeed a problem. One thing I say to him is this. Canada will unquestionably be awarded the 1968 Olympic games. As I have said, Banff will be selected as the site. We are therefore I hope going to receive immediately full co-operation from his park officials in order to put the facilities in shape so that we can meet the requirements.
I want to refer, and it has been suggested that perhaps I might so refer, to bears. I know there was a certain amount of facetiousness, not in the way the minister answered the question this morning but because of the obvious humour attached to a certain expression he used. I would hope in all seriousness that in addition to painting the "bear's behind" we do seriously give some thought

to thinning out these animals. I think we should deplete the numbers because in the last two years a great many of them have gone without food and consequently when they move down to the populated areas it is not a question whether you give any encouragement to them, because they will attack you without provocation and we have had several instances of this in recent times.
I suggest that the only solution is to destroy a number of these animals, especially the larger ones; otherwise we will find there is not anything very funny about the subject of painting bears, for quite often the individual concerned will not be able to see if their behinds are painted. Therefore I suggest to the minister that we destroy a large percentage of these animals; in other words, we should cut down the numbers which are currently roaming the parks and thus give the freedom to our people to go camping and to use the facilities of the parks without fear of being attacked by bears.
Lastly I come to the only other point to which I wish to refer, and it was the note on which I began, and that is the encouragement of people to come into our Canadian parks as a whole. It seems to me that while we have made a great deal of progress, as we certainly have, the figures given to the committee today by the minister show that we recognize we have a great deal to offer. I hope he can encourage to an even greater degree his colleagues, especially those on the treasury board, to provide more funds to advertise and promote these parks beyond the borders of the United States, and particularly in Europe, because in the two and one half months I spent there some while ago there seemed to be far too little known of the national parks of Canada. I think I can do no better than to close on that note, by wishing the minister every success in the work he has carried out in his department on behalf of the government, and I know that certainly my colleagues on this side of the house will join with me in that regard.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Arthur Smith: Yes, I would be happy to receive your question.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: When the Olympic committee has found out the Banff site is inadequate, I wonder if the hon. member would be prepared to support Canada's number one site, Garibaldi, in British Columbia?


Arthur Smith: The hon. member for Vancouver-


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Burnaby-Richmond.
Supply-Northern Affairs


Arthur Smith: -has provided me with the opportunity for reminding him that a year ago Banff was selected as Canada's site for the 1964 winter Olympic games, and I have no doubt it will be confirmed in 1968. If it is not I would be happy to support any site selected for Canada.


Mr. Robichaud:: Mr. Chairman, the remarks I intend to make on the first item of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources will be brief. First of all I want to join with the minister and hon. members who preceded me in expressing my regret for the recent illness of our colleague, the hon. member for Mackenzie River, and wish him a very prompt and complete re covery.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: The minister in his remarks expressed his appreciation for the loyalty and devotion of the employees of the department, and here again I want to join with him and express my appreciation for the loyalty and the devotion of the employees of the department, both in Ottawa and in the field. We understand the difficulties encountered by those employees who are called upon to work in the northern and isolated regions of this country. We know that they require exceptional courage and devotion and we feel that those employees should receive the full protection of the department.
May I be permitted to make a brief reference to the unfortunate incident which was referred to in this house this afternoon by the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys where two female employees of his department who were lost while working for the department in the Great Bear lake area. The information which we have is that the plane which was supposed to bring supplies to those girls flew in on July 4, again on July 12 and on July 20. Not only was the plane unable to establish contact but the pilot reported that he had not discovered any sign of human life.
I think we should be told as to when the department was informed of the lack of any sign of life in the area. Reports are circulating that there has been negligence somewhere, that the department was not informed immediately and it was only after the second or third flight that attempts were made to search for those missing employees. I urge the minister of northern affairs to take every precaution at this time so that the employees of his department will not be called upon to suffer due to lack of care and precaution.
In the course of the minister's remarks he referred to the total amount to be voted for

Supply-Northern Affairs the administration of his department for the fiscal year 1960-61. He mentioned that there is this year a decrease of $10 million, and he further stated that this decrease was mainly due to the completion of several major projects. This is an admission by the minister that most of those major projects were initiated by the previous administration and have now been completed, and notwithstanding his great vision the minister has been unable to replace this work with new projects, thus providing the employment so badly needed at this time.
The minister also referred to the northern administration branch of his department, and there again he stated that there was this year in the present estimates now under study a decrease of $4 million, and that this was accounted for mainly by the completion of several major projects. There again he admitted in an indirect way that those projects had been initiated by the previous administration and are now completed.
The minister also made reference to last year's meetings and the report of the committee on mines, forests and waters. We know that that committee made a number of recommendations to the department and to the government, and we would like to know before the estimates of the minister pass how many of those recommendations have been implemented. It is not enough that recommendations should be made. These recommendations must be implemented by action.
The minister has referred to the new activities of his department. We all welcome the announcement he made with reference to the conference on resources of tomorrow which in co-operation with the provinces will be held in Montreal in October, 1961, and I know that all Canadians are looking forward to practical suggestions emerging from this conference.
In referring to the roads to resources program, the minister expressed the hope that the province of Quebec may soon join with the other provinces to share in this program. I know that here again every Canadian will welcome the province of Quebec sharing in this program of roads to resources.
Here, Mr. Chairman, may I refer briefly to a request which is of major interest to my own constituency? I believe that in recent months a request was made by the province of New Brunswick for approval under this roads to resources program of the construction of a bridge to link Shippegan island to Miscou island. On the basis of the correspondence tabled in this house during the present session, I realize that the request made by the province of New Brunswick was somewhat weak and on this basis


the minister turned down the application. But I would like to remind the minister that the reason why the construction of this bridge is desired to serve the population of Miscou island is to develop industry. The entire population of the island is presently employed in fishing operations, but we have on Miscou island one of the largest peat beds in eastern Canada and if a bridge were constructed to link Miscou island to Shippegan island the peat bogs of Miscou island could be developed and a new industry would be introduced capable of employing between 150 and 200 people I understand that the purpose of this roads to resources program is to further the development of industry, so I urge the minister to take a new look at this request and give it favourable consideration.
I could not fail to notice that the reference made by the minister in the course of his remarks to the new oil regulations and oil developments were somewhat limited. It was an approach altogether different from that contained in the statements made by the minister only a few months ago. In fact, he failed to mention in any detail this question of oil and gas development. I wonder if this was because he is embarrassed by some of his previous statements made both inside and outside this chamber; I wonder if the minister is not, perhaps, now even more confused than the people he has been confusing by his extraordinary statements in the past about oil and gas exploration and development?
I have here an article which appeared in the Moose Jaw Times-Herald. of October 30, 1959 and it is entitled: "Low Cost Production of Oil in North, Hamilton Urges". I will read part of this report:
Low cost oil production in the north is in the interest of both government and the oil industry, resources minister Alvin Hamilton said today in outlining special considerations that may be given to northern oil explorers.
"We feel that early development of northern oil and gas resources is a major key to northern development and of importance for our national economy/' Mr. Hamilton told a meeting of the Canadian petroleum association.
But low production costs were vital to allow the investor to show a profit and to permit the government to encourage development and thus swell its revenues. Mr. Hamilton said government policy is to protect the public interest and encourage oil development. "If we do not adopt policies to achieve low cost oil, then it appears likely that northern oil cannot be marketed within the next few years," the minister said.
I think the minister should tell this committee what new policies have been introduced by the government or by his department to achieve this low cost oil which he was talking about in Moose Jaw on October 30, 1959.

I also have here an article which appeared on the editorial page of the Albertan dated January 13, 1960 and it has for title: "Mr. Hamilton's 'Low Cost' Oil". I will read one paragraph of this report:
We don't wish to appear as though we are in any way against Arctic oil development. It is a most important matter for the future development of Canada. But until Mr. Hamilton can come out of the clouds long enough to spell out in detail the secrets of his wonderful plan for low cost Arctic oil, we believe he would be well advised to stop talking about it and to refrain from casting aspersions on the methods, successfully proven, by which other governments have solved certain basic problems.
In referring to the reduction of the estimates of his department, the minister did not make any reference to the increase in the cost of departmental administration. As shown in item 265, this amounts to $120,322 more than last year, and I would like the minister to tell the committee why in 1959 there were two economists employed in his department whereas in 1960 three are employed. Perhaps the minister could also tell us why he now has 21 administrative officers as compared with 18 in 1959, and also why he has eight purchasing agents as compared with six in 1959, in the light of the fact that the capital expenditures of his department are this year being reduced by over $10 million. There is no doubt that this great vision of the Prime Minister's which was so strongly supported by the minister of northern affairs is now gradually fading away.
The minister, addressing the business papers editors association here in Ottawa on January 22, 1960, said, and here again I wish to put on record three points which were mentioned by the minister on that occasion; I am quoting from an article in the the Ottawa Citizen of January 22, 1960 which reads as follows:
Mr. Hamilton said there are three ways in which costs can be reduced:
1-	Elimination of waste, by both government agencies and private companies, through the highest possible level of technical and administrative efficiency.
The increase in the expenditure on the administration of his department certainly does not correspond with the suggestion made by the minister of that time. The report continues:
2-	Effective public investment in the form of roads, airfields, harbours, communications, town-sites and other public services.
3-	New ideas by governments, research institutions, companies, consulting engineers, universities and individuals.
I think the minister should tell us what is being done toward reaching the aims which he was outlining in that address to the business papers editors association in Ottawa on January 22.
Supply-Northern Affairs
I should also like the minister to inform the committee what the situation is with reference to the Pine Point railway. I have here an article from the Edmonton Journal of June 16, 1960, entitled "Peace River MP Says Outlook for Pine Point Railway Good", which reads in part as follows:
G. W. Baldwin, M.P. for Peace River, in a wire to the Journal Thursday said, "There is every reason to believe the federal government will authorize construction of the Pine Point railway soon after the Manning commission report has been considered."
Mr. Baldwin was commenting on a report Wednesday which said "there have been indications that the government may not proceed with construction of the railway link, since the emphasis on mineral exploration has shifted to northern Quebec areas more easily accessible."
In view of the more recent recommendation which was made by members of the Northwest Territories council following the tabling of the report of the Manning royal commission I think the minister should make a definite statement as to the intention of the government with regard to the construction of this railway. We know that the report has been tabled and that it is rather confused. The recommendations have created confusion. This committee and the country have a right to know what will be done by the government with respect to this railway which has been promised.
In his remarks would the minister also offer some clarification with respect to a statement he made as reported in the Windsor Star on February 13, 1958, in a Canadian Press release reading as follows:
According to an editorial in the Globe and Mail of February 14, 1958, resources minister Hamilton stated that his department was considering a road from the Keno Hill mining area in the Yukon to the mouth of the Mackenzie, and another connecting the mineral rich Great Slave lake area with the Arctic.
The program would mean jobs for "hundreds of thousands of Canadians" and would open the way for investment "by Canadian and foreign investors of hundreds of millions of dollars."
Here again we have an example of the vision at work. I hope that before the minister's estimates are passed we will have definite information from the hon. gentleman with respect to these two roads. I will resume my seat now and ask specific questions later on individual items.


Mr. Southam:: Mr. Chairman, in rising to speak on the estimates of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources I should like to join with those hon. members who have expressed sincere regret at the illness of our fellow colleague, the hon. member for Mackenzie River. I have sat here on various occasions and listened to the valuable contributions the hon. member has made
6800	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs to our debates, especially those relating to the subject of northern affairs and national resources.
I also wish to take this opportunity of expressing my congratulations to the minister and to his hard-working officials for the very effective work that is being carried on in this department. My constituency is in the neighbourhood of that of the minister in the province of Saskatchewan, and feeling that I am a kindred spirit I take a particular interest in the work he carries on. The minister heads a busy department with a heavy work load and the hon. gentleman is doing a highly effective job with the assistance of his officials.
I was surprised at the shallow, empty and carping criticism advanced by the hon. members for Nickel Belt and Gloucester in relation to the minister and his department, and particularly with respect to the roads to resources program. Perhaps this stems back to the negative attitude hon. members in that party have taken over the years. I think back to the time of William Lyon Mackenzie when we were planning the development of our great country through bringing in the railway. We did that difficult job despite much adverse criticism from the Liberals, but it proved to hasten the development of Canada and has been a lasting benefit to the nation. It has brought Canada the reputation it now enjoys as the bread basket of the world. Now, approximately 100 years later, we have a similar government in office and the minister of this department has a far-reaching vision to develop our great northland. The remarks of hon. gentlemen to whom I have referred can be viewed only as empty criticism.
Last autumn a representative from one of the leading newspapers of the old country came to Canada to examine the Canadian parliamentary system and the work of the ministry. This correspondent spoke highly of all our cabinet ministers but he singled out one in particular. I refer to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. The correspondent praised him for his vision and the far-reaching leadership he was giving to Canada through the introduction of a great policy for the development of natural resources.
I wish to direct the attention of hon. members of the committee to one of Canada's most important industries, the tourist industry. The attention of hon. members has been directed to this subject on a number of occasions by various hon. members, but particularly by the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. It was mentioned again this evening by the hon. gentleman when he spoke


of planning for the future. Other hon. gentlemen who have made worth-while contributions on this subject this session include the late hon. member for Niagara Falls, the hon. member for Inverness-Richmond and the hon. member for Calgary South. I believe that my colleague, the hon. member for Nanaimo, also made a contribution in this respect not too long ago in this chamber.
I ask the committee to bear with me for a few moments while I attempt to put the tourist industry in perspective again by bringing hon. gentlemen up to date on some statistics. I have in my hand the proceedings of the standing committee of the other place on tourist traffic dated Wednesday, June 10, 1959. The chairman of the committee was the Hon. R. B. Horner. The witnesses called on that occasion were Mr. E. A. Cote, assistant deputy minister of northern affairs and national resources; Colonel James McAvity, president, Canadian tourist association; Mr. John Fisher, executive director, Canadian tourist association; Mr. Allan Field, director, Canadian government travel bureau, and Dr. J. Lawson Mackel, director of public relations, joint board of Ontario travel associations.
I will read a brief excerpt or two from the evidence in order to present these recent statistics which I believe are of interest. Mr. Cote said:
I do not think there is any need to remind hon. Senators that the travel bureau was established in 1934 as a result of the activities of a committee established by the Senate. A moving spirit in this was the late Senator Dennis from Nova Scotia. In that first year, 25 years ago, the bureau's budget for nine months was somewhat modest, being $100,000. Twenty five years later the budget looks a good deal healthier. It is $2.3 million.
In 1934 travel, as far as Canada was concerned, was an export which amounted to, according to the dominion bureau of statistics figures, $106 million. Today it is reckoned by the same bureau that travel as a Canadian export amounts to $352 million.
The latest figures of the dominion bureau of statistics indicate that this sum has increased to $393 million. I continue:
This is the third highest single export by Canada. While these figures show good progress it is not the whole picture. Last year there was a drop of 3 per cent in the travel export figure, a drop of $11 million.
Mr. Cote went on to say:
That much less money has been spent by Americans in Canada. There was much more money indeed spent by Canadians abroad. There was a $30 million increase last year. In 1948 Canada was reported to have obtained 43 per cent of the money spent by Americans abroad, which amounted to $631 million. If Canada obtained such a high amount at that time it was due to the lack of facilities in war-torn Europe. They could not accommodate tourists. The moment European facilities opened and the moment United States and other carriers increased their activities to Europe, then the unprecedented high percentage of Canada's share of the American tourist trade dropped, so

that today out of a total of 1.6 billion United States dollars spent on foreign travel, Canada obtains 22 per cent. This is obviously inevitable but it does not mean by the same token that we should not strive to obtain more United States dollars in Canada.
This is, I think, a very salient factor and pretty well sums up in toto the whole evidence that comes out of this report, the fact that we have to compete for our tourist traffic. As I have just read, in the war years Canada did not have so much competition but now other countries of the world are realizing the value of this export of tourism.
I might say in passing that in my travels across Canada-and I have also had the opportunity of travelling over quite a large area of the United States-I feel that Canada is a veritable gem so far as tourist attraction is concerned. It is something that we have taken for granted and as a result we are now beginning to find it is costing a little money; therefore, we should take a very serious look at the situation. I should like to give a few more statistics to put in perspective just how unfortunate it is. I hold in my hand "Canada 1959". The following description appears on the fly leaf:
The official handbook of present conditions and recent progress. Prepared in the Canada Year Book section, information services division, dominion bureau of statistics, Ottawa.
I think the figures are authentic and enlightening. It refers to Canada's visitor industry and says:
Tourist travel has become one of Canada's major industries. It is the third ranking source of export income, surpassed only by newsprint and wheat, and has grown to such an extent over the past two decades that the standard of living of every Canadian is affected to some extent by the progress it makes each year. The typical dollar from tourism has a primary distribution as follows: between 31 and 32 cents of each dollar is spent on food and beverages; over 23 cents for lodging and 16 cents for transportation; 7 cents of the travel dollar is spent on handicrafts and souvenirs; 12 cents for other merchandise and about 10 cents for other miscellaneous items. This income is then redistributed through all channels of commerce and taxation in the country. Gasoline taxes, for instance, paid by visiting motorists help build more and better highways, while income derived from fish and game licences does its share in conserving those resources. Because of its tremendous returns, the competition in the field of travel is intense and Canada is today faced with the stiffest international rivalry yet encountered, as European countries and Canada's North and South American neighbours vie for visitors. To stimulate travel to Canada, the federal government and the 10 provincial governments each maintain an active bureau, backed by the transportation companies and by regional and local private interests.
There are a great many more statistics here but I do not want to trouble the committee with them. I wanted, as I say, to put this on the record to bring it into perspective. I hold in my hand the Canada Year Book for 1959 and I should like to read what it says
Supply-Northern Affairs about national parks, how effective and important they are in the national tourist picture:
From 1885, when the first national park was established around the mineral hot springs at Banff, Alberta, until 1958, 18 areas covering more than 29,000 square miles have been established as national parks.
These parks are maintained by the federal government for the protection of their flora, fauna and natural phenomena, for the preservation of their scenic beauty and interest and, in some, the marking of their historical significance in the building of the nation. They are supervised by the national parks branch, Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and are developed and maintained in such a manner as to provide perpetual inspiration, education and healthful recreation for present and future generations.
The national parks are Canada's greatest single tourist attraction. Accommodation in privately owned hotels, cabins, chalets, lodges and cottages is available and modern cabins have been built in several of the parks by the national parks administration to afford low rental accommodation for park visitors. Recreational facilities include equipped camp grounds, some with trailer prrk facilities; golf courses in superb scenic settings; tennis courts; bowling greens; well equipped children's playgrounds; athletic fields; horseshoe pitches; outdoor checker-boards; and, in some of the parks, heated outdoor swimming pools with dressing room buildings, and amphitheatres where plays, concerts and film shows are held in the open. For winter sports there are downhill and slalom ski courses, ski jumps, ski tows, and, at Banff, a chair lift.
It goes on to give further statistics. I should like to mention for the record a few of the parks that exist in Canada. We have 18 national parks: four of these are in Alberta, four in British Columbia and, I might say in passing, only one in Saskatchewan. I do this to focus your attention, Mr. Chairman, on the fact that Saskatchewan has only one park. In a few moments I shall deal further with that particular aspect of it. There are a total of 14 historic parks in Canada, and Saskatchewan has one of those, in Prince Albert, four miles south of the city. Originally it was an R.C.M.P. post built in 1876.
There are a total of approximately 310 provincial parks in Canada. Of these British Columbia has the largest number, 137; Ontario comes second with 115; Alberta is third with 37; and Saskatchewan has only 10 provincial parks. This brings me to the point where I should like to suggest to the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources the urgent need of further recreational and park development in my province of Saskatchewan. The increased revenue from this developed resource would greatly assist in eliminating the industrial lag in that area of Canada. In passing, may I say I noticed a little article in the Saskatchewan News, which reads as follows:
If you're at all interested in tourism, and about this time of the year who isn't, you'll like a little

Supply-Northern Affairs
gem the Canadian tourist association managed to dig up. It goes like this: attract an extra 24 tourists every day of the year and you'll have the equivalent of a manufacturing plant with an annual payroll of $100,000.
Now, play with the figures for a while the way a good statistician should. See what you get-240 tourists, one million dollars-2,400 tourists, ten million dollars. Get the idea? Tourism is big business.
When you start to think in terms of a multimillion dollar industry, it's not hard to see why Saskatchewan is conducting a vigorous campaign to attract the attention of out of province guests and you begin to realize some of the advantages of holidaying at home. For, according to provincial travel bureau director, a tourist is anyone who travels away from home for pleasure.
It goes on to say here that the:
-travel bureau points out, people are just beginning to realize there is more to "Cinderella" Saskatchewan than wheat stocks and gopher holes.
The fact is, the entire continent, even Saskatchewan herself has just awakened to the undeniable truth that her foot fits the gilded tourist slipper just as about as neatly as you can get.
I fully realize how much importance the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources puts on the tourist business and its relation to the national parks. In a memorandum sent out on March 16, 1960 he phrased it better than I could, and I should like to quote:
The world has a "population explosion" problem on its hands. The 18 national parks of Canada have a problem of the "exploding metropolis''.
As our cities grow and industries grow, they cut progressively deeper into those natural areas which form an important part of the recreational life of many thousands of Canadians. But the demand for outdoor recreational facilities is also sharply growing, with the result that parklands outside cities are now being used by a greater number of Canadians than ever before in our history.
With few recreational parks across Canada to serve the growing public need, inevitably our national parks have become the major centres of attraction for larger numbers of Canadians every year seeking relaxation through healthy outdoor recreation. But visitors often forget that these beautiful areas exist for other important purposes as well. In fact, the parks were founded as "nature sanctuaries"-to be protected as such for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations of Canada.
This, Mr. Chairman, brings me to a subject that is near and dear to my heart, that is my home constituency of Moose Mountain. The name "Moose Mountain" was arrived at to describe this beautiful parkland area in the north, central section of that constituency. I might say there is an elevated area there, about 500 to 700 feet in height and with an average width of about 12 miles and 20 miles in length. In this beautiful parkland area there are a number of lakes, perhaps 10 or 11 of major size, three of which are of particular interest. These three are known as Kenosee, White Bear lake or what is commonly called Carlyle, and the third is Cannington. I might


say that the provincial government has developed an extensive provincial park known as Moose Mountain park in the Kenosee lake area.
In discussing the problem of park development with the authorities we find that today there is such an intense demand in every section of Canada, in every section of each province for parks to be developed that our treasury departments and departments of natural resources are more or less overcome by these demands. They have not the money available to meet the accelerated demands of the public for recreational facilities.
This demand is only a natural result of the higher standard of living enjoyed today, the shorter hours of work; all these things create an increased demand for recreational facilities. If we do not provide them at home, our people will go elsewhere to find them because today they have the economic ability to travel farther afield in pursuit of these recreational facilities. I believe that we will have to take a second look at this situation where possible. As I mentioned a moment ago, Moose Mountain provincial park area is catering to a great many people. We find people coming in from the United States.
I might mention for the benefit of my colleagues that the reason I am so interested in this particular area is its significant geographical location. Moose Mountain park is only 40 or 50 miles from the United States boundary. I might say in that particular section of the United States, the northern section of North Dakota, the eastern side of Montana and the western side of Minnesota, there are no parklands for a long distance. As a result the people of the United States in that area have been commuting back and forth into Saskatchewan and up into the Moose Mountain area. This has resulted in the overcrowding of the facilities there. There is a very strong demand, even from our friends to the south, for the accelerated development of this park area. The people in southern Saskatchewan, our own Canadian citizens who have the same desire for recreational facilities, are making a strong demand for the development of this area.
I have quite a brief in my file right now urging strong support for the development of the area, and I believe the minister is familiar with it. There is a very strong demand for this, even from the constituents of Assiniboia to the west and Qu'Appelle to the north. I know that we cannot have a national park in every area, but when we can have a beautiful woodland area in what is known as a prairie grassland plain, it does appear to me to present a strong argument for further development. I feel that we could get some support from the provincial government. I

have discussed the matter with the provincial minister of natural resources, and he has indicated a willingness to co-operate but he has admitted they have not the financial resources to meet the cost of development.
I might mention, too, that Saskatchewan has only one national park while Alberta has four and British Columbia has four. I think we should take a look at this plan and balance up the economic possibilities against the cost, balance up the fact that Saskatchewan is basically an agricultural province against the fact that the development of this national park would help the tourist industry. We are very pleased, of course, with the response and the action our department of northern affairs has taken in connection with our roads to resources program. I feel that this will go a long way in helping the development of Saskatchewan from an economic point of view because it will increase our economy through the development of other than agricultural resources.
In passing I should not overlook the fact that in the Moose Mountain area we have a large Indian reservation which is a federal responsibility. We, as a government, have been giving a great deal of consideration to the welfare of our first Canadians. We are being widely acclaimed for this in my own constituency. I fully believe that the development of a national park there would also improve the economic condition of the Indians on the reservation. In thinking of my visits to Banff national park, where they also have Indians close by. They are always a source of great interest to the tourists. The Indians take part in Indian dances, rodeos, and there is a museum situated close to the park boundary. The Indians exhibit their handicraft, leatherwork and beadwork, which also attracts the tourists. This is quite a development in conjunction with the national park. I think the same sort of development should be considered in conjunction with the Moose Mountain park.
I hope that these few remarks will bring these matters to the attention of the minister and that the department will give consideration to them. I think, as I said before, that the whole tourist industry is becoming so important to Canada I would go along with the suggestion of the hon. member for Nanaimo that we should seriously consider the establishment of a department of tourism in conjunction with the department of northern affairs. I was very pleased at the practical look which our government took at the lumber and timber industry which resulted in the opening up of a department of forestry, thus taking some of the responsibility off the shoulders of our hard-working minister. I think the tourist industry is becoming so
Supply-Northern Affairs important we should consider the possibility of establishing a tourism branch, thus bringing to culmination the prosperity of this great tourist industry, which is now the third ranking industry in Canada.


Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Chairman, we have listened to a most interesting discourse from the minister when introducing his estimates. He ran the gamut from northern visions, geographically speaking, in the land of the aurora borealis, to the vision of the north end of a bear going south with his posterior painted red. This was undoubtedly an interesting gamut and an interesting vision. I am not going to speak about the land of the aurora borealis or bears with their rear ends painted red. I leave those subjects to those who know more about them than I do.
The main feature I want to ask information on at the present time is, of course, the question of the minister's attitude on the future of that area in British Columbia on the lower mainland known as Garibaldi park. We have heard and read a good deal of recent weeks and months of an offer being made to the federal authorities to take this area over as a national park. Questions have been asked of the minister upon several occasions by those of us who represent the lower mainland of British Columbia. Up till now at least we have been told that there is nothing official because there has not been anything official from the province of British Columbia. At least that was the last information that was received when questions were asked on orders of the day.
Personally I am rather ashamed of the way in which this matter has been handled- as I understand it, at least, from the press- by those who should be responsible officials in the government of British Columbia. I think they have been absolutely irresponsible, from all my information, in the fact that they do all their talking in the press or to the press-and there is nothing wrong in doing that-but do not say anything of a specific nature so as to bring this matter to a head so that we know just what is going on and whether or not British Columbia is sincere.
As far as all of us from British Columbia are concerned, irrespective of party, we are sincere in our belief that Garibaldi park, if developed, would make an excellent site for the winter Olympics in 1968. From our understanding and knowledge of that area we are also sincere in our belief that, if developed, it would undoubtedly be one of the greatest tourist attractions all the year round in this section of our country and in the western area of this continent. I say it would be an all year round attraction because it is not only attractive from the viewpoint of skiing but it has one of the finest Alpine gardens-that is a
6804	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs natural Alpine garden-in the world and it would be attractive from every point of view.
However, I am not trying to sell Garibaldi park to the minister just because I come from British Columbia. I think the time has arrived for a definite statement from the minister as to what he needs from British Columbia on this project; whether there is anything official; and, if not, just what he requires as the minister in charge of northern affairs and national resources in order to be able to give consideration to the development of Garibaldi park as a national park.
A few moments ago I mentioned the irresponsibility of those who are now running the province of British Columbia. The other day I read in the Vancouver Province a report under date of July 5, 1960. The article was headed "Garibaldi Action up to Ottawa". The article is dated at Victoria and it states as follows:
Nobody here has offered in writing to turn Garibaldi park over to the federal government- and nobody intends to do so.
Recreation minister Earle Westwood made it clear Monday that he is not writing to confirm the verbal offer Premier Bennett made at Squamish recently.
The premier said then that if Ottawa will promise to develop Garibaldi to winter Olympic standards by 1968, B.C. will turn it over for a federal park.
Mr. Westwood said Monday that the next government move is up to Ottawa. He said that the premier arranged-
I would ask you to take note of this, Mr. Chairman.
-that the Squamish board of trade would make the offer to Ottawa through William Payne, M.P.
"We expect that Ottawa will then write us, setting out in writing what it is prepared to do in the park," Mr. Westwood explained. "If it meets our suggestions we will then turn it over."
In 20 years in the provincial legislature and seven years in this House of Commons I have never heard or read of anything quite so fantastic as is the situation we have here where a cabinet minister in British Columbia will state that the premier of British Columbia had arranged that the Squamish board of trade would have a federal member of parliament make an offer to Ottawa to turn over Garibaldi park as a federal park and that then, that having been done-whether or not it has been done, I do not know-it is up to Ottawa to say what they intend to do about it.
As I say, Mr. Chairman, it is the most fantastic method of handling a matter of this nature that I have ever heard of.
I should like to ask the minister whether that is the way in which this matter is being handled, whether he has heard from the Squamish board of trade or whether the local member has now conveyed to him the official desire of British Columbia that Garibaldi park


be taken over as a national park. If so, will he state what were the terms conveyed by the Squamish board of trade or the local member to him as to the requirements of British Columbia and whether or not, if this has been done, he has now notified the premier of British Columbia or the Squamish board of trade of the conditions upon which he will take over this park.
I have put the matter this way because to me this is the most fantastic and ridiculous situation I ever heard of in connection with a serious matter or a serious proposition. If that is the way in which the provincial government is dealing with this matter I think it is time the minister here in Ottawa made a forthright and definite statement as to the interest and attitude of the government at Ottawa and on what is necessary if consideration is to be given to Garibaldi park being turned over as a national park, and the basis upon which his department would be interested in taking that action.
May I add to what I was saying a few moments ago, Mr. Chairman, that to my mind it is one of the greatest potential developments in British Columbia. Garibaldi park now, of course, can be reached only by expert hikers or by helicopter. I have gone over it a number of times by air. Without doubt it has one of the greatest potentials of any section of North America. If developed, it is just about two hours or two and a half hours by car from the lower mainland of British Columbia which contains over half the population of British Columbia. In addition, add on two or three more hours, and within five to six hours you have 1.5 million population in the state of Washington just south of the border interested in all year round attractions, recreation and development.
I have to speak somewhat up in the air because we do not know exactly what the proposition is from the government of British Columbia. I understand that the minister this past year has been in, shall I say, a little bit of turmoil in trying to arrive at a policy across Canada whereby more attention and development can be given to our national parks so that they are to a considerable extent placed on a self-sustaining basis.
I have read enough to know that he may have been up against some difficulties in this regard, but I want to say, personally speaking, that if the minister is interested and will take action if he gets the necessary confirmation from British Columbia to develop Garibaldi as a national park, he need not be disturbed by the fact there may be criticism from the rest of Canada because it would require somewhere in the neighbourhood of about $28 million to $30 million

to put it into operation and provide the proper facilities for the winter Olympics of 1968. I am absolutely convinced, having lived nearly all my life in the city of Vancouver, the the expenditure will be worth while, and I believe that the people of the lower mainland who would patronize that area to a great extent would not have any objection to certain reasonable charges being made on the basis, not of a recovery of capital expenditure but to maintain the recovery of the operating cost of national parks in their utilization throughout the year.
I believe that is a good fundamental basis upon which to operate. I want to stress that because I can understand criticism coming from hon. members in other provinces if a heavy expenditure was made of a capital nature on Garibaldi if it were just done on the basis of doing something for only six weeks in 1968. I want to assure hon. members that such will not be the case if Garibaldi is developed. It would be something on an all year round basis and one of the greatest attractions in western Canada, and I am certain we would all agree to a policy whereby annual operating costs were a charge on those who use the park and benefited from its recreational facilities and its own natural beauty.
I will not say any more, but I hope the air will be somewhat cleared when the minister replies to all the questions and suggestions which have been made and that he will state what he knows the situation to be, whether he has heard officially from British Columbia, and whether, if he is put in the position to make any definite recommendations to the cabinet for the development of this area, he is able to say what expenditure of capital moneys is required.


Charles Ronald McKay Granger: Mr. Chairman, as hon. members know, my riding includes Labrador, one of the great northern areas of Canada. That is why I have such particular interest in the estimates of the minister's department, and why I have always been interested in the northern vision.
I am not one to scoff at vision. I believe quite literally what the scripture says, that where there is no vision, a people perish. But I do think that I should criticize, if I may, what I may think to be a limited vision or a narrow vision, and my chief criticism of the northern vision is that it is not beamed wide enough. It does seem to me as if the beam heads northwest and fails to take in the northeastern part of Canada, and I do not think it is fair that a large section of the north should apparently be left out of plans for northern development.
Supply*-Northern Affairs
Labrador is a great Canadian treasure house. In recent years particularly, its wealth has been recognized, but it is still to a large extent an unknown land. Labrador has been very fortunate in this respect, that the premier of the province of Newfoundland sensed long ago the need for Labrador's development and the development which is taking place there now is a fulfilment of Premier Smallwood's vision. For developments are taking place in this land which even now is largely unknown and which not too log ago was almost completely unknown.
I would like to mention the hydro power development at Twin Falls on the Hamilton river by the British Newfoundland Corporation and the transmission line being built to the iron ore deposits in the Carol lake and lake Wabush area. In the former we have the Iron Ore Company of Canada and its associates even now developing iron ore mines, and in the latter the Pickands Mather Company and its associates are planning mining development. The time will come when not only the iron ore of Labrador will mean much to the Canadian economy, but the almost limitless power of the Hamilton river may supply power outside the confines of Labrador.
In addition to iron ore and water power there is last, but by no means least, the great resources of the waters off the coast of Labrador. The Labrador fisheries have for many years provided a livelihood for many people and are nowadays becoming of increasing importance, and I venture to say that before very long these fisheries will be absolutely vital to Canada.
But Labrador-and this is where I would invite the minister's especial attention-is so vast and has such potential wealth that it is obvious, at least to me, that a road building program is needed there. It seems to me equally obvious that only an agency like the federal government can build the roads which Labrador needs; a road from Goose Bay to the iron ore area and on down to Seven Islands. I might say that the town and seaport of Seven Islands itself, although not in the province of Newfoundland, has undergone rapid growth and expansion and this affects the Canadian economy in general. The growth of Seven Islands has been largely due to the development of the north. The time will come when I believe it will be plain to everyone that federal roads in Labrador are a necessity. Sometimes too much time can be lost waiting for development. It is often wise to do the planning now in readiness for what the future may require. I would like to see roads not only in the interior of Labrador but along the coast. As a secondary item,

Supply-Northern Affairs tourism in Labrador will undoubtedly add much to the tourist intake in dollars in Canada.
If I may speak of tourism for a moment I should like to point out something which I know is not new. The car ferry operating in Newfoundland, the William Carson, is proving to be very successful but it cannot handle the traffic that is offered. Sooner or later another car ferry operating from the east coast of Newfoundland will be required if the tourist possibilities of the island are to be realized. I do not overlook for future development a linkage of the road system of the mainland with the road system on the island by a causeway or tunnel or ferry across the straits of Belle Isle. Of course, some of these things must wait for future development, but the beginning of roads to known resources in Labrador is something which should not be delayed and I would ask the minister to keep in mind the development of Labrador by provision of federal roads there.
In concluding these brief remarks I should like to make a suggestion that the minister might consider in connection with the original inhabitants of what is now Newfoundland, the Beothic Indians who unfortunately ar.e today extinct. These early inhabitants have disappeared. The last survivor, Mary Marsh, died years ago, and I should like the minister to consider whether it would not be appropriate in connection with historic sites and monuments to provide a monument in an appropriate place to the last of this tragic race.


Mr. MacLellan:: Mr. Chairman, the fact that this is the third occasion in the period of a little over two years since I first entered this house in which I have arisen to deal specifically with the development of Fortress Louisburg, illustrates the vital importance which I attach to this subject. I should like to thank the minister of northern affairs very sincerely for the interest he and his department have shown in Louisburg since our first conversations concerning it in 1958 and would like to express my appreciation to the Cape Breton associated boards of trade and to the people of Louisburg for their representations to the minister on behalf of the development of Louisburg as a prime historic site.
The general interest in Fortress Louisburg as one of the foremost historic monuments of this continent was aptly demonstrated at the bicentenary of the final siege of Louisburg on July 27, 1958 when some 40,000 people visited the old fortress to remember for a moment one of the most outstanding chapters in Canada's history. Indeed, the interest of not only Canadian, but also of American


tourists is shown by the increased registration at the museum every year. Last year, for example, there was a 25 per cent increase in visitors over 1957-58.
At present at Louisburg there is a good museum which displays many of the exhibits and mementos of the days when Louisburg was a thriving, self-sufficient, French community, and in particular an excellent scale reproduction of the old fortress town, showing the location of the various gates in the fort, the moat and private and public buildings.
As a result of the minister's interest in a long range development plan to show Louisburg as it should be shown he sent Mr. Russell Harper, an outstanding archaeologist, to Louisburg in 1959. Mr. Harper and his wife both worked very diligently, with the labour which comes from keen personal interest, and made a comprehensive and very useful report to the minister. It is noteworthy that Mr. Harper, before commencing his work at the site, devoted some time in the French archives at Paris to studying some of the old documents and maps of the fortress and harbour which are preserved there, and also checked the information available in our Canadian archives. I very much hope that Mr. Harper will be able to return again to continue some of the excellent archaeological work of last summer.
There can be no question in anyone's mind that Louisburg is a prime landmark of the chapter of strife between England and France out of which this nation was born. It was built by Louis XIV at so great a cost that it is said he expected to see the spires of Louisburg rising in the western sky from his palace in France. It was the only completely walled city in North America, and as the guardian of the gulf of the St. Lawrence, was the foremost sentinel of France in North America. After Louisburg had fallen in 1758 it was possible to lay siege to Quebec in 1759, and no chapter of Canadian history is complete without the pages devoted to the battles and diplomacy that swirled about Louisburg.
The interest of the New England people in Louisburg can be quickly understood from the fact that there are buried there many young men of the expeditionary force of four thousand that successfully lay siege to the town in 1745, augmented by eight warships. I think that it should be impressed upon all young Canadians that Canada's future was determined on the 27th of July, 1758 when men who were enemies at the dawn joined together at sunset to lay the foundations of this great British and French nation.
Apart altogether from its historic importance, and from the very obvious necessity

of its being developed on that score, I would like to point out that an investment by the minister in Louisburg would be of paramount economic importance to my constituency and indeed to all of Nova Scotia. Over the past three years our tourist industry has grown at an unprecedented rate.
However, one of the difficulties we encounter in Cape Breton is that tourists, brought to the island by the magnificent scenery of Inverness county and the Cabot trail often visit the trail and then leave via Baddeck without visiting the southern part of the island. If Louisburg were built into the tremendous tourist attraction which it has the potential to become it would serve to bring tourists from Baddeck, after visiting the Cabot trail, to Cape Breton and Richmond counties. Indeed, I hope some day that the traffic to the fortress of Louisburg will be such that a major highway can be built along the south shore of Cape Breton and Richmond counties through Gabarouse, Framboise, Grand River and L'Ardoise to St. Peters, so that tourists could make a circular drive around Cape Breton island and have a chance to see the very beautiful scenery on the Atlantic coast of Cape Breton and Richmond counties.
In these days when the government is making a special effort to find a solution to the unemployment that has arisen as a result of the headlong plunge into automation by Canadian industry in its effort to meet world trade competition I would suggest that there could be no better means of providing employment for jobless persons than in expediting development of some of our national parks and historic monuments.
Work on the Louisburg fortress, for example, would have to be done almost entirely by hand as the use of machines could very well destroy valuable mementos and relics that it would be necessary to preserve. A large scale plan for redevelopment of the fortress would also coincide very well with the need for employment for persons engaged in seasonal industry. In the Louisburg area the prime employment is in fishing. The fishermen very badly need some ancillary form of employment which they can turn to after the lobster season is over, and in the fall of the year when seas are too rough to permit safe sailing. There are many men available for work of this type after the fishing season, and I would most heartily commend to the minister an immediate program at Louisburg to develop it into a foremost Canadian tourist attraction and as a by-product, to provide much needed employment in the area.
The possibilities for development at Louisburg are limitless. The old cobblestone streets
79951-0-429
Supply-Northern Affairs covered with earth and rubble should be cleared so that tourists can walk upon the same ground as did some of the first Canadian settlers. A typical dwelling of the period should be restored and possibly one of the public buildings such as the chapel. The original altar of the old French chapel is still on the island of Cape Breton and in use in a church not far from Louisburg. I also think the King's garden should be restored with the original flowers and a large scale model of the fort and town should be constructed so that visitors who come to Louisburg can see the story of this town portrayed in a graphic and dramatic manner.
I know that the minister has studied very carefully the brief of the associated boards of trade which I had the honour to present to him on behalf of the people of Cape Breton island last year. It contains very many excellent practical suggestions for the restoration of Louisburg. I again commend it to his attention and submit that for purposes of providing employment, and for the development of our vital, expanding, tourist industry, and for the preservation of Canada's most important historic landmark a major redevelopment program should be instituted at fortress Louisburg as soon as possible.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, would the hon. member permit a question?


Robert Simpson MacLellan: Certainly.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I listened attentively to what the hon. member said. I wonder if the hon. gentleman would tell us if automation has now taken the place of the Liberal inheritance in the Tory mythology of the explanations of unemployment?


Robert Simpson MacLellan: Mr. Chairman, I would say that perhaps one of the chief reasons for unemployment at the moment, is the rampant inflation that the Liberals allowed in this nation after the last war.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Chairman, I wish to take the minister to task for something rather petty to start off with. In his remarks the minister referred to the committee on mines, forests and waters as not being a political committee. I wish to say in general terms that I would like to see the hon. gentleman and other ministers drop the habit of using the word "political" in a dirty sense. What is the matter with being political? How are we going to get the game of politics to become something meaningful and something of which we can be proud if ministers are going to roar around saying that to be political is dirty and unclean. The minister was loud in his praise of the committee because he thought it was not a political committee. This is a petty point but since the minister tends
6808	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs to be one of the idealists on the Conservative front benches I wish he would make the elevation of the words "politics" and "political" part of his credo.
The report the minister made indicates that the department has moved toward meeting the recommendations of the committee that reviewed the department rather fully last year. He indicated especially that the department was taking action with reference to two branches, the tourist bureau and the forestry branch and the provision for expansion there. We welcome both moves, as the minister knows, especially in relation to forestry.
After spending a day in the travel bureau watching the system they have built up of tracing and developing contracts by direct mail I was very much impressed by the almost scientific means the bureau now has for determining the kind of advertising that is effective in drawing people. With all respect to those hon. members who are anxious to have more travel bureau offices located in the United States, my own conclusion after looking at the system thoroughly was that perhaps a more effective return for the money would be in making sure that the travel bureau and more money for its direct mail contacts that follow newspaper, magazine and television advertising, especially magazine advertising. The system of punch card sorting the bureau has is so intriguing in the results it brings forward that I only wish it could be applied to more aspects of the government service.
The minister is very proud of the conservation conference which is now called resources for tomorrow. I want to know why it is being held in Montreal? Montreal does not strike me as being a particularly good location. I can think of others such as Toronto or Winnipeg which seem to me to offer a more natural location in view of the leading role of the federal government is playing in this conference.
I also wish to know from the minister more details about the preliminaries to the conference. We have so many conferences, conventions and panels that one grows sceptical about them. I understand that the largest conference held here in recent years was the one on education. I have yet to meet anyone who took part in that conference who was not dissatisfied with it because there were too many meetings, too many papers and too little opportunity to get an over-all point of view.
I want more details on how the conference planning group will bring the major problems into focus. Is it planned to have some of the preliminary papers printed and publicized several months in advance in order to give


the people attending the conference some introductory information to enable them to play a vital role? The minister has stressed that the conference will deal with the multiple use concept. That is a phrase something like the phrases "sustained yield" or "integrated management" or "conservation of resources". It sounds very good and most people would accept it but I want to know how the concept will be approached by this particular conference.
The reason I am so sceptical is that we have had conservation conferences in Canada before. We had a rather mighty one back before 1920 as a result of which all kinds of books were published. You can find them on some old library shelves. They went into such things as forest fire losses, the danger from bugs, the need of research, and these are things which I suspect will come up again.
I want to know from the minister how this conference is going to be planned in order to get the maximum amount of co-operation and value out of it. We do not want this to be one of those conferences where a bunch of experts get together and dazzle each other with their particular science and the whole thing fades away. I want to know what the goals of the conference will be and what is going to be achieved at the end of the conference. Conferences to me are somewhat suspect these days unless we know fairly certainly that something will come out of the meetings.
Another reason I am suspicious about conferences is just because the minister has indicated that the co-operation from the provinces looks pretty rosy. If the minister's servants have reached the stage where they have all of the provinces co-operating beautifully for this resources program I suspect it must be a pretty bland conference because there are enough differences in outlook and lags in approach in the various provinces to make one wonder if we are not going to get something of great mediocrity.
I do not want to push criticism of the conference too far. I feel that some good could come out of it but I also entertain some suspicion in my mind about it because of the rather grandiose way the minister proclaimed it without giving too much in the way of detail as to how it will be worked out. Since he has had his corps of experts going on this for several months, I should like to know a bit more about it. I should like to know the kind of papers that are going to be prepared. Are they going to be largely scientific; are they going to be popular papers? Is there going to be an aspect of the conference designed for the popular person, or the person

who must have a popularized approach? These are all things I think we need to know about.
Another point I wanted to mention to the minister was that he began his remarks with a very praiseworthy reference to all his civil servants. I wish some day we would get the minister to stand up here and tell us just what he finds wrong not with particular civil servants but with the civil servants that work under him. The suspicion that many of us had in the committee last year, and one of the reasons why its recommendations were so extensive, were that many of the minister's advisers, while they were quite beautiful workers and went by the book, were strongly lacking in imagination. I should like to get from the minister some examples to show that there was some imagination on the part of his officials. I know when I look at the incident of the Rousseau case I wonder about the imagination of some of the senior officials. I should like to get from him some examples of how these civil servants of his are really kicking through with the imaginative leadership. I know some of them are quite good at dreaming up propaganda, because I have in front of me here an advertisement that appeared in the Powell River Digester last year. It is done in colour and is entitled:
Look to the North! By Hon. Alvin Hamilton.
It has a very nice picture of the minister over in the corner and a majestic shot of the Laurentian shield in colour with the focus upon the Northwest Territories and that grand domain where the minister is operating. Let me tell you what makes me skeptical. I want to read the last paragraph of this particular presentation. I think it makes the point. I imagine this is by the minister with some advice from those great civil servants of his. It says:
The time-honoured means of transportation by rail is also to add its quickening influence to the development of the north. The federal government's decision that a railway connection is to be extended to the south shore of Great Slave lake is another good omen for the early opening of a new and exciting chapter in the economic development of Canada's last frontier.
This magazine was published well over a year ago. Judging by the time it takes to produce a blurb like this, it seems to me the minister must have written this late in 1958, almost two years ago. Just listen to this:
-a new and exciting chapter in the economic development of Canada's last frontier.
We wonder about the pace of this development. Another point that interests me is that over two years ago the minister rapped United States control of Canadian mineral resources and especially Canadian iron ore.
79951-0-429J
Supply-Northern Affairs I am reading from an article in the Montreal Gazette of April 15, 1958. It says:
Hon. Alvin Hamilton, head of northern affairs and national resources, told the annual dinner meeting of the Canadian institute of mining and metallurgy at the Queen Elizabeth hotel that this "outside control" presented the great difference in the ore and finished products industries.
One of the significant things that we heard when the Wabush railway bill was before the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines was that less than $1 in the way of royalty was going to Newfoundland and to Labrador from each ton of ore that poured out of that particular area, while the value of that ore was much higher than that. This would tend to support the argument that for some reason United States control of these particular resources as it works through provincial authorities leads to an inadequate return to the people who own the resources. In view of the ringing speech that the minister made two years ago I should like to hear from him what progress has been made in making the shift. I know in his speech he referred to the new regulations that had been provided in so far as oil is concerned. I have a copy of them here. I believe they were published in the Canada Gazette. I also have some of the Canada mining regulations that were promulgated recently.
While foreign capital is going to have more encouragement to explore, when it comes to the exploitation stage Canadians are going to be protected. Is there any possibility of any of this being done on a retroactive basis? Is there any possibility that the minister and his officials might be able to do something in going around and talking to some of the provinces that have sold so much of their natural resources birthright with no particular return?
If the minister is going to be the great Messiah in the natural resources field, bringing Canadian resources into control and exploitation of Canadians, the place to start is not only in his own particular bailiwick but in offering leadership to the provinces. I should like very much to know whether this resources for tomorrow conference is going to have this on its agenda? Is the resources for tomorrow conference going to consider this question of foreign control of our natural resources, not only for the future but what they control at the present time?
The minister promises to table returns. He indicates that he does not expect to get into the particular jackpot that he did last year when he told us, that as Premier Frost had finished his electoral campaign he could go ahead and give us the information. The agreement with Ontario has been signed. When we
6810	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs get to that part of the estimates will he tell us in detail just what progress has been made?
I want to repeat the question on which I have had some correspondence with the minister. I refer to the particular matter of using the resources funds to develop the connecting link between highways 11 and 17 over the lake Superior north shore watershed, somewhere in the area of Manitou-wadge, roughly between Hornepayne and Hearst, down through Manitouwadge to White River or to Marathon. The minister's last communication to me was to the effect that this road location project had been approved but no furher word of it had been received from the provincial government. I should like to get from the minister at that particular stage of his estimates some information as to how the provinces are responding to this particular program. I should like to know whether Ontario is taking up the full limit of the money that is available under the $15 million program?
The picnic sites grant on the trans-Canada highway is also very interesting; but I under-tand it is just a 50-50 split of $2 million, or the federal government pays up to $2 million. I suppose the provincial governments put up the other $2 million, which make a total of $4 million. The division is going to be on the total mileage of the highway. I should like the minister to give us some idea of the total mileage of that highway. If it is as long as I expect it is in thousands of miles, that $4 million is going to be broken down to a pretty small figure. I could become very enthusiastic about these picnic sites, especially if there were a crash program to do something in the area north from Sault Ste Marie to Marathon. However, the figures seem rather pitiful when we consider the length of the highway.
The water resources branch was very thoroughly investigated by the committee chaired by the hon. member for Comox-Alberni. I do not want to touch on that at all except to ask the minister what part his conference next year is going to play in connection with the question of water pollution. There were no details about that in his speech that I recall, and it seems to me this is one of the areas of crying and nagging concern. We can look at the cesspool outside our door or the one in Hamilton harbour; we can see what they have done in Montreal. We have great problems even in an area such as my own. I think one of the most imaginative things Premier Frost has done has been the establishment of his water resources board and the projection of this very large expenditure of over a billion


dollars in the future to ensure that the urban communities in Ontario have adequate water resources. How much money is the federal government going to put up to help provinces such as Ontario with a program such as this? Is there any liaison at all? Have there been any requests, and what does Ontario want in this particular field? Is this going to be one of the central focal points of the conference?
We are told that our water is becoming so valuable that ultimately we may have tremendous projects to pipe water from the Hudson bay watershed down into the great lakes system in order to provide the United States with water. Actually water can become one of the biggest sale assets to the United States, if this evaluation of the problem is as bad as it seems to be, and if there seems to be a lowering of the water tables across much of North America where there is heavy urban development. It seems to me this should be a very important, almost a contentious point in a conservation conference. I should like to hear from the minister what part pollution is going to play in this particular conference.
The minister gave an indication that the national parks program is going along well and that there is increased usage of these parks. I should like to know whether it would be possible for the federal government to play any larger role in connection with Quetico park. We in the central part of Canada are not very lucky or fortunate in so far as federal national parks are concerned. If there is any possibility of the federal government negotiating with the provinces in connection with any area such as Quetico I think it would be very much to the good. The provincial government again has been doing quite well in its spending on parks, but in our particular region the federal government makes almost no contribution. You have to drive, I suppose, all the way to Manitoba, and well into Manitoba to find a federal park.
The minister gave us some figures in connection with oil exploration. Evidently there were priority bids for some 140 million acres. Now there are actual permit holders with licences to explore in some 45 million acres. I sometimes wish the minister would give those figures in square miles, which would bring it down to something of the proportions that we can understand. I consider that there are in the northwest some 500,000 square miles. I think we would get a much better sense of proportion if we had the figure in square miles rather than in these

grand figures of acres. Acres of moose pasture do not mean a thing, whereas square miles puts it in better perspective.
In connection with the northern part of the minister's statement I should like to read him something that I clipped from the Journal of last year wherein Dr. Maxwell Dunbar of McGill University, an expert on northern living, said that Canada's northern workers were pampered and spoiled. The article reads:
Dr. Maxwell Dunbar, a McGill University expert on northern living, says Canada's northern workers are pampered, spoiled and over-protected.
Far from being the dedicated, happy band of pioneers they are popularly pictured, Dr. Dunbar said Tuesday, most northern communities are "unhappy, torn by petty jealousy, boredom and over-developed egos."
They are this way, he told a meeting of the national federation of financial analysts societies, because companies interested in northern development don't hire the right sort of people.
Dr. Dunbar later went on to say that suitable men could be attracted by the "high moral standard" which used to characterize northern living; quiet, modest people with senses of humour, cynical rather than overoptimistic and without illusions about their strengths and weaknesses. I wonder if the minister has consulted this expert on northern living. The reason I ask is that conversations with a friend of mine, whose name I cannot reveal but I would not mind telling the minister privately, seem to confirm much of the information contained in this clipping. She made a tour of this area last year and indicated that this kind of judgment was a fairly sound one and that, indeed, the northern workers were rather pampered and spoiled and that, far from being dedicated, they were rather unhappy and bored. Indeed, this criticism is a reflection of the kind of development that is taking place in the north. I heard a gentleman over the C.B.C. radio about six weeks ago from British Columbia giving exactly the same analysis. It seems to me that this is a very real problem in relation to the tremendous optimism of the vision that the minister is always preaching. Is it possible that the very over-optimism of people like the minister may create the very boredom and unhappiness?
My views on this are not substantiated particularly, but they are supported somewhat from reading this book I have here called "The Canadian Northwest: Its Potentialities". It is a symposium presented to the Royal Society of Canada and those men who did the various parts are all very distinguished in their fields. I can give the minister a sample of their kind of thinking, which I would suggest indicates that perhaps he has been somewhat over-optimistic. I am reading this paragraph from the section called
Supply-Northern Affairs "Assesment by a Geographer", written by William C. Wonders, professor of geography, University of Alberta. The last paragraph
reads:
In conclusion, if we are serious in our oft-stated support of such a policy, we must be prepared to pay for it. Eventually the north may carry itself but we cannot expect this immediately. In 1953-54 the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources was constituted to demonstrate our increasing interest in the north. A capable, efficient organization exists to effect such policy. Yet since the formation of this department, it never has received as much as 1 per cent of the federal budget. For the fiscal year ending March 31, 1957, it received $37 million, or 0.8 per cent of the total, and less than half of this was for northern purposes! At this rate we can hardly discharge our present responsibility in the north, let alone realize the fulfilment of its promise.
The minister has given some indication that spending in his department has gone up. I should like to know how much expenditures for the north are expanding in relation to the total Canadian budget. Are we up above the 1 per cent mark yet? One of the last articles in this particular book is one written by a man by the name of D. B. Turner and it is called "The Resources Future". He has the interesting argument that the development of the north will be a rather temporary one. He argues that a century from now there will be no more people in the north than there seem to be at the present time. He argues that the potentialities in terms of various agricultural soils are not enough to support a large population, that the climate is against a large population or a larger population and that the only interest in the north-that is, the economic one; there are no cultural reasons that he can particularly see-would be the exportation of mineral resources.
This interest is I think the rather obvious one and the minister has geared his northern administration to move in this direction. But the question I keep hearing from the people in my own particular region is this. Why is this government so intent on the north and the northwest when we have closer at hand so many mineral resources that are not exploited at the present time? Here again is a subject with which I should like to see this conservation conference deal. This is a question of priority in exploitation. If we have copper mines that are not even functioning in northern Ontario; if we have base metal resources in northern Manitoba that we are not even touching; if we have huge iron ore deposits along the southern fringe of the shield, what priority should we give to mineral resources in the north?
I cannot give any answers to the minister but I would suggest that here again a priority schedule or a discussion of a priority schedule
6812	HOUSE OF
Supply-Northern Affairs of development will be of fundamental importance to this conservation conference. I can think of it in these terms because I think we have to go into it in these terms inasmuch as the minister has indicated what this government is going to spend in the north in order to lay the groundwork for private development.
Private development,-that is private risk capital, as I understand it-because of great government expenditures in the north, may go in there to develop it; and yet it is perfectly arguable, in the light of our resources and proper economics, that that particular capital might be much better spent or much better directed into resource development in the southern fringe of Canada's shield. One cannot be too dogmatic about anything like this but it is a matter that I should like to see considered by this conservation conference.
In concluding my remarks may I say that I should like to hear from the minister about his claim for the littoral, in so far as the regulations are concerned. I should like to know whether he has yet heard from any of the provincial organizations. I should like to have a bit of elaboration on what the continental shelf means to him and what distance is involved. If there was a discovery of oil, say, out in James bay, in the relatively shallow waters, who would have the right to exploit that oil say within the 10-mile mark or the 12-mile mark, in terms of jurisdiction? Are these new regulations an indication that the provinces have rescinded their rights in this particular field or is there something to be worked out? I do not think this is a great matter but it could be a contentious one. I should like to say that our particular view is that we are glad to see the federal government make this particular claim.
In conclusion I should like to thank the minister for the pleasant treatment I have had from him, his executive assistant and most of his officials. I have always insisted to many members of this House of Commons that the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, is one of the most underrated ministers in the cabinet. I should like to say that, in my opinion, if there is any member in the cabinet who stands out in terms of sincerity, he is that minister. While I can find a great deal to criticize about his administration, I think he deserves at least that expression of opinion at the conclusion of what have been largely critical remarks.


Mr. Dumas:: The minister devoted some part of his remarks to this important national undertaking, namely the conservation conference which is to be held in October of 1961. We were told by the minister that in 1958 and 1959 meetings were organized with


representatives of the various provinces and that the provinces had shown their desire to do everything they could for conservation. It was decided that this national conference would be limited to renewable resources. I think that is fair enough because even at that it will cover a large part of our natural resources including agriculture, forestry, water, wildlife and fisheries. The minister also mentioned recreation. I think those who will participate in this conference will have a great deal to do. I think this conference can be a good thing. I hope that good results will flow from the conference next fall.
Contrary to what has been said by the hon. member for Port Arthur, I think that Montreal is an ideal place in which to hold this conference. Montreal is the metropolis of a province which is rich in natural resources. We have immense forests and tremendous water power resources of which only a small part has been already harnessed. Montreal is definitely the place in which to held this conference. The availability of good hotels should recommend Montreal. Good accommodation would be an assurance in advance of the success of the conference next fall.
Another part of the minister's statement this morning covered the road to resources program. I would have hoped that the minister would say more about this program. Last year he had an extensive statement which was mostly made up of promises. This year his statement was short. Of course he repeated that this was one of the major development programs used by this government and that there was an offer by the federal government to share the cost on a 50-50 basis with the provinces to a maximum of $15 million over the length of the various agreements.
He also mentioned that agreements had been signed with all nine participating provinces, meaning that already nine provinces are participating. It will be interesting to know what amount of money has been spent to date. In the blue book for 1958-59 I notice that the government has spent $1.75 million on this program. For 1959-60, of course, we do not have the final figures. However, the blue book shows that to December 1, 1959 the government has spent $349,000 and there was an estimated amount of some $8 million to be spent during 1959-60. It would be interesting to know if this amount has been spent; I suspect it has not.
The minister told us last year that this program could not start as quickly as he would have liked. However, we can say that it is not what everybody was led to understand, that millions and millions of dollars would be spent on roads to resources. We have had lots of time for this program to



I960

[Stage Direction]
be expanded, and I notice the minister mentioned that the province of Quebec is working out with the federal government a plan to join in the roads to resources program. As early as July 9 there was an article in Le Devoir to this effect:
(Translation):
The Lesage administration has already approached the Diefenbaker government with regard to possible sharing in the roads to resources program and the provision of picnic and camping grounds. Such was the information being passed along the corridors of the House of Commons, yesterday, in Ottawa.
(Text):
I also understand that the minister has received a visit from the Quebec minister of mines, and I hope that following this visit the minister will be in a position to tell us that everything will be done by his department so that Quebec will be able to go ahead with this program of roads to resources in a very short time. Actually, in Quebec the province is building a road about 110 miles long from the town of Amos to the lake Mattagami mining area and this road should be built under this program.
Unfortunately the previous government of Quebec did not want to participate in this program with the result that already some money has been spent in the construction of this road, money which should have been spent by the federal government. I sincerely hope the minister will see his way clear to let the province of Quebec take advantage of this very important program of roads to resources, especially for this road going from the town of Amos to the lake Mattagami mining area. I understand the cost of the road has been estimated at $4 million and the province of Quebec instead of coming here and trying to co-operate with this government to share 50 per cent went and constructed this road by themselves. But they were not shy to go to the mining companies and ask them to participate in the cost of this road.
I already mentioned in this chamber that I was against asking the mining companies to participate in the cost of building a road of that kind, if it is a hard road leading to a definite point where you have only one mining company.
The minister has already explained his department is ready to participate even in the construction of those roads on a 33 per cent basis; the provincial government would put up 33 per cent and the mining company interested would put up 33 per cent. That is all right, but in the matter of constructing a road which will be utilized by maybe 100 companies engaged in exploration and by other people interested in the lumber and pulp
Business of the House
industry, a road like this should be the responsibility of the provincial government and the federal government.
I hope the minister will answer these questions: How much money did we spend in 1959-60? We know that in 1958-59 we spent $1.75 million on roads to resources. I would also like to know what we spent in 1959-60 and the amount the minister really expects his department will spend for the year 196061. In the estimates there is the amount of $8 million while last year it was $9 million. Of course these figures do not mean anything, because as I said before during the last fiscal year we did not spend the full amount of $9 million.
Another matter in which I am interested concerns the construction of roads in Yukon and the Northwest Territories. Last year an amount of $4.1 million was spent in the Yukon and $6.9 million in the Northwest Territories. This year we are supposed to spend $3.4 million in the Yukon and $4.1 million in the Northwest Territories. This is a difference of $3.5 million, meaning that this coming year we will spend $3.5 million less. Is that because roads are not necessary or is it because the program is not such that plans are ready to construct those roads? Because I understand the government had a program of $100 million to be spent in the Yukon and Northwest Territories during the next seven years.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.

John Whitney Pickersgill: Has the minister any
change to suggest with respect to the program for tomorrow, and I think he also undertook to say what would be done at the beginning of next week.


Gordon Minto Churchill: No change in the program for tomorrow.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the minister would list the departments again so that they are on Hansard.


Gordon Minto Churchill: We will carry on with northern affairs, followed by the estimates of secretary of state, defence production and legislation.
For Monday and Tuesday we will deal with legislation, chiefly the combines act. I am not in a position to report to the house what other items might come forward. I said that there might be one or two minor items to announce, but unfortunately that information is not available tonight.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to special order.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Items Passed
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:

[Stage Direction]
314.	Administration, and operation and maintenance of parks, parkways and grounds adjoining government buildings at Ottawa and Hull, $1,860,320.
315.	Interest charges on outstanding loans that were made for the purpose of acquiring property in the national capital region, $800,000.
316.	Payment to the national capital fund, $3,450,000.
Privy council-
National capital commission-
488.	Loans to the national capital commission in accordance with section 16 of the National Capital Act for the purpose of acquiring property in the national capital region, excluding property being acquired for the purpose of establishing what is commonly referred to as the "Greenbelt", $2,300,000.
489.	Loans to the national capital commission, in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with section 16 of the National Capital Act for the purpose of acquiring property in that area of the national capital region commonly referred to as the "Greenbelt", $8,000,000.

[Stage Direction]
457.	Departmental administration, $2,367,981.
458.	District services-administration, $3,295,958.
459.	Veterans' welfare services, $3,544,272. Treatment services-
460.	Operation of hospitals and administration including authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year for hospital and related services, $44,634,594.
461.	Medical research and education, $350,000.
462.	Hospital construction, improvements, equipment, and acquisition of land, $4,937,000.
463.	Prosthetic services-supply, manufacture and administration including authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year for prosthetic and related services, $1,286,275.
464.	Veterans' bureau, $643,705.
465.	War veterans allowance board-administration, $155,960.
War veterans allowances and other benefits-
466.	War veterans allowances, $62,079,000.
467.	Assistance fund (war veterans allowances). $3,000,000.
468.	Treatment and other allowances, $2,560,000. Miscellaneous payments-
469.	Burials and memorials, $1,417,150.
470.	Grant to army benevolent fund, $18,000.
471.	Grant to Canadian Legion, $9,000.
Canadian pension commission-
472.	Administration expenses, $2,496,755.
473.	Pensions for disability and death, including pensions granted under the authority of the civilian government employees (war) compensation order, P.C. 45/8848 of November 22, 1944, which shall be subject to the Pension Act; and including Newfoundland special awards, $148,939,700.
474.	Gallantry awards-world war II and special force, $21,000.
Soldier settlement and Veterans' Land Act-
475.	Administration of Veterans' Land Act; soldier settlement and British family settlement, $5,152,000.
476.	Upkeep of property, Veterans' Land Act, including engineering and other investigational
planning expenses that do not add tangible value to real property; taxes, insurance and maintenance of public utilities, $47,500.
477.	Grants to veterans settled on provincial lands in accordance with agreements with provincial governments under section 38 of the Veterans' Land Act and grants to veterans settled on dominion lands, in accordance with an agreement with the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources under section 38 of the Veterans' Land Act, $115,000.
478.	Grants to Indian veterans settled on Indian reserve lands under section 39 of the Veterans' Land Act, $60,000.
479.	Reduction of indebtedness to the director of soldier settlement of a settler in respect of a property in his possession, the title of which is held by the director, or such soldier settler loans which are administered by the Indian affairs branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, by an amount which will reduce his indebtedness to an amount in keeping with the productive capacity of the property or his ability to repay his indebtedness under regulations approved by the governor in council, $1,000.
480.	To authorize, subject to the approval of the governor in council, necessary remedial work on properties constructed under individual firm price contracts and sold under the Veterans' Land Act and to correct defects for which neither the veteran nor the contractor can be held financially responsible: and for such other work on other properties as may be required to protect the interest of the director therein, $5,700.
Terminable services-
481.	Veterans benefits, including assistance and the training of certain pensioners under regulations approved by the governor in council, $713,900.
Repayment in such amounts as the Minister of Veterans Affairs determines, not exceeding the whole of amounts equivalent to the compensating adjustments or payments made under the acts hereunder referred to, where the person who made the compensating adjustments or payments received no benefit under the Veterans'' Land Act,. or where, having had financial assistance under the last mentioned act, they are deemed by the minister on termination of their Veterans' Land Act contracts or agreements to have derived thereunder either no benefits or benefits that are less than the amounts of the compensating adjustments or payments-
482.	Repayments under subsection (3) of section 12 of the Veterans Rehabilitation Act, $15,000.
Veterans affairs-
495.	To increase to $400,000 the amount that may be charged at any time to the revolving fund established by vote 517 of the Appropriation Act No. 5, 1958, for the purpose of financing the manufacture of remembrance day poppies and wreaths; additional amount required, $50,000.
Soldiers Settlement and Veterans' Land Act-
496.	Protection of security-soldier settlement, and refunds of surplus to veterans, $4,550.
497.	Purchase of land and permanent improvements; cost of permanent improvements to be effected; removal of encumbrances; stock and equipment; and protection of security under the Veterans' Land Act, $28,624,965.
571.	Treatment services-operation of hospitals and administration-further amount required, $766,213.
572.	Prosthetic services-supply, manufacture and administration-further amount required, $50,000.
Canadian pension commission-
573.	Gallantry awards-world war II and special force-further amount required. $2,300.
[Stage Direction]
Saturday, July 23, 1960