1960-02-24

Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, I think the house would be interested to know that the investigation into possible criminal activities in connection with the collection of tolls on the Jacques Cartier bridge has now advanced to the point where it appears that criminal charges should be laid. Accordingly my colleague, the Minister of Justice, has appointed counsel to assess the evidence now available, to advise as to the course of further criminal investigations, and to draft the charges that should be laid. The house can be assured that the completion of this aspect of the investigation and the laying of charges against all those who may be involved in a criminal way will be pressed with the greatest possible speed.
It is the view of the government that until this aspect of the investigation has been completed, and the number and extent of those involved in criminal activities have been ascertained and specific charges have been laid, the hearings before the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines should not be resumed. As soon, however, as charges have been laid, the government will ask the committee to resume its hearings immediately and make the fullest possible examination of all other aspects of the matter. (Translation):


Mr. Johnson:: Has the member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier) nothing to say?
(Text):



CANADA ELECTIONS ACT


Mr. Jean-Paul Racine (Beauce) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-48, to amend the Canada Elections Act (age of voters).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Jean-Paul Racine: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to provide that the age of voters under the Canada Elections Act shall be 18 years in lieu of 21 years as at present.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



STARRED QUESTIONS


Mr. Robichaud: 1.	Did the Borden commission hold hearings in the Atlantic provinces?
2.	If so, on what dates, in what places and from which bodies did it receive submissions?


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: The answer to No. 1 is no. The answer to No. 2 is as follows. Submissions were presented to the commission at public hearings in Montreal from (a) the department of mines, province of Nova Scotia, on July 22, 1958, and (b) Irving Oil Company Limited, New Brunswick, on July 16, 1958.
As the hon. gentleman knows, recently the Rand commission on coal was appointed and it will shortly be holding hearings in the mari times.


GOLD HOARDINGS AND SALES
Mr. Fisher: 1.	Did changes initiated by the government in 1956 allow gold producers to hoard or sell privately any or all of their production?
2.	If so, has the government statistical information which indicates (a) how much, in value and in ratio, of gold production for the years since has been so hoarded or sold; (b) what producers have so hoarded or sold such gold in these years and the respective value of each's holdings and sales?


Mr. R. A. Bell (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance):: 1.	In his budget speech on March 20, 1956, the then minister of finance announced "Mines agreeing to forgo aid under the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act will be able to sell their gold wherever they desire subject merely to reporting their production and sales to the Department of Finance." This policy has not been altered. Mines whose production costs place them in the position of qualifying for emergency gold mining assistance must sell to the Royal Canadian Mint all or that portion of their production on which they wish to obtain assistance. Mines whose production costs do not place them in the position of qualifying for emergency gold mining assistance and producers who do not come within the definition of a gold mine as stated in the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act, may dispose of their gold wherever they wish. There is no obligation on

Starred Questions
the part of producers in these latter categories to report to the Department of Finance unless they use the Mint facilities.
2.	The reporting which is given to the Department of Finance is done on a confidential basis and it is considered to be not in public interest to release such information as is available.


EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES CONTRACTS, NATO
Mr. Fisher: 1.	Is there provision within the NATO infrastructure for competition bidding from member countries on any contracts for equipment and supplies?
2.	If so, have Canada and Canadian companies entered any bids for such contracts in the past five years?
3.	How many bids were made each year and how many to what value, for what items, by what companies, were successful?
4.	What was the total value each year for the contracts let within the NATO infrastructure?


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I think we would have to ask the hon. member if he will allow this to stand. Several departments are concerned with regard to this, and it is a question of consulting with NATO to see if this information can be obtained.
Question stands.


RICHELIEU SEAWAY INVESTIGATION
Mr. Cardin: 1.	Is the investigation of the economic and technical feasibility of constructing the Richelieu seaway that would link the St. Lawrence to the Hudson river being continued by the present government?
2.	If so, what government departments are now engaged in making an economic and technical study of the Richelieu seaway?
3.	What department is in charge of co-ordinating these studies?
4.	When were these studies begun?
5.	Has there been any correspondence with the international joint commission concerning this project since the completion of the St. Lawrence seaway?
6.	Has the government, since 1957, had any correspondence with the authorities of the state of New York and/or Washington on the subject?


Hon. Leon Balcer (Acting Secretary of State):: 1.	Yes.
2.	The Department of Transport and the Department of Public Works are reviewing the economic and technical aspects of this project.
3.	The Department of Transport.
4.	Spring of 1959.
5.	No.
6.	Yes.


PROVINCIAL RESIDENCE REQUIREMENTS, WELFARE ASSISTANCE
Mr. Benidickson: 1.	Has agreement been reached with any of the provinces for reduction of the minimum Canadian residence requirements as one of the bases for cost-sharing of payments under the Old Age Assistance Act, the Blind Persons Act and the Disabled Persons Act?
2.	If so, with what provinces, and what minimum residence term has been agreed upon with each?


Hon. J. W. Monteith (Minisier of National Health and Welfare):: 1.	No.
2.	The minimum residence requirement in the three acts is 10 years' residence in Canada. This has been the residence requirement under the Blind Persons Act since January 1, 1952; under the Disabled Persons Act since January 1, 1955; and under the Old Age Assistance Act since November 1, 1957. The requirement is set out in the legislation as passed by the parliament of Canada and can only be changed by parliament. All provinces have agreed to the residence requirement specified in each of the three acts.


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT PERSONNEL
Mr. Fisher: 1.	Has the employee strength of the Department of Transport gone up since January 1, 1957?
2.	If so, what has been the percentage increase, as of the end of 1957, 1958 and 1959, in each of the following services: air; canal; marine (including steamship inspection) ?
3.	What consideration has been given, either internally in the department or by the civil service commission, or by the department, and the civil service commission, to either (a) slow up the rate of growth or (b) reduce staff that becomes redundant?
4.	What form has such consideration taken, and has it led to any reports, recommendations or actions affecting the number of employees?


George Harris Hees: The answer to this question is of great length, and with the consent of the house I should like it to be printed in Hansard without being read.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The answer referred to above is as follows:]
The answer to part 1 is yes. As to part 2 the answer by services is as follows:
Air services, including casual and part time employees: December 31, 1957, 11.75 per cent; December 31, 1958, 9.07 per cent; December 31, 1959, 3.04 per cent.
Canal services, including casual and part time employees: December 31, 1957, .93 per cent (decrease); December 31, 1958, 2.94 per cent (decrease); December 31, 1959, 66.49 per cent (decrease).

Marine services, including casual and part time employees: December 31, 1957, 1.72 per cent; December 31, 1958, 5.7 per cent; December 31, 1959, 1.03 per cent.
With regard to part 3 I might say-(a) The development of formulae to measure realistically the work load foi a number of classes in the major work areas of the department.
(b)	The following delegation of authority which directly reduced work load, both at Ottawa headquarters and in regional and district offices:
Delegation of authority to regional and district offices for construction contracts to a value of $50,000 and maintenance contracts to a value of $5,000;
To approve and purchase locally non-stock materials, supplies and spare parts to a value of $1,000;
To rent and enter leases for departmental property;
To enter into service contracts in all cases where standard rates are applicable and no capital expenditures are involved;
Through decentralization to regional and district offices, accounting work for all operational and maintenance votes.
(c)	The more important operational changes which slowed up growth or reduced staff are the following:
Electrification of lighthouses at many locations;
Replacement of older ships with modem vessels capable of greater work capacity and effectiveness;
Discontinuance of lifesaving service at Sable island;
Introduction of high speed mobile equipment for runway clearing;
Establishment of more formalized procedures for program and co-ordination of planning in relation to construction programs;
Introduction of a 54-hour work week at northern stations;
Installation of automatic telephone system for Magdalen island;
Transfer to provide private ownership of telephone and communications systems in the maritime provinces, Alberta and Saskatchewan;
Reducing the number of inspections required for certain licensed radio stations;
Use of contract cleaning service at airport terminal buildings.
(d)	For the purpose of obtaining greater flexibility, improved analyses and to slow up rate of growth, the department has developed a program whereby a substantial number of projects are now undertaken on data processing machines.
In answer to part 4, consideration has taken the following forms:
Orders for Returns
Group discussions at district, regional and headquarters levels.
Special teams studying specific problems, either within region or at headquarters.
Discussions with outside commercial organizations having similar experience and problems.
Use of suggestions received in suggestion award program.
Training programs directed toward establishing good supervisory practices and high employee productivity and employment.
Use of special departmental committees to make special annual review of staff requirements and to thoroughly screen requests for additional staff. Also an annual review of department staff by an establishment review committee consisting of officers of the civil service commission, treasury board and the department.
It is considered that staff increases would have been substantially greater had not the procedures and actions outlined above been taken.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Argue: 1.	Have any goods been stolen from the premises of the national harbours board, Montreal, and from customers using the facilities? If so, what value each year from January 1, 1948 to January 1, 1960?
2.	How many convictions, if any, for theft from the premises of the national harbours board, Montreal, have been obtained each year from January 1, 1948 to January 1, 1960?
3.	(a) What is the name of each person so convicted; (b) date of conviction; (c) nature of theft; (d) sentence imposed; (e) what force or protective agency obtained the evidence used in each case?


NATIONAL HARBOURS BOARD, MONTREAL   POLICE FORCE
Mr. Argue: 1.	What is the name of the chief of police, and each member of the police force of the national harbours board, Montreal?
2.	What was the date of appointment of each, qualifications, and salaries?
3.	Is there a competitive examination for harbours board police?
4.	If so, under what body is it administered, and what are the standards and qualifications required for this force?
5.	If not, who approves appointments and under what authority?


NATIONAL HARBOURS BOARD, MONTREAL   PURCHASES
Mr. Argue: 1.	Have any (a) locomotives; (b) rail cars; (c) cranes; (d) trucks, been purchased by the national harbours board, Montreal, from January 1, 1948 to January 1, 1960?
2.	If so, (a) what was the total money expended in purchases of each item in each of these years;

Orders for Returns
(b)	from whom was each purchase made; (c) on what date; (d) for what quantity of what item; (e) for what total price?


NATIONAL HARBOURS BOARD, MONTREAL  PUR- CHASE TENDERS
Mr. Argue: 1.	Have any (a) locomotives; (b) rail cars; (c) cranes; (d) trucks, been purchased by the national harbours board, Montreal, from January 1, 1948 to January 1, 1960?
2.	If so, were tenders advertised (a) in what papers; (b) on what dates; (c) what tenders were received, and from whom; (d) value of each; (e) what was the nature of the tender; (f) which one was accepted?
3.	Was the lowest tender accepted in each case? If not, for what reason?
4.	Were bid forms sent out in regard to any purchase?
5.	If so, (a) what was the name of each company to whom a bid was sent; (b) on what date;
(c)	for what purpose; (d) from whom were bids received, and on what purchase; (e) what price was submitted in each case; (f) which bids were accepted; (g) on what date?


ANTIBIOTIC PATENTS
Mr. Howard: 1.	Are any patents held for each of the pharmaceuticals of (a) nystatin; (b) tyrothricin; (c) neomycin; (d) dihydrostreptomycin; (e) streptomycin; (f) tetracycline; (g) oxy tetracycline; (h) meprobamate; (i) chlorpromazine; (j) chlorothiazide; (k) chlortetracy cline; (1) erythromycin; (m) chloramphenicol; (n) penicillin?
2.	If so, and for each of the said pharmaceuticals what are (a) the names and addresses of the patentees; (b) the dates upon which each patent was issued?
3.	Has the commissioner of patents issued any licences for the production of any of the said pharmaceuticals?
4.	If so, for each such pharmaceutical what are
(a)	the names and addresses of the licencees;
(b)	the dates upon which each such licence was issued?


INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND DISPUTES INVESTIGATION ACT
Mr. Howard: 1.	Since January 1, 1950, has the governor in council altered the remuneration payable under section 64 of the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act?
2.	If so, what was (a) the date of each change; (b) the new provisions which each such change ordered?



COLLECTIVE BARGAINING


Mr. Howard: 1.	Since January 1, 1958, have any conciliation boards been appointed to endeavour to bring about agreement between parties engaged in collective bargaining? If so, how many?
2.	Has the initial period of activities of conciliation boards of fourteen days been extended in any cases?
3.	If so, in how many instances and with respect to each such extension; (a) by what additional period of time? (b) was the extension agreed upon by the parties? (c) was the extension allowed by the ministry?




Mr. Howard: 1.	Since January 1, 1958, have any conciliation officers been instructed to confer with parties engaged in collective bargaining? If so, how many?
2.	Has the initial period of activities of conciliation officers of 14 days been extended in any cases?
3.	If so, in how many instances and with respect to each such extension: (a) by what additional period of time? (b) was the conciliation officer instrumental in bringing about agreement between the parties?



COLLECTIVE BARGAINING-APPOINTMENTS OF CHAIRMEN

Mr. Howard: 1.	Since January 1, 1956, have any conciliation boards been appointed to endeavour to bring about agreement between parties engaged in collective bargaining?
2.	If so, with respect to the chairman of each such board: (a) what was the date of his appointment? (b) what was his name and address? (c) what was his total and per diem remuneration?
(d)	was he selected by agreement of the two other members of the board?



WINTER WORK PROGRAMS


Mr. Denis: 1.	By provinces, what is the number of municipalities, towns and cities in Canada?
2.	How many municipalities, towns or cities in each province took part in the federal govermnent winter work program during the winter of 1958-59?
3.	What provinces contributed financial aid to this program, and what amount by each province?
4.	What are the estimates or actual amount, in connection with this program, incurred by (a) the provinces; (b) the municipalities, towns or cities;
(c)	the federal government?



ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT AGES

Mr. Badanai: 1.	What is the normal retirement age for officers in each of the three defence services, of the equivalent rank of: (a) navy vice admiral; (b) navy rear admiral; (c) navy commodore; (d) navy captain; (e) navy commander; (f) navy lieutenant commander; (g) navy lieutenant; (h) navy sublieutenant?
2.	What is the formula for calculating the pension of an officer in the defence forces?
3.	What officers of the rank of rear admiral, major general, air vice marshal or above are now receiving service pensions?
4.	In respect to each of these officers covered by (3): (a) what was the date of his retirement; (b) what was his age at retirement? (c) what is his annual pension?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 35-Mr. Howard:
For a copy of all telegrams, letters and other documents exchanged between the govermnent or any agency or department thereof, and Northland

Navigation Company Limited or any other person since January 1, 1958, relative to the steamship subventions for western local steamship services.
He said: I wonder if I might indicate that as a result of discussions I have had with the department I have discovered that there are a great number of routine letters which it is not my intention should fall within the ambit of this motion. If that is agreeable to the minister, perhaps we could proceed on that basis.
George Harris Hees: That is quite agreeable.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitation which has been expressed, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 51-Mr. Roberge:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged from June 1957 to date, between the Premier of British Columbia or any other member of the British Columbia government and the Minister of Finance or any member of the federal government on the subject of federal financial assistance for the development of the Columbia river.
Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: There is no objection to accepting this motion subject to obtaining the permission of the province of British Columbia, and subject to the usual reservations concerning privileged documents. However, I think it should be understood that some of these documents which are still under negotiation cannot be tabled at this time.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitation expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 53-Mr. Pickersgill:
For a copy of all correspondence exchanged between the government of Canada and the government of Manitoba since June 16, 1958, regarding federal financial assistance in the flood control program in the Red river valley, including correspondence regarding the tabling or publication of such correspondence.
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I see no objection to accepting this motion subject to the same reservations that apply to the last motion.


Mr. Pickersgill:: 
Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to accept the motion subject to the limitation expressed by the minister?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 54-Mr. Caron:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, contracts, agreements and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the government of Saskatchewan, any Saskatchewan municipal government, and any other Saskatchewan organization, since June 1, 1953, concerning the construction of a bridge over the Saskatchewan river in the city of Prince Albert, Saskatchewan.
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: This motion seems like a duplication of the motion of the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) last week. However, subject to the usual reservations I see no reason for objecting to this motion, because the date mentioned is different from that mentioned in the motion of the hon. member for Assiniboia.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitation expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
INTERPROVINCIAL BRIDGE, OTTAWA-HULL Motion No. 55-Mr. Caron:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, contracts, agreements and other documents exchanged between the federal government, the provincial governments of Quebec and Ontario, and the municipal governments of Hull and Ottawa since June 1, 1957, concerning the construction of a bridge over the Ottawa river between the cities of Hull and Ottawa.
Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of Public Works):: The motion is accepted subject to the usual reservations concerning the production of provincial correspondence.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitation expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 56-Mr. Mcllrailh:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the Canadian government, on the one hand, and the United States government on the other in the period of the past two years on the subject of the purchase of uranium by the United States of America from Canada.
Hon. Howard C. Green (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: I would ask that this motion be subject to the usual reservations.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitation expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 57-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the government of each province since January 28, 1959, dealing with federal assistance toward the construction of (a) the trans-Canada highway: (b) a primary highway system; (c) provincial highways; (d) urban roads.
David James Walker: The motion is accepted, subject to the usual reservations.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitation expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 58-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the government of Saskatchewan since January 28, 1959, dealing with the building of power plants, and electrical transmission lines, within Saskatchewan.
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: This motion is acceptable, subject to the usual reservations.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitation expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier):: I wish to address a question to the Minister of National Defence in view of the fact that the United Kingdom has decided to change its plans and revert to manned interceptors, as reported in a news item in the Ottawa Journal of February 19 with a London date line, the first sentence of which reads as follows:
Just three years after the government announced that the end of manned tactical airplanes was in sight plans now are going ahead for new fighters and bombers, both to be operated by flying crews.
Can the minister tell the house whether the government has decided to follow a similar course in Canada?


Hon. G. R. Pearkes (Minister of Naiional Defence):: Mr. Speaker, as far as I know the defence policy of the United Kingdom, as expressed in the most recent white paper, is to combine the various forms of defence against attack from the air. They are going ahead with the development of ground to air missiles, and at the same time they have some interceptors.
As far as Canada is concerned, we have interceptors at the present time and we are going ahead with the preparations for the Bomarc missile.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kooienay West):: Mr. Speaker, with your permission I wish to go on a legitimate fishing expedition. I wish to address a question to the Minister of Fisheries. Would the minister inform the house whether he or any of his officials have had correspondence with the minister of recreation for the province of British Columbia suggesting a meeting to discuss the licensing of sports fishing by the federal government?


Hon. J. A. MacLean (Minister of Fisheries):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for giving me notice of his intention to ask this question.
Correspondence has been exchanged recently between the department of recreation and conservation of British Columbia and the area director of the federal Department of Fisheries at Vancouver, suggesting that a meeting might be held to discuss the possibility of introducing a licensing system for sports fishing in tidal waters in British Columbia. The proposed meeting is scheduled to take place in Victoria in about two weeks' time.
I should make it clear, however, that this suggested proposal has nothing to do with the licensing system of sports fishing in inland waters, which system is and for many years has been purely under the jurisdiction and control of the provincial government.



HARBOURS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucester):: I wish to address a question to the Minister of Public Works. In view of the recent decision by Brunswick Mining and Smelting Corporation

Limited to bring the Brunswick lead-zinc mine into commercial production, can the minister advise the house whether the government is now prepared to proceed with major developments in the port of Bathurst, as announced in a communique issued by the Prime Minister on September 27, 1957?


David James Walker: Mr. Speaker, may I thank the hon. member for his question, and answer it under the following headings.
First, in 1957 the government, at the request of the Brunswick Mining and Smelting Company, agreed to carry out capital dredging in the entrance channel and turning basin at Carron point at an estimated cost of $3,500,000. This agreement was on the understanding that the Brunswick Mining and Smelting Company would proceed with its plans to invest in excess of $20 million for a lead smelter, zinc concentrator and other facilities, including a dock.
Second, at the request of the company this agreement was suspended due to the depressed condition of the world market in lead and zinc, which made it inadvisable for the company to carry out this development.
Third, the department has received no request from the company for a renewal of this agreement.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. P. Deschatelets (Maisonneuve-Rose-moni):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the Minister of Labour. Will the minister tell the house whether, since January 15 last, he has received any communication from the authorities of the province of Quebec expressing their concern at the unemployment situation in the province of Quebec, and suggesting a possible program for its solution?


Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, not to my knowledge.



ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. W. Martin (Timmins):: I would like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence, of which I sent him notice yesterday. Now that the minister has seen
Inquiries of the Ministry the letter with reference to the alleged activities of R.C.A.F. personnel at Rivers, Manitoba, would he be prepared to comment on these allegations?


George Randolph Pearkes: The answer to the first part of the question asked by the hon. member is that the Department of National Defence does not exercise control over the activities of service personnel during their off-duty hours as long as their activities do not bring any disrepute to the service, and if there is no emergency.
The second part asks regarding the selling to the general public of automotive and petroleum products. In certain circumstances the canteens or stores of the Maple Leaf services have established pumps by means of which gasoline and other automotive products may be sold to station personnel only. This rule is strictly enforced. It is not permitted to sell to the general public, and the allegation made in the letter that there is selling to the general public is quite wrong. If the hon. member knows of any particular instances where members of the general public have been supplied I shall be only too pleased to look into this and correct it. Disciplinary action will be taken.



SHIPPING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Harris Hees: Yesterday, in connection with the tabling by the Secretary of State for External Affairs of the aide memoires dealing with pilotage on the great lakes, the hon. member for Laurier asked two supplementary questions.
The first of these related to the matter of restricted areas. The hon. gentleman will find that the aide memoires explain the basis upon which agreement is being reached on this matter.
The second question related to the legislative intentions of the government. This matter will require the introduction of legislation in Canada, but I am not yet in a position to announce a definite decision in this regard. It may, however, be introduced during the latter part of the present session.


Lionel Chevrier: A supplementary question. The last sentence in the aide memoire reads:
In the event that that bill does become law in the United States, it is the intention of the Canadian government to submit to the Canadian parliament legislative proposals which would effect

Inquiries of the Ministry just such a co-ordinated pilotage regime in the great lakes in the manner indicated in the United States aide memoire.
My question is, do I take it from that sentence that legislation will not be introduced here until the bill becomes law in the United States?


George Harris Hees: It will not be introduced here until we are certain that it will be passed in the United States.



AIR TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. R. Smith (Calgary South):: May I ask
the Minister of Transport whether he can confirm that Canadian Pacific Air Lines has made application for an extension of its licence to include the important city of Calgary on its Vancouver-Amsterdam route?


George Harris Hees: Yes; Canadian Pacific Air Lines has made application to have Calgary added to its present route licence-Vancouver-Edmonton-Amsterdam-as a Canadian point of call on its international route.
This application is at present under consideration but has not as yet been acted upon.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lucien Cardin (Richelieu-Vercheres):: I wish to address a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Can the hon. lady inform the house whether she has received any indication to the effect that the acceptance by Canada of 400 refugees and 100 tubercular refugees under the special program to assist refugees will not cost the government the $600,000 originally estimated0 If this is the case, will the government consider accepting more of these unfortunate people, at least up to the point when the $600,000 earmarked for this purpose is exhausted?


Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: I do not think we can estimate the cost until all the bills are in, and in any case the cost is dependent to a large extent on the length of hospitalization required by those who need treatment. It is true there is some indication that it may not be as expensive a procedure as was first envisioned. The whole matter is being considered.
[Mr. Chevrier.l



JAPAN-REQUEST FOR STATEMENT ON DISCUSSIONS WITH PRIME MINISTER

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if I might ask the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to a letter, signed by the Japanese ambassador, which appeared in the New Canadian of February 6, in which the ambassador said that during the recent visit to Ottawa of Prime Minister Kishi the question of immigration was discussed with Canadian government leaders; and whether the Prime Minister can make any comment on that discussion.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the particular item in question has not been drawn to my attention; therefore I am unable to make a reply.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Can the Prime Minister make any comment on any discussions that there were on this subject?


John George Diefenbaker: On what subject?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Immigration.


John George Diefenbaker: I have no recollection of any discussion on that subject. I am speaking, of course, from memory at the moment, but I do not think I am in error in that regard.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, in connection with the answer I gave to the question of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate that in my recollection there had been no discussion between Prime Minister Kishi and myself with regard to immigration, my answer still stands; but it has been pointed out to me that on the occasion of our discussions some reference was made to the fact that the province of Saskatchewan wished to secure various managerial and technological personnel from Japan. The question arose as to whether they could stay beyond the usual period in the event that such arrangements were made. That was not an immigration matter, but it may be the matter to which the hon. gentleman was referring in the article in question.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I thank the Prime Minister for his explanation. This letter is signed, of course, by the ambassador of Japan and it does not say that the discussion was with the Prime Minister. It says there was discussion with the government leaders. I read it before, but perhaps I might be permitted to read it again. It says that "the question of immigration was discussed with Canadian government leaders". That was the question I addressed to the Prime Minister.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. J. Broome (Vancouver South):: I wish to address a question to the Minister of Labour. To what persons or organizations, other than labour unions, will the unemployment insurance commission make available information on the files of claimants with the claimants' written, signed approval?


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member advised me of his intention to ask this question, and I have the following answer for him.
The release of information by officials of the unemployment insurance commission relating to individual claims is specifically dealt with in section 98 of the act. In this section it is set out that such information may be released where the commission deems it advisable, thus leaving discretion in the hands of the commission. The governing factor in all such cases is, of course, the claimant's own interest and his welfare.
In the case of labour unions, where presumably the union is acting on behalf of the claimant, it is presumed to be in the interests of the claimant. There are other cases, even where the request might be made by the claimant, where such a presumption would not exist. There are no definite categories of persons or groups to whom such information is or is not released.
I believe, Mr. Speaker, that each case is dealt with on its merits by the officials of the commission, keeping in mind the central factor of the claimant's welfare. I might add that if the hon. member has any specific case of an individual or organization in mind, if he would bring it to my attention I should be glad to look into it.


Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister care to comment on the letter sent out by the regional director of the unemployment insurance commission in Quebec, in which he said their offices have been forbidden to give this type of information to third parties? Does this agree with the minister's statement of policy?


Michael Starr: I would not wish to make any comment on the document the hon. member has referred to until I have had a chance to look at it and ascertain the source of the information.


Hazen Robert Argue: I sent the minister the document a few days ago; I would ask him to look into it.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Michael Starr: A few moments ago the hon. member for Assiniboia asked me a question and advised that he had brought the matter to my attention a few days ago. He has now sent over the information, and I find that he has addressed a letter to me dated yesterday, but I have not received it as yet. Now that I have this letter I shall look into the matter and endeavour to answer it.



BRIDGES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Grant Campbell (Stormont):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of Transport. Is the minister prepared to review the decision which resulted in an increase in fares on the international bridge at Cornwall, especially with regard to commuter fares?


George Harris Hees: Yes, Mr. Speaker.



PUBLIC BUILDINGS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Maurice Bourget (Levis):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. With respect to the answer given by the minister on February 18 to a question dealing with the construction of the post office building at St. Maxime de Scott, cpunty of Dorchester, Quebec, can the minister now inform the house when we may expect the examination of qualifications and tendering methods of the two lowest tenderers to be completed?


David James Walker: Shortly, Mr. Speaker.


Maurice Bourget: I should like to direct a supplementary question to the minister following the answer he has just given me. Does he not feel that in more than two months the department has had ample time to make such an investigation?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member's question is one of those argumentative ones that had better be made in debate.


Maurice Bourget: With your permission, sir, may I be allowed to show the urgency of the question?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Maurice Bourget: I think I should be permitted to show the urgency of the matter.

Inquiries of the Ministry Mr. Speaker: If the hon. member has the question I directed to him on Wednesday, another question he may ask it, but the February 17, in connection with the unquestion in the form in which he now asks employment situation in Pictou, which ques-it simply does not conform with the practice, tion he took as notice at that time.


Maurice Bourget: I should like to be allowed Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime
to show the urgency of the question.	Minister): Mr. Speaker, I hope to answer that
question tomorrow.



HISTORIC SITES AND MONUMENTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Murdo William Martin: Mr. Speaker, some time ago, I believe on January 25, I directed a question to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources took the question as notice at that time. It had to do with a national historic site, namely Battlefield park at Stoney Creek, Ontario. I wonder whether the minister has looked into the matter and is prepared to make any comment.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: At the time the hon. member asked the question I stated that some years ago the department of northern affairs had taken this over as a national historic park. Actually I should have said a national historic site.
This was done back before the first world war. At that time the department made a contribution of $5,000 to the historic site on condition, I think, and on the understanding that the society would raise the remainder of the cost of the monument. This cost was $16,000. The society failed to raise this amount, so we added an additional $11,000 to bring the total contribution of the federal government to $16,000. Since that time we have been keeping the monument in repair, and we have contributed since that time $8,500 to keep the site in shape.
At the time the park itself was set up, it seemed from the files, the historic society purchased the land. They were aided considerably by the provincial government, which paid for the park lay-out. Since that time the provincial government has made contributions for the maintenance of the park. There have been contacts between the local historic association and my department in trying to arrange some sort of interview to discuss the matter further.



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hédard-J. Robichaud: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he is now in a position to answer



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Is Canada negotiating with the Soviet union on the sharing of scientific data in the Arctic? If so, and if those negotiations are completed, has an agreement been reached and is the minister in a position to advise the house what its provisions are?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take that question as notice.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Essex East addressed a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs concerning the interchange of scientific information among Canadian, Russian and other scientists with respect to the floor of the Arctic ocean. I have some knowledge that I think I can give the house, and perhaps make it unnecessary for the Secretary of State for External Affairs to take the question as notice.


An hon. Member:: You are following the Prime Minister's example.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: At the international symposium on Arctic geology held in Calgary about a month ago, scientists from seven or eight countries of the world attended. I understand unofficially, though I was not present myself and I do not believe any other Canadian official was present, that there was a discussion among a number of scientists about the advantages in understanding the geology of the Arctic area if an interchange of information on the polar sea were carried out.
I understand that the secretary of the Arctic symposium is going to address a formal request to the government to see if we will not play a part. Until the receipt of the formal submission to the government, there is nothing more I can say.


Paul Joseph James Martin: May I ask
a supplementary question. I thank the supplementary secretary of state for external affairs for this valuable information, that is an aspect of Canadian foreign policy. If an agreement is to be concluded, may I ask the minister whether he will be good enough to discuss the matter with the Secretary of State for External Affairs?



WEST GERMANY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, a question was raised yesterday concerning news reports which had alleged that West Germany was in the process of concluding certain military agreements with Spain. Since then I have received a specific denial from the German government that negotiations have taken place with Spain concerning military bases or training facilities there for German air force or missile units. This denial was also contained in an official German statement to the NATO council since the house met yesterday, and I believe that statement has since been given to the press.
The German government indicated that in recent years, in agreement with NATO, it has conducted negotiations with neighbouring countries in order to overcome difficulties in the field of logistic facilities which would serve the interests of common defence. These negotiations have been conducted with neighbouring countries which are also members of NATO, and I believe certain agreements have been reached.



CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of National Revenue is in a position to answer the question I asked him last week, as to whether any provision was made in the capital budget of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for the proposed television station at Edmonton.


Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minister of National Revenue):: I will answer that question tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
Inquiries of the Ministry PRIVILEGE



MR. FISHER  QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER MADE ORDERS FOR RETURNS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to raise a question of privilege in relation to the practice or usage of asking that questions on the order paper be made orders for returns. My question of privilege is, is it just that those questions Should be taken off the order paper? Sometimes we have to wait for as long as six months for an answer; I have waited that long. I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to rule that a question cannot be taken off the order paper until an answer is ready to be given to it.


Mr. Speaker:: This practice is one that is governed by the rules; I do not think it is a matter of privilege. It is simply a rule, and my recollection is that where the question involves either a complicated answer or refers to the collection of substantial amounts of information the question may, at the request of the minister, be made an order for return.


Douglas Mason Fisher: I have no objection to it being made an order for return, but I have objection to it being made an order for return and taken off the order paper, and then have those interminable waits for the answer.


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member has some complaint or a request to make about an answer to a specific question, perhaps he might raise it at this time; but not in general terms.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, arising out of the matter which the hon. member for Port Arthur has brought up, may I direct a question to the Solicitor General in his capacity as Acting Secretary of State and ask him if he will not give consideration to three orders made by the house some time ago respecting questions in my name and which have not yet been returned, one of which will be required in a debate next week. I would ask him to urge those responsible to see that these returns are made to the house.


Léon Balcer: I will do so with pleasure.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder whether I might ask a supplementary question of the Acting Secretary of State. Last year his predecessor was good enough to give us a table of the returns which had not been made from the previous session. For the convenience of the house, could the minister give us a list of

Inquiries of the Ministry those returns that were ordered in the two previous sessions of this parliament but which have not yet been made?


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, I will investigate the possibility, and when a decision is taken I will let the house know.


Mr. Speaker:: On the point of order raised by the hon. member for Port Arthur, may I refer him to standing order 39, subsection 4-


Mr. Fulton:: And subsection 5.


Mr. Speaker:: And 5-and indicate that if objection is to be taken the proper time to take it is when a minister requests that a question be made an order for return.


Mr. G. J. Mcllraiih (Ottawa West):: Just on that point, Mr. Speaker; as I understand the standing order, subsections 4 and 5, it does not make it clear when the action should be taken by the minister. I understand the question to be as to when the minister should request that a question be made an order for return. It is not a matter of the right of the minister to do so, but when he should do it.


Mr. Speaker:: May I suggest that hon. members have a look at the rule, and if the matter arises again it will be dealt with at the time such a request is made.


Edmund Davie Fulton: If my hon. friend will look at today's order paper he will see that the right time to do this is marked there for his information, and that was the way it was done today.


George James McIlraith: Oh, no.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Oh, yes.



HIGHWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hazen Robert Argue: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Can the minister report what progress is being made toward the signing of a roads to resources agreement with Saskatchewan, and whether the federal government is prepared to sign an agreement for $15 million over and above the Prince Albert bridge?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, the federal government made its offer to the province over a year ago, and we are prepared to sign an agreement with Saskatchewan for $15 million including the cost of the bridge.
[Mr. Chevrier.l


Hazen Robert Argue: Does the minister not feel that the agreement should provide for $15 million over and above the Prince Albert bridge, since the bridge is 100 miles or so from the nearest road to resources?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, we believe in giving the same deal of $15 million for roads to resources to each province, and not showing any preference to any one province.


Hazen Robert Argue: 
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: It is a $15
million agreement. We have bridges in other provinces as well as Saskatchewan.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether I could ask the Minister of Agriculture if he would lay on the table the correspondence he had with the minister of agriculture of Manitoba with regard to deficiency payments on hogs and eggs.


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, I have no objection to tabling the correspondence. I understand that it was tabled in the Manitoba legislature. If so I would presume there is no objection on the part of Manitoba, but I will have to ask them in any event before I table it here.



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Murdo William Martin: I should like to direct a question to the Postmaster General. Has the minister received a copy of a petition from residents on rural route 2, Minden, Ontario, concerning one Angus Coulter? If so, is he giving the matter consideration?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The question certainly does not indicate any great urgency. May I suggest that the hon. member put it on the order paper.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Flynn in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR Special services-
615. Payments to provinces and in respect of Indian bands under the municipal winter works

Incentive program during the 1959-60 and 1960-61 fiscal years of amounts not exceeding one half of the cost of labour incurred in the period from the 1st day of December, 1959, to the thirtieth day of April, 1960, in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the governor in council, $15,000,000.


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, this item deals with the municipal incentive program, and the amount of the item is $15 million. It is an estimate and the government is prepared, as I have mentioned, to increase this amount by as much as is necessary, depending upon submissions by the municipalities of the various projects that come within the scope of this plan.
When we started this debate, Mr. Chairman, according to your ruling it was to be kept within the scope of this item. However, with the agreement of the house it has taken a wider scope, and we are now discussing the problem of unemployment as a whole. The release of the statistics by the dominion bureau of statistics last week brought about the concern exhibited by all members in this house; consequently the debate has ranged around that release. I want to say that there have been some constructive suggestions from those who have taken part in the debate, suggestions that need closer scrutiny by the government. However, in the main there has been criticism of what is being done at the present time, and the suggestion that more should be done.
It is acknowledged by the government that this particular program is not the complete solution of the problem. There is no question about that. This government has acknowledged the problem of unemployment in this country and has endeavoured to do something about it in the past through various means, and we are trying to do something in the present situation.
The dominion bureau of statistics publication, to which reference has been made, has other aspects to it. It is not one that is entirely devoted to the stark side of the picture. The dominion bureau of statistics release summarizes the employment situation as of mid-January, 1960. It shows that our labour force totals 6,203,000, which compared with the labour force in January, 1959 shows an increase of 127,000. The number of persons with jobs in January, 1960, according to this latest release, is estimated at 5,699,000, which compared with January, 1959 shows an increase of 161,000. This means, Mr. Chairman, that there are 161,000 more Canadians at work this year than at the same time last year.
Those without jobs and seeking work, in January, 1960 are shown at 504,000. This is 34,000 less than in January, 1959, and this 79951-0-891
Supply-Labour
figure for January, 1959 is below the figure for January, 1958. The sharpest shift in seasonal activities takes place from December to January, and that has been the case each and every year. The amount of the increase in unemployment depends upon two developments, Mr. Chairman; first, the amount of the seasonal decline in employment and, second, the seasonal reduction of the labour force.
These statistics, as released by the dominion bureau, show that an estimated 40,000 fewer men and 6,000 more woman were looking for work in January this year than the year before. On the employment side, we have 86,000 more men and 75,000 more women who have jobs, so that total employment is up 2.6 per cent from a year earlier.
It is well known-and there is no attempt at this time on my part to minimize this problem of unemployment-that a large number of either the single or married seekers of work come from families where one or more member is already employed. This means that unemployment should not be equated with total loss of income in each of these family units. In order to illustrate this, I would say that of the 504,000 in January, 1960 who are classified as without jobs and seeking work, an estimated 237,000 were single people. If we break this figure down we find that it represents some 187,000 men and 50,000 women; and of the 504,000, 267,000 were married. This figure represents 253,000 men and 14,000 women.
As I mentioned before, and I want to emphasize, unemployment is a serious problem. This government recognized it when it assumed office in 1957. Now, what did we do about this problem at that time? Recognizing that it could become a lot worse than it is at the present time, this government took certain steps to alleviate the situation. First of all we slowed down


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if the minister would permit a question.


Michael Starr: Yes.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Did he say that when his government took office unemployment was much worse than it is at the present time?


Michael Starr: No, I did not say that at all. I said if we had not taken certain action then it could have been much worse than it is at the present time.
What did we do? We slowed down the rate of immigration. Slowing down immigration is not a step that any government wishes to take. We all realize that immigration is necessary. We have a very large country, and immigration helps to increase our consumer purchasing power which, in turn, provides opportunities for more employment. However

Supply-Labour
in a situation where people are allowed to come into the country and who are kept in the dispersement centres, as they were just prior to 1957, without any jobs for as long as one year, something must be done. This is certainly not good housekeeping. We slowed down immigration in order to give the economy an opportunity to absorb those who were coming into this country. This had quite an effect.
Housing was stimulated. No one can say that the action taken by the government in housing was not necessary or did not prove effective, because housing in this country probably supplies more employment than any other undertaking that could be stimulated by the government. Public works were stepped up in order to help those who might find themselves without employment. Then we extended the unemployment insurance benefits by an additional two months in the seasonal class. Last session the regular benefits were extended to 52 weeks. Certain large projects were undertaken, such as the Saskatchewan dam and power developments in the maritimes. Deficit budgeting was brought about in order to stimulate employment.
These are some of the things this government endeavoured to do. These things indicate that there was some willingness on the part of this government to face up to this situation and to see what they could do to alleviate it. There were many other things done that I will not dwell upon at this time.
There has been a great deal of talk to the effect that unemployment is something that has just happened recently. That it is something that has been brought about since the Conservative government came into office. Let us look at the picture; let us go back and look at what the dominion bureau of statistics figures show.
At this point I might say I am very glad that some attention is being paid to the dominion bureau of statistics releases in this regard.
It is not my intention to cast any reflection upon any member of this house but I want to make some remarks about the attitude of the hon. member for Essex East. As an example, I watched him with a great deal of interest just a few weeks ago when he was on television and I found, to my great surprise, that he stated that he always thought that the dominion bureau of statistics figure was the proper figure for measuring unemployment in Canada, but that since he has been in the opposition he has had more opportunity and more time to review the whole situation and has come to the conclusion-and also some of his colleagues; I do

not think they all have; I am quite certain of that, but some of his group have done so- that this figure of the dominion bureau of statistics is not any good at all and that the N.E.S. figure is now the right one.
What that really means is that Right Hon. Mr. Howe and my predecessor, Mr. Gregg, must have been wrong about these things because they asserted that was the right figure. Of course, if you want to go back and look at the standards set up by the International Labour Organization at Geneva which established this formula for unemployment, they must be wrong also. The United States, which adopted that formula from the I.L.O. and which use it as a measure of unemployment in that country, must be wrong also. Of course Mr. Howe and the former Liberal government must have been wrong also because we now have a different attitude toward the measure of unemployment in this country.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder whether the
minister would permit a question at this point?


Michael Starr: Yes.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Will the minister tell us when he saw the light on the road to Damascus because he always used the N.E.S. figure when he was over here on this side of the house.


Michael Starr: I will be quite frank, Mr. Chairman. I came to this house in 1952. I had no experience in the house at all. When I came into the picture in 1954 and 1955, I must be frank with you and say I did not realize which figure was the official figure.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Michael Starr: But certainly there was no excuse for the hon. member for Essex East who has been in this house since 1935.


Paul Joseph James Martin: He is not as bright as the minister.


John Whitney Pickersgill: What about the hon. member for Vancouver Quadra?


Michael Starr: I am not responsible for any action of any other hon. member of this house. All I can substantiate is my own position in this regard.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is a big job
in itself.


Michael Starr: Let us look at the situation back in 1936 when the hon. member and his government were in office. I am not going to look at any figures released by the dominion bureau of statistics for a time when unemployment is at its peak, which is in February or March. Let us look at the figure in June.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Take the whole
year.


Michael Starr: The figure for the whole year would not be a great deal of use before 1936. In June employment in Canada is usually at its highest or at least it is on its way up to its highest peak. That is not really the month when unemployment is at its lowest. This date I am going to give is for June and it is taken from the D.B.S. reference paper No. 23, revised edition. In 1936 the figure for those unemployed was 12.8 per cent of the total labour force.


Paul Joseph James Martin: For June?


Michael Starr: That is not a figure to minimize; that is quite high. In 1937, in June, the figure was 9.1 per cent.


Paul Joseph James Martin: In June?


Michael Starr: Yes.


Paul Joseph James Martin: One month?


Michael Starr: Yes.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The whole year is what counts.


Michael Starr: It is when employment is practically at its highest point.


John Whitney Pickersgill: May I ask the minister whether these figures were arrived at in precisely the same way by the same sampling methods as the figure was arrived at in the 40's and 50's?


Michael Starr: I would presume that the same method is used by the dominion bureau of statistics in ah cases. This is a D.B.S. release.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister does not know, in fact?


Michael Starr: No. I asked them what the percentage was of the labour force of those unemployed during that time and this is the figure they gave me.
In 1938 the figure was 11.4 per cent of the labour force which was unemployed. In 1939, again it was 11.4 per cent. In 1940, even after the world war started-and it started in the fall of 1939-it was still 9.2 per cent. Then they said, "Now we have a solution for unemployment; there is a war on and everybody goes to work". In 1941 the figure dropped to 4.4 per cent. That is the story. That is the way unemployment was. When you talk about the Liberal party being the good times party, with no unemployment, may I say that here is a clear picture of what was happening for the first six years they were in office.
This government has been in office only since June, 1957 and this is a cycle that has been going on for all these years. They say, "Why have you not done something about it? Why have you not eliminated this problem?" But as I said in the early part of
Supply-Labour
my remarks, this government recognized this situation and we did not just look at the picture. We have tried to do something about it through these various things that I have pointed out and many other things.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Will the minister permit a question?


Michael Starr: Yes.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Will he explain how this government has concentrated upon particular areas that are suffering most? What I mean is this. We have appreciated what he has asserted in his outline of general policy. What about the areas such as the one I represent where we have winter unemployment ranging up to 22 per cent and 25 per cent of the labour force. That is the situation right now, over 20 per cent out of work. What is your particular policy there?


Michael Starr: We have looked at that situation and I must say this. I am extremely proud of some of the attempts that have been made in that area. When Canadian Car threatened to move out, this government was instrumental in holding them there and they are still operating there.


Douglas Mason Fisher: At its most stable time the working force was in the neighbourhood of 1,000. It is now about 250. The company is holding there but that is quite a cut-down.


Michael Starr: That is quite true. Of course, that is the business of the company, as to the amount of business they may have there. But let me also say that the hon. member has a peculiar area there in that a great many people are employed as woodsmen. As an example, I talked to some of the people not in Port Arthur but in the neighbouring city of Fort William. One gentleman told me he has never worked during the wintertime in 12 winters. I asked him why. He said he was employed as a bush worker and in that particular summer made $7,000. When I asked him what he was doing in the wintertime, what he was doing then, he said "nothing". I said, "That is too bad". He said, "It is not too bad. I am drawing unemployment insurance". I do not know how many people there are to whom this situation applies, but this is just one example that I ran up against when I was in his area. If the hon. member has any suggestions about how to alleviate that situation in his area, I shall be only too glad to look into it and to do everything in my power to implement it, provided that it is a reasonable suggestion.
As to 1946, we will come in this instance to the present part of the year. In March, 1946, 4.7 per cent of the labour force was unemployed.

Supply-Labour


Paul Joseph James Martin: What month is that?


Michael Starr: March.


Paul Joseph James Martin: One month?


Michael Starr: That is right. That is what we are dealing with. We are dealing with the release for January this year. We are dealing with one month also. In March, 1947, the figure was 3 per cent; in 1948 it was 3.2 per cent. I am not just quoting large figures. I want to give the complete picture year by year.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is right.


Michael Starr: In 1949 the figure was 4 per cent. In 1950 it jumped to 6.1 per cent. Of course, the Korean war came along then and it was another solution to unemployment. During all this time there is no evidence whatsoever of any action on the part of the government of which the hon. member was a distinguished member on the treasury benches.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Thank you.


Michael Starr: There was no action. They waited for one war and then they waited for another war. In 1951 the figure was 3.3 per cent; in 1952, 4 per cent; in 1953, 3.4 per cent; in 1954, 6.1 per cent-the cycle had started again-in 1955, 7.4 per cent; in 1956 it dropped back to 5.3 per cent; and in 1957 it was again 6 per cent.
I am not going to be critical of any individual member, particularly the hon. member for Essex East.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Oh, why not?


Michael Starr: You can see this has not all been full employment in any one year right down through the list from 1936. It is a thing which has recurred, but it provides evidence that there was no action on the part of the government to do anything about it.
Now we are criticized because it is alleged we are doing nothing about it. We have introduced measures which have not been undertaken before. This municipal incentive program has never been undertaken before; it is something new. I admit immediately it does not solve the problem. The hon. member for Essex East says it is peanuts.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I said it is anemic.


Michael Starr: Anemic. My hon. friend from As-siniboia said it was peanuts. It may be peanuts to my plump, well fed friends in the opposition-


Hazen Robert Argue: Look at your well fed friends around you.


Michael Starr: -but let me say it is not peanuts to some 40,000 Canadians who will get jobs under this program. To the 40,000 Canadians who will get jobs under this program it means bread and butter on the table.


Mr. Denis:: How many pounds of butter?


Paul Joseph James Martin: How many days?


Azellus Denis: And what kind of bread?


Michael Starr: The hon. member for Essex East says, how many days. It means approximately 1,578,128 man days of work.


Paul Joseph James Martin: About four days apiece.


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, last year the average was 45 days for each man. Remember, this is during a period of seasonal unemployment, and most of the people are very glad to get the jobs. It is an indication that this government is willing to do something about it. We are willing to listen to any reasonable suggestions which hon. members have.
I would like to commend the hon. member for Kootenay West. He was very reasonable in his contribution to this debate and he gave some suggestions which I think should be looked at very closely. I have always maintained this position, that we, as the federal government, are prepared to recognize, and are recognizing, the unemployment situation as such, but it is not something which the government itself can remedy entirely. We can initiate certain things to help relieve the situation, but it certainly needs the cooperation of hon. members opposite, the cooperation of the provinces, the co-operation of the municipalities and all other interested bodies in this country. Their suggestions, with that co-operation, will help to alleviate to quite a degree the seasonal unemployment we experience in this country.
The hon. member for Essex East made some suggestions about what should be done and he projected a program of ten points. These ten points I have studied closely. Upon their immediate presentation it looked as though there might be something in them, but if his suggestions were implemented, no good could be brought about at once. He recommended in his ten points, three committees and two conferences. I must say at once that, in my opinion, no unemployment has ever been solved in this country through conferences.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is what the hon. minister recommended himself; a dominion-provincial conference and a parliamentary committee.


Michael Starr: I did?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Your party, and you supported it.


Michael Starr: I said earlier when a similar question was posed to me by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate that I speak for myself in this regard. What has been said by others in the past is their own responsibility. They were speaking as individual members of this house, and if the hon. member for Essex East has a different viewpoint now than he had when he was sitting on the treasury benches, then he has every right to it.
The hon. member says that this problem is too big for the Minister of Labour to handle by himself. I have never pretended, neither has the government, that the Minister of Labour was responsible for the solving of unemployment in this country, because the actions which have been taken have not been actions taken under the direction of the Minister of Labour but actions taken by the government. In this regard the government does take the responsibility for those actions and future actions which may be taken. I, as Minister of Labour, am naturally the one responsible to the house in respect of these policies.
Another suggestion was made that an advisory board should be set up. I must say that that is true to form because there have been so many advisory boards in the past when the opposition was sitting on the treasury benches that they even had advisory boards to the advisory boards. I suppose the hon. member for Essex East knows that there is an advisory committee on national employment in Canada which was organized in 1941. He is suggesting we organize one now.


Paul Joseph James Martin: A different kind of thing altogether. The minister has not understood it.


Michael Starr: It would not perform any different functions from the one it is performing now in advising the unemployment insurance commission on the situation of unemployment in this country.
Then the hon. member recommended a parliamentary committee. We have a parliamentary committee; it is sitting right now. This is the third day, and there has been every opportunity for reasonable suggestions to come forward. What has the hon. member got in mind as far as a parliamentary committee is concerned? Is it to provide a method of talking about the question? Talking will not solve the problem. We have the opportunity here and now to put forward suggestions, and we have the same function and flexibility as any committee. As a matter of fact, I think this committee has a greater flexibility.
Supply-Labour
Then the hon. member wants a federal-provincial conference. We realize that such a conference may have some use, and we did call one. We wasted no time and called one in July 1958, and not only was it composed of the federal government and the provincial governments, but also the municipal governments, labour bodies, industrial bodies* the Canadian Manufacturers Association and all the most interested people in this country came along to the conference. They had no direction but they sat and discussed the whole problem and made recommendations on incentives, and some of those recommendations have been implemented. In fact, we have before us one of the results of those recommendations.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if the minister would permit a question. Could he give us a list of the recommendations of that conference and indicate which of them have been carried out?


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, the report of that conference was tabled in this house and is available. All the hon. member has to do is to look at it, and if he feels there is something in that report that the government has not implemented which they should implement, most certainly he can bring it to our attention.
The hon. member also pointed out in the course of his ten points which he said would help unemployment-I have dealt with some of them-that the Canadian Labour Congress has asked for a conference of labour and management on unemployment. That is not so because he referred in particular to a speech which the president of the Canadian Labour Congress made to the board of trade in Toronto, and he requested a conference between labour and management on better labour-management relations, something similar to what is being asked for in the United States by Mr. Meany.


The Chairman:: I am sorry to interrupt the minister but his time has expired.


Some hon. Members:: Carry on.


Jacques Flynn: Does the committee give unanimous consent to the minister continuing?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Michael Starr: It is something similar to what happened in the United States, where the president of the AFL-CIO, Mr. Meany, asked the government of the United States to bring about discussions between labour and management so that their differences in labour-management relations could be ironed out, and they could be brought together and made to realize the common interest that they have.

Supply-Labour
The hon. member wants a national employment committee. There is one already in existence. He wants a modification of the winter works plan. He calls this plan anaemic. That is what he called it. Probably it does not take in the whole picture of unemployment but, as I said, it was never intended to; it is just another part of the total effort- a good suggestion which has been put into effect and which has put another 40,000 people to work. Who would not wish to have this program in effect at the present time? As to modifications, what modifications does the hon. member want? Why does he not tell us?


Paul Joseph James Martin: As recommended by the Windsor city council.


Michael Starr: A recommendation by one municipality does not apply to all municipalities. It does not follow that all municipalities will be engaged in similar undertakings. The projects vary and there has to be a plan which will give the best opportunity to the majority.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Or the recommendations made by Mr. George Moody on behalf of the Canadian association of municipalities.


Michael Starr: There have been some suggestions that we should pay increased attention to vocational training. I think the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate mentioned this subject during the debate. I should point out, though, that in accordance with the way in which this is now set up, the initiative is in the hands of the provinces. I have personally written to various provinces pointing out that we are prepared to participate in this plan. For example-and I think this might be of interest to the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate-on my visit to Bell Island I was asked by the unions there to make provision for a training school on the island because, they said, the people of the island were not prone to go to the mainland to attend training schools. On my return I immediately wrote to the premier of Newfoundland saying that the federal government was prepared to participate in such a plan. They are studying the question in Newfoundland, but to date, we have not heard of a definite commitment. We have taken action in other cases, too, but as I explained, the initiative lies with the provinces.
Last year the number of men taking advantage of vocational training rose by 35 per cent, but that is not enough, because we are only dealing with 3,000 to 5,000 people. We want to participate in measures

providing for the training of a great many more. We want to be able to say we are training people at the rate of 20,000 or 30,000 a year, and we are prepared to do that. However, this necessarily means initiative by the provinces and provincial participation.
Suggestions have been made about setting up a capital assistance fund for the Atlantic provinces. On taking office, this government immediately recognized the necessity of doing something to improve the standard of living in the Atlantic provinces. I need not recite here what action has been taken but we have certainly endeavoured to do all we can in that respect. It is not my intention to take up much more time, Mr. Chairman, but surely we have before us now an estimate of $15 million-and this is not the ceiling. If more work is undertaken we are prepared to go beyond this figure. We can come back here and ask for another $10 or $15 million.


Murdo William Martin: Can the minister suggest what kind of work can be done under 13 or 14 feet of snow in western Ontario?


Michael Starr: We are not trying to kid anyone. The municipalities asked for this program. The Canadian federation of mayors and municipalities, including mayors from Saskatoon and Winnipeg where there is snow and where there is frost, asked us to help carry out sewage programs and so on. They said: yes, we can do it. It costs a little more, but if the federal government pays part of the cost of putting these services in we are prepared to go ahead. Since then they have had nothing but the highest praise for this program.


Murdo William Martin: Does that reply mean that the present system will continue until we get another request from the municipalities for some improvement?


Michael Starr: We discussed this with the Canadian mayors and municipalities and we told them that because they had seasonal unemployment we were prepared to help them, and they said that some program such as this would be agreeable. If there is snow, then there are other types of work which municipalities can undertake-clearing rights of way, getting out the brush and other projects where there is a large labour content. This is a very acceptable type of program.
Let us see what the municipalities are doing by way of co-operation. The municipalities realize that they must put to work as many people as they can, and they review these projects and sort them out accordingly. The result is that of 1,900 projects amounting in cost to some $84 million the labour content is averaging 35.3 per cent. I think

that is good housekeeping by the municipalities. When they are able to do that I think they are using good common sense. They are choosing projects on which they can employ the higher percentage of labour and from which they can obtain the maximum amount of help in this situation.
There is on the order paper now in the name of the Minister of Public Works a resolution to make more money available for housing. This, too, will be the means of providing employment. I say to hon. members of this house: I welcome your co-operation and I welcome your suggestions but I do hope we can go on to approve this item as well as the item concerned with housing in order that we may put these measures into effect and get the people to work.


Mr. Garland:: Might I ask a question? I did not wish to interrupt the minister in the course of his remarks. During his presentation, the hon. gentleman made the statement, quite properly, that housing creates employment. I think all hon. members will agree with that statement. As the minister knows, the average number of starts for the past five years has been 138,000. Last year housing starts were down as compared with the previous year and the government's objective is apparently 125,000 starts to be made this year. Does the minister think that in view of the present serious unemployment situation there is any justification for the government persisting in its policy of curtailing house construction?
(Translation):


Mr. Dupuis:: Mr. Chairman, I have just heard the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) try for a few minutes to prove that things are not as bad as we on this side of the house claim them to be. He attempted, by going back to the past, to prove to the country that under the Liberal administration the situation was worse than it is now. The minister said-and I took down his exact words-"If no definite action had been taken, unemployment would be more serious that it is now".
I think the minister should have said: If we had taken definite action, unemployment would not be as serious as it is today. In fact, Mr. Chairman, we are now faced with a situation that reflects no great credit either on the person in charge of the Department of Labour, or on the one entrusted with the future of this country.
The Minister of Labour said, a while ago, that "talking will not solve the problem".
Supply-Labour
Perhaps, but unemployment will certainly not be solved either by voting $15 million to assist municipalities in carrying out winter work.
The minister said that not all municipalities took advantage of this plan, but that they are entitled, and are given an opportunity, to participate.
Well, Mr. Chairman, we may say, in view of last year's experience, that the present legislation will certainly not help any municipality solve its unemployment problem.


An hon. Member:: We never said so, anyhow.


Yvon Dupuis: No municipality is able to announce that thanks to that legislation it has settled the unemployment question in its own area. And in my riding, as in every other constituency in this country, people are suffering from an unemployment situation that is causing concern throughout the nation.
When the Conservatives took office, in June, 1957, there were 741 unemployed in my riding. Today, after two years and a half of Conservative administration, there are 3,700. In the city of St. John, there was a very prosperous and well known factory, the Singer Sewing Machine Company, with over 3,000 workers on its payroll. Well, Mr. Chairman, that plant almost had to shut down. Right now it employs only 500 workers, because it has to face the competition of Japanese imports.
Mr. Chairman, we would be happy today to rise and say to the Minister of Labour that the legislation he just introduced in this house will settle the unemployment problem and that we thank him for it. That is precisely why we are rising today, we do so in order to ask the Minister of Labour to try to solve the problem. It is not enough to just stand up and say "I know I will not settle everything with this legislation". An effort must be made to stop unemployment.
We are always surprised to see representatives like the hon. member for St. Hyacin-the-Bagot (Mr. Ricard), rising in this house to make fantastic and strange statements, as all hon. members have noticed but for him it is nothing, as it is his habit to put his foot in it. Nevertheless, may I be allowed to recall the words he said in this house last Friday, February 19, and I quote:
X should like through you, Mr. Chairman, to remind my hon. friends in the Liberal party that under the Conservative government unemployment insurance benefits have been extended to married women and fishermen, and there has been an extension to 52 weeks of the period during which benefits are given to unemployed workers.

Supply-Labour
And he added:
The workers are not likely to forget what the Conservatives have accomplished on their behalf. I know it is distasteful to the hon. members for Essex East-
-of course it is the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot speaking.
I know it is distasteful to the hon. members for Essex East, Laurier and Bonavista-Twillingate to have me remind them of what was done by the Conservative party, but the action it has taken is a reality, something the workers will remember for years to come.
How wonderful, Mr. Chairman. While we are discussing matters and all hon. members are interested in putting forward requests on behalf of their constituents, a Conservative member from Quebec, the representative of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot, rises to say:
The workers are not likely to forget what the Conservatives have accomplished on their behalf.
What did he mean by that? He did not go into any detail but, so that hon. members may understand, I shall delve a little into the probable meaning of words spoken by the hon. member from St. Hyacinthe-Bagot. It means this: the workers will remember that, when the Conservatives came into power, there were 1,105 unemployed, in the riding of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot, and he could have added that they will not forget either that two and a half years after our hon. friends opposite took over, there were some 3,490 people seeking work in January. That number has probably gone up to 3,800 by now.
When the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot told the house, last Friday, that workers would never forget the Conservative party, he probably meant that those of his constituency would always remember that the Super Knitting Mills, which used to employ 225 persons in St. Hyacinthe, has closed down. He probably also meant that the Gotham Hosiery Co., which used to employ 750 persons, has also closed down. He was probably referring also to the Penman's Ltd., which has dangerously slowed down its production and which will close down if import of Japanese garments remains authorized. Perhaps the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot was also referring to Lassonde Cutlery Company, in St. Hyacinthe, which used to employ nearly 100 workers, but which will close down next week.
Well, Mr. Chairman, I would ask the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot to stop trying to play Union Nationale politics in the house, and deal rather with the actual problems of his constituency.
Of course, Mr. Chairman, all those figures should have been quoted by the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot, but they were not.

Mr. Chairman, there is not a single member here who does not remember the promises made by the leader of the Conservative party (Mr. Diefenbaker) when it was a matter of winning the election. If he had travelled from one end of the country to the other to tell the Canadian people: "There will be more unemployed when I am elected, but I will offer compensation by way of winter works and that will be enough," he could have been judged accordingly, but he did not say that at all. The leader of the Conservative party, a worthy successor of the Bordens and Bennetts, travelled across the country making all sorts of promises.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to quote some of the promises made by the Prime Minister. Of course, I will not be able to quote the 300 or 600 statements made by the leader of the Conservative party, from one end of the country to the other. Actually, there were so many of them that they come from all quarters.


Mr. O'Hurley:: This thing is well organized.


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Chairman, I would much prefer hearing the Minister of Defence Production (Mr. O'Hurley) talk about what he had promised to do for the civil service during the last by-election.


Azellus Denis: Especially in Russell.


Yvon Dupuis: Mr. Chairman, I have here a Conservative poster-I hope the Minister of Defence Production will adjust his glasses- which reads as follows:
(Text):
I promise you this. As long as X am Prime Minister no man or woman will ever be allowed to suffer, deficit or no deficit, and as long as I am Prime Minister the welfare of the average Canadian will never be forgotten.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, you find a logical sequence to that statement when you hear the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot declare that working people will never forget the Conservative party.
During the last electoral campaigns, the Prime Minister travelled across the country. He appeared on many television programs, and I shall now quote a few samples of his nice promises. As reported in the Montreal Star, of February 19, 1958, he said:
(Text):
On the live telecast, Mr. Diefenbaker said he would take any practical step to ease unemployment in addition to his billion dollar public works plan.
(Translation):
We are still waiting for his billion dollar public works program.

Again, according to the Gazette, the Prime Minister went on to say:
(Text):
"As long as I am Prime Minister of Canada," he said in a live telecast, "everything that can be done-everything without regard to limit-will be done to the end that no one will suffer."
(Translation):
On February 24, 1958, according to the Winnipeg Free Press of February 25, 1958, the Prime Minister said in Cornwall:
(Text):
We have acted ...
(Translation):
-the Prime Minister probably meant "acting" as do movie or television actors-
(Text):
We have acted. We are meeting unemployment. We have given young Canadians the hope.
The hope, yes, but nothing else, Mr. Chairman. I continue:
"We have given them the vision," Mr. Diefen-baker said.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, similar pledges will be long remembered by the Canadian people, and it is our duty to remind our friends opposite of those promises and to ask them what they intend to do about them.
According to the Toronto Daily Telegram of March 1, 1958, in Coxheath, Nova Scotia, on February 28, 1958, the head of this government made this promise:
(Text):
Touching on unemployment the Prime Minister repeated what he has said earlier in this campaign, "that no Canadian without work would suffer as long as I am Prime Minister, regardless of whether we have deficit financing or not".
(Translation) :
During a speech he was making on television on March 4, 1958, in Toronto, and according to a Canadian press bulletin published in the Montreal Star, of March 5, 1958, the Prime Minister again said:
(Text):
As long as I am Prime Minister, this government will not rest while one Canadian remains out of work. No one will be allowed to suffer.
(Translation):
And here is what the Prime Minister said in Edmonton on March 9, 1958:
(Text):
Unemployment-
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, this statement was made in March 1958, and it can be considered in the light of the situation which exists today.
Supply-Labour
(Text):
Unemployment has now reached its winter peak in Canada and will start to decline, he told an overflow of more than 5,000. The Prime Minister said, "The worst has taken place in regard to unemployment in this country and we are now on the way back".
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, I do not know what he meant exactly when he said: "We are now on the way back", but I think he could be told today: "You are on the way back to opposition", because you have not fulfilled any of your promises.
Mr. Chairman, the C.L.C. suggested to the Prime Minister that he call a conference on industry and labour. If the Prime Minister had complied with this request, he probably could have found answers to unemployment with the help of all the experts in this field.
But the Prime Minister of Canada, who had promised that no one would suffer, now that he is faced with over 800,000 unemployed, merely replies that there is no need for such conferences on industry and manpower.
Mr. Chairman, the minister juggled with the figures a moment ago and tried to show the percentage of workers who were unemployed under the former Liberal administration.
The fact remains, Mr. Chairman, that at this very moment, the average number of unemployed in Canada is the highest ever seen since the time of R. B. Bennett. We now have in Canada 800,000 unemployed people, the majority of whom voted Conservative. Obviously, it hurts to be told that there are
800,000	unemployed.


Azellus Denis: More than that.


Yvon Dupuis: I am using the figures quoted by the member for Restigouche-Madawaska (Mr. Van Horne), for which I hope my hon. friends will not bear me any grudge. Think of it, Mr. Chairman, 800,000 unemployed out of a total of 18 million people. And we are asked today to vote $15 million so that municipalities may help some of those people. There is not one unemployed person in Canada who is satisfied with this attempted solution.
How much money will each unemployed person get? How long can they survive with the pittance that the federal government is giving them, in any attempt to solve the problem?
Mr. Chairman, we are in the throes of unemployment, and the government is doing nothing but act like an ostrich, hiding its head in the sand and doing nothing.

Supply-Labour
The Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) smiles. I hope he is not smiling at the thought of 800,000 unemployed, because that would hardly be the thing to do.
It is a fact that the post-war period brought about much hardship and unemployment throughout the world, but that period is over, and things seem to be picking up everywhere except in Canada. Great Britain has
250,000	unemployed out of a population of 50 million. Here, we have 800,000 unemployed out of a population of 18 million.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister to give us an opportunity to vote on a measure that would really help relieve unemployment.
The hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) made practical proposals. The Minister of Labour does not believe in them, but he has no alternative proposals to put forward.
A federal-provincial conference should be called to discuss the unemployment problem and the minister should call one immediately.
The Prime Minister of Canada talked about his great billion dollar public works program.
Mr. Chairman, it is about time that this billion dollar public works program should start, before the unemployed die.
In my riding of St. Jean, the Conservatives promised during the last election campaign that if they were returned to office, they would immediately see to it that all the equipment used for the St. Lawrence seaway be transferred to the Richelieu so that canalization work might be started there.
People from a riding next to mine, that of Chambly, believed in those promises and took the risk of voting for the Conservatives; today they are sorry they did.
Fortunately, the people of St. Jean were not taken in by those promises, and voted for the Liberals.
Mr. Chairman, public works must be undertaken. I am not the one who is asking for them, but the Prime Minister himself promised them. We are asking now that he keep his promise.
The Conservatives had promised to deepen the Richelieu. He is asked to deepen the Richelieu. This would indeed bring new industries into the area with the result that the unemployed would find jobs.
Winter works were inadequate; what we need are the public works that were promised to solve the unemployment problem, real projects that would put an end to the unemployment.
As long as the present Minister of Labour continues to pretend in this house that he is

doing all he can while he does nothing, the public will be justified in asking the Conservatives:	"What about your promises?"
especially if they keep on playing politics as they are.
Two years and a half have gone by and, if the situation remains unchanged, the people of Canada will make a clean sweep of the Conservative party as they did in 1935 when they got rid of the Bennett administration.
(Text):


Mr. MacEwan:: Mr. Chairman, I have a few remarks to make on this item, one reason being that earlier in this debate I had the dubious distinction of being mentioned in the Pickersgill papers. Therefore for that and other reasons I am speaking in this debate. It was brought out during the debate, which has gone on for some time, that the unemployment figures in my area were very bad. First of all, before I go on I should like to congratulate the Minister of Labour for the winter works program which has been initiated by him and the government. I should also like to thank him for the speedy action which was taken, while I was at home before the start of the present session, with respect to a large number of unemployment insurance claims that were held up in the regional office in Moncton. Following a telephone call from one of the executives of the united steelworkers union I immediately called the minister's office in Ottawa and as a result things were moving within an hour and a half and the claims were being looked after properly as they should have been.
With respect to unemployment in the county of Pictou I should first like to outline briefly the reasons for unemployment there as I see them. I think the situation should be explained. For many years up to 1951 coal mining was our most important industry, employing approximately 2,000 men. In the year 1951 our coal mines commenced to close. First the Allan shaft closed in 1951 followed in rapid succession in subsequent years by the MacGregor mine in February 1957 and Albion mine and also a substantial curtailment of work at the Drummond mine in Westville. As a result, employment afforded coal miners in that area has decreased from approximately
2,000	workers to approximately 500 at the present time.
This all came about before I became the member for the riding and before the present government came into power. As I said, the result has been a great decrease in the number of men employed by the coal mines and as a result we have had a labour surplus on our hands since that time. We have a number of other types of industry there including fishing and farming and small industries

making bricks, tile, structural steel and so on but the plants carrying out the work are not large enough to take the surplus labour force and therefore we have been faced with this situation.
Mention was made by the hon. member for Gloucester of the unemployment situation in connection with the Eastern Car Company plant in Trenton which, since the closing of our coal mines, has become the largest employer in that area. The Canadian National and Canadian Pacific railways are the largest purchasers of railway cars, freight cars from the Eastern Car plant. They also make purchases from the National Steel Car Company in Hamilton, and Canada Car in Montreal. We were told, after the last order Eastern Car received from the Canadian National for a special type of box car, that the railway had not made up its budget for the year 1960 so no further orders would be forthcoming until the budget had been looked into. In addition, Canadian Pacific railway had not decided what they would need in the way of rolling stock for the coming year.
I should like to point out to the minister something which was pointed out in the excerpt from the Halifax Chronicle-Herald, February 9 of this year, which was read in part by the hon. member for Gloucester. This article concerns a submission by the Pictou county ministerial association, and I should like to read a few words which were uttered by the Rev. Mr. Kingsbury, of the Anglican church in the town of Stellarton, who has long been a great worker on that committee in the area:
Mr. Kingsbury said the clergy was involved in the situation as much as the men who carry the lunch pails. He said men working in the car works in Trenton were usually employed for only five or six months each year. He suggested the governments be asked to provide work at the plants in the time of the most need-in the winter months. Although the full year was important, he said the winter was the time when men should be taking home the pay cheques.
This matter was brought to my attention shortly after I returned to Ottawa, but had been mentioned to me before that. This plant is the largest employer in the county and its history, except in wartime, has not been one of permanent employment. 1 would agree with this suggestion by the Rev. Mr. Kingsbury, and ask that work be provided in the winter months. This would make one of the best winter projects possible. I might add that the united steelworkers of America, local 1231, wrote a letter to the Minister of Transport in connection with this matter, the sentiments of which I endorse. The letter, in part, reads:
Again we would like to point out the necessity of arranging railway car building programs in the winter months. It seems that our plants are always
Supply-Labour
idle in the winter. You appreciate that if the plants worked in the winter and were idle in the summer most of the hardships would disappear as the average citizen can find something in the summer when many work programs are being carried on, and if he has to be idle it takes far less to keep him going when no fuel, winter clothing, etc., are required.
Another matter which was brought out by the union in connection with this winter work, and which is an interesting point, is that one of the industries in this area, Standard Clay Products, for years worked in the summer and closed during the winter. However, some two or three years ago the company was taken over by a holding company which immediately reversed the work schedule from summer to winter, after they found out that it was necessary to maintain the plant in the winter with heat and power.
I should like to bring again to the attention of the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Labour at this time, the fact that the government should submit to the Canadian National and the Canadian Pacific, the largest purchasers of this type of rolling stock, the necessity for giving orders for rolling stock during the winter months.
Amongst other things, the hon. member for Gloucester brought out the fact that the ministerial association suggested that the government should proceed with public projects, such as the federal building in New Glasgow. It is about 10 years since this project has been mooted, and the former government was unable to decide on a site for it. I am glad to say that the site has been cleared and I hope that within another week, or two weeks at the most, tenders will be called for this federal building. This project will provide a lot of work in the area and the building is a necessity so far as the town of New Glasgow is concerned.
The hon. member for Gloucester also quoted from the same press clipping some words of the Rev. Father Chisholm. Father Chisholm has long been an outstanding leader in the community, and I should like to quote some remarks of his in order to give the hon. member some food for thought. I quote:
Father Chisholm said it was up to the clergy to get behind the common man because "they are the producers of the nation's wealth." He said Pictou county and the maritimes as a whole needed a united voice at Ottawa.
"We have been playing party politics too long. We must get together and speak as one voice to solve our problem."
I commend that thought to the hon. member for Gloucester. The hon. member also stated that conditions in the county of Pictou were similar to those which existed in many other areas in the Atlantic provinces. I do not agree with that at all. The other areas, such as the Halifax area, the Saint John area, the

Supply-Labour
riding of the hon. member for Queens-Lunen-burg where the Mersey Paper Company is starting to construct a $3.5 million addition to their mill, have different conditions. In many other places in the Atlantic provinces, things are very definitely progressing. I do not intend to read it in toto, but I have here a clipping from the Montreal Gazette of February 19, 1960, which is headed, "$100 Million Building Program Set for Nova Scotia".
Among other things, it says that two areas, Halifax and the strait of Canso, will get the major share of the work. There is a $40 million sulphite mill for Nova Scotia Pulp Limited at Point Tupper; over $6 million for an international airport at Kelly Lake; construction at Dalhousie University; additions to both the Lord Nelson and Nova Scotian hotels; some $4 million for new married quarters at Greenwood; $2 million for a shopping centre at Sydney and $1 million for a new hospital at Waterford. I think, therefore, the situation in the county I represent is extraordinary. It is definitely different from the situation in other areas. 1 would recommend to this government that a committee or some other mode of investigation be set up at once. This committee should be composed of federal, provincial, municipal, industrial and labour leaders in the area and should fully investigate conditions throughout the country.
As I have said, the reason I am suggesting this is because conditions in this constituency are unlike those in most parts of Canada and in other parts of the Atlantic provinces where industry is booming and things are really going ahead. I believe that such an investigation should be held because it could look into the matter of industry in the upper towns which include Trenton, Stellarton, New Glasgow, Westville and the town of Pictou. I believe this investigation could bring forth some ideas on how industry could be diversified in the area. Just recently a half million dollar contract has been let to the Trenton works of the Dominion Steel and Coal Company for parts for electronic equipment. This is part of a general contract which has gone to the E. M. I. Cosser Ltd. in the Halifax area. This is the type of thing which could be carried out in these plants which are made up of the Trenton Steel Works and the Eastern Car Company, which I have already stated make railway cars, and Trenton Industries Limited, which is one of the finest machine shops in Canada. I have gone through these shops and very definitely they could carry out the best type of work.
The Nova Scotia government has taken steps in introducing the Faini Company, a textile plant in Stellarton which is another

form of diversification. I will therefore say that definitely there are other forms of industry which could be obtained for this county, things which could be done in present plants and other industries which could be brought forward in connection with the Industrial Estates Limited of Nova Scotia, and things which could be done by the federal government.


Mr. Van Horne:: Can the hon. member tell the house what percentage of the total capacity of the Trenton plants are in use at present?


Howard Russell MacEwan: I do not know the exact percentage but I know that the Eastern Car Company, which is the largest employer, has a peak of approximately 1,000 to 1,100 men. Trenton Steel Works Limited, which make axles for cars in Canada, have, as I understand it, 230 men employed at this time and Trenton Industries Limited have 190. But it is the Eastern Car Company plant, the biggest employer making these cars, in which the labour force is cut down the most.
Something which has been done in a matter the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska brought forward in his speech last week regarding various things set out by the Atlantic members, among them the promise of cheap power. I believe that the new grid set-up between the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick will assist in this way. I am glad to note that one of the thermal power plants-one of the first-is situated in the county of Pictou at Trenton and that as the new mill is going up in the Canso strait area we hope that our present mines will be able to sell more coal to the power plant which will be producing power for use in that area.
Finally, as to the hon. member for Bona-vista-Twillingate, may I just say that as far as the county of Pictou is concerned, I was born there, brought up there and received my education in the town of Westville, a small coal mining town. I worked in the mines there during the summer holidays, just as a great many other members have worked in various places. In setting up my law office there, back in the years when the Drummond Coal Company threatened to close, I recall that delegates were sent to Ottawa here as well as to Halifax. I do not know whether the hon. member was whittling willows, sharpening pencils or sitting in the seats of the mighty on the treasury benches at that time but I will tell him this. The reception obtained by that delegation did no good. I do not know fully how they were treated but certainly nothing was done and the mine finally was carried on with 100 men instead of 500. That is one reason for the number of unemployed, miners especially. But I would say to him that

as long as I am a member, or no matter where I am, I owe a duty to this county; and there is no doubt that I will speak up for it, whether in this house or elsewhere.
(Translation):


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, an opposition is certainly a good thing in this parliament, because it enables us to know what happens in Canada, and to find out that there are more than three quarters of a million unemployed in this country. We did not hear hon. members on the government benches speak about it,	except, perhaps, one of them,	my hon. friend
from Restigouche-Madawaska (Mr. Van Horne) who realizes that there are unemployed people seeking work in this country.
A few moments ago we listened with much interest to the speech of the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr). However, he was, to my mind, not in order, as we are discussing the winter works program to help the unemployed, while he spoke all the time of the hundreds of thousands who were employed. He suggested that, if there were more people working in Canada, it was due to this government. On the other hand, he said that the former administration was responsible for the present number of unemployed.
As a matter of fact, he was not the only one to say so. Whenever things go wrong in this country, Conservatives blame the Liberals and the former governments. However, when everything goes well, thanks to some legislation introduced by the Liberal party, they claim credit for it, and reap acclaim for such legislation, which they pretend to have worked out themselves.
Now, as far as wet blankets are concerned, as the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot (Mr. Ricard) would say, there is none better than this government, including the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot. This government brags that it has done more in three years than we did in twenty two. As a matter of fact, they succeeded in spreading many more wet blankets in two years than we did in twenty two.
The proof, Mr. Chairman, is that nobody cares about present conditions. I have now in hand a copy of the speech from the throne reproduced on three columns or so, or one and a half pages. In the speech from the throne, I find five words with regard to unemployment. And do you know what it says about unemployment? I quote:
The recurrent problem of seasonal unemployment remains, however, but apart from this ... etc.
It is like the song "All is well, madame la marquise, all is very well"!
Supply-Labour
There is of some mention of the independence of Nigeria, of an impending meeting of great heads of states, of scholarships for commonwealth students who are coming over here to study; and of various other matters which, though they are doubtlessly most interesting, hardly give the unemployed anything to eat nor, indeed, any work. And that is the reason why I submit that this government is ignoring this problem which, in my opinion, is the most important of all.
Astounding figures are quoted, huge sums of money-$15 million-are voted to help the unemployed, while last year, under that famous municipal winter works incentive program for 1958-1959, two thirds only of the $10 million provided were used. This means that there still remains $3J million which the municipalities did not utilize.
And now, a new program is being submitted by the government and we are invited to vote $15 million. But why not, $20 million or $25 million? It is a well known fact that the Conservatives are quite prone to quoting impressive figures as window dressing. Fifty million could have been mentioned. The government knows perfectly that, in the spring, there will remain practically half or perhaps a third of that amount. But, to come back to that famous program, I have here a copy of it, which is more explicit than the law itself, because it is full of conditions which are practically impossible to fulfill and which do not affect, or very slightly, those people who are really in need of work. That program is in the form of a letter addressed by the Minister of Labour. His main purpose is to encourage municipalities to increase job opportunities. Do you know what that incentive program amounts to? It represents from 6 to 12 per cent of the total cost of works. I quote:
We trust that this program, added to other efforts made by governments-
The other governments. Do you know, Mr. Chairman, what is the effort being made by the Ontario government? Nothing at all, Mr. Chairman, nothing. And the effort made by the Ontario government? Twenty five per cent of salaries.
And the letter goes on to say:
"We trust that this program will encourage industry and individuals".
Do you know in what way it will encourage industry and individuals? First of all, that money was collected through that famous conversion loan. Besides, industries and individuals cannot obtain money any more, because the government has taken it over to pay its debts.

Supply-Labour
When industries are in need of money for expansion purposes, they have to borrow; and if they can, they have to do so at exorbitant rates.
Is that, Mr. Chairman, the way of encouraging industry and individuals?
I have here, Mr. Chairman, a newspaper item which reads:
Credit restrictions, as well as irresponsibility have resulted in an increase of 50 per cent of bankruptcies in the province of Quebec.
How can you expect these people to contribute to the solution of unemployment? It is not I who say so, it is the protonotary.
This increase of close to 50 per cent is due first of all to the credit restrictions that were in effect last year.
That is a fine way to help the unemployed.
On the other hand, municipalities are being asked to undertake works that may not be urgent, that could be put off till next year. But the government forgets, on the other hand, that they have to pay more than 85 per cent of the costs of this program. The municipalities are forced to borrow money at rates varying from 7 to 7-J per cent.
I have, Mr. Chairman, a newspaper clipping of March 4, 1959, saying the city of Montreal had submitted 41 projects which cost it $2,007,000. Do you know what was the federal government's share in the cost of those projects?
It was $243,000, Mr. Chairman; in other words 12 per cent.
In order to obtain $243,000, the city of Montreal is forced to borrow $2 million at 7J per cent. Should those works be put off until a year from now, the city of Montreal would be forced to pay 7J per cent for two years, that is $300,000.
Therefore, in order to obtain $243,000 from the federal government, the municipality is forced to spend $300,000 needlessly, not including the $2 million which are tied up forever.
This year, the same proposal is offered.
Let us take, for instance, the province of Quebec where this year, there are 243,384 unemployed. The city of Montreal itself has 40 per cent of that number.
Have you heard the province of Quebec complain about having one third of the country's unemployed? This afternoon the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont (Mr. Deschatelets) asked this question of the Minister of Labour:
Will the minister tell the house if he has received any communication from the authorities of the province of Quebec expressing their concern at the unemployment situation in the province of Quebec and suggesting a possible program for Its solution?

The Minister of Labour made this reply:
Not to my knowledge.
That is the answer given to the unemployed in the province of Quebec: It is a federal responsibility. Quebec tells its unemployed to go ahead and starve, that it cannot look after them. We are more interested in pretending to favour a formula for autonomy, or in finding whether the rights of nuns of such or such a convent will be unfairly treated if we accept gifts to universities or the hospital plan. Unemployment is not important.
Yet in 1959, a church leader, His Eminence Cardinal Leger, made this statement:
On the other hand, it is a responsibility of the state to play a positive part and do its full share. Despite all their ingenuity, individuals and organizations cannot alone cope with the unemployment problem. Public bodies have a duty, as was indicated by Pius XII, to provide the greatest possible measure of employment by undertaking generally useful works and by making jobs easier to get.
That is the position of church authorities. How does the province of Quebec respond to that call, which is all at once logical, human and based on common sense?
Municipalities have to pay, out of their own resources, over 85 per cent of the cost of whatever works they may undertake to deal with unemployment.
There is an act which is entitled the Unemployment Assistance Act, to help the unemployed who are ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits.
Mr. Chairman, do you know what has been the share of the province of Quebec out of the amounts paid out by Ottawa? Not one cent, Mr. Chairman, absolutely nothing.
In these winter works programs, there are some jobs to be undertaken by the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources (Mr. Hamilton). Those jobs involve building access roads to the forests and developing camp sites.
Such expenditures existed under the Liberals. Out of $6 million that were spent by Ottawa to develop 500 camp sites, how much do you think the province of Quebec has received? Not one penny.


Jacques Flynn: Order. I regret to interrupt the hon. member, but I must remind him that he is discussing now matters that are not the responsibility of parliament or the federal government.


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, I want to comply with your ruling-
(Text):


Michael Starr: Would the hon. member permit a question?

(Translation):


Azellus Denis: Yes, with pleasure.
(Text):


Michael Starr: The hon. member has made two references; that the province of Quebec has received nothing in the way of unemployment assistance-


Azellus Denis: Public assistance.


Michael Starr: You mean, under the Unemployment Assistance Act?


Azellus Denis: Yes.


Michael Starr: And that they received nothing in respect of camping grounds. Does the hon. member mean by that that this government has not offered that to the province of Quebec, or is he saying that the province of Quebec has not taken advantage of it?


Azellus Denis: I will answer that question, Mr. Chairman. What I mean is that in either program the provinces are invited to help in such a way as to reduce, if possible, the number of unemployed in the provinces. I am trying to prove to the Minister of Labour that as far as Quebec is concerned, Quebec is doing absolutely nothing in this field.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, when the Conservatives in this house boast of doing their best to find a solution to unemployment, we find that their effort is only 10 per cent. Their re-sponsibiliy is not large since barely $6.5 million was spent last year by Ottawa.
The government reminds us of someone who would say to his neighbour: "You are out of work, you are unemployed, you need money, I will take care of that. How much do you need? $100? Wait; I will get you the $100." He then writes to the municipal authorities and tells them: "Send me $90". The municipalities send him $90 and the Minister of Labour comes to his friend, adds $10 and tells him: "Here is the $100; I am the one who rescued you from unemployment."
Mr. Chairman, I believe that the proportion that exists between the burden of federal and that of the municipalities is not properly set. It is like splitting the expenses this way: one horse, one rabbit-


Mr. Valade:: How would you split it?


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, it is simply a small share-


Georges-J. Valade: Lengthwise or crosswise?


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, I have here a list that has just been tabled in the house, regarding the amounts the federal government has paid to certain municipalities of the province of Quebec who wanted to take advantage of this famous winter works program.
Supply-Labour
I see here, for instance, that in the city of Cowansville, in the constituency of the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey), 36 unemployed will receive exactly $277.75, for a period of five months.


Mr. Graffiey:: That is not true; give the exact amount.


Azellus Denis: Those are the figures the
Minister of Labour gave to the house. The municipality of Cowansville-


William Heward Grafftey: I repeat it is false.
(Text):


Azellus Denis: Ten thousand dollars for 36 people, which means that for five months those 36 people will each receive $277.75 per month.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Azellus Denis: I mean, the contribution of the federal government. That is the share of the federal government.


An hon. Member:: Say what you mean.


Azellus Denis: Divide that by the week, and those 36 people will receive exactly $13 per week.


An hon. Member:: And you are sorry about it.


Azellus Denis: I am sorry, because, it is chicken feed.
(Translation):
More than that Mr. Chairman, the winter works program was made so attractive that the municipality of St. Hyacin-the, in the riding of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot- did not bother to submit any project-though it has a good many unemployed.


Mr. Ricard:: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for St. Denis is speaking through his hat, for, last year, the municipality of St. Damase received $2,000 from the department, whereas this year, my riding will benefit by another $50,000.


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman-


William Heward Grafftey: I shall repeat your remarks to the knights of Cowansville.


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, it is obvious that among hon. members on the government side, the noisiest are not the most brilliant.
According to that list-


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: You are not clever enough to have made out that list yourself. Somebody prepared it for you.


Azellus Denis: To come back to the hon. members on the government side who are making so much noise, I see that in the riding of Roberval, not a single project has been submitted so far.

Supply-Labour


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: The hon. member is not intelligent enough to have prepared that list himself.


Azellus Denis: I see that in the riding represented by the hon. member for Roberval (Mr. Tremblay), the municipalities of St. Felicien, Dolbeau, Normandin and others, which are important municipalities did not submit any project .


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: He is certainly not intelligent enough, to have made this out on his own.


Azellus Denis: In the city of St. Hyacinthe, there is not a single project.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: You are speaking through your hat.


Azellus Denis: As the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville (Mr. Dupuis), so aptly said, I am convinced that the Conservatives of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot will remember this.
In the constituency of Vaudreuil-Soulanges, there is no project for the three important municipalities of Vaudreuil, Dorion and lie Perrot.
No municipality in the constituency of Montmagny-L'Islet has presented any project either.
The municipalities of Baie St. Paul, La Malbaie, Chateau Richer, in the constituency of Charlevoix, have submitted no project.
As to the constituency of Brome-Missis-quoi, I mentioned it a few moments ago.
As far as the constituency of Three Rivers is concerned-


William Heward Grafftey: What did you have to say about the constituency of Brome-Missisquoi? Repeat your remarks. Mr. Chairman, on a point of order-


Mr.   Chairman@: Order.


William Heward Grafftey: Mr. Chairman, on a question of privilege.
The hon. member for St. Denis implies that the municipalities of the Brome-Missisquoi riding did not submit any project. I wish to inform him that they did submit projects and I would ask the hon. member to rectify his statement. As usual, he is telling falsehoods.


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, there is no question of privilege there.


William Heward Grafftey: The hon. member implied that the municipalities-


Jacques Flynn: Order.


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, I read in the papers that the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Allard) stated in his constituency that the measure was so attractive that more

than 79 municipalities took advantage of it last year.
I got hold of a copy of the 1955 municipal directory, published by one of their friends, the Hon. Paul Beaulieu, and in it I find the following:
(Text):
In the province of Quebec on January 1, 1955, there were 1,640 local municipalities divided as follows-
And so forth.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, it sounds good to say in Sherbrooke, in the course of a speech, that over 79 municipalities have availed themselves of this act; however, 79 municipalities out of a total number of 1,640 does not sound so good or so impressive. It is about 4 per cent. And this year, out of all the municipalities in Quebec exactly 66 will benefit from this act.
Do you expect me to blame the municipal authorities for that? Not in the least, because they realize that this scheme is unsound and illogical and that in the end, they are the ones who would have to pay most of the cost of such winter works.
(Text):


Michael Starr: May I ask the hon. member whether he wishes the government to withdraw this program?


Azellus Denis: Oh no. Better half a loaf than no loaf at all. It is not even half a loaf; it is crumbs. In addition, the half a loaf is not supplied by this government, it is supplied by the municipalities.
(Translation):
Mr. Chairman, it is not surprising that mayors and municipal councillors openly expressed themselves through the newspapers. As a matter of fact, some of them said that "it was but a drop in the bucket", "a monumental farce"; others said "that this is making fun of the unemployed", that "an attempt was being made to drive our municipalities needlessly to the brink of bankruptcy".
I could quote pages and pages of similar comments from other mayors and municipal councillors. Far from blaming them, I congratulate them for seeing through that smoke screen put up by this government. When the minister is in a position to submit to the house a program that would provide work for more unemployed-the present program employed only about 30,000 men while there were 600,000 last year-we shall congratulate him and applaud his initiative, like those famous Conservative members who are like trained seals, applauding the government each time it makes an announcement, even though it is bad news.

Mr. Chairman, I would ask the Minister of Labour to realize the efforts that are required to solve the unmployment problem. When our unemployed will have found work and their number will have gone down, we shall be able to say that this government has done something tangible for them, but as long as this does not happen, I say that the Minister of Labour and government members are ill-advised to talk about the years 1938, 1940, 1952, 1955, etc.
That is your responsibility, face it; you have been in power for three years, and that is your problem. Suggestions were made to you by the dozen, and you have followed none of them. You are quite satisfied with yourselves, and when you will have become conscious of the work you had to do, well, unfortunately, the people will have cast you aside, and we will have taken over again; and once more, there will be work for everyone in Canada.
(Text):


Michael Starr: Would the hon. member permit a question? Now that the hon. member has made his position clear-that he is against this program-


Some hon. Members:: He did not.


Michael Starr: -would he tell us whether he agrees with the statement of the Canadian Congress of Labour-


Paul Joseph James Martin: On a point of order.


William Heward Grafftey: The front bench to the rescue.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I know this is very difficult for the member for Brome-Mis-sisquoi, but I say that under the rules of this house it is not permitted for any hon. member to make a statement imputing views to another hon. member when it is obvious that that statement has not been made. The minister said that the hon. member who has just spoken said he was against this program. A question on that very point was asked by the minister, to which the hon. member replied that he was not against the program but that it was inadequate. I am sure that the minister, who is an honourable gentleman, will want to withdraw at once.


Jacques Flynn: Order. I think the hon. member for Essex East has said enough for me to decide there is no point of order. I am sure that if the hon. member was misquoted by the minister he will make the correction.


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, with your permission, with respect to the point of order by the hon. member for Essex East, which is not a point of order at all, I want to say I have listened attentively to what the hon. member said in his speech and there was
Supply-Labour
every indication-more than indication-in his words that he did not consider this program as one acceptable to the municipalities. I, therefore, ask him whether he agrees with the Canadian federation of mayors and municipalities when they commend the government for this program?


Paul Joseph James Martin: They do not.


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, all the hon. member for Essex East has to do is to look not at his own statistics but at the statistics of the Canadian municipalities in their submission of November, 1959, and he will find that commendation. I ask the hon. member whether he agrees with that commendation that the municipalities of this country put forward?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Oh, no, they did not.


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, there is a French saying to the effect that,
(Translation):
There are none so deaf as those who do not want to hear.
(Text):
The minister asked me that question before and I remember telling him that half a loaf was better than no bread. Does he remember that? Does he remember also I said we did not even have half a loaf from the government but only crumbs? He said in his speech he was providing the population with bread and butter.


Michael Starr: That is right.
(Translation):


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, dictators used to say: "Give them bread and games." I think it ill becomes the minister to rise and say that municipalities are enthusiastic about his scheme, because over 1575 of them, out of a total of 1640, have not even acknowledged his offer, an attractive offer according to the Conservatives.
And the Quebec provincial government, which should have taken a stand on the advisability of the scheme, should also have contributed something. But no, that government regards the unemployment problem as a purely federal responsibility, and is not interested in feeding the unemployed. It is not the least bit interested in helping the present federal government, even though it is a friendly one.
Perhaps it is the fault of the Minister of Labour, who has not pressed his point as much as he should have, or applied enough pressure on the provincial government, despite the fact that a third of the unemployed are

Supply-Labour
in the province of Quebec. I think the provincial government should share in the program to a large extent, instead of staying out of it.
The reply given this afternoon by the Minister of Labour to the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont (Mr. Deschatelets) is quite clear-
(Text):


Michael Starr: On a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman; I listened with interest to the hon. member who has gone beyond any question of privilege in this instance. I say to the hon. member that if he says now he is in favour of this program I most certainly say that, judging by what he said in his speech previously, I did not reach that conclusion. The hon. member now says he thinks it is a good program.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Paul Joseph James Martin: He says it is a very inadequate program.


Michael Starr: Are you not in favour of it? On a question of privilege, I wish to say to the hon. member that if he is not acquainted with the situation, the province of Quebec received the same communication as did the other provinces.
(Translation):


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, for the third time, I shall tell the minister of Labour that I am not against this winter works program.
(Text):


Michael Starr: You are in favour of it? Do you think it is a good program?
(Translation):


Azellus Denis: But I say it is inadequate, insignificant and a colossal joke.
(Text):


Michael Starr: I said that you were against it. (Translation):


Azellus Denis: I say it is a drop of water in the ocean. One thousand five hundred and sixty four municipalities claim that the program put forward by the federal government will result in driving the municipalities to bankruptcy, or in burdening them with debts for years to come, to no useful purpose.
Mr. Chairman, how can the city of Rober-val for instance, that has now a $45,000 deficit, get deeper into debt by borrowing money to take part in this winter works program during which a lot of time is lost on account of bad weather?
Does the Minister of labour think he will solve the unemployment problem by having a few unemployed shovel snow or by putting to work a few labourers digging the frozen ground?

Mr. Chairman, I submit that there is room for improvement in this winter works program, not only with respect to terms and conditions, but in relation also to the financial contributions of the federal government. Tradesmen and carpenters could also be put to work-
(Text):


Michael Starr: What is your suggestion? (Translation):


Azellus Denis: Masons, carpenters-
(Text):


Michael Starr: Make your suggestions. Suggest how this should be done.
(Translation):


Mr. Denis Very  Well-@Text: 


Jacques Flynn: Order. I regret to interrupt the hon. member-I do not know whether I am interrupting his speech or his answer- but his time has expired.


Mr. McCleave:: I am happy to see the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska in his seat this afternoon, for I have given him the courtesy which he did not see fit to extend to me. I told him-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Why did the hon. member not give me the same courtesy the other night when he falsely made those ridiculous remarks.


Robert Jardine McCleave: I think the hon. member is perhaps anticipating and his question deserves no answer because there is no question at all.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: When you spoke the other night I was not in my seat; you know that yourself. I gave the reason-a maritime meeting.


An hon. Member:: That is your fault.


Maurice Bourget: See what happens to this program, a fight.


Robert Jardine McCleave: I am barely able to get off the ground. The hon. member seems to be anticipating a great deal that I have not said so far in the debate this afternoon. I said that I had given him the courtesy this afternoon of informing him that I was going to take issue with the pale Billingsgate that he heaped upon the pages of Hansard in reference to my participation in a previous debate. That courtesy I have extended to him.
I think it is customary, Mr. Chairman, when one member attacks another in the House of Commons or in committee, for the attacking member to notify the other member so that he will be on hand to defend himself.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: There was no attack made on the hon. member except to suggest that

he look after his problems in Halifax and stop obstructing my looking after unemployment problems in Restigouche-Madawaska.


Robert Jardine McCleave: I have given notice to the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska. Perhaps he will hear me out. Then I shall be delighted to hear him out.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: All I asked you to do the
other day was to look after Halifax and not obstruct my looking after unemployment in Restigouche-Madawaska.


Jacques Flynn: Order. May I ask the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska to remember the rules. He should address the Chair and not interrupt unless he gets the permission of the hon. member who has the floor.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I should like to raise a very important point of order. If this problem were not half as serious as it is-


Mr. Thrasher:: Get on to the point of order.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: -I certainly would not have interrupted the hon. gentleman in his remarks on the seventeenth, which was a Wednesday, or the sixteenth, when he said that I had not done a certain thing which I said I had done. He was here in the house when I said I had done it. All he had to do was to check on that, and his remarks this afternoon would be quite irrelevant.


Jacques Flynn: On the point of order, if the hon. member is just trying to correct some statement made by the hon. member for Halifax he knows that this is not a matter for a point of order. He will have an opportunity to speak later and correct any statement if he claims he has been misquoted.


Robert Jardine McCleave: As I was saying before I was interrupted, I gave the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska notice, both verbal and written, that I intended to rise before the committee at the earliest opportunity to refute some of the points he had made in an earlier speech in this same debate. I do not intend to be particularly quarrelsome about it. I simply want to place this on the record, and if there is going to be any question raised as to the bona fides of two members then the committee will have to judge that question without very much assistance on my part. But I hope the hon. member will have the courtesy to give me the opportunity to be heard. I think he will at least admit that I have been in touch with him and told him some of the points I intended to raise this afternoon.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: They were all wrong.


Robert Jardine McCleave: The hon. member's remarks with particular reference to myself may be
Supply-Labour
found at page 1243 of Hansard of February 19, more particularly this paragraph:
I was shocked when on February 15 the hon. member for Halifax moved the adjournment of the debate on the motion then before us involving some kind of move toward reciprocity rights for the people of ridings such as mine. I was shocked that he should use as an excuse for moving the adjournment of the debate a snowstorm that had taken place ten days before, when in fact the snow had mostly all melted away. Before leaving the house for a meeting on maritime problems on the night of that debate I had been assured that the motion would not be adjourned.
The facts are these, Mr. Chairman. There are a number of members from ridings close to the state of Maine who have an interest in this problem just as the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska has an interest in the problem that was raised at that particular time. It so happened that my roommate of last year, now parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Labour, had asked if I would, on behalf of our party, arrange an orderly list of speakers, and one very important thing was to see that the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska, who has a deep interest in the subject, should be on that list. Accordingly that was done. There were other speakers on the list as well.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I am very reluctant to interrupt the hon. member but I think in the interests of good order I must raise a point of order. Surely what the hon. member is doing is discussing another debate in the proceedings of this session, which debate has not been concluded, and that is notoriously out of order, sir. We have a very important subject before us that most of us would like to debate.


Robert Jardine McCleave: If I may speak on the point of order raised by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. I am going to state facts to refute statements made in this very same debate on February 19 by the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: There is only one person mistaken and that is the hon. member for Halifax.


Robert Jardine McCleave: May I finish? I could, I suppose, raise this as a question of privilege.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: That would have been the proper thing to do.


Robert Jardine McCleave: Last week the Chair gave the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska the fullest opportunity to attack me when I was not in the house to defend myself.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: You did not wait until I came in the house before accusing me of utter falsehoods.


Robert Jardine McCleave: I am asking that the house out of a sense of decency, give me the same opportunity to reply.

Supply-Labour


John (Jack) Henry Horner: At the proper time.


Jacques Flynn: I am prepared to give some leeway to the hon. member for Halifax but I would think that up until now he has gone a little too far away from the subject matter of the debate. In principle I think the point of order of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate is well taken. If the hon. member intends to bring his remarks within the orbit of the debate I will listen to him further but not for very long if he does not.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before you make your final decision, Mr. Chairman, if the hon. member for Halifax is allowed to enter into a debate about this matter I would hope that the hon. member for Beauce, who moved the motion and who is also interested, will also be allowed to make his point. That shows how unwise a course this is.


Jacques Flynn: I think we will decide each case as it arises. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate will remember that I said I was hoping the hon. member for Halifax would come back as soon as possible within the orbit of the debate.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: On a point of order, if the hon. member for Halifax wishes to discuss this motion about reciprocity rights I have some very vital information here that I should like to give the house.


Jacques Flynn: Order. I have not recognized any point of order in these remarks as yet, and I think I have ruled sufficiently for the hon. member for Halifax to decide as to his course of action now.


Robert Jardine McCleave: Thank you. The point I was going to make was that the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska-


Mr. Van Home:: On a point of order again-


Some hon. Members:: Sit down.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: This is just another subterfuge. If we are going to have a debate on reciprocity rights I insist on the right to speak because I have some very vital information just received this morning.


Mr. Benidickson:: Mr. Chairman, would you read the text of the item before the committee at the present time?


Jacques Flynn: I would ask the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska to be patient and to wait. I do not think he should raise points of order as he has been doing. He will have an opportunity to enter into the debate later and we can then judge whether or not the remarks he intends to make are relevant. The hon. member for Halifax.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Mr. Chairman-


Jacques Flynn: Order. I have given my decision and I hope the hon. member for Restigouche-Madawaska will abide by it.


Robert Jardine McCleave: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The point I should like to make, if I may finish even one sentence without my hon. friend anticipating what I am going to say, is that in his speech on February 19 he went on to say that I had made ridiculous and irresponsible statements.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, one of those words was uttered by me but not the other. I was very sorry to see the other word in the record. If the hon. member had not told me that he was going to raise a question of privilege today about these words I would have got up on a question of privilege and corrected Hansard. I did not use one of those words and hon. members who were here at the time can bear me out because I did not use it. I know that for a fact. I do not know how those two words got in there. They were probably both in my notes which I gave to the Hansard reporter but I did not use one of them and the one I used was certainly correct.


Robert Jardine McCleave: Mr. Chairman, I will tell you frankly my purpose in rising. A week ago certain statements were made by the hon. member. I take issue with some of the statements made by the hon. member and I am prepared to challenge them, but I agree with the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate that I am not really participating in the debate as he and I am sure most other members would like to see it develop. I am simply trying to defend myself as a member now that I am in the house, something I could not do a week ago when I was not in the house.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Nor was I in the house when you accused me. I had to go to a meeting and you knew about it.


Robert Jardine McCleave: I simply want to make this point very clear. The hon. member has attacked-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I am not going to put up with this tomfoolery. There is no horse sense in what you say and there will be no dog dancing as long as I am here, nor will I permit you to obstruct the rights of people in my riding.


Robert Jardine McCleave: You will have to hang yourself then.


William Moore Benidickson: We will debate that tomorrow.


Robert Jardine McCleave: The point I want to make is that he quarrels with my bona fides on that occasion and I say that the hon. member for Rimouski and the parliamentary secretary

to the Minister of Labour were two of the members who had an interest in taking part in the debate at that time. The hon. member for Rimouski was held up by a snowstorm and was unable to be here that evening. I wanted to bring that out in direct refutation of what the hon. member said.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: There was never any mention made by me of any of those things. I never mentioned any other member or particular date.


Robert Jardine McCleave: I am not going to pursue this.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: You had better not, because you're all wet.


Robert Jardine McCleave: I could have explained it in about five or 10 minutes, and we have wasted 15 or 20 minutes now, mostly as a result of interjections from the hon. member for Resti-gouche-Madawaska. I am concerned with the problem with which he and many other members are concerned, because we do have woodsmen from Halifax county who go to work in the state of Maine. The problem is to find some sort of reciprocity with the state of Maine. I do not quarrel with any hon. member who recognizes the problem, but what I have been trying to do is to point out some of the factors involved there.


Jacques Flynn: I fail to see that the remarks of the hon. member have been related to the debate with which we are now occupied. If the hon. member cannot relate his remarks to the subject matter under debate, I shall have to ask him to resume his seat.


Robert Jardine McCleave: I must apologize to the Chair. I was trying to answer an attack that was made upon me, in my absence. I am sorry if I have taken the time of the committee in so doing.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: There was no attack in this at all upon you. The only attack that was made was upon me when you tried to obstruct reciprocity rights for my people in Mada-waska.
(Translation):


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Chairman, I would like-
(Text):


Jacques Flynn: Order. The hon. member for Timiskaming.


Mr. Peters:: There has been a lightning exchange across the floor which has probably altered the course of the debate a little bit and probably has given us a little rest from some of the problems under debate. I am sure the minister will appreciate it. I was interested in hearing the previous speaker being queried by the minister as to whether
Supply-Labour
or not the winter works program was of any value. I would suggest that the winter works program has been of some value to some parts of Canada, but it has been of no value to other parts of Canada. The winter works program should fit into the unemployment picture in general.
I believe it has been generally agreed that if three quarters of a million people are looking for work, then we have a very serious problem. While the minister is correct in saying that there are more people employed now than there were a year ago, he should also take into consideration that the population has increased and obviously there should be more people employed. We have an annual population growth in Canada of well over 2 per cent per year. This will be reflected in the labour figures, just as they will in other statistics. The fact that three quarters of a million people are looking for work is certainly an indication that this government must give more consideration to the matter of full employment. We must, in Canada, be adult enough to be able to supply our people with work.
The Canadian situation has not appeared to be so serious in the last two or three years because you can walk down the street at the height of the unemployment period and you will not find any number of people standing around as you did during the depression. I have noticed in my travels that there are not nearly the number of people around railroad stations as there used to be. I think we have done something through legislation to alleviate some of the problems that unemployment produces.
Unemployment insurance is a good example of what we have been able to do, what the Canadian people have been able to do, to alleviate some of the problems produced by unemployment. The workers and employers contribute to this plan, and they have been able to take care of some of their own unemployment problems.
Second, I think there has been an increase in part-time employment. People who are employed in bush operations quite often drive taxis or go to work in service stations or do other types of jobs on a part-time basis. This means that they are not on relief. It means in many cases that they are able to stay in the communities in which they have lived; they are able to get by, and still, at the same time should be classed as unemployed persons.
The seasonal benefits that are obtainable in some industries have been taken into consideration in negotiations with the unions that are bargaining in those industries. There has been consideration of the fact that these men are going to be employed for only part

Supply-Labour
of the year, and the unions have succeeded in getting them enough money that they can carry over the period of unemployment. In this way the man does not become a liability on the community by requesting relief from the municipality.
The winter works program has been a step in this direction. In the three ridings that are close to me in northern Ontario, the ridings of Cochrane, Timmins and Timis-kaming, there is not one winter works scheme so far as I have been able to ascertain; absolutely none. There cannot be any winter works program, because of the manner in which this scheme is constituted. I would suggest that this fact be given some consideration. It is time that these northern municipalities were able to enjoy the benefits of legislation, just as the municipalities in other parts of Canada are able to do.
In the first place, under this winter works program the federal government pays only for labour. We have found that even if the period of time for this program were extended and there were not four or five feet of frost in the ground or very close to 150 inches of snow on the ground, we would still only be able to employ a very small labour force. We have been told that by the time the municipality employs the foremen, and the people who are specialists in their field, the actual labour force would be only four or five at the outside. If the labour costs was 10 per cent in connection with that project, the federal government would only have to assist with 5 per cent of the total cost of that project.
As everyone in Canada knows, the municipalities are experiencing considerable difficulty in obtaining money for sewers, roadbuilding and other jobs of that nature because of the high interest rates on the moneys that they have to borrow. The winter works program in my part of the country, therefore, and I think this is true of many more areas, has no effect at all. I agree the municipalities need this particular program. A suggestion was made by the hon. member for Timmins that we might extend this program a month at both ends of the period and this might, in some cases, allow some of the municipalities to take advantage of it.
Another very important problem in connection with unemployment is the kind of unemployment against which you cannot insure. I refer to area unemployment. This area unemployment is almost equal from coast to coast. We attempted last week to introduce a resolution which would have allowed discussion of this problem in terms of the unemployment in such areas as Cape

Breton island, Pictou county which has been mentioned this afternoon, Sable river in British Columbia, Bancroft, Elliot Lake and other areas. This is a problem in my own area. We have a large woodworking plant which because of conditions beyond their control is no longer able to employ the 500 people it used to employ and is now employing only five or six. This is a situation which we find throughout the railway industry where automation and other conditions have caused a cut-back in employment. This is the type of unemployment against which the worker cannot insure. This area displacement in many cases becomes a direct responsibility of the government. I should like particularly to discuss this area unemployment problem in terms of one particular area with which I am quite familiar, namely the Elliot Lake area.
This obviously is a government responsibility. This area of unemployment certainly is the baby of the federal government and the provincial government concerned and has been discussed in one way or another in the various aspects of the problem. In Elliot Lake we have a community that was started for one purpose. It is as well put in an article written by Larry Sefton as by any. He points out as follows:
The uranium industry owes its life to state research and it was financed by state investment-
He goes on to say:
-has depended almost entirely upon government planning and government expenditure-
Then he goes on to point out:
Research, development, and production of atomic energy has been a product of public, not private, enterprise.
This is one case where the government has had something to do with an area which is now going to be totally unemployed. We read headlines to the effect that there will be 3,000 workers out of work and others which indicate that the number will be 4,000. I would suggest that not only are 3,000 or 4,000 people going to be out of work but that a community of 25,000 people is going to be in this unemployment position owing to area unemployment.
The Liberal government has had some responsibility. Very recently in this house we had a debate in which the leader of the Liberal party pointed out what had been done and how the situation arose in the first place. He then went on to say what the government had not done in this particular case. What he said was true. What he said applied to the government. But I would suggest that it applied much more to him and to his party than it did to the present government with respect to this particular area.

Let it be remembered, Mr. Chairman, that there is not much difference between the unemployment situation at Elliot Lake and the situation that developed in area unemployment a short time ago in connection with the Avro Arrow project. You will remember that at that time, as in this case, planning was not developed to the stage where any future was assured to those workers simply because the work had not been done in planning for this particular area.
If this was an ordinary mining community, you would say that might have been expected. But the province of Ontario, because of conditions existing, did not allow the miners to go into Elliot Lake as they normally do. I know this from past experience because I have been involved. A miner normally going into a development area goes into that area with the idea of either working in the development stages of the area and getting out-staying only as long as the large money is to be made-or he goes in there to make a living for himself. In most cases, in most mining communities-and you can go back to Cobalt, Timmins, Kirkland Lake and the others-these communities began with tarpaper shacks. You hear stories of banks being installed in camps, a restaurant being run in a circus tent and so on. However, in Elliot Lake the Ontario planning board went in and said, "This town must meet specific conditions" and the town was built in that way. It was built with $40 million of our money from Ottawa through Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and it was built with a great number of millions of dollars from the Ontario government for the development of sewers and streets. I would ask you to remember, Mr. Chairman, that this town has no unpaved streets. It is probably the only city of 25,000 in which all the streets are paved. It was built for the future and that future was a very flimsy one.
The Leader of the Opposition last night said that in signing a five-year agreement for the contracts for this production and in bringing this production into being they thought they were doing a service to that industry. It is also true that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation knew this industry was not going to last under that type of contract and they said, "We will go in here only for five years and from then on the C.M.H.C. mortgages must be carried by the companies themselves". Hence they did not take any chance.
I have many friends

many people with whom I have worked-who went into this area of Elliot Lake. They went in there to work. I advised many of them, fellows with whom I worked who went in at the development stage, to make sure not to buy a house
Supply-Labour
there and not to consider it as a permanent settlement. They must have known there was going to be trouble when the contracts ran out in 1962. They knew they could not be renewed.
To be fair about it, it was not known that they were not going to be renewed. We had been told that uranium was going to be in short supply across the world. But we knew when these mines were brought into production, having regard to the size of them, there would be the same problem, we expected, as in gold where we had a surplus of the commodity and the price would be far lower than we could afford to sell it at; in other words, the mines would not be able to produce at the price they would get for their product. That is not what has happened. We cannot sell this stuff. We cannot give it away at the present time.
When the present government says that the responsibility is that of the former government, I think that is true. I think we must now stop trying to decide whose fault it was and devote our attention to what we are going to do about the situation. I would suggest that the present government has done nothing about it. That is why I think this area unemployment problem is one that this government must face now. It is not good enough to say that what was done previously was not satisfactory.
We have this community; we have a permanent community at Elliot Lake and something can be done for that community if this government wants to give leadership. I would suggest that some of my miner friends working in Elliot Lake have put a great deal of money into homes and a great deal of money into that community. Indeed, some of them are now resting in the graveyard in that area because the development of this uranium industry cost 57 lives. Some of those 57 people have made a permanent contribution to that community. I think the other people have a right to ask that something be done now for this community and I think this government is the one that is going to have to do it.
In listening to the minister speaking last night on this problem, I was greatly surprised to find that he derived any satisfaction out of the fact that he was able to extend these contracts. This is no answer. This community cannot exist if you take away three quarters of the money that is coming in. The storekeepers will go broke, as will the people that went in and established a hospital and others who are involved. For instance, I have a friend who owns a dental clinic up there and who spent $80,000 or $90,000. This undertaking will not be able to exist if there are only 6,000 or 7,000 people

Supply-Labour
there. It can be carried on only in an expanding community. They were looking toward the future, not looking into the past. I suggest this has been no solution and will be no solution for these people; and I think they will be quite happy to come and tell the government that this is no solution to that particular problem.
I use Elliot Lake only as an example. I am sure that, if he wished to do so, the hon. member who represents the riding in which Sable river is situated, could rise in his place and tell you exactly the same story in his community. I am quite sure the representatives from Cape Breton island and Pictou county could rise in their places and tell you that in their area something must be done. I suggest that before I finish they will probably agree that it must be done by this government and that it must be done somewhat along the lines that I hope to suggest.
This problem of depression areas is not new to governments and it is not new to mining. It has always been there in the north and very little has been done about it.
The former government for reasons known to themselves decided that they would save the gold mining industry by passing the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act. But this act has not saved those communities and it cannot be the answer even if it were made a permanent act. It is only a stopgap to carry us over until they decide what to do to supplement the income, because no matter what you do, a mine will eventually be worked out anyway. So if we were honest in passing the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act in the first place, we must carry through and develop something to supplant it.
In other countries they have used various methods to overcome this problem. We in Canada find that industrial development has to follow population, and I think if free enterprise is left on its own it will follow population. We have seen almost all the industry in the province of Ontario centered in the Toronto area. I suggest this is not a good employment practice for a country to observe. I think we could get much more benefit as Canadians if we were to decentralize a lot of this industrial development which is now causing such havoc in the city of Toronto and its surrounding areas where workers have to get on a street car two hours before they are due to start work in order to reach there on time.
This raises another problem in the employment picture. People were laid off in large numbers on the Avro Arrow project, and I think this problem rests squarely on

the shoulders of the present government because they blamed the previous government for doing it but they did nothing about it themselves except to stop the development. They did not do anything about the unemployed people, many of whom are still unemployed. In the city of Toronto they were able to get jobs in various parts of the city, and the problem never remained as apparent as it is in northern Ontario. These miners who are laid off in northern Ontario have no place to go. I know of no major mining development taking place in Canada today which would employ any number of miners. This is not the pattern Which has existed over the years, because I can remember when it was Belle Isle, when it was Yellowknife, when it was Uranium City, Knob Lake, Sudbury, and then Elliot Lake. Always before there has been some place for miners to go, but now I know of no place where they can go.
I should like to make some positive suggestions. All sorts of statements have been made; everybody blames everybody else, which I think is a good thing. I think -that has to be done and the Conservatives have to be able to say that the Liberals did it, and I think the Liberals have to be able to say the Conservatives did it. But I think that we as members of parliament have to speak for these people in Elliot Lake and forget the reason and ask ourselves, where do we go from here? I have a long article here which will interest the people of Elliot Lake. I do not want to read it all, but it is an editorial in the Sudbury Star, which incidentally is the newspaper which serves Elliot Lake. The headline is, "Was Elliot Lake dropped to satisfy the political situation in Manitoba?" Then it goes on to say:
Trade minister Churchill is from Winnipeg South Centre.
Prime Minister Diefenbaker is from the west.
Premier Roblin of Manitoba is chairman of the Manitoba development authority which has been working in close liaison with Atomic Energy of Canada Limited . ..
It is fair speculation that there may be political overtones because Liberal leader Pearson's riding is Algoma East, in which Elliot Lake is located.
True, these points may be evaded by Ottawa as "political guesswork," but they appear to be more pertinent than trade minister Churchill's talk about "national interest". The general political palatibility of distributing "gifts" from one end of the country to the other, regardless of other factors, is "smart politics" but sometimes unsound in the true national interest.
I am not suggesting this editorial is true. I am not suggesting that the minister did this, although I would not put it past governments to do this because it has been done in the past. Frankly, I do not think it is too important if we move this particular project at White Shell to Elliot Lake as far as the

employment situation is concerned, tor the simple reason that very few miners will work there because of their training. Therefore I do not think that necessarily this is the industry we need in that particular area. But everyone knows we need industry, and I suggest that this government should give fairly close consideration to setting up a manpower resources board.
Let me first of all point out that I do not want this manpower resources board to be the one which was established during the war as a war measure, because the main fault with that board was that once a man was placed in a job he could not get out of that job even if he wished. I want the manpower board to assess the field of availability under the direction of the unemployment insurance commission. They have been singularly unsuccessful, in the main, in being able to find places for workers. I think the reason is that they have not been able to make on an over-all basis a clear enough assessment of what are the needs. When they assess the needs, then they have to have the facilities and the money to re-train and re-locate people in jobs which these people are willing to accept.
This government and other governments will from now on have to give really close consideration to using our working force in the best possible national interest, and will have to give some assistance in this regard. I think the companies, particularly the mining companies, should help. I can show where $25 million was invested in Rio Tinto, which would make them a very large sum of money under the terms of their contract. If that mine had existed for another five or ten years they would have made a mint of money, enough to run this country, if they could have operated without any expenses, as they have.
It has been drawn to my attention that Bob Winters is president of that company, so the Liberal government is very close to the situation and the Leader of the Opposition should be able to give first-hand information on this. Also, he had quite a bit to do with this in days gone by and is or was a director of the board of that particular company.
I think other things can also be done by the manpower resources board. I think we can demand that mines in development areas must have a reason for existence. We would have been a lot better off if not one ton of uranium had ever been mined at Elliot Lake. We would have been much better off if that community had never been born, because it is now costing our national income a lot of money because there is an industry there which we have to assume responsibility for whether we like it or not. We established that industry only to satisfy the United States.
79951-0-90i
Supply-Labour
I say to the Minister of Trade and Commerce who is here today that we have paid very dearly for our deal with the United States, and I demand that he consider very closely curtailing any further support for the defences of the United States until they put some money into helping run the industry which they caused us to create, in order to keep these peonle working in that industry. They were responsible for this and it is a two-way street; if it is not we had better get off it because we are getting the short end of that particular deal.
I suggest that we curtail our assistance to their defences till we get some defence for our own industries which we built for the defence of all America. That is the only justification we had for ever going into this uranium deal, because I think the minister indicated last night that it will be a long time past 1970 before we will be using very much uranium for industrial purposes.
I think this board should also have the right to assess pension plans, and to demand from industries of this nature severance pay. I know that this severance pay which has been negotiated by the unions at Elliot Lake is going to be considered by the minister. The minister cannot ignore the fact that here is an opportunity to help these miners in their resettlement problems and I think that this is one small way in which his department has the opportunity to do something about this.


Jacques Flynn: I must inform the hon. member that his time has expired.


William Arnold Peters: I should like the indulgence of the committee to continue for a few minutes.


Jacques Flynn: Has the hon. member
unanimous consent to continue?
(Translation):


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Yesterday, we gave ten minutes to the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin). That is enough.


Azellus Denis: He just wants to finish his remarks. It will only take a few moments. (Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I understand that the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe-Bagot is acting today as chief whip and there has always been an understanding that the chief whip did not participate in debates and, particularly, did not interfere with the granting of unanimous consent which everyone else in this committee seems ready to give.


Mr. Bell (Saint John-Albert):: Where did that rule come from?


Hazen Robert Argue: On the point of order, I would ask the committee to consider the request made by the hon. member for Timiskaming.

Supply-Labour
After all, there is only another five minutes to go before six o'clock. The minister and others asked for unanimous consent to continue their remarks, and we in this group are always willing to oblige.


Georges-J. Valade: I have already given my consent, so carry on.


Hazen Robert Argue: Members of all parties should exercise toleration on occasions like this.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I rise only to say that the statement made by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate is not an accurate one, because I was on that side of the house when the chief whip on this side, Mr. Weir, intervened in debates.


Georges-J. Valade: I agreed to let the hon. member speak. But I have been trying to get the attention of the Chair for an hour, yet I did not have the chance to say one word.


William Arnold Peters: I believe we should give close consideration to ascertaining what measure of decentralization can take place in our industry. Certainly, good places for consideration are the areas affected at the present time, particularly the mining areas. I think something else should be done, namely the setting up of a national industrial planning board. One of the measures which would help solve this problem would be the development of secondary industries, and I suggest that a board could be set up to assist in such development. It may be that the committee is not too familiar with the inducement offered to mining undertakings, but if secondary industry were given the same advantages as mining companies, many smaller firms might be induced to come to an area such as Elliot Lake.
It should be remembered that Elliot Lake is only a few hours drive from Sault Ste. Marie and that it can be reached after an overnight drive from the city of Toronto. It takes no more than 12 hours to get to Montreal. Many of these areas of northern Ontario which have developed as mining areas and which are not now finding it economical to continue could be advantageously changed into industrial areas if the government were to set up a board to examine the potentialities in those areas and then offer inducements in order to bring in secondary industry.
In the mining areas mines going into production are given a three-year tax exemption period. If we offered the same advantage to secondary industry many of these smaller secondary plants which are being built in
major cities at the present time might well be attracted elsewhere, especially if we pointed out that they would be moving into communities where there was a complete range of services including sewers, water, schools, fire halls and so on and where the federal government had speeded up amortization to the mining companies bringing new mines into development.
Such a board as I was suggesting was established in the United Kingdom not long ago and certain inducements were offered to industry to go into areas where labour was available or where natural resources were available. If we follow this example I think we could help solve this problem.
I do hope that we can take Elliot Lake out of the political arena and put it back in the employment field. I have worked in that area. I was in there when there were only sawmills in that area. We have a beautiful little city there of 25,000 inhabitants-hardworking people who want to settle down. Some of them have been there for three or four years, and their children are attending schools in that area. I think all the Canadian people will wish to retain that community as it is. We cannot, of course, retain all the miners, but with some help a proportion, at least, of the working force could be retained. Those who can remain will be a credit to Canada if they are only given the help they need; the help which, I suggest, should be given by this government.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if I could ask the leader of the house what the plans are for the remainder of the week and if there has been any change from the program announced yesterday.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I regret that I cannot say tonight what the order will be on Friday, because there may be one or two changes. However, I can be sure of this for Friday- a continuation of supplementary estimates and the resolution standing in the name of the Minister of Public Works dealing with the amendments to the National Housing Act. By tomorrow night I may be able to add one or two items to that if the house will give me some assurance that it requires more business for Friday.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.﻿FEBRUARY 24, 1960