1961-09-25

Mr. Laurier Regnier (St. Boniface):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege on the ground that as the result of an irregularity in our proceedings, irreparable damage may be done. The other place will be meeting tonight, and unless I am allowed to raise my objection now the other place may have to deal with legislation that is not legally and effectively before them through an irregularity in our proceedings. The other place is being convened earlier than was planned this week. I am asking Your Honour that I be heard now. My argument will be brief. First I should like to read the proceedings as recorded in Hansard of September 18.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member has made a request which is not within my power to grant. He refers to the irregularity of our proceedings as the basis for his request. He raised a similar objection the other day. From what he said at that time I saw no irregularity and I have not seen any upon further review of what took place. As I indicated, the hon. member was unfortunate in missing the opportunity to speak on the bill on second reading, and he could not expect to be heard now except by unanimous consent of the house.


Laurier Arthur Régnier: With respect, Mr. Speaker, may I say this. Last Thursday I was not allowed to complete my argument. The last words I uttered were "In addition". I was told to sit down and out of deference, Mr. Speaker, I followed your instructions. I was not allowed to make a full argument on my point of privilege last Thursday. I am a member of parliament and I represent minorities in western Canada. I insist that I have the full freedom which my mandate allows to a member of parliament.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Will the hon. member indicate the page to which he refers?


Laurier Arthur Régnier: I refer to page 8502 of Hansard. The part of the proceedings recorded 90205-6-557
on that page that I wish to read is as follows. It starts at the middle of the page:
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Chown in the chair.
Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.
Schedules A, B and C agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Preamble agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported.
Mr. Speaker:: When shall this bill be read a third time; now?


Mr. Pickersgill:: Now, by leave.
I do not think the hon. member for Bona-vista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) has the power of attorney to speak for the whole house.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Laurier Arthur Régnier: No question was put to the
house asking for unanimous consent. This is the irregularity of which I complain, Mr. Speaker. Just a simple reading of the record, without doing violence to the English language, would prove my point.


Mr. Speaker:: I understood the hon. member to say that he had been prevented from speaking. However, in what he refers me to I see nothing which indicates that he was even present.


Mr. Winch:: I should like to raise a question of privilege.


Mr. Speaker:: I recognize the hon. member for Vancouver East.


Laurier Arthur Régnier: Have I the floor, Mr. Speaker?


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry, but I am afraid the hon. member cannot expect the house to interrupt its proceedings in order to hear him make comments now which there was an opportunity to make when the bill was before the house. It would be disruptive to our proceedings to allow any member who felt that he had not said all he wished to say, or had not been given a full opportunity to do so, or who happened to miss the proceedings, to intervene at another stage and make his speech again or add to it. I think the hon. member will appreciate that fact. He has indicated his interest by raising the point. However, I am afraid that is as far as the matter can go.


Laurier Arthur Régnier: With all due respect, Mr. Speaker-

Questions of Privilege


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before the hon. member for Vancouver East raises another question of privilege, and since the hon. member for St. Boniface was allowed to read a good deal of the record of September 18, I should like to read the lines he left out.


Mr. Pallelf:: What page?


John Whitney Pickersgill: This is the same page, 8502. He read:


Mr. Speaker:: When shall this bill be read a third time; now?
Then I am reported as saying this. I happened to be the senior person on the front bench on this side of the house at that time, and this was a perfectly normal procedure:
Now, by leave.
Then the record reads:


Mr. Balcer moved: the third reading of the bill.
I think the record should be complete.



MR. WINCH    REFERENCE TO ARTICLE IN CALGARY &quot;HERALD&quot;

Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege concerning an hon. member of this house. My question of privilege is based on an article in the Calgary Herald of Friday, September 22 where, as is understandable, there is a report on the death of William Duncan Herridge. The report states:
Outspoken diplomat dies at 73.
It points out that this man was a wealthy Ottawa lawyer, diplomat and brother in law of a former prime minister. It goes on to say how he was considered as a leader of the Conservative party. That I do not challenge at all, but I do draw to the attention of the house the fact that in the Calgary Herald, where all these statements are made, the picture is that of the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge).


An hon. Member:: Where is he?


Harold Edward Winch: I should like to say that the hon. member for Kootenay West, who is the deputy leader of this group in the house and a national council member of the New Democratic party, is alive; that he is alive physically, mentally and politically, and will continue his constructive contributions for many years in this- House of Commons.


Mr. Speaker:: I am sure all hon. members of the house will be relieved.



UNITED NATIONS


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, as a result of the recent outbreaks of violence in the Congo a serious shortage of internal air transportation and maintenance personnel has developed. This matter was brought to the attention of the various countries concerned by the United Nations secretariat at a special meeting on September 20, when a general request was made for any assistance possible. This request was further amplified on September 22, when more details were furnished as to the exact requirements.
On September 23 the government agreed to provide assistance, and appropriate orders were issued. Two C-119 aircraft of 436 squadron, R.C.A.F., Downsview, left their base at 9.14 and 10.44 on the morning of Sunday, September 24. A C-130B and North Star were also despatched to carry the personnel and extra stores, spare parts, etc., required. These two latter aircraft will return from the Congo immediately they have delivered their cargoes.
Over and above the C-119 detachment, 12 highly qualified supervisory technicians have been provided to assist the United Nations Congo maintenance organization. The entire detachment and supervisors, totalling approximately 80 all ranks, should be in position in the Congo by 7.40 Congo time, Tuesday evening, September 26.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 162-Mr. Hellyer:
For a copy of the Department of National Defence working paper showing the derivation of figures used by the minister in respect to the additional costs to Canada as a result of Canada taking over the operation and maintenance of certain Pine Tree radar stations from the United States air force.
Douglas Scott Harkness: Such working papers prepared by civil servants or by service personnel for the guidance of departmental officials are, and always have been, considered privileged documents. I must therefore refuse to accept this motion as presently worded. The last time this matter came up was on February 27, when the house refused a similar motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Does the minister make the point of order that the matter has been disposed of by the house?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Yes, Mr. Speaker; I make the point that exactly the same matter was disposed of by the house, though in connection with another department, on February

Inquiries of the Ministry
27 when a motion was made by the hon. Nowlan	Simpson
member for Assiniboia for papers of this kind in connection with the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. The minister stated that these papers-


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry, but I think the hon. gentleman will agree that although that was a similar motion it was not an identical motion, and the circumstances would therefore not prevent the hon. member who wishes to move for these papers from having the question put before the house.


Mr. Speaker:: I declare the motion lost.



CHIGNECTO CANAL SURVEY

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 163-Mr. McWilliam:
For a copy of all communications received by the Minister of Public Works and/or any official of his department, since July 1, 1961, in connection with the survey of the proposed Chignecto canal, together with a copy of the reply to each communication.
Hon. D. J. Walker (Minister of Public
Works): I accept the motion, Mr. Speaker, subject to the usual reservations about the production of privileged documents and communications with the provinces.
Mr. Speaker:: Shall the motion pass subject to the reservations announced by the minister?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier):: May I
direct a question to the Prime Minister and ask him whether the story which was heard on C.B.C. "News Round-up" this morning to the effect that the Minister of Finance is being summoned back to Canada from Rome is correct.
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime
Minister): Mr. Speaker, the other day a question was raised, I do not know by which hon. member opposite, as to whether the ministers who were participating in the Accra conference would be returning to the house soon. At that time it was expected that the house would be sitting somewhat longer than present anticipations would lead one to believe, in view of the progress that has been made. I discussed the matter with the Minister of Finance and in order to carry out the understanding given to the house I suggested that it might be well for him to be here to answer any questions directed specifically to him, and in particular to pilot through the house the legislation in connection with fiscal

Inquiries of the Ministry matters which it now seems will be available for consideration by the house on Tuesday or Wednesday. There is no question about directing him to return. It was simply pointed out that because of the unusual co-operation of the opposition, the house was proceeding to get its business done with a celerity that has not really been characteristic in recent months.


Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):: May I ask
a supplementary question of the Prime Minister, in view of the happy mood in which he obviously is this morning. As the leader of the delegation, the Minister of Trade and Commerce, is back in the house, does the Prime Minister not think that if the Minister of Finance were to extend his European tour there might be more progress made in the dispatch of public business at this time?


Mr. Diefenbaker:: I suggest to the hon. member that he is the last member in this house who should speak about progress in the public business, because he does more than anyone else to interfere with that progress.
(Translation) :



SECRETARY AT UNION NATIONALE CONVENTION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. P. Deschatelets (Maisonneuve-Rosemont):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Defence Production. Has he any comment to make about a report in this morning's Globe and Mail to the effect that his private secretary, Mr. Benoit Parent, attended the Union Nationale convention held in Quebec city Saturday, and does he think that a minister's secretary should identify himself with the Union Nationale in this manner?
(Text):


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member perhaps misconceives the nature of questions on orders of the day. They are supposed to relate to the administrative responsibilities of the government. The private affairs of employees of the minister or of his department, I would think, do not come within that category. If the hon. member does not agree with me I should be glad to hear what he has to say. However, it seems to me that this is not a question which is within the scope of those permissible.


Jean-Paul Deschatelets: Mr. Speaker, I should like the minister to tell us whether it was with his approbation that his private secretary attended this rally.


Hon. Raymond O'Hurley (Minister of Defence Production):: Mr. Speaker, I think this


matter should be cleared up now. I myself learned of the presence of my assistant secretary at this convention on Saturday through reading the Globe and Mail this morning. If he went there he did so as a private citizen, of his own volition and without my approval or approbation. He worked here on Friday and left to go to Quebec city on Friday night. If he went, he went of his own volition.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Prime Minister in view of the fact that the Minister of National Defence made a statement this morning concerning additional aid granted by Canada in connection with the Congo operation, with which we all agree. In view of the situation in the Congo, may I ask whether any consultations were held with the United Nations secretariat before there was armed intervention in the province of Katanga?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I must say that as I understand it, this question is not one of immediate importance. It has to do with something that allegedly took place in the past and, as such, I do not think it is a proper one for orders of the day. I suggest that the hon. member place his question on the order paper in the ordinary way.



DISARMAMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Harold Edward Winch: should like to address a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the statements made in this house on Saturday last by the Secretary of State for External Affairs that the President of the United States would be addressing the United Nations today and making new proposals relative to disarmament, I should like to ask whether the Prime Minister also heard on the radio this morning that his government had received a preview of the speech which was to be made this morning. If so, in view of the prorogation of the house which is anticipated within two or three days, I should like to ask if he will find it possible to make a statement to the house on the government's attitude to the proposals relative to disarmament made to the United Nations I understand only this morning.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I think the house should await the speech by the President of the United States.


Harold Edward Winch: I understand you have it.


John George Diefenbaker: If there are any questions, they can be asked at that time. As to Canada's stand on the question of disarmament, may I say that it has been stated over and over again. The Secretary of State for External Affairs has placed before the United Nations and elsewhere the policy of this government on that matter. But after the speech has been delivered, if the hon. gentleman has any questions in connection therewith I will endeavour to answer them.



ACCRA-REQUEST FOR STATEMENT ON CONFERENCE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: May I
direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce and ask him whether, as the head of the Canadian delegation at Accra, he has a report to make to the house this morning.


Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I will be looking forward, as I know my colleague the Minister of Finance will, to making a full report to the house. When he returns I look forward to reporting not only on the economic conference at Accra but also on my visit to five of our major markets in Europe. However, as the hon. member knows, the Minister of Finance will be back in this house tomorrow, and since we attended the Accra conference as a team I think it would be highly desirable that we both give our reports tomorrow. I can assure the hon. member, and all hon. members, that I will be glad then to answer any questions which may be directed to me.


Paul Joseph James Martin: May I ask
a supplementary question of the leader of the delegation. Would the minister put us in a proper mood to appreciate the statement to be made by the Minister of Finance tomorrow by providing us with the text of the speeches delivered by both distinguished gentlemen?


George Harris Hees: Well, Mr. Speaker, I will be glad, as I know the Minister of Finance will, to outline what we said on behalf of Canada at this conference. As the hon. member no doubt knows, it is not considered correct procedure for ministers, when they return to the governments which they represent, and to their houses of parliament, to table the text of speeches delivered at the conference. However, as I say, we will be glad to inform the house of what we said and to answer any questions that might be asked.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. G. J. Mcllrailh (Ottawa West):: I should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce if he released a partial text of his speech to the United Press service.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I learned that a text that I used at the conference was mistakenly given to the press. There was no fault on anyone's part, but I did not direct that it should be given out nor did I give it to the press. However, I understand copies of the text did get into the hands of some press representatives.


George James McIlraith: In view of the fact that the text has been released to the press service, would the minister release the same text to the House of Commons?


George Harris Hees: I have always been of the belief that two mistakes do not make a thing correct. As I have said, by mistake the text was released to the Canadian Press representatives. I do not believe the hon. member would seriously suggest that I table in this house a document which it is not the custom of commonwealth representatives to table in their parliaments upon their return from such meetings.


George James McIlraith: I take it that the minister expects the members of the House of Commons to treat this as another booboo on his part?


George Harris Hees: Coming from an expert in such matters, I am most interested to hear the hon. member's views on this subject.


Harold Edward Winch: I only wanted to ask one question. In view of what the minister has said, I should like to know whether the mistake was in releasing the text to the press or in what he said.


George Harris Hees: I think it is obvious. I think the hon. member will realize, when he hears the very lucid explanations that will be given to the house by my colleague the Minister of Finance and myself tomorrow, that the mistake that was made was in releasing the text to the press.



URANIUM-INQUIRY AS TO NEGOTIATIONS WITH UNITED KINGDOM

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Can he say whether the renegotiation has been concluded of what he earlier described as a firm contract for the sale of uranium to the United Kingdom? If so, can he report to the house?

Inquiries of the Ministry


George Harris Hees: No, not yet, Mr. Speaker. While in London on Friday I talked about this matter with Sir Roger Makins, head of the British atomic energy authority, and suggested that we get together again just as soon as possible. He advised me that his schedule will keep him tied up for the next month. However, I hope it will be possible to continue these negotiations very soon after that.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Does the minister see any possible terminal date in connection with these negotiations?


George Harris Hees: In a matter as complicated and as important as this, Mr. Speaker, it is impossible to predict a terminal date with any degree of definiteness.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to ask another supplementary question. Does the minister still regard this as a firm contract?


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I think we straightened that matter out a few weeks ago.


Mr. Speaker:: I think the hon. member's question, in asking for an opinion, is perhaps not in order.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. I should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce whether, since his return, his attention has been drawn to the fact that another uranium mine is shortly to be closed down because of the lack of any allocation under this contract.


Mr. Speaker:: I do not see that the hon. member's question is a supplementary one. In any event, it seems to be opening up a line of argument rather than asking for information.



PRODUCTIVITY COUNCIL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. M. Benidickson (Kenora-Rainy River):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Prime Minister, who will recall that in our debates last week on unemployment there were questions about the further activities on the part of the productivity council. It was indicated by the Minister of Labour that they would meet today, but all that parliament was informed about was that they would discuss labour-management relations. There is some suggestion that as they meet today they will hold a unique press conference-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. If the hon. member has a question will he please ask it?


William Moore Benidickson: Yes, Mr. Speaker. My question is this. Has the Prime Minister become acquainted with the press release of the productivity council? Has he also become acquainted with a suggestion that the productivity council may meet not only with the Minister of Trade and Commerce, to whom it is responsible, and the Minister of Labour but might also add another visit, namely to the Minister of Justice with a view to enlarging the amendments that were made to the Combines Investigation Act last year and under which, for export trade purposes-


Some hon. Members:: Question.


William Moore Benidickson: -there might be a widening of the legislation. Is this the government's desire?
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime
Minister): Mr. Speaker, that question is so long and so complicated that it is not understandable. So far as the council is concerned, it will be convening today. I think it is to have a two day meeting. I am not acquainted with any press release that was made, and so I think that is as far as I can go.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Erharl Regier (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of Fisheries. Now that Norway is reported to be following the example of Iceland and is attempting to enforce the 12 mile limit jurisdiction over its waters, can the minister report what progress is being made toward obtaining an international agreement in this regard?


Hon. J. A. MacLean (Minister of Fisheries):: Mr. Speaker, I have nothing to say at this time. In any case, it is a question which should be dealt with by my colleague the Secretary of State for External Affairs.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo):: I should also like to direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries. My question has to do with Mr. MacArthur's report on his investigation into the results of the fisheries failure in Newfoundland. Will the minister consider tabling Mr. MacArthur's report, preferably before the

Inquiries of the Ministry end of this session? If the report cannot be Mr. Hellyer: In view of the very con-tabled before the session ends, will the min- siderable discrepancy between the figures ister consider making copies available to given in the United States-
Newfoundland members at as early a date as
possible?	Mr. Speaker: Order.


John Angus MacLean: Mr. Speaker, I will do everything possible to keep Newfoundland members advised of what the situation is in Newfoundland as accurately as we can assess it.



SINCLAIR REPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: I should also like to address a question to the Minister of Fisheries, and ask him what progress is being made in the attempt to transform Dr. Sinclair's report on licence limitation on the west coast into policy and legislation and when we may expect such legislation to be presented to the house.


John Angus MacLean: Mr. Speaker, this is a rather complicated matter which is engaging the time and interest of those in my department. We communicated with the people who are especially interested in this matter. Having had replies from most of them, an attempt is being made to devise a course of action which will be reasonably satisfactory to all concerned. I have nothing further to add at the moment. At a later date I hope I shall be able to report something to the house, but not during this session.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Hellyer (Trinity):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. Can the minister say whether the taking over of certain Pine Tree radar stations from the United States air force by the Royal Canadian Air Force will result in an annual saving to the United States of approximately $50 million a year?


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, naturally I cannot say what are the United States calculations as to the savings they may make through this action. All I can say is what I have already said; that is, what the cost to Canada will be. Those figures are already in the record, having been put there during the course of the debate on the estimates.


Paul Theodore Hellyer: -and those given by the minister here-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member is obviously embarking upon a controversial statement rather than a supplementary question in search of information.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Hubert Badanai (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Notice of this question has been given to the minister. It has been reported that Canadian National Railways are experimenting with ties made of concrete which are imported from the United States. Is the minister in a position to say whether such experimentation is going on, and if so, why could not these ties be made in Canada?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. If the minister wishes to answer he may do so, but the same question has already been asked and answered, as the hon. member will see if he refers to the official report.



INQUIRY FOR RETURN

[Stage Direction]
SECTION 96a (2) INDIAN ACT-PROCLAMATION
On the orders of the day:
Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to either the Secretary of State or the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. My question is based upon a question of mine which was made an order for return on September 13. I understand it is relatively easy to put the information together. I wonder whether either of these ministers could check to see what progress is being made to comply with the order, and have it tabled.


Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Minister ol Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, I had a report from my department this morning. The hon. member may think it is relatively simple, but that is not the information I get from the department. However, I am told that every effort is being made to procure the answer for the hon. member before the house closes.

Advisory Council on Sports INDIAN AFFAIRS



SARNIA, ONT.-DISPOSITION OF MONEY FROM LAND SALE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I may ask the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration whether all the moneys paid by Dimensional Investments in respect to the Sarnia Indian reserve have now been disbursed either to the band funds or to the bank.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, all the moneys which were to be disbursed under the terms of the contract have been disbursed.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Could the hon. lady say what funds there are that have not been disbursed, and what is their purpose?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Speaking from memory, there is approximately $1 million which is either held in a trust fund under the terms of the contract or is held in the band funds. I presume that is the information the hon. member requires.



NUCLEAR ENERGY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask the Minister of National Health and Welfare if any further readings with regard to radiation levels are available since the last Soviet union explosion took place.


Hon. J. W. Monleith (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that the readings as a result of the last explosion, which took place on Thursday of last week, are not available as yet.



ESTABLISHMENT OF ADVISORY COUNCIL ON FITNESS AND AMATEUR SPORT

Jay Waldo Monteith: the second reading of Bill No. C-131, to encourage fitness and amateur sport.
He said: Mr. Speaker, as was evident in the debate on the resolution, all parties have welcomed the initiative being taken through this bill. As President Kennedy has said of his country:
The physical fitness of our citizens is a vital prerequisite to America's realization of its full potential as a nation, and to the opportunities of each individual citizen to make full and fruitful use of his capacities.

No one, I am sure, will dispute that these words apply with equal force to Canada, or that the legislation now being introduced fills a long felt need.
In presenting these new proposals for the encouragement of fitness and amateur sport we are fully conscious of the fact that we are dealing with a complex and dynamic aspect of Canadian life on which there are widely varying views. Anyone familiar with this field will be aware of the broad range of activities involved, and of the problems to be faced in endeavouring to work out a sound and practical piece of legislation within which such a program can grow and develop in line with both present and future needs.
Even so, it is our view that the bill now before the house will offer an opportunity to achieve most of the things which have been advocated over the years by lay and professional leaders in the fields of fitness, recreation and amateur sport. But as I pointed out in speaking to the resolution, we would welcome any suggestions which would improve the program as now envisaged. Even in its final form this measure might have its shortcomings, which could become apparent as it comes into operation, and which could require amendments to be made from time to time in order to permit the achievement of its full intent.
Furthermore, we have recognized that the objectives of this program cannot be attained in a vacuum. They can only be reached through the network of recreational programs operated by public agencies as well as by the many non-governmental organizations devoted to fitness and amateur sport. We hope that with the full co-operation of professional leaders and volunteer workers it will be possible to add a new dimension to these activities throughout Canada.
I should like to pay a warm tribute to all those who for many years have been labouring actively in these fields. I hope they will regard this new legislation as the fulfilment of their faith and vision; for our expectation is that building on their efforts, this present initiative will furnish that new spark and that new dynamic leadership necessary to achieve a sound, broadly based and sustained effort all across the country. It is this type of pattern which unfortunately in the past seems to have eluded our grasp.
Hon. members will note that the legislation places considerable emphasis on assistance for amateur sport. We are all aware that in the case of professional sport, revenues are considerable, stemming not only from paid admissions but also from various sources such as television and radio. Amateur sport has, unfortunately, lacked the same degree of support. This has meant inadequate financing

for the whole range of amateur athletics, as well as for programs specifically designed for fitness.
Obviously further financial aid is urgently required if existing services for the development of fitness and amateur sport are to be strengthened and extended. Our new program is aimed at fulfilling this requirement. With the assistance now proposed it is possible to foresee a whole new development with respect to sports events supported by federal and provincial governments. We would hope, too, that federal activities in relation to international and national programs would complement and supplement those of the provinces.
In this connection, we are very anxious to assist with joint projects organized and administered by the provinces on a basis that is acceptable to them. Certainly-and I want to make this abundantly clear-the dominion government will be most careful in respecting the rights of the provinces and of local governments in this field, for we are fully aware that if the program is to succeed it must enjoy the wholehearted support of the provinces and, through them, of municipal authorities as well as of local groups within the communities themselves.
There is one further point I would make in relation to the program's scope. The new undertaking will not be concerned solely with the gifted athlete who may be in a position to take part in national and international competitions. It will also be concerned with fitness and sports programs for the great mass of our population. Here I would stress that even the large sum being made available under this program represents but a small part of the total effort required to develop well balanced recreational activities across Canada.
In perusing this bill the house will naturally be interested in comparing its provisions with those of the national fitness act of 1943. Perhaps one or two comments would be helpful on this point. The most significant difference is the amount of financial support provided in the new legislation. The present act makes available the substantial sum of $5 million annually, or about 22 times the amount allocated for somewhat similar purposes under the former provision. I think there can be little doubt that the relatively small sum and the manner in which it was made available under the previous program tended to hamper the work of the then national physical fitness council.
In the years since the 1943 act was introduced, very considerable changes have taken place in Canada. Our population has increased from less than 12 million to over 18 million people. During the interval, provincial
Advisory Council on Sports and local governments as well as sports groups and organizations have devoted a great deal of effort to the strengthening and extension of fitness and amateur sport programs.
Moreover, the climate of public opinion, as indicated in the many representations received by the dominion government, has changed considerably since the repeal of the former act. As I pointed out in discussing the resolution, there appears to be a growing awareness of the importance of fitness both to the individual and to the nation. Here an important factor has been the advent of new means of communication such as television. The fact that many sports activities are now brought into our homes-whether from another part of Canada or another part of the globe-has done much to stimulate the interest of Canadians in such activities.
Over and above this, Canadian participation in international competitive events is emerging as an important aspect of a growing spirit of nationhood. In the representations made to the government over the past few years, strong desire has been expressed to see government financial aid provided to assist our athletes in competition abroad.
Another distinction between the legislation before us today and the act of 1943 is that the amount of $5 million is set out as a statutory item to be provided each year. No fund is established, as was done under the former act. By making allocations available on a statutory basis the federal commitment will be clearly known, and it will thus be possible for the new advisory council to suggest projects and advise on priorities with the firm expectation that adequate funds will be available from year to year. Continuing commitments and major undertakings requiring a number of years to complete will have as much assurance of financial support as it is possible to give.
At the same time, the statutory approach will provide an important safeguard. Any amounts not expended in a fiscal year will lapse. This means, for example, that in the first few years, when expenditures may be -and I repeat, "may be"-somewhat lower while programs are getting under way, funds will not accumulate in a manner which might lead to a lack of concern for ensuring their careful expenditure.
A fourth important difference in the present legislation as compared with the former act relates to the council. The national physical fitness council established in 1943 was a body with executive authority. Under our new provisions the council will be advisory to the Minister of National Health and Welfare, and expenditures will be subject to the

Advisory Council on Sports usual government scrutiny and control. In following this approach we have, of course, looked to the experience gained through the advisory committee on vocational training, the advisory committee for rehabilitation of disabled persons, and the dominion council of health.
A fifth and final point of difference is the fact that the new program will place considerable emphasis on federal aid for national and international sports events.
To sum up, then, we believe we have now developed a program that is more comprehensive, better rounded, and more in keeping with the needs of the people of Canada than that which was formerly in force. In so doing we have tried to benefit from the mistakes of the past, and to lay the groundwork for an undertaking which will provide greater opportunity for harmonious growth in the future.
Turning to the specific objectives of the bill, the house will note that there is provision of assistance "for the promotion and development of Canadian participation in national and international amateur sport." An important aspect of this objective will be furnishing encouragement and assistance to Canada's more gifted athletes in national and international competitions, this to involve the co-operation of national sports organizations. In the past many Canadian athletes with real potential have not had an opportunity to develop to their fullest extent because of the lack of facilities and qualified coaching. Others have not found it possible to pursue amateur sports beyond local competitions even though they may have had the ability to enter national and international sports events. We would hope that when this program fully develops it will offer greater opportunities for persons with athletic ability to participate to the utmost in athletic pursuits of their choice.
In extending greater assistance to Canadian participation in international sporting events, we are merely doing what many other nations have done over the years, and we hope this will help assure a greater measure of parity for our athletes in relation to their fellow competitors from other countries. In taking this action we are also recognizing the fact that Canadians who compete in the Olympics, the British empire and commonwealth games, the Pan-American games and other international championship competitions are ambassadors of good will for Canada. In this connection it should be noted that support by the dominion government must carry with it a responsibility on the part 

of our athletes. Canada will expect them to exemplify the highest standards of sportsmanship on all occasions.
In developing a formula for federal aid with respect to international competitions, we shall need the advice of the agencies which organize such events, the Canadian Olympic Association, the British empire and commonwealth games association, and the Pan-American games committee. Other sports-governing bodies covering fields not included in these events are also concerned in Canadian participation abroad and these, together with the Canadian sports advisory council, will, I am sure, all have valuable suggestions on how federal support might be provided on an equitable basis. Here again is an area where the advice of the new national council will be of particular importance.
The new program will give major emphasis to promoting amateur sports and fitness for all our young people. Much of the development in this area has centered around community and school athletic programs and so comes within the jurisdiction of provincial and municipal governments. Accordingly we shall be looking to the provinces for suggestions and guidance in this field. Having in mind the valuable experience we have already had in working with provincial authorities under programs such as the national health grants, vocational training and vocational rehabilitation, I have no doubt it will be possible to work out mutually satisfactory arrangements without much difficulty.
In promoting wider participation in amateur sport and recreation, there is a need for more facilities of both the indoor and outdoor variety. Here the federal government plans to move forward in a number of ways to assist with expansion and development.
I might mention, first, that the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources is continuing to give considerable attention to the expansion of recreational facilities in national parks. Second, there is the important federal contribution being made through the municipal winter works program in the construction of recreational facilities across Canada. Through the co-operative effort of the various levels of government, the Department of Labour can approve projects covering the construction of community rinks, community swimming pools and playgrounds, stadia and playing fields, as well as other recreational facilities. In the last fiscal year outlays under this program amounted to some $15 million, of which the federal treasury paid $3,800,000 for parks, playgrounds and other recreational facilities. Thus while the main objective of the winter works program is to provide useful employment for persons out of work, it has also had as an important

by-product the increase in community recreational facilities across Canada. Incidentally, in these projects alone some 11,000 individuals were employed last year.
A further impetus to the development of such facilities will be afforded by the program we are now discussing. Among other things, it is hoped that this new effort will make it possible to develop some fitness and amateur sport facilities at the federal and provincial level through which courses for coaches and other leaders can be provided. In this connection we plan to seek suggestions from the national advisory council.
Speaking of courses for coaches and other leaders, hon. members will note the bill's provisions for the training of personnel. The emphasis on coaches is deliberate, because we are convinced that if we are to assist young Canadians effectively to discover and develop their capabilities, the number of competent coaches must be increased many times. We believe the potential athletic ability of our young people to be second to none in the world, but it is obvious that they have been handicapped by the lack of opportunities to obtain the proper training. While we cannot expect results overnight, there is every reason to believe that over a period, very satisfactory progress can be made.
Another area in which assistance could be given would be in relieving the shortage of suitably trained persons. As outlined in the bill, this objective may be met through the provision of bursaries and fellowships to provide for graduate training for professional personnel needed in fitness and amateur sports activities. I would also emphasize the importance of voluntary personnel. In a people's program such as we hope this will be, the extensive use of voluntary leadership is essential. One of the major problems for consideration, therefore, will be the ways and means by which progress can be furthered in this area.
A further objective of the new program will be the undertaking or assisting in research or surveys in respect to fitness and amateur sport. Here we have endeavoured to make provision for a variety of projects. For example, there has been a recurring demand for the inventory type of survey of recreational services, facilities and personnel. Many provinces may wish to assess their existing services, facilities and their personnel needs as a part of the long term development of their programs. In all likelihood surveys of this type will receive considerable prominence in the early stages of the new program. In such research projects there would also be a place for studies related to the development of standards.
Advisory Council on Sports
Another research area in need of financial aid is fitness. Much remains to be learned of the extent to which fitness depends on the mechanical and functional efficiency of the body. The rapid advances in physiology made possible by recent developments in electronic, biochemical and photographic instruments of research have opened up new avenues of investigation. In March of this year the Canadian Medical Association and the Canadian association for health, physical education and recreation held a joint conference on physical fitness. The research personnel attending this meeting included physiologists, neurologists, biochemists, cardiologists, medical doctors, and physical educators qualified to conduct research. Their discussions indicated many gaps in our present knowledge and pointed to the fact that research should be undertaken on the following general problems:
Collection of precise anthropometric data on Canadian school children of all ages in different provinces and information on the combined effect of growth and exercise on stature, weight, muscular and skeletal development.
Measurement of the physical working capacity of representative sections of the Canadian population, both for accurate comparison with data from other countries and to enable changes over the course of years to be observed and measured.
Study of the effect of continuing physical activity or inactivity on normal biological ageing.
Study of the relationship between physical activity and specific disease morbidity.
Study of effect of different types of activity on physical performance.
From these suggestions it is obvious that there are important areas of research to be developed and assisted. We anticipate that this aspect of the new program will be patterned after procedures used in connection with other federal research grants. A panel of research scientists will be established to consider projects submitted for financial support, and liaison will be maintained with other research programs to ensure a coordination of effort and to avoid overlapping.
On the matter of the provision of awards, the house will recall that the former national physical fitness council granted the national amateur athletic achievement award, and that the first recipient was Miss Barbara Ann Scott. This practice of providing certificates, citations or awards of merit is common in many countries as a means of giving national recognition for outstanding accomplishment.
8836	HOUSE OF
Advisory Council on Sports We will be looking to the new advisory council for suggestions on the best manner of making such provisions in Canada.
The final objective I would mention is the preparation and distribution of information. Different media may, of course, be used including printed material, films, radio and television. For example, films and film strips may prove helpful in coaching courses. We would also look to an extension of departmental publications on fitness and recreation, which over the years have been very well received and most of which have been made available on a "for sale" basis.
These are some of the directions in which I would expect increased progress to be made through the stimulus of the new legislation. In clause 4 the bill provides for grants to agencies and organizations carrying on activities in the fields of fitness and amateur sport. As I have already mentioned, a satisfactory basis of support will have to be developed to ensure the equitable and effective use of funds. This will not be an easy task but is one which I am sure can be worked out in co-operation with the agencies concerned and with the advice of the new national council.
As to clause 5, considerable discussion with the provinces will obviously be required concerning federal-provincial agreements related to the payment of federal contributions for provincial projects under this program. The basis of distribution of funds among the provinces and matching and non-matching features of grants are but a few of the questions which will be of vital concern here.
The details with respect to both clauses 4 and 5 will be set out in orders in council. This feature we intend to borrow from the national health grants. In this way the formula of assistance and the basis of continuing support can be dealt with in some detail but, at the same time, some flexibility can be afforded in making the changes and adjustments which will arise in developing the program. In the case of assistance to the provinces, of course, any changes affecting the agreements with the dominion government are covered by the provisions of clause 6 of the legislation. This ensures that amendments will be dealt with either through a method of amendment agreed upon and included in the agreement itself or by the mutual consent of the federal and provincial governments.
Clause 7 covers the establishment of a national advisory council on fitness and amateur sport, to which I have already made reference many times in the course of these


remarks. It would, of course, be premature at this stage to discuss its membership in any detail, but it will be noted that at least one member shall be appointed from each province. There will also be representation from the federal government. The remaining membership will be derived from various non-governmental sources. A major problem will be to ensure a balance of interest in the wide range of activities covered by the new legislation. We would hope that this could be achieved with a council of from 25 to 30 members. Even with an upper limit of 30 it will only be possible to select a few of the many Canadians who could make a useful contribution to the work of the council.
One further word about the council. It will be noted that appointments may be for up to three years in duration. This could well mean that a number of appointments will be for less than three years, to permit rotation of members. It will also allow for the fact that some organizations may wish to change their representation more frequently than the maximum term provides. Some, for example, may want to be represented by an annually elected president. In any event the bill, I believe, furnishes sufficient flexibility to take care of most problems in this regard.
The house will naturally want to know when we plan to establish the new advisory council being proposed. Before appointing and convening this body it will be necessary to recruit staff and build up a departmental organization to carry out our part of the program. This will take some time, but we will press forward immediately, and when this phase has been completed we will be in a position to hold the first meeting of the national advisory council. I would sincerely hope that this process could be accomplished reasonably soon, thereby setting the course for the implementation of long range plans.
This is not to say, however, that in, the interim funds will not be made available for projects which may need immediate attention.
I have in mind, for example, further financial support which will be required in connection with Canada's efforts to obtain the winter Olympics in 1968. Another matter of some urgency is the fact that the British empire and commonwealth games association is looking to the government for financial support in connection with the games to be held in Perth, Australia, next year.
All these rather pressing problems will receive consideration by the government and will be dealt with while the over-all plan is being developed. There may be other ad hoc projects which will have to be considered prior to the first meeting of the new advisory council.

In any event, my department stands ready to do its utmost in meeting current needs and in seeing that everything possible is done to get this far reaching new venture off to a good start. I should like to thank hon. members for bearing with me through this rather extended explanation. I trust I have covered the major points of interest and I will, of course, be happy to go into further details when we reach the committee stage.
(Translation):


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I should like to thank the minister at once for the lengthy statement he just made, not only regarding the principle of this legislation, but with respect to the various provisions of the bill before us. In his statement, the minister gave us a general idea of the manner in which this act will be administered.
All those who are either directly or indirectly interested in this important matter must be grateful to the minister for the information he supplied to the house.
It is essential, in my opinion, that we should know not only in a general way but also in some detail, the objects of this legislation, how it will be administered, and the manner in which the national advisory council will operate.
For this reason, I say to the minister that the information he just gave will be very valuable to us.
This bill has three purposes. 1. To encourage, promote and develop fitness and amateur sport. 2. To enter into an agreement with any province to provide for the payment of contributions towards the undertaking of programs designed to promote fitness and sport. 3. To provide for the setting up of a national advisory council on fitness and amateur sport.
This bill is not controversial and will not give rise to partisanship.
The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson), has made known to the house our stand on this important bill, and I have no intention of repeating what he said. It is for personal reasons and in my capacity as a private member that I am taking part in this debate.
This bill is not only good, it is essential. I am sure that all parties, indeed every hon. member will be in favour of the bill and will readily support it.
In this legislation, Mr. Speaker, we find two recurring words, fitness and sport. The two features of this bill are the promotion and the development of fitness and amateur sports.
Advisory Council on Sports
It is a sound piece of legislation for several reasons. First because it concerns more particularly our youth. I do not think one can put too much emphasis on the value of sports as an effective training for our youth.
The aim in sports is substantially the same as that in education. It is to develop the natural dispositions of the individual, to build his character, to strengthen his will and intelligence and to give him sounder judgment. But, I do also believe that sports, where practised in a sound and sensible way, can effectively contribute to the intellectual fitness and moral training of the individual.
I consider athletics as an excellent school for courage. The athlete is called upon to do his utmost, to concentrate all his efforts in order to achieve what he is aiming at.
He must often risk the fiercest impacts, ask of his body efforts which will leave him nearly exhausted, but above all he must work constantly at improving his performance because, of course, no one is born an athlete. Heredity is not of much consequence in this field and athletic ability is only the result of constant effort.
Success in sport is impossible without regular and constant repetition of exercises to develop muscles and reflexes, and that is done by hard training.
I have in mind a great athlete, the greatest, I think, in the field of hockey, Maurice Richard, whose brilliant career has warmed the heart of all his compatriots and indeed of every Canadian. But the triumphs he has known were made possible only by his determination, his steadfastness of purpose and his courage in bringing his art to perfection.
It was that kind of courage which enabled him to obtain the highest honours in the world of sports, and it is that same strength of character which must be developed by all athletes aspiring to success, especially those who want to imitate that great athlete.
I am also thinking of another athlete who won fame on the gridiron, another Montrealer, Phil Cornellier.
In the glorious era when the University of Ottawa won the Canadian football championship year after year, Cornellier was one of the brightest stars on the team. His speed, his running ability, his judgment, his power kicks, won the admiration of all those who saw him in action at the time. But his achievements did not stop there. I think his athletic training had much to do with his academic career, in which he later on obtained unlimited success. He was rector of the University of Ottawa, and dean of the faculties of
8838	HOUSE OF
Advisory Council on Sports philosophy and theology. He now lives as a simple Oblate father at the university after such a brilliant career.
In the second place, sports are a training school because they provide the opportunity to exercise self discipline. In a democratic country like ours the discipline necessary for the maintenance of order must be self inspired rather than imposed from outside.
It is said that President Lincoln, on entering an American hospital, collided with a young man who was quite in a hurry getting out. In fact, the president was knocked over and fell. As he was rising slowly, the young man said: "What on earth are you doing? Don't you see where you're going?" Then the president replied: "Young man, there is something wrong within you, in your inner self."
The society in which we live demands from the individual a greater measure of self control. Man must learn to bend his will and conform his actions to the needs of the common weal. In fact, his happiness and success in life are conditioned, to a large extent, by his ability to integrate himself in the life of the community.
In many ways, the practice of sports contributes to instil into the soul that internal discipline which is the best guarantee of success and happiness.
In order to succeed, an athlete should also be able to comply with the needs of concerted effort or team work. In many sports, like football, baseball and hockey, individual feats are less important to the success of a team than harmony and teamwork. Whatever his ability and his desire to shine individually, the athlete should be able to stand aside and co-ordinate his action with that of his teammates. To sum it up, he should make a personal sacrifice for the common benefit of the team.
The happy influence of sport in a young man's education is also evident in many other ways. Such activities stimulate self expression. Living long hours with his fellow athletes, talking and having fun together develop more relaxed personality and faster renewed self confidence. Teamwork and companionship train the young man in self expression and in giving the best of himself. Wherever it may be-at university, college, school, on public playing fields, or even in the great Canadian arenas, sport efficiently contributes to the training of tomorrow's leaders.
In Canada, team work has a particular significance, because it helps bring together


from all parts of our vast country athletes who represent the various nationalities and religions comprised in this nation. At a time where complete national unity is of such vital importance, sport can play a significant part as a means of goodwill and understanding.
I am thinking now of "Newsy" Lalonde, one of the greatest of his time, both on lacrosse fields and in hockey rinks. I recently read what he thinks of those with whom he contended. In a talk with the representative of a Canadian magazine, he had particular praise for his opponents. And the same thing happened when Maurice Richard and Gordie Howe made comments with regard to each other. They not only praised each other's achievements, but insisted on moral qualities.
Now, may I ask, how can prejudice and distrust subsist among young athletes brought together in daily life and making a common effort with the greatest and closest possible co-operation?
Inter-scholastic and amateur sports, which oppose teams of different parts of this country, bear the same good fruits.
I recall that several years ago, during the Alexander cup series between Valleyfield and Sydney, Valleyfield authorities organized a grand official reception for the visiting team. I am sure that those young athletes from Nova Scotia, some of whom perhaps were visiting the province of Quebec for the first time, went back home with a better understanding of their French speaking fellow-countrymen and with higher regard for them.
While it is true that clashes of opinion make for better understanding, I believe it is equally true that bodily clashes are often conducive to good will and mutual respect.
In time of peace as in time of war, a nation should be able to rely on a strong and healthy youth. In a rich and young country like ours, those who face life with strength can look forward to a bright future. Our boundless resources belong to the most aggressive and spirited people. They also belong to those who, among this new generation, will show strength, personality and initiative.
Those are a few of the reasons for which, I think, we should support this bill. They are also some of the reasons-there are many more-for which I believe this is an excellent measure.
I should not want to conclude on a discordant note, but may I draw to the attention

of this house an item in the Nouveau Journal of Saturday, September 23, 1961, under the by-line of Mr. Jacques Barrette. Let me quote only a few paragraphs of the article entitled:
Will the province of Quebec have its share?
With regard to everything taking place in the federal parliament, at Ottawa, the people of the province of Quebec remain prudent. They are not sure that they will receive their share from those parliamentarians who, more often than not, neglect our wonderful province. This is not chauvinistic, but a statement of fact.
And elsewhere:
One thing always puzzled us. How is it that no hockey team of the province of Quebec has ever been chosen to represent our country at Olympic games or world championships?
And finally, this last paragraph:
Last year, Hev. Father de la Sablonniere, s.j., director of the "Centre de lTmmaculee-Conception", made stirring representations to our governments with a view to securing substantial financial aid, without which the admirable work of those sports devotees is impossible. The "Reverend Father" had also proved unequivocally that the free time of our youth must be properly organized. The best way to achieve this is to get young people interested in sports.
I need not tell the house what place the "Centre des loisirs de lTmmaculee-Conception" occupies in Montreal sports under the leadership of its director, Father de la Sablonniere. Not only did he take particular interest in sports, but he also rendered tremendous service to our youth.
My colleague, the hon. member for La-fontaine (Mr. Ratelle), in whose constituency the "Centre des loisirs" is located, has time and again spoken about it in this house as outside.
I hope that Rev. Father de la Sablonniere's appeal will receive favourable consideration in the future.
Again, I could say something about recreation centres in the parish of St. John the Baptist and of St. Denis, in Laurier riding where tomorrow's youth is being developed, but unfortunately I do not have enough time.
I would only add that recreation centres are to be found everywhere in the province of Quebec and that a wonderful job is being performed there. I hope that, under this legislation, we shall be able to help these establishments as well as the young people who try to improve their bodies and their minds in those magnificent places.
I shall close my remarks with a simple comment, and a rather pleasant one. I thank the minister for having listened attentively to what I said.
Advisory Council on Sports
It is obvious that the minister will see to it that the act is administered with justice and fairness, whether through a national advisory council or through another body, for all groups, or associations which this legislation concerns.
Since this measure has been welcomed by all the members at the resolution stage and the bill before us will receive the unanimous approval of this house and since, in the administration thereof, there must be no "partisanship", in the broadest sense of the word, I am confident that the minister, through the government, by the well-advised selection of his advisory council, will see to it that the act is administered with justice and fairness throughout Canada.
(Text):


Erhart Regier: Mr. Speaker, I intend to occupy even less time than is available before the luncheon adjournment. At the resolution stage the hon. member for Peterborough indicated clearly and ably why the members of this group intend to support this bill at the present stage and also at the ensuing stages.
I have only a few ideas to mention at this time. In the expenditure of this money on physical fitness and amateur sport I hope our government is going to realize the urgent need to develop an adequate number of leaders. Before we can actually have an effective national physical fitness and amateur sport program I believe we shall require tens of thousands more leaders than we now have in this particular field. I believe that one of the most important responsibilities in connection with the expenditure of this amount of money ought to be to prepare a program that will assure us of adequate leadership.
I hope the government is going to be much more successful in obtaining the co-operation of the ten provincial governments in this particular matter than they were in connection with the program of a number of years ago. At the time of the ending of that program only the government of the province of Saskatchewan was taking advantage of the assistance then available. I regret that at that time British Columbia curtailed this program to the point that it no longer participated.
I wish to raise these two points now. I note that the bill contains authority for the federal government to proceed on its own in the expenditure of this money. We all realize that under the terms of the British North America



HOUSE OF COMMONS AFTER RECESS

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Advisory Council on Sports Act, health and education come within the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces. Hitherto the provinces to a certain extent agreed to permit Ottawa also to participate in the development of good health in Canada. We have such things as a national hospital insurance program and grants for health. However, in the bill the government takes unto itself the authority to expend this $5 million a year without necessarily receiving the consent of the provincial or municipal authorities.
In the light of our experience with the pro-rec program I believe the attitude adopted may be wise indeed, in that it will enable this government to assist organizations and agencies within a province even though the provincial government may find itself unwilling to have any participation in the expenditure of this money. I hope all the provincial governments are going to recognize their responsibility and are going to help the minister more than they helped the then minister in the days of the pro-rec program.
I also note that the bill contains authority for an annual expenditure of $5 million. This provision is a bit unusual. It is something that we usually do not have in our legislation. The legislation usually merely establishes the authority and the machinery and then by way of annual estimate the House of Commons decides, on the advice of the government, how much it is going to allot to this particular program in each and every year. I know that the act as it is now presented is going to make it much easier for those responsible for planning to engage in long range planning, in that they are no longer dependent upon the House of Commons for their minimum annual revenue. However, it either carries on or initiates rather a departure from established custom, and it contains a certain danger. I should like the minister to tell us exactly what was the reason of the government for making the amount a part of the act, and making it an annual amount.
I hope the minister will also attempt to explain how the government hopes to enlist the aid of other levels of government. If we average this amount among our constituencies we find that it involves an expenditure of roughly $19,000 per constituency. Without the active team work of the other levels of government, $19,000 cannot very usefully be expended on this program in each and every constituency. The active participation of other levels of government will be urgently needed if we are to attain the aim indicated in this act.
At one o'clock the house took recess.
[Mr. Regier.l
Mr. W. F. Matthews (Nanaimo):: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to be able to take part in this important debate on sports. Sports that are properly conducted are very necessary for the youth of today, and extremely important to the present and future of Canada. This year 22 cents out of every dollar of our budget is spent on welfare. One sure way of cutting this down would be the proper training of youth.
It seems that the Olympic games are more in the limelight and receive more interest from the average Canadian than ever before. This is perhaps because of the sports pages of our newspapers, because the games are completely covered by these expert sports writers. Sports and competitions between countries can serve to promote good feelings if conducted in the right way, and I am sure that our sports writers have been and always will be of great help in this regard.
Mr. Speaker, the creed of the Olympic games has been mentioned previously, but I should like to repeat it. It is as follows:
The Important thing in the Olympic games is not winning but taking part. The essential thing in life is not conquering but fighting well.
The motto is simply citius, altius, fortius, which means "higher, swifter, stronger". Neither the creed nor the motto can be properly carried out under the strain of present-day Olympics without the best coaching and direction, and I believe this should be the concern of the federal government.
Grown Canadians have a great variety of sports that will keep them in shape. They can take part in golf, badminton, tennis, softball, ping pong, swimming, boating, fishing, hunting, archery, trap shooting, hiking, mountain climbing, riding, flying, skiing, skating, curling and bowling. Most of these sports are available and are being carried out by a great number of Canadians in all parts of Canada. If one does not care to spend money on any of the above to build up his strength and keep fit, he can get good results by walking or by doing the daily dozen every morning.
Mr. Speaker, it seems that our most important duty to Canadians in the line of sports is to have a program of sports training for our youth. Children should be exposed to sports at a very early age, and should receive proper instruction and supervision. Too many of our children are left to fend for themselves They grow up without proper training, and without this training many of them later on in life help to swell the ranks of the unemployed. The youth of today are the leaders

and builders of our Canada of tomorrow. A proper training system should be set up as soon as possible.
Back in 1946 I suggested to Mr. Douglas Grimston, president of the Canadian amateur hockey association, that a school of coaching should be established in Canada by the federal government, and that the government should have a department to promote and finance sports in Canada. Mr. Ken McConnell, then sports editor of the Vancouver Province, agreed to this plan but said I was 15 years too soon. It seems that Mr. McConnell was right when he said 15 years, and I am very pleased that this government is now taking action.
At that particular time I talked this plan over with Mr. Summerfield, sports editor of the Nanaimo Free Press, and also Bill Phillips, who is now the arena manager in New Westminster and was at that time. Of course, as everyone knows who follows hockey, he was at one time a national league hockey player. Mr. Phillips endorsed that plan, and the suggestion that I take it up with the government. As a matter of fact Mr. Grimston asked me to go east to the meeting of the Canadian amateur hockey association, but I was unable to do so at that time.
I am going to take the liberty of reading from an official hockey program of the 1946-47 season. This is a program published by the Queen's Park arena, New Westminster. The editorial is entitled "Hockey News" and reads:
Bus Matthews of Nanaimo, one of the coast's most ardent hockeyists, both as a player and coach of young players, expresses a thought which carries so much merit, it can not very well be ditched and forgotten.
Hockey today is big business in the east and is becoming big business on the Pacific coast, and, with the expansion of the game the cry is going to be, more and more, for hockey material. Canada has been and will for a long time continue to be the proving ground for young hockey players who will carry the load in the future in top brackets. How these youngsters are trained and developed will determine the greatness of future hockey. The percentage of boys starting the game who make the top is very small; according to Bus, the percentage could be very greatly increased if proper methods of training them, by men themselves properly trained in coaching, were adopted.
Bus maintains that there are only a few men living today who have the knowledge to set down in print the fundamental principles of good hockey play and the right methods of teaching these principles, and while they are available to the game they should be brought together as a body and set up as the authority defining good instruction, good methods of teaching and qualifications of men to become teachers of our future hockey stars. A few years from now, these men will be gone and the opportunity lost.
I might explain that at that time I suggested the government should get a group of these leaders in sports together for a period of say two weeks. Stenographers would
Advisory Council on Sports be provided to take down what was said, and each man could contribute from his experience of the phase of the game in which he was most interested, defensive play, attack and so on. I mentioned at that time the name of Lester Patrick as one of the hockey experts who might be invited to such a meeting. He and others like him have had years of experience in training young hockey players and shaping them from the raw material. We have already lost Mr. Lester Patrick, and we have also lost that famous player and coach Mr. Dick Irwin.
Men such as these have an experience which covers many decades of hockey. Their knowledge of the game goes back over the time when we in Canada played seven man hockey, six man hockey and five man hockey. Many people in Canada do not know that there was a league which played five man hockey. I think this new council might well consider the suggestion that men of this calibre should be invited to a conference to give us all the benefit of the knowledge they have gained; and I have in mind all sports, not just hockey.
Today the big leagues want players who are complete in all respects; they do not want to have to teach them anything. That is the work of the coaches. I do not want to give the impression that I have in mind only professional hockey. I do not think it should be confined to professional hockey. I believe it should be extended to help young Canadians who are on their way in the business world as a means of building up their minds and improving their bodies.
In July of 1958 a softball game was played in Hull between members of parliament and members of the House of Commons staff. I forget all those who were there, but I am sure the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. Taylor) and the hon. member for Waterloo North (Mr. Weichel) took part. I do not remember now who won the game, but I think it was the staff. Lester Patrick, Newsy Lalonde, Fred Taylor and others were there as guests. We had a get together afterward at which Lester Patrick, Mr. Lalonde and others were asked to say a few words. When my own turn came to speak I stressed the importance of the government setting up a department to help promote sports, and said I thought a coaching school should be established. Hon. members will well understand my pleasure when the Prime Minister announced the other day that such a program would be put into operation by the government.
As reported on page 120 of Hansard for January 20, 1959, the hon. member for Waterloo North suggested that a ministry of sport

Advisory Council on Sports should be established. If hon. members turn to page 1037 of Hansard of February 16, 1959 they will find that the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard proposed the setting up of a sports council. I wish to congratulate these two hon. members and other members of the house who have worked so hard, informally, in the promotion of these ideas. There was a committee formed for this purpose, and the hon. members I have mentioned, together with others, contributed a great deal to the idea which is now being put into practical form.
I support Bill No. C-131. When a member supports a bill in the House of Commons I believe, Mr. Speaker, that he should put his reasons for doing so on record. The following are my reasons. Statements have been made that Canada is a nation of weaklings; that people who are just spectators and who do not play games are weaklings. I do not agree with this, and I do not take such statements for granted.
Let us not sell Canadian youth short. I know that we have in Canada many very fine young people who will go a long way in business and sport as the years go by. Looking around today we see that our young boys are growing broader, taller and stronger. I do not like to hear people say that we are a nation of weak people, and I would not advise anyone to step up to many of these young fellows and say that. It reminds me of a story of a man in Texas. When he had had a few drinks he looked around and said "I can lick anyone in this bar". No one said anything; he was a pretty big man. After a while he turned around and said "I can lick anyone in Texas." Still nobody took him on. Finally, after one or two more drinks, the visitor declare "I can lick anyone in the United States". At that point a little fellow stood up, took off his glasses, and knocked him down. When the challenger finally came around he murmured "I guess I took in too much territory".
Taking part in sports is important for the building of the mind as well as of the body. I coached sports for a number of years, and I found that the important thing was to get the player to think. A player who thinks becomes twice as valuable. I have coached many players who I am sure would have gone a long way in hockey if they had continued in the game. I have kept records of many hundreds of my young players, and I go over them from time to time. There is not one of those boys who is not doing very well today. Two of them, for example, quit and went fishing. They now own commercial fishing boats worth between $75,000 and $100,000 each. Others have become electrical


contractors, clothing store owners, pharmacists, dentists and doctors-and I am talking now about the stars who quit the game, people who could really have gone places in the sport itself. However, they decided they would seek careers in business or in the professions rather than in commercial sport.
As I was saying, it is important that a player should learn to think. It is harder to think, to really concentrate, than it is to run, jump or skate. If you cannot get your players to think you will certainly never have top grade players. I remember I was once in a rink at the start of a season when Mr. Lester Patrick was looking over one of his clubs. I said "Lester, you certainly have a fine bunch of strong players. They should go a long way." This was on the west coast. He said "I have not got one man on that team who will ever get to the national hockey league". I said "They look good to me". He said "They can stickhandle, check and skate, but they have not got it above the ears". Unless a player has it above the ears he will not go far in professional sport today.
Today, when we worry so much about what our young people are doing, we should certainly see that their bodies are developed. We should make sure, also, that we have coaches who will develop their minds. If I were going to make a quotation at this time I would say "Men who do not think are the weaklings of today".
People who observe sport have always been important to me, and when I coach I use sports writers as a source of information. A sports writer has to meet a deadline. He has to examine the performance of players and scrutinize the games closely in order to have something about which to write. The only way he can do so is by thinking. The day following a game I always made it a point to talk to the news writers and get their views. As a result I was often able to learn things which were a means of improving my players.
A good coach is, in a sense, a mirror and by that I mean a mirror that is accurate, that is not cracked or distorted. There is no one in this building who would accept as gospel truth the reflection given by a mirror with a tendency to distort. Such a mirror would be thrown out of the window. A good coach requires the ability to accurately reflect the potentiality of his team. I know of a famous golfer in the United States who every once in a while would ask some minor pro to follow him about and watch him play, and advise if he was doing anything wrong. Some pros protested that the player knew more about golf than they would ever know, but he pointed out that it was impossible for him to drive or putt a ball and look in a mirror

at the same time. He asked them to reflect back to him accurately the way he played the game. I use this illustration to indicate that a good coach must accurately reflect the ability of his team. If he is a good coach he must be of assistance to the boys.
One could speak at great length about coaching, but I shall content myself with telling one small story. The cousin of a player in a small town, a young lad who had been in reform school, expressed an interest in sports. I spoke to the young man about having his cousin come down to play, and eventually spoke to the mother of the former inmate of a reform school about the boy participating in juvenile sport. I expressed my interest in having him join us. The mother explained that he did not wish to play because he was aware that the boys knew he had stolen and thought they would not want him in the locker room. I explained that I had spoken to the boys and that he would be welcome. After persuasion the young man came and played hockey. In speaking to his mother at a later date she said that had it not been for that opportunity to participate in sports the boy would have run away and perhaps again taken up a life of crime. That young man is now married, with two children, and is purchasing his own home. If it had not been for the opportunity I have mentioned he might well not have been in that fortunate position today.
I have told that story to illustrate how important it is that the council ensure that good coaches are obtained. I think it is most important also that the council give consideration to assisting young Indian boys especially by encouraging them to participate in lacrosse. I urge the council to endeavour to have lacrosse returned to its former standing in the Olympic games.
I hope the council when in operation will be careful in making grants. I do not believe grants should be made to professional teams. I know of a very good orchestra that made application for a Canada Council grant. The orchestra received the answer that the council only assisted orchestras that had reached professional status. Probably the members of the Canada Council know more about music than I do, but I disagree with their basic policy. I maintain that if an orchestra has reached professional standing it should not be given grants.
Similarly, I do not see why grants should be given by the sports council to people who have reached professional status. I believe they should be given only to amateur sports that do so much to build healthy minds and bodies among young Canadians. I suggest assistance in the establishment of playing fields and ice surfaces. I know of a number
Advisory Council on Sports of clubs that would be interested in participating in a program of that type. Very careful attention will have to be paid to the selection of the members of the council, and equally careful attention will have to be paid by the council in the selection of coaches if a school is set up.
Sports are important to all countries, and one could discuss this topic for hours. Last year I was in attendance at the interparliamentary union conference in Tokyo, where I stayed at the New Japan hotel. I was surprised to receive a telephone call advising me that Prince Takeda, the president of the national skating union of Japan, wished to see me. I said I would be interested in meeting him, and although I suspected at first that I was being kidded an appointment was made for 2.30 the next afternoon. I was pleased when the prince arrived with his secretary and we discussed sports, including hockey. As hon. members know a Japanese team participated in the Olympic games last year and did a fine job, although they achieved no great success. Much credit should be given to them for the spirit they brought to the game. The prince has requested that I send him a film illustrating lacrosse about which I told him. He is of the opinion that it might become a popular game in Japan.
During our visit we wore badges indicating that we were from Canada. At a reception one night I met a young Japanese boy who said, "Me Broda". I found out that he played hockey and knew of Turk Broda, who was his hero. The badge brought me many encounters. Two young Japanese connected with newspaper and radio spent most of an evening with me. All they wished to talk about was sports including baseball and hockey. I assure hon. members that Canada is held in high regard by the people of Japan.
Many interesting articles concerning sports appear in newspapers from time to time. In the February, 1960 issue of The Legionary Mr. Lome Manchester, in an article entitled "A Bad Case of "Spectatoritis" stated:
Thousands of youngsters under the guidance of Canadian Legion branches are engaged in regular league schedules throughout the country .. . Many youngsters are also getting their first introduction to ''Operation Star-Shooter", the Canadian Legion's program of carefully worked out gymnastic exercises designed to improve the physical fitness of our young people.
The Legion branches across Canada are sponsoring sports. Every branch in my constituency sponsors a team or buys equipment. All are anxious to do their part for the future of Canadian sports. Before I left home I was approached by the new Legion branch. They are interested in knowing if any assistance could be given in the establishment of

Advisory Council on Sports a small ice surface. They have a number of boys' teams. They wish information and assistance in the form of a grant, and would be willing to participate in financing the necessary balance. I am proud to say that every service club in my constituency sponsors a team or provides uniforms or equipment for hockey and lacrosse teams. This is a wonderful thing, and I think a similar situation prevails across Canada.
Within these small groups are found some of the finest coaches in Canada. They donate their services without charge and desire no remuneration. Men who are prepared to do that are coaches of the best type. When the school of coaching is established, and when information and ideas on coaching are finally collected and drafted, I suggest that these men be informed. They should be given every assistance and all the information that will be of help to them in their coaching.
I spoke a few moments ago about lacrosse, a wonderful game that is much misunderstood. For years it was represented as brutal and sensational, but when properly presented it is known as a game of skill. It is widely played in England and Australia. Interestingly enough, more lacrosse is played in colleges in the United States than is played in Canada, and that in spite of the fact that lacrosse is historically Canada's national game. I have here a short dispatch from London which reads as follows:
Canada's historic sport, lacrosse, is becoming increasingly popular in Britain. Two London schools have now included lacrosse in their curriculum, and more are expected to join.
In other words, our game is to be brought up to the status it should have, because it is number one in sports as a mind and body builder. It has been proven by professors who have investigated the matter that lacrosse is number one as a body builder and mind builder. One junior lacrosse team in a league in Vancouver was composed entirely of what we sometimes refer to now as dead end kids. I got to know many of the boys and I can tell you that there were some bad actors among them, but they went on to play senior lacrosse, and played the finest lacrosse in Canada. Those boys were all salvaged and trained to be good Canadians by a coach who was not a professional but who did a tremendous job and prevented those dead end kids from being a charge on the rest of the people of Canada.
I could read other articles about the progress of lacrosse in the United States. No doubt the committee will be made aware of all this information. I have all the statistics as to injuries which show why lacrosse is considered to be safer than hockey and even safer than baseball in some respects. These


statistics have been collected over a period of years, and I will be very glad to supply them to the minister because I know he will make good use of them.
It may be that first of all the board will make a survey right across Canada to get suggestions and advice from people who have been engaged for years in the sports field. There are many members of the house who are well qualified to do this work and who would know how to get in touch with people to obtain this information. I know these men could supply good advice on the subject.
I could continue but I know there are other members who wish to speak on this very important subject. There is one point I should like to make in conclusion. I am afraid I will not be able to make it, because apparently I need a little more coaching; I have mislaid my note. I should like to mention that this year the British Columbia senior women's softball championship was won by a Duncan team coached by Duff Chaster. He is not a professional coach, and this is a wonderful achievement for a team in its first year of competition.
Various championships in all kinds of sports have been won by teams in my constituency. However, I do not want to take any more time, and I will simply say that I am very happy that we have reached the ponit of taking action with regard to this matter that is so important for the future of our children and the people of Canada generally. I know the minister will do a tremendous job. I know he is most interested in the subject. I noted a short time ago that due to conditions beyond his control he lost five or six suits. In sports when a sponsor loses a lot of money he is referred to as having lost his shirt. I hope the minister will not allow this committee to get out of control and lose his shirt.


Mr. Arthur Smith (Calgary South):: Mr. Speaker, my first remarks, of course, must be to congratulate the minister on the introduction of what is perhaps in this session the first piece of legislation uncontested and unanimously supported, not only by members of the house but by the people of the country at large. This is certainly to his credit. The demand or desire for the legislation is quite apparent. It was introduced in the form of a private bill initially, and has since received support from newspaper columnists. Credit is due to a great many people for their efforts which have culminated in the bill now before us, even to those members of parliament who have taken part in some athletic endeavour, either in hockey or on the baseball

diamond. If their inability to play these games is any indication, surely this bill to improve their physical fitness is certainly necessary.
One cannot and should not be facetious about legislation involving such an important principle, and involving $5 million to be taken from the public treasury. While I accept all the arguments as to the necessity for the bill, perhaps not only at this point but in the committee stage we might look at how these worthy principles and objectives are going to be achieved. How are we going to spend the $5 million; to what purpose; who will receive the money, and what are going to be the problems of the administrative council on whom in the final analysis the success or failure of the legislation will depend?
As many speakers who have preceded me have said, the bill has three principal purposes; first, to improve the physical fitness of the people of Canada as a whole; second, to aid amateur sport and, third, to assist Canada's competing athletes in international events. I suggest to you, sir, and to the minister that all these are separate objectives, though interrelated. None the less, at this stage and,in the committee we must assign ourselves the task of recognizing that each requires individual study if we are to achieve any degree of success in attaining our objectives.
We have read the bill, and have observed the nine points which form the basis of the regulations, and the principles as to how the moneys are to be assigned under working agreements with individuals, organizations and with the provinces. The first question we must ask ourselves is, what control will the council have when these moneys pass from their hands.
To take a specific example, let us say that province A is provided with X dollars. How are we going to be assured that the objectives outlined in the legislation will be pursued by province A? How are we going to avert any possibility that these moneys will perhaps go toward some other objective which is not indicated or intimated in the terms of the legislation? To a large degree, of course, this is going to be a responsibility of the council itself, the administrative body.
Second, in addition to establishing a group of fundamental principles and making an assessment of all the essential needs in respect of coaching in schools and improvement of facilities, we must assure ourselves that somehow we create a desire within Canadians to want to be physically fit and to take a greater interest in amateur sport, because if the desire is not present there is no purpose in providing facilities.
At this point it amuses me a little to listen to some of my colleagues who, in describing
Advisory Council on Sports the advantages of helping amateur sport, cannot resist the temptation to kick what they describe as professionalism in sport. I think it should be clearly understood that many of the youngsters we see on the playing fields are emulating the Jackie Parkers, Babe Ruths and other major sports heroes. It is from these professionals that they get the desire to become athletes. I am not advocating that money be contributed to assist professionalism, but I suggest that in the end this legislation will not be successful unless professional sport and professional organizations carry on as they have done in past years.
I can recall having taken part in the first large scale attempt by the west to win a well known sporting event, the Grey cup in 1948. The effort was not that of a group of professionals. It was a community endeavour by a group of people who got together and decided that the then little known pastime of football should be made a national classic. It was not any paid group of promoters who were involved, rather, it was community spirit which made it so successful. We took our cowboys, our Indians and our football players and captured the imagination of the Canadian people, thus making this sporting event what it is today.
Here again I must relate the importance of this bill to other aspects of the subject. Take hockey, baseball or football, and you can see the advantages of professionals and amateurs working together to achieve a better physical condition for the Canadian public. What concerns me, though, is that Canadians today, unfortunately, are gradually becoming a nation of spectators rather than competitors. I hope this is a place where the bill perhaps makes its greatest contribution. As I said at the outset, we must be absolutely certain we press steadily forward to achieve this objective. The council will have many responsibilities and many problems. Let me try to tell the council what I hope it will not do because, after all, in the final analysis success or failure is going to rest upon this.
First of all, I would hope they would not contribute moneys to purely organizational or office work which is involved in developing a sport. I would hope that the moneys would be assigned to the root of the problem, to the youngsters. Second, I would hope the council would not assign moneys to any organization which had a history of not being able to help itself. I listened to one of my distinguished colleagues who made a great contribution to the debate, but in the first six minutes he had spent the $5 million. I heard also suggestions to the effect that a dollar

Advisory Council on Sports should be paid here or $50 there, and that this was going to help amateur sports and physical fitness.
I agree that these are indeed worthy causes, but we must remember that if the $5 million is going to be spent wisely it is going to have to be spread amongst a great many individuals and a great many interests in the sporting field. I would hope, therefore, that the council would try to assist those people who are prepared to help themselves, and let the contributions in terms of dollars be measured accordingly. Any sporting organization-you and I have belonged to many of them-which is not prepared to get off the ground itself and do something for itself will never survive, no matter what government hand-out is given. The point I make, therefore, is that there should be a careful assessment of what the organization has done in the past, how it is prepared to assist in its own endeavour, and then whether government aid can give it enough help to get beyond the point of being mediocre.
Then we come to another problem. How do you reconcile the differences that may exist between those people who believe in physical fitness as an end in itself and those well organized groups of people involved in amateur sports, in so far as representation on the council is concerned? How are you going to distinguish where the money is to go, and who is going to get how much? This is going to be another major problem. It is a platitude and a generality, I recognize, to say that one area of sport should receive a benefit while another does not. There is a point here, Mr. Speaker, and the bill clearly sets out that there are these two principles. The one must not in any way become the poor relation of the other. The council must, therefore, be selective on the basis that there will be those who can speak as advocates for both.
I should like to make one or two other suggestions. The council will have its problems, but after all if this legislation passes the house our advice to it will be of little value. It is only now while the bill is in this stage that we can make definite recommendations. I would hope the council would not attempt to spend its money in sending, for example, vast arrays of coaches or escort parties abroad with our athletes. This again is something that is important. I would hope that the money would be spent in developing athletes basically in Canada, and let these other organizations take up these additional costs. I would hope the money would be utilized for some of those things which have been suggested here, but we must place


priorities on them and see that we do not spend so little on each that there is no real effect in any particular area of sport. >
As I said at the beginning, I think the important thing is to try to get a philosophy of mind in our young people so that they will want to compete. This is the biggest problem the council will have. I have heard from a friend of mine about youngsters who were discouraged from competing in the vast areas which could be devoted to some form of recreation. I suggest to you, sir, that keeping in mind the variety of interests which today compete for the time of our young people, we must map out a plan that will encourage them to reach the standards we hope will be attained as a result of this bill. If Canada intends to put itself on international display in the Olympics and other world events, I believe we should be improving the ability of our youngsters to compete by providing them with the facilities they require. We should set up co-ordinating bodies to ensure that one organization does not overlap on the functions of another organization. This is another area in which the council can well assist, not only through its administrative responsibilities but through the funds it has to administer.
I suggest, therefore, that in making an assessment of the problems you must first of all make a review of the facilities that exist in Canada to determine the areas requiring the most help. Only from this point can we make a successful start.
Finally, sir, I should like to make one other suggestion involving two points. It has been said, I believe by the minister, that it is not the intention to include under this bill any funds that could be utilized for capital costs for national events that may come to Canada, such as the Pan-American games, the British empire games or any of the Olympic games. I think this is indeed a wise move, and not because I come from a city which hopes to be the host for the winter Olympic games of 1968. If you take the moneys available under this bill and assign them to the larger international events it means that the entire program will suffer. In fact it will be disrupted, because all the funds will be required for these three major events I have men tioned. In this way the funds needed to stimulate physical fitness and amateur sport will be lost. I was happy, therefore, to hear the minister make that point very clearly, that this money may be used to help the athlete prepare for the Olympic games, but it is not intended that it should be used for capital costs in connection with those games.
The second point, sir, involves the two booklets produced by the armed services known as 5BX and 10BX, in the war against

obesity in the services. I think many of us in this chamber might consider them as required reading for ourselves. These two booklets have become, in fact, Canadian best sellers, with sales totalling something over a quarter of a million. I would hope that the funds derived from the sale of those booklets would not go back into the general revenue fund. I would hope rather that, because of the importance of the work these people have already accomplished in the field of physical fitness, these funds could be used to encourage them to go into other areas as yet unexplored. I believe this is the greatest single contribution that any government agency has made to date in helping to assist in the national problem of reaching some level of physical fitness.
So, Mr. Speaker, I close as I began, by congratulating the minister in making the first step an important one. Second, I wish to state my belief that the council has indeed a real job in making this bill work, function and become successful. Third, I suggest that the council should attend to the problem of creating the desire in addition to the facilities so that our young people may enjoy physical fitness. Fourth, I would remind them that they have a dual responsibility, both in the field of physical fitness and of course amateur sport. Fifth, I would hope that in every area, whether it be in physical fitness or amateur sport, the professional and the amateur alike realize the vast potential that is available to them in the playing fields and the skating rinks; for here the real athletes are to be found. Here are the youngsters who will represent us in future years. Indeed, I suggest that here in fact is the future of Canada.


Mr. R. M. T. McDonald (Hamilton South):: Mr. Speaker, it is very difficult to follow such eminent speakers as those we have heard this afternoon. I should also like to congratulate the Minister of National Health and Welfare for bringing this important measure into the House of Commons. I might start off by saying that I come from a town that is well known for its athletics, both in the professional and amateur fields.
However, I should like to confine my remarks to the amateur field. I might say that this bill should be channelled to the masses if we are to have competitors in the future. We cannot merely buy championships. We cannot merely take a hockey team, spend $50,000 and send them over to Germany or to Russia in order to meet someone. I think the $5 million we are allocating today should be spread out across the country.
It disturbed me somewhat in the last week when I noticed that in some of their articles the newspapermen were saying that it was
Advisory Council on Sports time for Canada to flex its muscles. To me it seemed that they were trying to play down the bill. I think it is a great step in fostering the development of young people in the country, but it should not start when the boy is 18 or 19 years old, with a view to sending him to the Olympic games or to the world hockey championships. It should start in the homes by the parents encouraging their children to participate in active sports. I know that some parents do not wish this participation. They wish their children to go ahead and be scholastic in their ability. However, a little playing never hurt anyone.
In federal politics you should not talk about the provinces or the municipalities, because the British North America Act prevents you from getting into the school systems. But unless the school systems of the country- public schools, high schools and colleges-[DOT] get behind this physical fitness and amateur athletics bill, I do not think it will get off the ground; for the coaching that we are striving to spread across the country must come and be taught to boys all across the country. I think it is very important that the Minister of National Health and Welfare talk to his provincial colleagues so they can encourage the development of amateur athletics through the education system and so that we shall indeed be trying to teach boys from grade V up to adulthood.
There has been some talk about professional entrepreneurs coming under this type of bill. I do not think we have much to fear on that score. The amateur athletic unions in Canada, such as the Olympic association of Canada, have been well organized for years. Through their representations I am sure they will help this council to beware of professionalism, although professionalism is not a dirty word. Some few years ago I happened to be a professional athlete, and I may say that professional athletes are fairly good types in developing coaching in the country I would not want the minister to set up a coaching system in Ottawa by means of which you would bring only a few people from across the country to coaching school. I would rather see a mobile coaching staff go across the 10 provinces and set up regional schools at given dates so that a larger group of people could come and be helped in this way. Rather than having two or three people sent from Vancouver to Ottawa, I would rather see a coaching school of instructors go to Vancouver and have 50 people or 60 people participate.
In the western world, as I see it today, we go in for a good deal of glamour. It will be noticed that after the Olympic competitions in the past several years, everyone in the United States, Canada and the western world

Advisory Council on Sports wants to be a sprint champion. They forget about other non-glamorous sports that could be taken up. The Russians have won a large number of points in gymnastics and fencing and what might be termed back room sports. I think if we start to encourage our children who cannot be one hundred yard sprinters in 9.6 seconds to get into some other things by mass participation, we shall eventually have a great deal to look forward to in the future.
With regard to the grants indicated in the bill, I think the minister should be very cautious with regard to whom he gives money. I know there are in the country a great many people who are looking for assistance, but as was indicated by the hon. member for Calgary South, those people who cannot help themselves usually will not get off the ground by means of the great white father from Ottawa coming down and giving them some extra money.
At this point I might indicate the job that police associations, service clubs and sports organizations are doing across this country. I think they should continue to do this job because it is the basic fundamental of amateur sport. I refer to people wanting to get out and play and help the children all the time.
I would also talk to the minister with regard to what I would call socialites in sports. As indicated by the hon. member for Calgary South, when Canada sends 20 athletes to the Olympic games we seem to find that, having regard to our way of life, they must have 10 coaches to go with them. When Australia sent people to the commonwealth games a few years ago they sent some 90 athletes but only 10 coaches. We find that politics are played in many associations. I would make the council aware of the politics that are played in associations across the country.
As to the surveys that are indicated in the bill, I think surveys should be made of the facilities that are required across the country both in relation to coaching and physical requirements. Unfortunately we in the northern part of the western hemisphere have long winters. I think we should look into the possibility of capital cost expenditures in co-operation with the provinces and the municipalities in connection with the creation of field housing facilities such as those in existence in the United States for all-round training in a vast number of sports.
I think this bill will be widely accepted across the country. I do not think any politics will be played. However, I stress to the minister the point that this money should be spent wisely. As indicated by hon. members who have preceded me, if we are going to have the winter Olympic games in this country I do not think this money should


be spent for the purpose of building facilities for those games. This money should be used to foster the development of fitness and amateur sport in the country by mass participation. I stress to the minister the importance of getting in touch with his colleagues the health and education ministers of the provinces, so they in turn can sell the program through the schools. I am sure the minister is planning some literature to be handed out for this purpose.
I should like to take this opportunity to congratulate the amateur athletic associations in the country which for the past many years have been struggling to get into international competition. I know that I have been called on to donate to these organizations, as have many others. I should also like to point out to this council that something should be put into this bill which will allow the council itself to accept moneys from organizations that wish to help to develop amateur sport. In other words, if we are to make grants to Olympic teams to go over and compete in games in Tokyo or in Helsinki, I am sure the minister will find that there are many people who are willing to put up their dollars in order to help Canada in this respect. I think the bill should stress physical fitness for amateur athletes on a mass participation basis and we should not get down to specialization, for only through mass participation can we produce champions, which might not be in 1968 but it will be some time in the 1970's.


Mr. Frank McGee (York-Scarborough):: Mr. Speaker, I had not intended to participate in this discussion at this time, and my contribution will be brief. Many hon. members, including the hon. member for Hamilton South (Mr. McDonald), are far better qualified than I to discuss this subject and have already given some very thoughtful and helpful advice to the council. Without going over the ground that has already been covered, I should like to offer this one suggestion to the council. In my view the whole purpose of this legislation will be accomplished if the notion I have in mind comes about.
Clearly Canada, due to geographic and many other conditions, is not, even in the most optimistic person's mind, likely to become a front runner and top-flight contender in the Olympics of future years. We have, relatively speaking, a limited population and growth potential. We should face that fact, and one of the tasks I hope this council will undertake is to approach the various provinces and the various areas of this country and try in a co-operative way to achieve a fairly well planned cross-section of athletic endeavour.

This point was touched upon by the hon. member for Hamilton South. We can envisage universities in one area of the country concentrating on swimming and related activities, others concentrating on track and field events, others on skiing, others on gymnastics, fencing and the other sports which make up the whole Olympics calendar.
A certain amount of this has taken place naturally, it seems to me. I refer to McGill, Carleton University and Ottawa University. These are universities which are located close to adequate, and in fact very excellent skiing facilities. It seems to me that if the council can encourage this type of specialization and encourage universities or groups of universities, high schools, as the hon. member mentioned, and even the public school system we could develop coaching to such a degree that we would produce results in a very few years.
Most universities, apart from the few specializations I have mentioned, have made some outstanding contributions. Certainly Bruce Kidd, potentially the world's greatest distance runner, is an example of the case in point where proper encouragement and coaching is available. Another example that comes to mind of a small university establishing a reputation for itself is St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia. I think that is an example of what I have in mind operating in a very successful way.
A few years ago that university brought Don Loney, who was a former professional football player with the Ottawa Rough Riders, to that university. He provided the university with the elements of a first-rate coaching staff. The institution has concentrated its athletic endeavours in that direction and as a result it has, I believe, the reputation of being the No. 1 football university in the maritime provinces, if not in eastern Canada.
It seems to me this concept should be extended possibly on a provincial basis, but certainly on a geographic basis. As I said when I rose to speak, if there is some movement and development in this direction this legislation will have justified itself beyond all our expectations.


Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to speak in this debate today it gives me great pleasure to associate myself with the remarks of previous speakers in connection with the bill which the minister has placed before the house.
It has been said that good health and good intellect are the two greatest blessings of life. This bill, because it strives to promote the health and well-being of the Canadian nation, has almost unlimited possibilities. The health of a people is the foundation upon which all their happiness and all their powers as a
90205-6-558
Advisory Council on Sports nation depend. It is an almost unfailing index of the morals of a nation. It has a very direct bearing upon the prosperity of a country.
The bill now before the house is significant because it serves to place the official sanction of parliament behind the importance of physical fitness in this country. Not only will this bill help to provide the means to foster and encourage amateur sport among people, but it should create a great awareness among the public of the important place that physical fitness must occupy in the life of our country.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that educationalists are becoming more and more aware of the fact that in our educational system physical training should hold a place co-ordinate with that of the intellect. There is no doubt that it should be a part of all academic training. Exercise does for the body what intellectual training does for the mind; it educates and strengthens it.
The maritime provinces are noted for a highly successful tradition in sport. As a matter of fact, Cape Breton island has been a hotbed of athletic competition for many years. As other hon. members have done during this debate, I could mention team achievements and individuals who have attained national recognition for that part of the country. I could mention the prominence brought to Cape Breton by the basketball team from the town of New Waterford. That is a mining town in which the community effort of a group of local sportsmen and the achievements of a group of local athletes have brought to the town national prominence in winning the Canadian title in that particular sport.
I could also mention the Sydney Millionaires and their achievements in hockey. In my own home town I could mention the efforts and the achievements of the Caledonia football team, which for many years was outstanding not only in this country but could face up to world competition in this particular game.
I might also refer to individuals such as three local boys from the city of Sydney who are now on N.H.L. rosters. I think this is a most outstanding achievement, because hockey players in my part of the country have far more to overcome to attain prominence in this sport than most hockey players throughout the country. When they were at school and were starting out in organized hockey they would probably have to be at the local rink as early as four or five o'clock in the morning. Therefore to gain the status of an N.H.L. player, as these three boys have done, is a very great achievement. The three boys concerned are Parker McDonald of Detroit Red Wings, and John Hanna and Allister McNeil now with the Montreal Canadians. I thinir
8850	HOUSE OF
Advisory Council on Sports the accomplishments of these boys in reaching this status has been achieved through a superior effort on their part because I know what they have to do in order to participate in such sports in my hometown. As I said, it means rising at three o'clock in the morning in order to practise in the local rinks that are available.
I might also mention the achievements of Joe Mullins a youngster from my hometown who has come into national prominence in track and field and has on two occasions recently represented Canada, at the Olympics and the British empire games.
In most parts of the country there are two important elements lacking to a greater or lesser degree. These are coaching and facilities. I honestly do not believe there is any shortage of athletes, but this potential needs proper guidance and an opportunity to compete. The funds made available as a result of the passing of this bill will not be sufficient to provide gymnasiums or rinks but will, I hope, encourage municipalities and provincial authorities, and more especially private enterprise, to take a more intensive interest in the provision of these facilities.
There is a great deal which could be said about coaching in general. Every community cannot afford professional coaches and must rely to a large extent on voluntary help. It is to these volunteers that we must look for a great deal of the assistance needed in order to promote amateur athletics. Even professionals must depend on the enthusiasm of the amateur and on the enthusiasm shown by members of the public for encouraging athletics among our young people.
I should like to enlarge for a moment upon what was said by the hon. member for Hamilton South (Mr. McDonald) when he suggested that we in Canada place too much emphasis on the management and coaching of national teams entering the Olympics and other important events of that kind while placing too little emphasis on the needs of the competitors themselves. In support of what he was saying, the hon. member pointed to the fact that Australia, for instance, could send out a large number of athletes accompanied by only a small representation of management and coaches, while the balance as far as Canada is concerned has always been on the other side. I think it is important we should correct this situation and that we should place greater emphasis on the competitors and their needs.
I should like to bring a further point to the attention of the minister. I think it is important that in this field our efforts to
[Mr. MacInnisJ

assist players and athletes generally should be concentrated on the phase when our young people are beginning to develop their talents and abilities. In this connection I think that in addition to providing coaches and the proper facilities for training we might organize a scouting team which could go about the country in search of young athletes of outstanding ability, as is already done on behalf of national hockey league teams and national baseball teams. We would thus be able to assist such athletes at an age where they would have every possibility of developing their potential. In other words, I do not think that any great emphasis should be placed on assisting athletes beyond the age of 21 or 22 years. I think help should be concentrated on age groups where the potential is probably greater, say between the ages of 14 and 18. I see no purpose in reaching into the ranks of established organizations. I think efforts should be made to scour the country for athletes whose natural ability could be developed by proper training. As I say, this system has already been developed to a high degree by the national hockey league teams and the baseball teams. No doubt, it has been developed by football teams also. I think this practice could be followed in all fields of sport in co-ordination with the coaching staffs, so that those selected might have the advantage of the facilities to be made available as a result of the present bill.
I should like once again to endorse what has been said by other hon. members who have spoken during this debate. While not playing down the necessity for assisting our athletes in professional sport I should like to emphasize again that before athletes become professionals they must participate in the game of their choice at a very early age. It is at this stage in their development that we should watch for them and help develop the potential which shows itself in any specific sport.
(Translation):


Mr. Azellus Denis (St. Denis):: 
Paul Joseph James Martin: You are not referring to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Monteith)?


Azellus Denis: No, because he is not too fat, but I could refer to the Secretary of State (Mr. Dorion), who could certainly afford to lose dozens of pounds, if the government would only give him the opportunity to do so.
Mr. Speaker, very recently the reconstruction of the parliament buildings was undertaken, and repair works are now under way which will amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions. I wonder if it would not be possible to include the construction of a gymnasium, not only for members, but also for the House of Commons staff and even for civil servants.
You must know that thousands of federal employees live in Ottawa, and, in view of the limited number of places where they can practise their favourite sport in this city, I think the government should set an example and apply the provisions of the act concerning fitness and the practice of amateur sport to enable the employees under the civil service commission, the staff of the House of Commons and hon. members to practise their favourite sport. Several members are now staying from eight to ten months a year in Ottawa. They even bring their wife and family, and I know for sure that the children of several members of parliament go to Ottawa schools.
I am convinced that various members, and more particularly the wives, children or relatives of members of parliament have nowhere to go, either to meet or to practise some sport. Indeed, they are condemned to live between four walls and they are unable to do any exercise, to practise any sport, as they should, particularly when they are living in this country's capital.
I am convinced that millions of dollars will be spent under the terms of this bill, and when sport is mentioned, it is not just baseball, hockey or tennis that is meant, but every sport, including the less violent ones like bowling, for instance. I do not doubt that other kinds of sport will be included, 90205-6-558J
Advisory Council on Sports which would enable citizens of the various provinces to meet and come to know one another better, thereby promoting a better understanding within this country.
Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of National Health and Welfare should not take this opportunity to convince his colleagues in the cabinet of the necessity to establish a recreation centre, not only for members of parliament or their families, but also for the staff and even people under the civil service commission.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, I am sure that if most of the hon. members had the opportunity to come back to sports in which they used to participate when they were in school or even if some members were to start playing some sport to improve their health, the government would have in its members, its staff and its federal civil servants ideal propagandists for sports and their benefits. Each one would be willing to encourage the members of his family or his fellow citizens to participate in various sports activity. I am convinced that the bill which is introduced today in this house will have at least some propaganda value. Now, if propaganda is good from the point of view of the Canadian citizens' fitness, it is equally good when the government decides to send teams abroad, whether for Olympic games or hockey, tennis or bowling.
Should the government decide that sending our athletes abroad is good publicity, I believe it should endeavour, from the very beginning, to organize, train and assist financially or otherwise, teams that could be a credit to us.
We only have to follow the example given by countries which are not as democratic as ours but which seek publicity more than we do. They have known outstanding success in a short time, simply by making sure that the athletes receive government subsidies so as to develop their athletic potential.
When the time comes to send some teams abroad, I also wonder if the government should not see to it that our best athletes are selected, because what matters-I make this comment even before the legislation is passed-is not to favour one particular team operating in one particular province, but rather to have our champions, from any province, represent the country. It might also be wise to see to it that they train regularly and seriously, so as to do credit to our country when they ago abroad to compete against other teams, for the minister knows that the teams we have been sending to the Olympics for many years have not been too successful.
8852	HOUSE OF
Advisory Council on Sports
Incidentally, I wish to recall that sport is synonymous with justice and friendship, efficiency and harmony.
I fail to understand why the province of Quebec seems to be overlooked when teams are being sent abroad. This legislation should not occasion disunion or disharmony in the country. No doubt an advisory council will have to be set up, but it has not yet been established, since this legislation has not been passed.
Therefore, I ask the minister to see to it that, when this advisory council is established, the province of Quebec and French Canadians are adequately represented on the council. I can assure him that if the representatives of the province of Quebec are chosen well and are in adequate numbers, French Canadians will do honour, not only to the minister, but also to the whole country.
Moreover, I believe that by uniting the various ethnic groups in the field of sports, the different races will get to know each other better and to appreciate one another more.
Besides, I think that if the government still has a majority and if its members practise some sport and meet groups and personalities of other races, it will think twice before making other appointments, because in the near future, this bill on fitness and sports, will be useful not only for sports in the restricted sense of the word, but also to the people of Canada by making them a nation of sportsmen, not only as far as baseball or hockey are concerned, but in all forms oi everyday life.
When the time comes to make appointments, to do justice or maintain harmony in the country, we will have, thanks to this bill, at least one more reason for being even more united in Canada.
(Text):


Mr. E. J. Campbell (Lambion-Kenl):: Mr. Speaker, I have listened with very great interest to the fine contributions that have been made by the previous speakers. I must say that I feel there is considerable merit in the suggestions that have been made. It is a great pleasure for me also to have this opportunity to speak for a few moments on this bill which proposes to establish a program to encourage a high standard of physical fitness.
May I say I admired the very broadminded attitude the minister revealed in outlining what he hopes will be accomplished by this measure. To my mind this program could accomplish great good for the people of Canada.


I feel certain that this measure can be the
means of adding years to the lives of our
people and of adding more life to their years.
During my earlier years I had the experience of being an instructor in physical culture. I have not only advocated but have also practised physical fitness for a period of approximately 40 years and so this matter is not a new adventure to me. Many people in my area could, I know, vouch for the truth of the statement I have made.
While the resolution and the bill make reference to "encouragement of physical fitness and sports" and while I have played many games for many years and enjoy them still and agree that there is much benefit to be gained from them, I nevertheless intend at this time to stress the need and the value of fitness for all regardless of how it is acquired rather than limiting my remarks at this stage to the benefits accruing to those who may participate in sports. I was particularly impressed by the remarks of the hon. member for Calgary South (Mr. Smith) who referred to the benefits that have been and no doubt will continue to ge gained from participation in the 5-BX and 10-BX programs.
I suggest that something continued along that line and broadened to include all the people of Canada might perhaps be of greater benefit than just to train athletes. Since I have been here as the representative of the people of my area in the parliament of Canada I have often thought that the most important contribution I might make would be to do or say something which would encourage the people of our country to follow such a course as is being advocated today. I spoke on this subject in the house on June 22, 1960, as recorded on page 5262 of Hansard. If I may, I should like to review a few of the remarks I made at that time.
May I say that it is my intention to speak about and to attempt to place special emphasis upon the need and the part that a physical fitness program encouraged from the federal level could play in working toward such a goal of improved health. I feel that there are practically unlimited possibilities in this field. I feel that I should at this time also acknowledge that it is generally recognized that the responsibility for this matter of physical fitness falls under the jurisdiction of the provincial authority, but I have long felt that more encouragement should be given from the federal level to encourage and assist the provincial governments, and in turn, the local municipal governments and the people themselves, in a program which would broaden and intensify their efforts in this regard.
Again, on the next page.
I am one of those who believe that health and strength is just as valuable and important to the average businessman and other people as it is to the athlete, and that the same things

which the athlete does in a somewhat modified form would also promote strength and health for the one who may not wish to participate in organized sports.
Again, on the next page.
I should like also to point out that the need for a physical fitness program on a national scale is becoming increasingly more important in this day and age when men are devising mechanical ways of doing the work which they did by hand in days gone by. As a result of the increasing nervous strain caused by the pace at which we are moving today I predict that there will be an ever increasing need in the years to come for something to take the place of the work that our bodies were intended by nature to perform.
And finally:
... I should like to take a moment to point out the tremendous benefit that could come to the people of Canada from a dollar and cents standpoint if a concerted effort were made to sponsor a health program which would be dominion wide and in which physical fitness would play a prominent part. I feel this to be especially important at this time since the government has become responsible for the health insurance of the people. An ounce of prevention to my mind is worth any number of pounds of cure. I therefore suggest that the government give most serious consideration to the advisability of encouraging some such program.
I know it is not going to be an easy thing to sell to all the people of our country the idea of keeping fit. In my earlier years I had trouble selling it even to my own family. But as the years have passed by my son now in his twenties finds that his father, who is well on in his fifties, can quite easily set the pace for him still. When my daughters see their mother in her fiftieth year wearing the same size clothes and dancing with the same enthusiasm and ease as she did when she was twenty, I find it becoming a powerful stimulus for them to strive toward that goal which we have attempted to set for them.
I do not say this arrogantly or boastfully. I say it because it is a fact and in the hope that it may prove an inspiration for other people. I know that many people dislike doing any more work than they have to. They seem to feel that the pinnacle of achievement is to get to the place where they do not have to work. I am prepared to agree with the statement that has been made in the house on many occasions, that you cannot legislate virtue. I must say that I agree with the hon. member for Hamilton South (Mr. McDonald) who spoke a few moments ago and suggested that he favoured mass participation. I feel that all of the people, not just the young, should be guided and told of the course that would assist them to maintain their health and strength. I can think of no more worth-while thing for any government to do.
Advisory Council on Sports
I believe in speaking frankly and because of that may I say that I feel that if this project is to be made to work someone will have to tell the people some things they may not like to hear. I feel sure that the people will have to be told convincingly by someone in authority that, speaking in general terms, we should be more careful about what we eat, and that many people do not get enough of the right food while too many eat more than they need of things that have little real nutritive value. Many people drink too much of things that are destructive to their well-being. Generally speaking we also spend too much time in physical inactivity while at the same time many people indulge at times in activities for which they are not fitted.
We often find ourselves in places where we must, against our will, breathe air that is laden with destructive impurities. For example, we inhale too much tobacco smoke for our good. Even non-smokers find themselves in the position where they must breathe air that has been fouled by the smoke of other people. Yet many people seem to think that the pinnacle of social accomplishment in our day is to be able to inhale great gulps of those same impurities deep down into their lungs and then blow them out again into the air for other people to breathe.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Shame.


Ernest John Campbell: I ask you, how can we expect to be at our best under these circumstances? I do not have time to discuss fully all the matters I have mentioned but I should like to refer to a number of practical cases with which I have been directly connected. These are cases that have left an indelible impression on my memory and, without doubt in my mind, prove the truth of the points I intend to make. I have in mind a meeting held in the city of London not too long ago at which our own Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) was the guest speaker. I happened to be in the unfortunate position where I sat in the midst of three cigar-smoking men, one on each side of me and one behind me, and it seemed to me as though they were deliberately puffing smoke directly into my face all during the evening.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Is the hon. gentleman making any accusations?


Ernest John Campbell: No, I do not
think the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) was there.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Maybe his smoke was.


Ernest John Campbell: While I did survive, the air was almost blue with smoke and a man close to me fainted because, to my mind, he lacked good air.

Advisory Council on Sports
He slumped to the floor and the confusion caused the Prime Minister to terminate his remarks and the meeting adjourned.


John Whitney Pickersgill: May I ask the hon. gentleman a question?


Ernest John Campbell: Yes.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Is he suggesting that as a cure?


Ernest John Campbell: I am suggesting as a fact that we do inhale more tobacco smoke than is good for us.
I should like to refer to an article which appeared in the newspaper under the heading, "Medical Association Cites Cigarettes for Cancer." I should like to read this part of that article:
The Canadian Medical Association for the first time has gone on record as saying that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer.
Until now the association had avoided a direct statement on smoking and cancer, but at its annual meeting Tuesday, the general council of the Canadian Medical Association approved a report linking the two and called on doctors to point out the dangers of smoking to their patients.
This was in Montreal. Another example along the same line but having to do with some of the other points I tried to bring out, is the experience I had in the prize ring in my early years as a boxer. I am thinking of the man who gave me the most difficult battle I ever had. He beat me the first time; 3 obtained a draw on our second meeting, and I beat him on the third meeting. However, that man died about ten years ago. I also have in mind two other men who were outstanding baseball players in our district. They have both died. These three men were all a little heavier than I was when they were at their best, but when they died they were about 50 pounds overweight. They died when they were still young men. As I have said, this proves that we perhaps eat too much and we eat things that are not good for us. We drink too much, too.
May I say, too, that when I came down here as a member I endeavoured to revive the custom of playing a few games of baseball, and to encourage some of the boys to try to get in condition. I knew what had happened here, and I knew of the tragic occurrence during a game being played here. Some of my well meaning friends in the house suggested that I should act my age; that I should not make any attempt to re-organize the games at this time. I did make the statement then that I thought we could die faster sitting in these chairs than we would on the ball field if we kept ourselves in shape by
[Mr. Campbell (Lambton-Kent) .1
playing games. I am sorry to say that that prophecy has been fulfilled. There have been a number of members who have died, and a number of them were younger than I am. I am pleased to be able to say that none of those who participated in the games we have played became casualties. The members to whom I have referred were not athletes. They may have been athletes in their earlier days, but they did not take part in the games we played here. I could cite many other cases to prove the point I have in mind.
For example, I have seen men who could shovel tons of grain, corn and sugar beet on their farms day after day without apparent ill effect. However, after a short time of retirement and a period of idleness they would break down while moving a bit of light, fluffy snow off their sidewalk. They were not fitted to do the work they had previously done.
Now, I feel certain that this legislation could serve a most useful purpose if it were to have the effect of developing a number of good athletes. Then, these athletes could go around the country and tell the people how they became good athletes and how they intend to remain good athletes. The example they set would be an inspiration to the rest of the people. I would stress the point, however, that it is not enough to play games for a while, and on this point I am in disagreement with an hon. member who spoke a while ago and said the playing of games should be limited to those between the ages of 14 and 21 or 22. I stress the fact, as I say, that it is not enough to play games for a while and expect to keep strong and healthy for the rest of your life. It is like your bank balance, you must keep adding to it if you hope to keep spending or you will go broke.
May I venture to say that I have seen many athletes who had trouble in their later years because they trained only for the purpose of excelling at a sport, and for nothing else. When the sport failed to give them a substantial financial return, they neglected themselves and returned to an untrained condition. In this untrained condition they are sometimes tempted to do what they used to be able to do while they were in training. The result is that they have a breakdown in their early years. Apparently, they fail to appreciate the value of maintaining a high standard of physical efficiency or are interested only in the money they receive from the sport. The most important purpose of sport, in the final analysis, is to exemplify the use that can be made of a body that is physically fit. I feel, therefore, there should be those who can speak with authority, who can not only advise people on how to become athletes but also

on how they can retain their athletic ability in the later years of life. May I also stress the fact that those who are less inclined to take part in sports for various reasons, who never try to make the team, are the ones who need the training most and who would benefit from it to a greater degree.
In my opinion, physical fitness comes ahead of athletic prowess. If you are fit, you can become athletic. If you engage in strenuous activities without being fitted for them, you are inviting trouble. I think we witnessed proof of that right on our front lawn here not too many years ago. It is much more important to keep fit in later life than it is to merely learn to play games during one's youth and then neglect oneself later. It is my well considered opinion, based on observation and experience over a period of many years, that the time when there is the greatest need to be physically fit is in the later years of life, when there is a tendency to let down and take things easy. If one has been active in sports in early life, the need becomes even greater than ever for some form of training to be continued in the later years. The medical profession acknowledges that the later years are the dangerous years. I feel very strongly about the fact that any program that is developed should be designed to encourage the people of all ages to engage in sport and thereby benefit from any plan that is approved. In my opinion it is much more important to health to keep fit later in life than merely to learn to play games in the period of youth. By nature the young are generally blessed with the desire to be active. The very young are almost impossible to keep quiet. We older people sometimes need a bit of prodding to get us to do what we know we should do. Our bodies were designed to be worked. I have often stated that it is by work and care of our bodies that we earn and deserve the right to be fit.
At this point I should like to refer to a number of statements that were made by Dr. Thomas K. Cureton, of Urbana, Illinois, a noted authority on physical fitness, while speaking on this subject in London, Ontario, recently. I am quoting from a press report:
-a person can extend his or her active life by 15 to 20 years... by following a moderate program of exercise and relaxation, said Dr. Thomas K. Cureton, of Urbana, Illinois ...
In the United States each year approximately 1,300,000 people have coronary attacks, he said. "They just fold up and it is not due to any disease that can be identified under a microscope. The general state of physical fitness in the United States and Canada is a bit pitiful."
Habits make the difference, he said. Graphs charting the fitness of thousands of people show a pronounced decline at the middle-twenties,-
Advisory Council on Sports
That is why I stated I do not agree with the remarks of the hon. member who spoke. I should like to repeat this sentence:
Graphs charting the fitness of thousands of people show a pronounced decline at the middle-twenties, when most young people drop active sports for career and household duties.
"Our bodies should be constantly trained to meet the physical and mental stresses that crop up suddenly-"it might be shovelling snow, or severe tension or over-excitement."
He advised all mature individuals to adopt a definite plan of exercise, with these points in mind.
I should also like to refer to the remarks made by the hon. member for Jasper-Edson (Mr. Homer) while speaking in this house on March 16 last as recorded at page 3063 of Hansard. I may say that the hon. member for Jasper-Edson was speaking on the agriculture estimates and was dealing with the use of butter at that particular time. But since he also referred to another matter I am going to quote him here. He states:
-butter is a grade A food which we can eat and enjoy without regard for the bogey man of coronary thrombosis, for behind the threat of coronary thrombosis are a number of other factors besides the cholesterol level in the blood.
I think the greatest underlying factor is a lack of exercise. Canadians and the people of the United States in general are victims of what we might call transportationitis which leads to their taking little physical exercise. This rather than the overeating of fats is probably the greatest cause of heart disease. Of course, I hasten to say that moderation in all things is a sound principle the application of which is essential for good health and this applies to the consumption of animal fats as it applies to other foods.
May I say that I am not one of those who subscribe to the idea that our days are numbered, no matter what we do. I sincerely believe that we can definitely and deliberately add considerably to the length of our own days and, just as definitely, add to the measure of enjoyment of those days, by the way in which we care for our bodies. I believe that we will just as definitely reduce the length of our lives and the measure of enjoyment we get while we live, by taking the opposite course of neglect and misuse. There is a scriptural recording to be found in the 90th psalm, verse 12, which reads as follows:
So teach us to number our days, that we might apply our hearts unto wisdom.
To my mind that is a divine inference that we may number our own days by the way in which we live now. I do not intend the things I have said to seem unkind. In fact, I intend them to be the opposite. While some of the statements may seem to be unkind now, I predict that as the years pass, the day will come when most of those who are listening here and most of those who may read what I have said will agree that the suggestions I have made here are the most

Advisory Council on Sports kindly and most friendly advice that I could have given on this matter. If you lose your health and strength, you have lost everything of value. If you can improve your health and keep it longer, you will have gained the greatest treasure.
I am very pleased to have contributed something to a measure which I am sure can help the people by pointing the way toward that goal whereby they may maintain that sense of well being that will enable them to skip, to run, to jump, to dance, to play, to row a canoe down the Rideau river, to chop a log of firewood, to walk from their home to the parliament buildings or to do almost anything within reason. I suggest that if you keep yourself in condition for these things you can go on year after year doing these things you like to do. I know it can be done by those who are willing to train to that end. I am glad to say something to encourage that training.
These things that I have outlined today, Mr. Speaker, are some of the things that I feel a physical fitness council or representatives of such a council will be obliged to tell the people of our country if they hope to accomplish the greatest measure of success and to make this resolution or this bill serve the purpose it should serve.
May I conclude by saying that I am glad to be able to lend my support to any measure which will inspire the people, young or old, to strive toward that goal whereby they might obtain and maintain that greatest of all possessions, namely health and strength.


Mr. Robert Simpson (Churchill):: Mr. Speaker, in taking part in this debate I should like to associate myself with the hon. members who have preceded me in speaking in their congratulations to the Minister of National Health and Welfare for bringing this resolution before the house. I feel that every member of the house will be in support of this type of resolution. I am sure also that they will join with me in feeling that very beneficial results can follow if this resolution is properly administered. Certainly we all hope that will be the case. The results which can come from legislation such as this are of course, as has been mentioned by previous speakers and as is well known, a healthier nation and a greater national pride. These are probably the two things which are most important in this bill. As I see it, there are two ways in which legislation of this nature can take effect. The first is that it can be forced upon the people. The other- which applies in Canada at least, and I believe it is the only one which should apply -is that this legislation should tend to make sports so attractive that the majority of our people will wish to participate.



OF COMMONS

[Stage Direction]
The question is asked at the outset, "Why is financial assistance needed in this regard?" I think the first answer is that it is needed to provide the necessary facilities to allow more people to participate in amateur sport and a fitness program. The organization of such a program and the tremendous job of coaching needed is necessarily going to require large sums of money. Travelling expenses for our international representatives, although taken care of normally through other means, should be given consideration in the moneys which are available through this legislation. Then there is the question of the promotion of leadership and incentive to take part in amateur sport. In the promotion of leadership and incentive large sums of money will be required to line up the program across the nation.
I should like at this time to endorse the remarks of the hon. member for Calgary South (Mr. Smith), who said that the incentive to take part is possibly one of the more important aspects which has to be put across to the people. As far as I am concerned, the incentive to take part is the most important aspect. If a person has not the incentive to take part in a program of this nature, he might as well forget about it.
All of us have had the experience of desiring our children to take part in sports or athletics of some sort. I think that without giving it too much thought many of us from time to time have felt it is essential that our children should do this. To a point it is fairly essential. But as far as team sports are concerned, I have found that a person should be encouraged in the first instance to give it a try. If after giving it a try they find out that they do not desire to continue in that sport, I do not think they should be given any further encouragement, because if they have not the incentive to take part in the sport they will only be a headache to somebody in the future. Therefore in my opinion the incentive to take part is one of the more important aspects of this type of legislation.
This, along with the provision of facilities and the organization of coaching for such a program is going to be one of the main tasks with which the council will have to deal. I believe this can present quite a problem. I think the suggestions put forward in some of the speeches made this afternoon will provide a certain amount of guidance to the council when set up.
There is one other aspect of a program of this nature that is almost as important, if not just as important, as promoting the incentive to take part. I refer to the vast number of volunteer workers throughout Canada who have given freely of their time

for many years in order to promote the incentive for young people to take part in various forms of amateur sport. Without these workers this or any other country would never get very far. These are the people whom it is impossible for any country to replace by paid workers. These are the people who will have to be given a great deal of consideration by the council when it is set up.
When I say they will have to be given a great deal of consideration, I do not mean that consideration should be given in any way, shape or form to paying these people salaries. However, I do feel that money must be spent on encouraging these people who have been doing this work to continue in it. We should encourage more volunteer workers to enter this field. I think the way in which this money can best be spent is in seeing that these people are financially able to attend coaching schools, which schools will undoubtedly have to be set up under this program.
I am sure that every hon. member in the house has come in contact in his own community and others with this vast army of volunteer workers. I am sure we all realize how important they are. However, I should like to dwell on this subject for a moment or two because I believe it is a most important one.
In the town of Flin Flon, Manitoba, in which I live we have been very well blessed with the tremendous number of volunteer workers we have had throughout the years in the field of promoting amateur sport and fitness among the residents of that town. This has resulted in winning a tremendous number of provincial championships for the town. They are too numerous to mention at this time. I believe the number of provincial championships won by teams and individuals representing the town of Flin Flon is a record unsurpassed by any other town in Manitoba.
I am not saying this in a selfish manner of pride in the town of Flin Flon or on behalf of the citizens of the town, but I am trying to make a point in regard to these volunteer workers. Four years ago the junior hockey club of Flin Flon, the Flin Flon Bombers, was successful in winning the memorial cup, emblematic of the junior hockey championship of Canada.
An hon. Member:: Amateurs?


Robert Simpson: Yes, definitely amateurs.
Junior hockey in Canada has climbed to a point where most of our major cities only support one club. Some cities, such as Winnipeg, support three or four clubs; but in general even the large eastern cities only support 90205-6-559
Advisory Council on Sports one, and sometimes, two, junior hockey clubs. In fact, most of these cities have on their rosters players imported from all parts of Canada. But when the Flin Flon Bombers won the memorial cup in the spring of 1957, from a town of 15,000 people 11 out of the 15 players on the roster were local boys who had learned and played all their hockey in the town of Flin Flon.
They were playing against a club from the Ottawa-Hull district which had a club with players in it from all over Canada. I must agree that as far as the coaching end of the Flin Flon hockey club is concerned we had a man who is, in my opinion, the top junior coach in Canada and a lot of credit is certainly due to Mr. Bobby Kirk, the coach of that club. However, I do not believe this would ever have been accomplished if it were not for the large number of volunteer workers who gave so freely of their time to managing, coaching, officiating, time keeping etc. and generally taking care of the minor hockey clubs in our town. As I said before, this ap-lies of course to many parts of Canada.
Now I should like to deal with one or two ideas as to how this money could be used to best advantage. First of all, as has been mentioned before, I think the council should give considerable attention to the possibility of conducting nationally sponsored coaching schools in the various provinces of Canada. When I talk about these coaching schools I should like to offer a word of suggestion to the council. I suggest they take a look at the system which the national hockey league has been using for a number of years. The league sends a well known coach and a well known referee to various cities across Canada to conduct one-day clinics in coaching and officiating. This has been beneficial. I think it has shown good results, particularly in western Canada. However, I do not want to see this same system adopted by the council. It is not too bad as far as a one-day school for officials is concerned, because there you have an official of the national hockey league sitting down and discussing the problems which arise in refereeing a hockey game and here you have a teacher instructing people who are going to use this information. But when it comes to a one-day coaching school the situation is entirely different. Here you have a well-known coach attempting to pass on to other people interested in coaching all the fundamentals of coaching a hockey team. He is trying to do all this in one day-to pass on lessons which it has taken him years and years of experience to learn. The difficult part is that he is not only teaching these men how to coach, but that they in turn have to go out and try to impart this information to the

Advisory Council on Sports players. The idea is all right but I do not think that one day is sufficient for a school of this nature. I would therefore suggest that when these coaching schools go across the country serious consideration should be given to extending them over a period of three, four or five days in each area, and for a further period if necessary. I also think the council should consider setting up nationally sponsored schools in most regions of Canada for volunteer workers, not only to impart to them the idea that Canada in general appreciates their services but to impart ways and means of adding to their value in this field.
I think, also, that schools should be conducted for organizers in the various parts of Canada. Some people may say we are going to have too many schools. However, these are three entirely different fields of endeavour; one is for coaching, the other is for volunteer workers and the other is for organizers. I feel it is essential we should have these organizers, particularly if any form of recreation in addition to strictly amateur sport and fitness is to be taken into consideration.
A few years ago, when legislation similar to this was in being, the province of Manitoba was among the provinces which took advantage of the federal legislation to the extent that it assisted communities which had decided to employ a recreation director. The provincial authority paid part of the cost incurred by the communities concerned. The result was good in many cases, but in some cases the municipalities were merely engaging these men because federal aid was available. Their programs fell through, and eventually the legislation was taken off the statute books in Ottawa and discontinued. I think the council which will he set up under the terms of this legislation should give consideration to assisting, through the provincial authorities, any communities which are interested in paying their share of acquiring a recreation director.
The legislation with which we are dealing is certainly very controversial, and many of us have our own ideas of how it should be worked out. In 1958 there was a Canadian Press ballot asking the following question: "Should the federal government subsidize amateur sport in an effort to develop athletes of international calibre for a healthier nation?" The voting at that time was 86 in favour and 20 against. Hon. members will see, therefore, that this, is a very controversial question. However, I am sure every one of us here is anxious to see this bill come into force and to play his part in seeing that it works.
There are many who feel that all forms of recreation should come under this bill. I know

that a large number of the people in the town in which I live feel this way. However, for the time being I think the council should take its first look at assisting fitness and amateur sport. As time goes on, possibly the other forms of recreation could be included. If that were to come about I think more money would be needed. However, I believe that could wait for a year or two yet.
I believe, also, that when we talk of sponsored coaches and organizers the council should give consideration to hiring coaches and organizers on a full time basis in some specific cases. But they must be men of proven ability. There have been times in the past when Canada has lost valuable coaches through the lack of employment opportunities in this field in Canada. I think they should be careful about this and that consideration should not be given to everyone who may call himself a coach. Only coaches of proven ability should be given this consideration.
I think we must examine means of making better use of our existing facilities to achieve greater results in this field. When we examine the question of assisting our teams to participate in the field of international sports we should consider the possibility of using the facilities of the Royal Canadian Air Force as a means of transporting our players. The planes of the R.C.A.F. make trips during the week to many countries in the world and perhaps these facilities could be used by our athletes representing Canada in international sports events.
Greater use should also be made of the facilities of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to publicize important sports events and our outstanding athletes. Many people have said that the radio has made the national hockey league the financial success it is. This applies not only to Toronto but other areas. I agree that radio broadcasts have tended to increase the gates in various cities and I feel that the C.B.C. through its television facilities could render a valuable service to amateur sports in Canada by giving them publicity. If more publicity were given to our national athletes through television and other means an additional incentive would be created for more people to participate in sports events.
I do not recall having seen televised a single national amateur hockey final. Professional hockey games are televised consistently and often the national league finals are not sponsored but are presented as a public service of the C.B.C. The same should be done with respect to amateur finals.
Each of us must ask himself this question: How do I feel about Canada's prestige in the matter of international sports events such as

the Olympic games? As legislators we must answer this question. The sports council, of course, must also face this question and answer it. We talk glibly about our prestige and national pride in athletics, but what do we actually do about it? I have advanced a few suggestions which I feel are deserving of consideration. I wish particularly to stress the importance of achieving greater publicity through the facilities of the C.B.C. I ask hon. members to consider how well they remember the athletes who through a great deal of self denial have brought honours to Canada by winning Olympic gold medals. Most of us recall, of course, how thrilled we were as a nation when Percy Williams astounded all the experts by bringing two gold medals to Canada in 1928 when he won both the 100 metre and the 200 metre dash. This was the second time that Canada had won a sprint. I wonder how many hon. members will recall who brought that honour to Canada on a previous occasion? In 1908 Mr. R. Kerr won the 200 metre event in the Olympics.
We remember people such as Percy Williams simply because of the publicity which was given at the time of the event. Probably none of us has given a second thought to the fact that in 1928 when Percy Williams returned from the Olympic games with two gold medals Ethel Catherwood of Saskatoon also brought home a gold medal for winning the ladies' running high jump. I recall this because on her return a public reception was held in her honour at Winnipeg.
We all remember Barbara Ann Scott who in 1948 won the ladies' figure skating event but we remember her mainly because of the publicity that was accorded her success. How many of us remember Canada's only gold medalist in individual events in 1952? Honours were won in that year by young George Genereux of Saskatoon in the trap shooting event. Back in 1908 the same honour was brought to Canada when the gold medal was won by W. H. Ewing. I wonder how many of us remember the names Robert Paul and Barbara Wagner who won the figure skating pairs medal this year at Squaw Valley? Probably in a year or two their names will have been forgotten by many of us. We do not forget the names of people like Jesse Owens and other United States winners because of the tremendous publicity accorded them. Their names are by-words when we come to think of athletics. We tend to forget the names of our Canadian athletes and yet as a nation we sometimes feel very deflated when our athletes fail to measure up to the standards of the athletes of other nations.
Some hon. members have suggested that we must be careful not to allow this money to be spent in such a way that professionals 90205-6-559J
Advisory Council on Sports will receive the final benefits and with this I agree. I am heartily in accord with the statement made by the hon. member for Calgary South who said that professional sport certainly has its place in our way of life. Professional sport serves as an incentive to many young people to participate in amateur games, an incentive which we as legislators and citizens have probably failed to give them.
Before closing 1 wish to draw to the attention of hon. members the record of Canadian athletes in Olympic games in the past. Of how many of these outstanding athletes have we even heard? The marathon was won only once, by Mr. W. J. Sherring in 1906. The
10.000	metre walk was won only once, by Mr. G. H. Goulding, in 1912. The 110 metre hurdle was won only once, by Mr. E. J. Thomson in 1920. The men's running high jump was won once in 1932. This event was given a little publicity so probably many of us remember Dune MacNaughton. The sled dog racing event was won once, in 1932 by Emil St. Godard of The Pas, Manitoba.
Turning now to hockey it will be remembered that Canada won the event in 1920, 1924, 1928 and 1932. It was not until 1936 that for the first time Canada did not win. That was the year that Great Britain, with a team composed mostly of players who learned their hockey in Canada, won the Olympic hockey event. In 1948 and 1952 Canada won but in 1956 the U.S.S.R. won and in 1960 the event was won by the United States.
As I said, there are some who say that we must make sure that this money is not spent so that the professional people will derive the ultimate benefit. When some of them say that, I think that possibly they have in mind the hockey situation in Canada today. I think that amateur hockey in Canada should be given all the support that the council can give it because the Canadian amateur hockey association, one of the largest sport groups in Canada, with a registration of approximately
120.000	players from the lowest age group up, has only one paid official, their secretary-manager, Mr. Gordon Juckes of Melville, Saskatchewan. They have only one paid official in their whole organization which looks after the interests of 120,000 children. When you compare Canada's hockey record with its record in other sports in Olympic competition, I think it is obvious that this is one sport that should be given every encouragement by the committee so that our prestige in Olympic competition with respect to our national game can be restored and maintained in the future in order that Canada may come out on top in Olympic competition in this event as we did in the past.

Advisory Council on Sports In the 1960 summer Olympic games Canada finished twenty sixth out of 53 countries competing and in the winter Olympics at Squaw Valley Canada finished eighth out of 16. When our children come home from school with their report cards and have marks under 50 we feel that something is wrong and something must be done about the situation. If we look at our record in the 1960 Olympics we find that in the winter games we did get 50 per cent but in the summer Olympics we were slightly below that mark. So far as the field of international sport is concerned, I would say that the council to be set up should take into consideration all factors which will assist Canada to produce athletes who can compare favourably with the athletes of other countries. It is not always absolutely necessary that they win. As long as they go to these games and give a good account of themselves, we are all proud of them. However, I believe that the council should give the fullest consideration to those athletes who will be competing in international sport. I should like to suggest particularly that the council should not be scared away from hockey because of the fact that the professionals eventually get most of our hockey players. I think the council should take a look at our great record in hockey in the past and give it as much support as any other branch of amateur sport in Canada.


Mr. M. L. McFarlane (Kootenay East):: Mr. Speaker, at this time I should also like to extend my congratulations to the minister for bringing in this legislation. I believe it is good legislation and I certainly support the contention of previous speakers this afternoon. I do not believe we can minimize the importance of sport in its various phases from amateur right through to professional. A great deal has been said this afternoon about those who have excelled in various sports in the past. I should like to ask the question, what about those who do not excel? What about the average hockey player, the average basketball player, the average tennis player or the average player in any kind of sport? I think these are the people whom we should assist.
At the present time there are established councils all across Canada. There are a great number in small communities as well as a great number in the larger centres. I think these are the people who need assistance. I should like to suggest to the minister that we use our existing government agencies. In most districts across Canada there are already recreational directors who have been appointed by a province or municipality or perhaps by a county. I believe we should use the present administrative set-up rather than establishing elaborate administrative machinery at this time. I believe we should

work with the municipal authorities who are in possession of the facts as to local needs and the necessity of promoting sport among the younger generation.
I was very pleased to see that the word "recreation" has been omitted from the bill. Otherwise we would have been in the impossible position of possibly supplying coaches for ardent bridge players or golfers and we might even have found ourselves in the position of supplying coaches for those who play tiddly-winks. I believe that we should cut down the overhead and see that financial help is given to the smaller groups rather than spending tremendous amounts on administration and for council meetings, joint meetings and other meetings all over Canada.
There is another point I should like to bring to the minister's attention. We must cover all types of sport. Various organizations have made pleas. I received one this afternoon from the Canadian amateur hockey association. I believe we should also give consideration to the Canadian amateur basketball association, the Canadian amateur football association, the Canadian amateur rugby association and so on so that we will cover all kinds of sport.
I should also like to have the assurance that the $5 million will be spent for the benefit of those in need of physical fitness, and I believe that in initiating this program we have to start with the youth of the country. Thousands of our younger generation are looking for leadership at the present time and I know that the minister and the government are capable of and willing to give such leadership.
A great deal has been said this afternoon about the necessity of training coaches. I should like to take a slightly different view. I believe coaches are a necessity but what might happen is that we might train a great number of coaches who would be allocated to the larger centres in Canada. I believe that the situation is just as serious in our smaller municipal centres where it would be impossible to obtain people qualified to teach amateur sports to a small group. Elimination of the smaller centres in Canada would have a serious effect. If we look at the line-ups of teams that have excelled in different sports we will find that the majority of the players have come from small communities.
At this point I should like to take hon. members back a few years to 1936 or 1937. In British Columbia at that time there was formed what was called a "pro-rec" department. The provincial government of the day spent thousands of dollars on this program which in my view was a very good one if

it had been properly organized and administered. In my own little area, we received over $2,000 worth of physical education equipment, and yet today I do not believe that any part of this equipment can be located. I feel we have a tremendous job to do in supplying leadership for this program.
In addition, I should like to suggest that we should support those who are working with our younger people in all lines of sports. They will produce better hockey players, better baseball players, better basketball players, better lacrosse players, across Canada. There are a great number of these sports that have been played on small playing fields or small sheets of ice, without the use of the elaborate buildings that have been suggested from time to time in this debate. I cannot help, Mr. Speaker, but pass along a word of congratulation to all those voluteer workers to which the previous speaker referred, who are the backbone of our amateur sports in Canada. It is on the basis of their work that we are going to establish this physical fitness and make it possible for our young people in Canada to reach that goal towards which they have been striving for a number of years.


Mr. P. B. Rynard (Simcoe East):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the minister upon the introduction of this bill. I think it is an excellent one and one which is long overdue. I believe it will be one that will provide a broad basis upon which governments, federal, provincial and municipal, will be able to build. We should keep in mind, at the same time, all the pitfalls that are related to the problems of coaching, classes and the even distribution of funds across Canada.
It is no secret that young Canadians have not participated in sports and training to the extent that they should. This participation in training has become necessary over the years in the light of changing conditions in Canada. In 1900 over 50 per cent of the population was engaged in working on farms, doing physical work from daylight to dark. Today, only 10 per cent of the people work on farms because these farms have become mechanized and most of the heavy work is done by machinery. The greater part of our population today is living in urban areas. Even here, the physical work is being cut to a minimum through the use of power mowers, power shovels and snow ploughs. All these things have reduced the physical work tremendously. Shorter working hours have provided a great deal of leisure time. As a matter of fact, not long ago I saw a statement by a psychologist to the effect that the ideal day consists of eight hours work, eight hours sleep, and eight hours play. I believe it is the eight hours of playtime that must be better planned. People
Advisory Council on Sports require physical work to keep their muscles, heart and other organs functioning properly. People require physical work not only to keep these organs fit but also in order to eliminate waste products in the bloodstream and to burn up other by-products which may be deposited in the body and do irreparable harm.
It is a fact that most Canadians follow occupations which are classed as sedentary. Most of us overeat and do not take sufficient exercise, if we take any at all. Any contribution that this bill will make towards interesting the people of Canada in proper exercise and physical fitness, will contribute in no small measure to the happiness of the individual and to his feeling of well being. In addition, it will also add a few years of extra life. The interest aroused in physical fitness and regular exercise will result in improving the mental condition of our people. I am thinking particularly of the stresses and strains of modern life which drive people to seek tranquillizers and sleeping pills. A physically tired body is a healthy body and of itself encourages relaxation and sleep.
I think, too, of our teenagers and young people with all the spare time that they have on their hands. The other day I noticed that a religionist pointed out that the spare time we have today is one of the tragedies of our time; that the responsibility of charting the activities in which young people engage must be faced by all of us. The fashion for the young people is to get a car of some vintage or other and go places. Most of the appeal is from commercial establishments trying to make a dollar from these people. Some of these teenagers join gangs. An outlet must be found for all this youthful exuberance, and it is small wonder that it finds an outlet in fights and so forth. An interest in sport is inherent in most youngsters, therefore we do have a great responsibility in providing opportunities for planned sport, physical fitness classes and general activities which require physical work. None of our youth in Canada must be by-passed. We must give the youth of this country an opportunity to try to mobilize to become physically and morally strong people with the spiritual courage to make Canada a model for the world to copy.


Mr. John Smith (Lincoln):: Mr. Speaker, I deem it a privilege to rise and speak briefly on this bill to encourage physical fitness and amateur sport. I do not intend to go into the broad principles of the bill which have been well covered by the many speakers who have preceded me. However, sir, there is one sport to which I should like to refer and there is one part of the bill about which I should like to speak briefly. I do not want anyone
8862	HOUSE OF
Advisory Council on Sports to think I am partial to a particular sport. However, we have heard references to hockey, lacrosse, baseball, football and a great variety of sports. I should like to bring to the attention of the minister amateur rowing.
Now, amateur rowing is a sport in which many municipalities cannot participate because it is a water sport. However, it is a sport in which the participants must attain a very high standard of physical fitness. They must spend many long hours in training, and often with very little publicity. This particular sport, amateur rowing, is well supported by our universities and colleges, and in many cases by our public and high schools. It is a sport, therefore, that we must keep to the forefront; we must not allow it to die out. It is a sport that requires very expensive equipment, but there seem to be those throughout the country who are prepared to help supply it. I think the minister should also lend his support. Many Canadians who in the past have followed this sport have gone abroad and in competition with oarsmen from other countries have brought to Canada national fame through winning what is known as the Diamond Sculls which is the world championship for rowing. I can recall at the present time four who brought that honour to Canada.
In the riding which I have the honour to represent we have a very active rowing club which is fully supported by the high schools. We also have the Henley course which is the course to which students from many high schools in the province of Ontario and in other parts of Canada come from time to time during the summer to hold their contests. At the Henley course there we also have once a year the big event, when teams from the United States and all over Canada come to contest for the international championship.
Rowing is probably not the most important sport in Canada but nevertheless it is an important sport in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Germany, and more particularly in Great Britain. It is a sport that develops strength of character. It is truly a builder of physical fitness and young manhood. When the Minister of National Health and Welfare is considering the setting up of the physical fitness council, which is part of the bill, I would ask that he give consideration to having on that council someone who is an authority on amateur rowing, as I feel that rowing is a very important sport for our universities, our colleges and our high schools.
I am not going to deal any further with the bill. I realize that many have spoken. I


concur in most of what has been said and I wish to lend my support one hundred per cent to the bill itself.


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington South):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to assure you at the outset that I shall be very brief in the remarks I have to make regarding this very outstanding piece of legislation which the minister has brought before us. I think all phases have been covered very thoroughly. However, I should like to bring to the attention of the minister and the council that he shall appoint the fact that, to the best of my knowledge, nowhere in Canada is there a university that provides a degree in the faculty of physical education. I believe that anyone in Canada who wishes to specialize in this field must go to the United States in order to obtain such a degree. I would think that Canada has arrived at the point, having regard to her population and her stature, that we should have in Canada a university that would provide such a degree in physical education.
At this time, if I may, Mr. Speaker, I should like to suggest that the University of Toronto, at their faculty of agriculture situated in Guelph, has one of the finest physical education buildings to be found anywhere in North America. It would lend itself ideally to the formation of a faculty of physical education for Canada.
I should like to say how much I as a member appreciate-as I am sure do all other hon. members-the great work the volunteer coaches are doing in the field of amateur sport throughout Canada. I am sure this legislation will serve a very useful purpose in bringing about fitness and improving amateur sport throughout Canada. In so doing we shall be developing young Canadians who will be the citizens of tomorrow.


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


Jay Waldo Monteith: Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief at this stage. I should just like to thank all hon. members for their contributions today. I know there has been a great deal of co-operation in the past. It is true that I mentioned that matter earlier in speeches that have been made in the house on private members bills previously. I think it is the unanimous opinion of the house that the bill should be passed. I can assure all hon. members that every suggestion which has been brought before the house today will be presented to the council for its consideration. I appreciate all the advice that has been offered and it will also be passed on. Many excellent ideas have been put forward, some varying

somewhat from others, but at any rate they will all be presented to the council for consideration. I shall, of course, be very happy to go into details on the bill when we come to the committee stage.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Chown in the chair.
Clauses 1 to 6 inclusive agreed to.
On clause 7-Council established.
Mr. Clermoni:: I would ask the minister who will appoint the member from each province?


Jay Waldo Monteith: The governor in council. The members are appointed by the governor in council.


Gaston Clermont: I would direct the minister's attention to the fact that the French text states that he will be appointed by the province. The wording is as follows:
(Translation):
(4) Each province shall have on the Council at least one member appointed by the province.
(Text) :


Jay Waldo Monteith: May I ask the hon. member to repeat that?


Gaston Clermont: This is the French wording: (Translation):
(4) Each province shall have on the Council at least one member appointed by the province.
(Text):
Do you mean the province?


Jay Waldo Monteith: I fail to understand how that clause 7, subclause 4, reads in that way in French. In the English version it reads as follows:
(4) Of the members of the council, at least one shall be appointed from each province.
We will take this into consideration, of course, but I understand the French version does indicate that the province will name the members.


Some hon. Members:: Yes.


Jay Waldo Monteith: I am afraid there is something wrong in the printing here. Can you advise me what to do in these circumstances, Mr. Chairman?


Azellus Denis: Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, the minister could amend the English version.


The Deputy Chairman:: I suggest that the correction be made in subsequent printings of the French version. If the minister asserts that the clause is properly worded in the English version, then the only logical solution would be to make the correction in subsequent printings of the French version.
Advisory Council on Sports


Jay Waldo Monteith: I am assuming that will transpire, will it? That correction will be made in subsequent printings?


Gordon Campbell Chown: Is this the wish of the committee?


Azellus Denis: Seriously, Mr. Chairman, why do we not amend the English version so that each province could name at least one member? I suppose that if the province is led by the C.C.F., there are some C.C.F.er's who are good sports and they might find in their ranks someone to represent their party. The same thing applies to the Social Credit party. I think it would be just and fair that the province should name at least one member of the council. I think the minister could do that. It will not hurt if at least one member is named by each province, because even if there were nine from each province, that would be fair.


Jay Waldo Monteith: I am not indicating exactly how this appointment from each province will be made, but the intent of the bill is that one member shall be appointed from each province. I prefer to stand by the English version.


William Moore Benidickson: I think that perhaps in our large province of Ontario the most western area might have an opportunity to be represented on the council.
Mr. Chairman, I know the minister is tolerant and I may be rather late in asking him a question or two. However, I should like to ask the minister whether or not he foresees that a municipal enterprise such as that in Kenora, about which I am very concerned, might in the development of swimming pools, tracks, interior tennis areas and so on, receive a small guarantee in this regard. I wonder whether it might also receive a contribution under the program of the minister contained in this bill?


Jay Waldo Monteith: I believe this clause has been passed, but I am glad to mention that of course the projects would come up through the provinces under provincial agreements, just as they do under the national health grants. As a consequence, if the province puts forward a project I assume it will be considered by the council.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, I want to say a word in connection with the point raised by my hon. friend from Labelle. I do not think we can leave this point as it is because, as the hon. member has pointed out, the English bill clearly states:
Of the members of the council, at least one shall be appointed from each province.
On the other hand, the language in the French version of the bill indicates that the province shall appoint. Under those circumstances, Mr. Chairman, I think there is only

Advisory Council on Sports one thing to do; that would be for you to consult the Clerk of the house as to whether there is a precedent for this situation, and what under the circumstances is the best method of determining the point. We certainly cannot have a bill in the English language saying one thing and the same bill in the French language leaving it open to another interpretation. I am sure that is the last thing the minister would want. This is a suggestion that I throw out for what it is worth. It seems to me to be a reasonable one.


Gordon Campbell Chown: I have already sent a suggestion to the house leader by messenger that an amendment to the French version could be offered by the government to correct the situation. It is not incumbent upon the Chair to consult with the Clerk of the house so much as I think it is for the government to correct the situation by the appropriate amendment.


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, I thought the two languages were official. In my view there is another mistake in the title. The English says "fitness" and the French says "la sante". I think "la sante" would be translated by the word "health", but one can be healthy and not fit for such sports or activities.


Mr. Drysdale:: Then how would the hon. member translate "fitness"?


Jay Waldo Monteith: I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that "health" may be a proper interpretation of "fitness" in the same sense. I am sorry I am not sufficiently well versed in the French language to be able to give a proper translation. I admit that a healthy person might have a good blood pressure and all that sort of thing, but he might still not be too fit.


Azellus Denis: Yes.


Jay Waldo Monteith: I accept that. In my interpretation "fitness" does mean "health". If a person is healthy, then I think he has a certain degree of fitness.


Azellus Denis: I still do not quite understand this word "fitness".


Jay Waldo Monteith: Would "aptitude" be the word for "fitness"?


William Moore Benidickson: Let us develop the people who have not the aptitude.


Azellus Denis: "Condition physique" would be a better translation than "la sante".


Mr. Chambers:: Let us deal with one at a time.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Mr. Chairman, I am not too well versed in the French language but I wonder whether the effect of clause 7 (4) would be carried out if we left out the words "qu'elle a nomme" and put a period after the
[Mr. Chevrier.l

word "membre"? Would this give the same effect as the English translation? I think that although the two languages are equal the Minister of National Health and Welfare is more familiar with the English language and would tend to look at the English version and assume that the translation gave the same effect. I think if we removed the words "qu'elle a nomme" and put a period after the word "membre" the French version would have the same effect as the English version.


Léon Balcer: Mr. Chairman, I think that after the brilliant suggestion of the previous speaker I shall recommend him as a new member of "academie franchise" very soon. I would move that the last four words of the subclause be removed. The new subclause would then read: (Translation):
Each province shall have on the Council at least one member.
And the last four words of subclause 4 would be dropped.
(Text):


Lionel Chevrier: It now develops that there are two inaccurate translations to this bill, the first as pointed out by the hon. member for Labelle and the second by the hon. member for St. Denis. As I look at this and at the clock I am wondering whether it would not be more advisable to ask the translators to look at this matter during the dinner recess, meanwhile standing the title and the clause, because although I think the intention of the amendment moved by the minister and so ably initiated by the hon. member for Bur-naby-Richmond is a good one, nonetheless I personally do not like the way the sentence in French now ends. It seems to me there might be a more elegant way of doing it. So I suggest that for greater clarity, to expedite the business of the house and also to preserve the two official languages, the course I have mentioned should be taken.


Jay Waldo Monteith: I have no objection to that being done. I was just wondering if the committee would agree to deal with the other clauses.
(Translation) :


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, since the Minister of Transport (Mr. Balcer) has spoken of the French Academy and since he is in the process of becoming a member of that famous body, perhaps he could lend a hand to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Monteith) so that the title of the bill we are now considering be translated adequately.
In my opinion, the word "fitness" should be translated in French by the words "condition physique", which is "physical condition" in English.

This has nothing to do with health. In fact, I could easily be an excellent hockey player and have trouble.
(Text):


Gordon Campbell Chown: Is it agreed that clause 7 be allowed to stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Clause stands.
Clauses 8 to 14 inclusive agreed to.
Progress reported.



PRIVATE BILLS

Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could interrupt our proceedings at this stage to ask for consent to revert to motions in order to deal with a matter pertaining to the divorce bills on the order paper.


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


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The house has before it a number of divorce bills which could perhaps be dealt with promptly within the next two days if we take certain action now.
This has been a difficult problem for parliament to resolve, that is, the method of dealing with divorce bills, and over the last two years a great deal of time has been spent in attempting to reach a solution. On some occasions we seem to have come very close to doing so, but not with the unanimity that is desirable. However, in view of the fact that the people who have made application for divorces have done so bona fide as far as we know and have complied with the law of the land it might seem wise to the house to deal with these bills this year and to continue to search for what some people consider would be a better solution to this entire problem. I am prepared to make this statement for the record which, if agreed to by other parties in the house, might permit us to proceed with the divorce bills on this occasion. I should like to make this statement: the question of procedure with respect to parliamentary divorce is under study, and the government has hopes of being able to present to the house at the next session some proposals in this regard.
If that is acceptable to the house then perhaps at this stage we might at least agree later on tonight or when we have completed our discussion on the Pine Point railway bill-if we do complete it-or certainly before the house rises at 10.30 to give second reading to the divorce bills on the order paper. These would then go to the standing committee on miscellaneous private bills for consideration tomorrow and when they
Private Bills
return from that committee they will be available to the house for third reading.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think that what the leader of the house has said will commend itself to my friends in the house. As is well known there are a number of hon. members on both sides who would, perhaps, not wish to approve these bills but I think there is a feeling that, as long as this procedure and no other exists, persons who have acted in good faith should not be denied a relief which has been available since confederation.
Indeed, I would hazard the suggestion that rather than embark during the next ten minutes on the affairs of the Pine Point railway and then go back to the other bill and return to the Pine Point railway matter again before considering this subject further, that if there were no objection from any other quarter of the house we might during the next ten minutes carry out the suggestion made by the leader of the house and give second reading to these bills which are on the order paper and send them to the committee right away in order that they might be considered as soon as possible.


Frank Howard: If a solution to this particularly vexing parliamentary problem could have been found and agreed upon earlier this session it might, at least, have contributed to a less apoplectic attitude on the part of some hon. members who are not with us at the moment.
However, as far as the researches of the government and others are concerned, we look forward with great hopes and anticipation to a solution of this problem. We hope that at the next session this difficulty may be overcome as far as parliament is concerned and that these particular bills will be able to be dealt with in a more expeditious, fairer and more just manner.
With regard to the bills now before us I think it would take not the ten minutes we have until six o'clock to give them second reading. If past practice is followed of passing them by automation I am sure we could give them passage within 10 or 15 seconds.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The proposal is agreeable, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreeable, then, that the house proceed now to deal with private bills, being bills Nos. 1 to 353 on the order paper, in one motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Speaker, have you referred to Bill No. SD-110 in this respect, or am I wrong?

Divorce Bills


Mr. Speaker:: The motion now proposed is that Bills Nos. SD-1 to SD-100 inclusive, and SD-102 to SD-106 inclusive, and SD-108 to SD-264, and SD-266 to SD-356, inclusive in each case, listed as orders Nos. 1 to 353 inclusive under the heading "Private Bills" on today's order paper be now read a second time. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



SECOND READINGS


[Stage Direction]
Bill SD-1, for the relief of Jean George Lipsman.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-2, for the relief of Margaret Terese MacDonald Tombs.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-3, for the relief of Esther Miller Finkelstein.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-4, for the relief of Matilda Aboud Henrig, otherwise known as Matilda Aboud Levac.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-5, for the relief of Charles Malcolm Macdonald.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-6, for the relief of Georgette Gi-nette Richardot Marica.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-7, for the relief of Roland Labelle. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-8, for the relief of Robert Clair Alger.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-9, for the relief of Susanne Louise Eismann Weinfield.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-10, for the relief of Florida McIntyre Marcil.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-11, for the relief of Muriel Frances Marion Simpson Anfossi.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-12, for the relief of Norma Catherine Shearly McMullan.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-13, for the relief of Violanda Fuoco Delage.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-14, for the relief of Leonda Suzanne Winston Gold.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-15,	for	the	relief of	Georgette
Claudy Bercier Brabant.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-16,	for	the	relief of	Anneliese
Bauer Kreuzer.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-17, for the relief of Beulah May-belle Purcell Stewart.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-18, for the relief of Diana Fraid Gross.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-19, for the relief of Nancy Anne Gray Levesque.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-20, for the relief of Agnes Larkin McBride.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-21, for the relief of Sheila Rose Hutchison Dendy.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-22, for the relief of Clara Melamed Schultz.-Mr. McCleave.

Bill SD-23, for the relief of Josephine Badaha Amyoony Marchadier.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-24, for the relief of Bella Grafstein Weintraub.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-25, for the relief of William John Earner, junior.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-26, for the relief of Dorren Mary Swain Mather.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-27, for the relief of Dorothy Grace Brown Vallieres.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-28, for the relief of Nellie Frances Drake.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-29, for the relief of Louis Fruttero. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-30, for the relief of Fritz Flunkert. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-31, for the relief of Claude Thibault. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-32, for the relief of Remmechiena Elsiena Jonker.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-33, for the relief of Mary Billias. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-34, for the relief of Helene Lempp. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-35, for the relief of Jean Elizabeth Geraldine Vimbor.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-36, for the relief of Hela Hinda Fachler.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-37, for the relief of Norma Skolar. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-38, for the relief of Jack Warran Jones.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-39, for the relief of Phyllis Marjorie Bradley.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-40, for the relief of Barbara Phyllis Barnes.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-41, for the relief of Clifford Harvey Stevens.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-42, for the relief of Nicolas Denis Lazanis.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-43, for the relief of Hedwig Anna Kiss.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-44, for the relief of Mildred Linda Sexton.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-45, for the relief of Hugh Donald McKean.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-46, for the relief of Catherine Louise Puddicombe.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-47, for the relief of Eunice Beverley Donaldson.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-48, for the relief of Florrie Naomi Wise.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-49, for the relief of Leslie Alfred
Wheable.-Mr. McCleave.

Divorce Bills
Bill SD-50, lor the relief of Roslyn Reisler.
-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-51, for the relief of Viola Saykaly. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-52, for the relief of Barbara Rose Isenberg.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-53, for the relief of Thelma Rosemary Picher.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-54, for the relief of Frank Grilli.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-55, for the relief of Rita Joubert. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-56, for the relief of Evelyn Ann Joy.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-57, for the relief of Wendy Grace McCullough.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-58, for the relief of John Dyall.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-59, for the relief of Anna Marie Cholette.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-60, for the relief of Richard Lome Moat.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-61, for the relief of Juliana Green. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-62, for the relief of Marie Ve-ronique Elmire Bugeaud.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-63, for the relief of Victor Robert Selvin Rafuse.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-64, for the relief of Francis John Turner.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-65, for the relief of Mary Berler. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-66, for the relief of Ruth Anna Becker.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-67, for the relief of Annunziata Collin.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-68, for the relief of Sophie Greu-zinger Abelius.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-69, for the relief of Joan Miller.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-70, for the relief of Marie Anne Sigouin.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-71, for the relief of Jean Paul Dussault.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-72, for the relief of Aleksander (Olexa or Oleksa) Chomenko.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-73, for the relief of Robert Whitla Ross.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-74, for the relief of Margherita Di Paolo.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-75, for the relief of Pauline Lew-kowict.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-76, for the relief of Marie Louise Aline Ross.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-77, for the relief of Gisela Lydia
Elisabeth Hunnius.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-78, for the relief of Dorothy Gertrude Payment.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-79, for the relief of Pierrette De Vynck.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-80, for the relief of Dorothy Joan Kovacs.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-81, for the relief of John Vere-shack.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-82, for the relief of Eloi Vincent.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-83, for the relief of Frederick William Steppings.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-84, for the relief of Dawn Carolyn Kronen.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-85, for the relief of Maria Ildiko Leitner.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-86, for the relief of Nora Vida Dobie.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-87, for the relief of Janina Keller.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-88, for the relief of Gordon Angus Moore.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-89, for the relief of Maurice Robert.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-90, for the relief of Johann Kinzl.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-91, for the relief of Elizabeth Robb Lilley.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-92, for the relief of Marguerite Ar-chambault.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-93, for the relief of Nancy Viola Doolittle.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-94, for the relief of Elsie Margaret Turnau.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-95, for the relief of Ruth Manhaim. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-96, for the relief of Micheline Maud Huguette Deutschenschmied.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-97, for the relief of Edith Martha Ami.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-98, for the relief of Christa Kruse-mer.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-99, for the relief of John Dennis Grubb.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-100, for the relief of Frank (Franz) Ziegler.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-102, for the relief of Amblena Eva Margaret Mary Brouse.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-103, for the relief of Marion Pelletier.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-104, for the relief of Catherine Lorraine Berthe Unity Miller.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-105, for the relief of Pierre Blag-don.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-106, for the relief of Helen Rita Freestone.-Mr. McCleave.
[Stage Direction]
Divorce Bills
Bill SD-108, for the relief of Mary Ann
Elizabeth Datko.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-109, for the relief of Frances Jane Ball.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-110, for the relief of Annie Beatrice Fordham.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-111, for the relief of June Catherine Volkart.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-112, for the relief of Edith Ruth Gurd.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-113, for the relief of Marie Lea Gertrude Constantinides.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-114, for the relief of Vera May Kirkpatrick.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-115, for the relief of Kathleen Isabel Argue.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-116, for the relief of Florence Parks.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-117, for the relief of Elaine Linda Goldberg.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-118, for the relief of Mary Helen Cormier.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-119, for the relief of Margaret Evelyn Grierson.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-120, for the relief of Madeleine St. Arnaud.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-121, for the relief of Ronald Clarence Breen.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-122, for the relief of Sally Falo-vitch.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-123, for the relief of Frederick John Downey.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-124, for the relief of Shirley Mae Clarke.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-125, for the relief of Jadwiga Nowak.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-126,	for	the	relief	of	Robert
Fender.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-127, for the relief of Joseph George Marcel Raymond Mady.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-128, for the relief of Reuben Gerald Sheaves.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-129, for the relief of Jean Paul Bourque.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-130,	for	the	relief	of	Theresa
Catalfamo.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-131,	for	the	relief	of	Charles
Woods.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-132, for the relief of Joan Winnifred Chrystal.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-133,	for	the	relief	of	Dorothy
Darling.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-134, for the relief of Lilia Margit Irenne Fekete.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-135, for the relief of Elisabeth
Franziska Chamulka.-Mr. McCleave.
£Mr. Speaker.]
Bill SD-136, for the relief of Evelyn Patricia
Hunter.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-137, for the relief of Walter Mason.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-138, for the relief of Anthony John Tunstall.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-139, for the relief of Ignatz Rada-kovitz.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-140, for the relief of Howard Ferncon Olsen.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-141, for the relief of Theresa Irene Godfrey.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-142, for the relief of Geraldine Bousquet.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-143, for the relief of Bernice Clara Judd.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-144, for the relief of Geraldine Koch.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-145, for the relief of Joyce Mary Walker.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-146, for the relief of Jeanne Ouellette.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-147, for the relief of Patricia Helen Gagnon.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-148, for the relief of Thelma Beatrice Davis.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-149, for the relief of Lydia Inge-borg Pachurka.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-150,	for	the	relief	of	Ourania
Timotheatos, otherwise known as Orania Timotheatos.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-151, for the relief of James Christopher Younger Elliott.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-152,	for	the	relief	of	Bernice
Catherine Bealy.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-153,	for	the	relief	of	Helene
Martineau.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-154, for the relief of Yvette Cecile Millar.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-155, for the relief of Mary Evangeline Jackson.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-156,	for	the	relief	of	Andrew
Drummond Page.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-157, for the relief of Katie Pollack. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-158,	for	the	relief	of	Shelagh
(Sheila) Harriet Jacqueline Smith-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-159, for the relief of Roy Charles Melvin-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-160,	for	the	relief	of	Shirley
Margaret Ball.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-161, for the relief of Irene Ruth Farber.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-162, for the relief of Margaret Edith Myrtle Latour.-Mr. McCleave.

Bill SD-163, for the relief of Charles
Georges Andre Perrin-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-164, for the relief of Norma Helen Hall-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-165, for the relief of Evelyn Byrd Taylor.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-166, for the relief of Eileen Mary Grant.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-167, for the relief of Shirley Levitt. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-168, for the relief of Judith Patricia Hogwood.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-169, for the relief of Rose Linden. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-170, for the relief of William Gibb Barnard.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-171, for the relief of Joseph Armand De Bellefeuille.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-172, for the relief of Bernard Campeau.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-173, for the relief of Derrick Walsh. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-174, for the relief of Genevieve Bollen.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-175, for the relief of Joseph Palma Lucien Boucher.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-176, for the relief of Joseph Arthur Roger Courtois.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-177, for the relief of Catherine Dale Porter.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-178, for the relief of Betty Jean Maurice-Jones.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-179, for the relief of Margaret Nancy Bishop.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-180, for the relief of Thelma Annie McKenna.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-181, for the relief of Florence Mary Gibson.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-182, for the relief of James Valiant Hatch.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-183, for the relief of Sofia Kleiza. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-184, for the relief of Elizabeth Ziehm.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-185, for the relief of Mary Winni-fred Paiement.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-186, for the relief of Dorothy Irene Payette.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-187, for the relief of Nancy Carol Stead.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-188, for the relief of Leo Thivierge. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-189, for the relief of Lola Polka.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-190, for the relief of Stella Liberman. Otherwise known as Stella Silverman. -Mr. McCleave.
Divorce Bills
Bill SD-191, for the relief of Patricia Cotton.
-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-192, for the relief of Verna Wilson Ellis.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-193, for the relief of Mary Freda Doutre.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-194, for the relief of Wilhelm Antoni.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-195, for the relief of Lilian Eleanor Hartglas.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-196, for the relief of Kathleen Gordon.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-197, for the relief of Roslyn Isaacs. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-198, for the relief of Claire Gray. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-199, for the relief of Olga Megas. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-200, for the relief of Frances Bou-rassa.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-201, for the relief of Janet Ellen Nelley.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-202, for the relief of Helen Mary Mailath.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-203, for the relief of Helen Mary Vol.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-204, for the relief of Douglas Yet-man.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-205, for the relief of Martha Klein. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-206, for the relief of Thelma Joy Tapp.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-207, for the relief of Marie Therese Beaudry.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-208, for the relief of Leon Schwert-finger.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-209, for the relief of Dorothy Golden.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-210, for the relief of Brenda Ruth Black.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-211, for the relief of Agnes May Hurst.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-212, for the relief of Stanley Sager. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-213, for the relief of Rae Price.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-214, for the relief of Margaret Bloom.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-215, for the relief of Beena Barbara Koch.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-216, for the relief of Pacifique Raymond Jean Ghislain Van Gulick.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-217, for the relief of Theresa Bernadette Rose.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-218, for the relief of Ila Rothman.
-Mr. McCleave.
[Stage Direction]
Divorce Bills
Bill SD-219, for the relief of Marcel Pa-quet.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-220, for the relief of Ada Florence Roberts.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-221, for the relief of Hannah Dorothy Erlich.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-222, for the relief of Teresa Mary Seguin.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-223, for the relief of Mary Stella Williams.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-224, for the relief of Kathleen Louisa Harrison.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-225, for the relief of Ilona Helen Adler.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-226, for the relief of Lillian Chal-fen.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-227, for the relief of Dolores Norma Auclair.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-228, for the relief of Patricia Lillian Mary Walker.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-229, for the relief of Milan Yan-kovic.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-230, for the relief of Norma Eileen Hicks.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-231, for the relief of Edith Erlick. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-232, for the relief of Sidney Russell Drake.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-233, for the relief of Grace Evelyn Lewis.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-234, for the relief of Ursula Edith Elsie Morgan.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-235, for the relief of Marie Marguerite Jeannette Enlow.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-236, for the relief of Barbara Lois Golden.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-237, for the relief of Eva Maria Muller.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-238, for the relief of Neil Marriott Compton.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-239, for the relief of Carol Marilyn Margot Norcott.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-240, for the relief of Eileen Alice Rose.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-241, for the relief of Mable Irene Collin.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-242, for the relief of Johan Hendrick Van Hattem.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-243, for the relief of Rhoda Heit-ner.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-244, for the relief of Normand Guy.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-245, for the relief of Elizabeth Mclnnis.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-246, for the relief of Carl Wilhelm Larson.-Mr. McCleave.

Bill SD-247, for the relief of Timothy Garfield Pilon.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-248, for the relief of Mary Theressa Oliver.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-249, for the relief of Egidia Flori-ana Ines Zeppettini.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-250, for the relief of Georgette Lemieux.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-251, for the relief of Sylvia Spivak. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-252, for the relief of Margaret Pate Orr.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-253, for the relief of Laureen Elizabeth Saunderson.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-254, for the relief of Jeannine Mar-leau.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-255, for the relief of Doris Villen-euve.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-256, for the relief of Estelle Shet-zen.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-257, for the relief of Eva Knopf.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-258, for the relief of Marie Alice DeWit.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-259, for the relief of Jean-Louis Trudel.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-260, for the relief of Doris Elizabeth McEllin.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-261, for the relief of Mary Jane Gabrielle Black.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-262, for the relief of Lucien Aube. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-263, for the relief of Denis Biron.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-264, for the relief of Guy Robitaille. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-266, for the relief of Edith Hen-shaw Owen.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-267, for the relief of Ruth Duggan. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-268, for the relief of Joseph Georges Maurice Legault.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-269, for the relief of Lomer Lus-sier.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-270, for the relief of Anna May Blair.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-271, for the relief of Norma Bernet Vallieres.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-272, for the relief of Rose Belsky. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-273, for the relief of Csilla Grosz-man.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-274, for the relief of Selma Kos-tiner.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-275, for the relief of Leah (Lily) Goldberg.-Mr. McCleave.

[Stage Direction]
Bill SD-276, lor the relief of Isabella Gardiner.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-277, for the relief of Diana Miriam Favreau.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-278, for the relief of Philias Doil Menard.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-279, for the relief of Viesturs Goba. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-280, for the relief of Clifford Woodward Hall.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-281, for the relief of Emelia Gador. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-282, for the relief of Barbara Jean Bertram O'Brien.-Mr. Cleave.
Bill SD-283, for the relief of Arthur George Sims.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-284, for the relief of Gladys Evelyn Viau.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-285, for the relief of Yvonne Hum-bert-Droz.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-286, for the relief of Joseph Paul Maurice Marcel Lefebvre.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-287, for the relief of Thomas Smith.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-288, for the relief of Marie Pauline Monique Denise Ferron.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-289, for the relief of Mara Wok-rina.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-290, for the relief of Joyce Mary Hagemeyer.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-291, for the relief of Rowland McLean Loftus.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-292, for the relief of Janina Stefania Luszczki.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-293, for the relief of Esther Mary Adler.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-294, for the relief of Marie Juliette Ida Dick.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-295, for the relief of Fred Austin Griffith.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-296, for the relief of Joseph Paul Jules Jodoin.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-297, for the relief of Janet Louisa Davis.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-298, for the relief of Margaret Dorothy Smith.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-299, for the relief of Christopher John Henry Doscher.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-300, for the relief of Martha Saltvik.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-301, for the relief of Eva Farkass.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-302, for the relief of Albert Cour-tois.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-303, for the relief of Madeleine Lebegue.-Mr. McCleave.
Divorce Bills
Bill SD-304, for the relief of Anthony Roy
Rabone Hearn.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-305, for the relief of Joseph Alfred Pope.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-306, for the relief of Marigold Mavis Singer.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-307, for the relief of Georgette Anne O'Leary.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-308, for the relief of Ann Cicely Cosgrove.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-309, for the relief of Agnes Hall-stein.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-310, for the relief of Shirley Sherry Aileen Sarah Bronfman.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-311, for the relief of Leta Sybil Farmer.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-312,	for	the	relief	of	Vlasta
Suchomel.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-313, for the relief of Lilian Norah Smith.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-314,	for	the	relief	of	Sarah
Galganov, otherwise known as Sarah Gale.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-315, for the relief of Anna Zinger. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-316,	for	the	relief	of	Lucien
Gagnon.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-317, for the relief of Dennis James Haney.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-318,	for	the	relief	of	George
Kenneth Polk.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-319, for the relief of Mario Lattoni. -Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-320, for the relief of Vincent Laplaca.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-321,	for	the	relief	of	Marie
Marguerite Jeanne-d'Arc	Paiement.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-322, for the relief of Joy Earle.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-323, for the relief of Barbara Rosemary Olga Barbary.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-324, for the relief of Assof Ernest Shaar.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-325, for the relief of Joseph Wilfrid Paul Emile Marois.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-326, for the relief of Erwin Gustav Pfeifer.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-327, for the relief of Rita Elizabeth Bowden.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-328, for the relief of Hazel Margaret Calvert.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-329, for the relief of Luciano Domenis.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-330, for the relief of Antonio
(Arthur) Archambault.-Mr. McCleave.
[Stage Direction]
Divorce Bills
Bill SD-331, for the relief of Ernestine
Lavallee.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-332, for the relief of Joseph Honore Antonio Lacerte.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill	SD-333,	for	the	relief	of	Doreen
Chantigny.-Mr.		McCleave.				
Bill	SD-334,	for	the	relief	of	Sema
Borodow.-Mr. McCleave.						
Bill	SD-335,	for	the	relief	of	Gisele
Lamarche.-Mr.		McCleave.				
Bill	SD-336,	for	the	relief	of	Estelle
Mathieu.-Mr. McCleave.						
Bill	SD-337,	for	the	relief	of	Vilma
Beaudoin.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-338, for the relief of Donald Kirk.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-339, for the relief of Jacques-Emile Blanchard.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-340, for the relief of Guy Thomas Carpenter.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-341, for the relief of George Louis Draper.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-342, for the relief of Berthe Daig-neault.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-343, for the relief of Stephen Beauchemin.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-344, for the relief of Marie Gabri-elle Lise Chouinard.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-345, for the relief of Zar Boik.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-346, for the relief of John Anthony Clifford Manning.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-347, for the relief of Pearl Arron.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-348, for the relief of Joseph Alfred Laflamme.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-349, for the relief of Dorothy Elizabeth Davies.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-350, for the relief of Elizabeth Rae Murphy.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-351, for the relief of Hazel May Terry.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-352, for the relief of Therese Hastings.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-353, for the relief of Paul Lapres.- Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-354, for the relief of Mary Christine Sweeney.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-355, for the relief of Corinne Ryder Nurse.-Mr. McCleave.
Bill SD-356, for the relief of Evelyn Sue Newton.-Mr. McCleave.
Mr. Speaker:: One other waiver of the formalities of the rules is necessary to permit the committee to sit at once and I take it the intention of the house following the statement

of the Minister of Veterans Affairs is that the committee proceed to consider these bills and report on them, if it can, so that they may come back to the house without undue delay.
I draw the attention of hon. members to the wording of paragraph 1 of standing order No. 106:
106 (1) No committee on any private bill originating in this house is to consider the same until after one week's notice of the sitting of such committee has been first affixed in the lobby; nor, in the case of any such bill originating in the Senate, until after 24 hours' like notice.
Therefore, it will be seen that 24 hours' notice would be required. If the house would give consent to the suspension of the standing order with respect to these particular bills which have just received second reading it would be possible for the committee to proceed.


Frank Howard: There are some bills which might be considered contentious concerning which there is some likelihood of contestation arising out of irregularities which might exist. By the waiving of this rule we would not wish to deprive individuals the right of a hearing of their case nor to have dissolution of marriage granted when perhaps it should not be granted.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps the hon. member will be prepared to leave that to the good sense and judgment of the committee. It is a matter for them. This waiver would only permit the bills to come before the committee. On that basis, is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, before the next order is called, may I suggest to the house leader that we call it six o'clock now. It seems rather absurd to embark on a discussion of the Pine Point railway bill for five minutes and then to come back to the other bill which was not fully completed. In making this suggestion perhaps I should ask the house leader if it is clearly understood that we will be disposing of the other bill at 7.30 so that no hon. member will feel, if he is a few minutes late, that he is being restricted in his rights.


Gordon Minto Churchill: In order that all might be informed I corroborate the statement that we intend to proceed with Bill No. C-131 and take up the corrections that have been made in its translation, to be followed by consideration of Bill C-126. Both are in committee. Perhaps we could move into committee now and then call it six o'clock.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that the house proceed in committee with Bill No. C-131?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.

Advisory Council on Sports



ESTABLISHMENT OP ADVISORY COUNCIL ON PHYSICAL FITNESS AND AMATEUR SPORT

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration in committee of Bill No. C-131, to encourage fitness and amateur sport-Mr. Monteith (Perth)- Mr. Chown in the chair.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.

AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 7.30 p.m.
On clause 7-Council established. (Translation):
Mr, Balcer:: Mr. Chairman, following the brief discussion we had this afternoon with respect to the French version of the bill now before the committee, I should like to propose this amendment to subsection (4) of section 7:
That Bill C-131 be amended by the deletion of subsection (4) of section 7, and its replacement by the following, in the French version:
(4) Au sein du Conseil, chaque province doit compter au moins un membre qui en provient.
Now, with regard to the other point raised by my hon. friend from St. Denis (Mr. Denis) concerning the translation of the word "fitness", I must say, first of all, that the translators have looked into this problem, and this may seem peculiar to the hon. members, but the word "fitness" is extremely difficult to translate in the present context. Personally, I think that the word "sante" was well suited for the definition of the bill, because this is an act to promote health through amateur sport. After all, a person who does not enjoy good health can regain health through sports and athletics.
However, if the committee insists on having the word "sante" replaced because it is a little too vague or because it could lead to confusion, I should tell the committee that it has been suggested to me that in such a case, the expression "condition de l'individu" could be substituted for the word "sante". The title would then read as follows: "Favorisant la condition de l'individu par la pratique du sport amateur". Then the word "sante" would be replaced by the expression "condition de l'individu" wherever it appears in the bill.


Azellus Denis: Mr. Chairman, I hope you will forgive me for interrupting the minister but the word "condition" means nothing in itself. The words "condition physique" or "sante physique" would be all right.
During the recess hour, we ventured to consult the larger dictionaries. We found that, the word "fitness" was translated by "sante
physique". It may seem strange, but the translation of fitness is "sant6 physique". Everyone knows that we usually say: "He is in good condition; he is in form". However, "sant6 physique" is defined in the dictionary by the words "en forme". By itself, the word "sante" would have no meaning, just like "condition" used alone would have no meaning.
I therefore suggest that we simply add to the word "sante" the adjective "physique".


Léon Balcer: Mr. Chairman, I think that what my colleague the Minister of National Health and Welfare wanted to make clear is that we are concerned here with both mental and physical health. Besides, the well known saying ''mens sana in corpore sano" shows that the word "sante" is used for both mental health and physical health.
When my colleague the Minister of National Health and Welfare suggested that we use that word in the French version, he meant that this legislation encourages physical and mental health of the individual.
As regards the word "condition", that word has an athletic meaning. Here is the definition I find in the Larousse dictionary:
Is applied to animals and athletes whose physical fitness has reached the highest degree of development. when they are capable of putting forth without fatigue the effort for which they are trained.
So we do not need the words "bonne condition" when speaking of the "condition de 1'individu", because it would be a pleonasm. In this case, it should be "condition".
As for me, I am far from being a linguist, but I am of the opinion that the word "sante" is a good translation of "fitness", since it means in fact the physical and intellectual or mental health of the individual.


Azellus Denis: If it is a case of explaining the intention of the Minister of Health and Welfare when he talks about "physical and mental health', why not amend the English version by substituting the word "health" to the word "fitness". The English version can be amended as well as the French. I do not see why we should always try to amend the French version when the English can be amended when the meaning, is not the same. Besides, the hon. member who just spoke knows very well that when we talk about a man in good health, we mean a man who is not sick in bed, who does not suffer from arthritis, who has no heart condition; that is what is meant by health.


An hon. Member:: He does not suffer from rheumatism.


Azellus Denis: "Fitness" simply means that a man is in good physical condition. But if the

Advisory Council on Sports Minister of National Health and Welfare has something else in mind and wants mental health to be included as well as physical fitness, he can express it as well in English as in French. Therefore, let him translate the French word "sante" by "health" in the English version. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
(Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think there is a great deal in what the hon. member for St. Denis has just said. I say there is some doubt as to just what the word "fitness" means. Surely, the whole problem would be solved if we changed the English title to "an act to encourage physical fitness". There would be no question about translating that by "sante physique". We all remember the old jokes by Stephen Leacock on the word "fitness". He asked, fitness for what? Fitness was, of course, really a slang expression up until a generation ago and it is only recently that it has become an accepted English word. I do think that perhaps we might resolve this difficulty if we were to put the adjective in both titles and it would make it clearer that we are not attempting to invade the realm of the spirit, which is perhaps within the provincial jurisdiction, if we can judge by some of the resolutions-


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Are you opposed to mental fitness?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, I am not opposed to mental fitness. I think even this house could profit from it. I do not know whether, in view of the fact that although the government promised this before the last election, the Minister of National Health and Welfare has never been willing to pay the federal share of the cost of people in mental hospitals, can be taken as an indication that they regard mental fitness as a provincial matter.
It seems to me that if we put the words "physical fitness" in the English title, they could be translated by the words "sante physique" and we would come as nearly as we ever can to "le meme sens dans les deux langues".


Jay Waldo Monteith: I wonder if I might mention that the present act under which we are operating, that is under which the federal government does not participate in the cost of hospitalization for mental illness, was originally drawn up by the previous administration.
I should like to point out that the word "physical" in the English text, at any rate, limits the concept of all-around fitness. We are interested in the "whole person" and in encouraging, through participation in amateur sports and fitness activities, the emotional

as well as the physical well-being of the participants. If we do not have the word "physical" it will be more in line with current views on this subject which have been developing over the past several years. As a matter of fact, the previous national physical fitness council had asked the government to delete the word "physical" in the previous legislation.
It seemed to me, from the explanation that the Minister of Transport gave, that the word "health" as translated by "sante" in the French language-I can only apologize for my inability to interpret the exact sense of it- that it might be well to leave it as it is.


Azellus Denis: The word "sante" in French has another meaning. When you take a drink, it is-
(Translation):
"A la sante!" That may be ambiguous, apart from the fact that if you abuse physical exercise, you are liable to mental illness. I know of boxers who, at a certain time, became mentally ill.
So it might be a good idea to clarify the situation in order to find out exactly whether you mean physical health or mental health. If you mean both, then say "physical and mental health".
(Text):


John Andrew W. Drysdale: I should like to make one comment. Under clause 12 of the bill, in both English and French, the word "fitness" which is translated by the word "sante" is defined under the regulations. I quote:
(Translation):
The governor in council may make regulations (a) defining for the purposes of this act the expressions "fitness" and "amateur sport";
(Text):
I feel this indicates quite clearly that under this specific measure the word "sante" will be defined by the governor in council under the regulations. I feel that this is purely a question of semantics in which the hon. member for St. Denis is engaged and the point is covered quite clearly by clause 12.


Azellus Denis: The hon. member is going too far if he means he wants to correct the French language. I would say, as the Union Nationale does, you are interfering with autonomy.


Léon Balcer: Actually, I have a lot of respect for the great knowledge of my colleague, the hon. member for St. Denis. However, I must admit that I think he has limitations, just as I have, in so far as being the grande linguiste is concerned. After meeting with the translators and hearing the various explanations as to why they picked the word "sante" in this context, I really think that the spirit of the bill and the intention of

the legislators will be extremely well covered by the word "sante" in the French. (Translation):
Actually, the idea in this legislation is to promote good health through sports.
I therefore think the expression is rightly used. I think that the word "sante" is a very good translation for the word "fitness", and I am asking this house to accept the version suggested by the government.


Azellus Denis: This will be another badly written legislation from the government.


Gordon Campbell Chown: It is moved by Mr. Balcer:
That Bill C-131 be amended by eliminating subclause 4 of clause 7 and replacing it by the following:
(4.) Of the members of the Council, at least one shall be appointed from each province.
(Text):


John Whitney Pickersgill: Just before the question is put-and I am going to support the amendment-I think the committee will feel a debt of gratitude to the hon. member for Labelle, one of the freshman members of the house, who spotted this mistake and who saved us all from making a regrettable error. Perhaps it is not a tremendously important one, but what is behind it is tremendously important. I refer to the complete equality of the two official languages and the importance of having our texts properly expressed in both.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Clause as amended agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Chown):: When shall the said bill be read a third time? By leave, now?


Some hon. Members:: Now.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Chown):: Agreed.


John Whitney Pickersgill: What about the hon. member for St. Boniface (Mr. Regnier)?


Jay Waldo Monteith: the third reading of the bill.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


Léon Balcer: that the house go into committee to consider Bill No. C-126, respecting the construction of a line of railway in the province of Alberta and in the Northwest Territories by Canadian National Railway Company from a point at or near Grimshaw, in the province of Alberta, in a northerly direction to Great Slave lake, in the Northwest Territories.
Canadian National Railways
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Chown in the chair.
On clause 1-Construction and completion.


Lionel Chevrier: Has the minister a statement to make arising out of the report from the committee?


Léon Balcer: No, Mr. Chairman. Actually there was quite an extended discussion of this project at the resolution stage and then on second reading. Hon. members have had the opportunity to ask questions of the experts who appeared as witnesses before the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines. I think the whole matter has been dealt with in a broad way. The agreement has been tabled. It was in the hands of all the members of the standing committee. Everyone has had the opportunity to ask any questions he wished to ask. I simply again recommend to the committee this bill which means so much in the development of the Canadian north and which makes provision for a great development undertaking. I do not propose at the present time to make any more remarks on it.


Lionel Chevrier: I do not know that I can agree with everything the minister has said. It is true that there was a meeting of the committee and it is true the committee was furnished with the agreement. The committee will recall that we on this side of the chamber gave our approval to the principle of this bill and that repeatedly we asked for production of the agreement which up until now has not been signed.
The agreement was produced shortly before the bell started to ring for 11 o'clock during the committee proceedings. I note that the minister shakes his head. Perhaps I could be a little bit more accurate. It is a fact that the agreement was circulated in the early part of the committee proceedings but we did not get to an examination of it until shortly before the bell rang for the 11 o'clock sitting of the house.
I do not wish to dwell on that agreement at the present time as there are some questions which come to my mind arising out of the agreement and which perhaps the minister would care to answer. However, before I put them, I think I should say this in all fairness to those who were members of that committee as well as to those who were not members of it. Here was a most important agreement that took many months to negotiate, perhaps a couple of years; I do not know how long it took. It is an extremely complicated agreement, one which a Philadelphia lawyer would have a great deal of trouble in understanding.

Canadian National Railways


Mr. Baldwin:: Quite simple.


Lionel Chevrier: We are given this agreement which expert lawyers took many months to prepare and we are told: "There is the agreement; if you have any comment to make or any suggestions to make, we are open to suggestions". My hon. friend has interrupted me by saying "Quite simple". I wish I had his legal ability. May I say that already I have read the agreement twice and that I certainly do not find it either simple or uncomplicated. However, if I understand correctly both the evidence and the agreement, it appears that the C.N.R. will move the concentrates at a rate which will permit them to pay for the maintenance and operation of the line. Any additional traffic will be surplus and that will go in reduction of the C.N.R. deficit. Pine Point will pay $7.75 per ton in accordance with the terms of the agreement for the movement of the ore. Pine Point will also pay a subsidy in accordance with clause 6.


Gerald William Baldwin: Clause 5.


Lionel Chevrier: Yes, that is correct; in accordance with clause 5. Cominco-that is Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company- will put Pine Point in funds for the construction of the mine and the C.P.R. together with the C.N.R. will get a share of the traffic which will move. The question which comes to my mind now is this. What will the taxpayer get for his $86 million? What provision is being made for (1) the amortization of the capital; (2) the servicing of the capital; and (3) the interest diming construction? Those are the questions to which I should like to have answers at this time.


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Chairman,-


Lionel Chevrier: I have not finished what I intended to say, Mr. Chairman. If it is the intention of the hon. member to interrupt, I will continue. On the other hand, I was trying to be helpful by asking the minister if he would reply to those questions first. I have other remarks to make.


Gerald William Baldwin: I will wait until the hon. member has exhausted his possibilities.


Lionel Chevrier: Thank you.


Mr, Balcer:: Once again I want to remind the committee and the hon. member for Laurier that this is the first time an agreement of this type has ever been put in the hands of the committee at this stage. These agreements have always been kept confidential. It is the first time that the government has ever placed such an agreement in the hands of the committee. The hon. member says that the agreement is not signed. I never said the agreement was signed. I said that

in relation to this agreement I have received a letter from Pine Point Mines Limited, from Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company and from the C.N.R. stating that they are ready to sign such agreement if the bill is approved by the house. This is the situation at the present time. There is no mystery about that; there is no secrecy. It is an open book. This agreement was placed in the hands of every hon. member of the committee. The hon. member for Laurier had time to read it twice.
As I said before the standing committee, the Department of Justice is still reviewing the agreement to check whether there are any legal errors in it, or anything of that kind, which should be corrected. At that time I also invited hon. members of the committee to make suggestions on this agreement. However, I must remind the committee that this agreement is actually requested in clause 6 of the bill, which makes it a condition. The government is ready to build a railway. We set forth in clause 6 some very clear conditions that have to be met by Pine Point Mines, Cominco and the C.N.R. before the bill before the committee comes into force and before the railway is built.
The hon. member also asked how this railway is going to be financed. I have stated, and he has recognized, that as far as the operation and the maintenance of the railway is concerned, the C.N.R. has a guarantee that what is going to be paid by the company for the moving of its concentrates will meet the maintenance and the operation of this line. Also, the company is giving a guarantee of 215,000 tons of traffic for 10 years. This will cover the operation and the maintenance of the line.
Therefore this railway will not be a source of deficit for the C.N.R. It will become an integral part of the C.N.R. and in addition, Canadian National Railways will have this great advantage of being the sole mover of these concentrates on the run between Edmonton and Calgary and will share half and half from Grimshaw to Edmonton on the Northern Alberta Railways, which is jointly owned by the C.N.R. and C.P.R.
As far as the financing of the capital for the building of this line is concerned, this is going to be paid out of an item in the estimates of the Department of Transport. These estimates come before the committee every year. Part of the capital will be reimbursed out of payments that are mentioned in schedule B of the agreement and also in subclause (a) of clause 6. These payments to Her Majesty can reach $20 million. This is part of the cost on the part of Pine Point Mines as its share in the building of this great undertaking of a railway in the north.

Of course, we could have built that railroad simply for the development of the north. It is a rather long railway; it is a huge railway, but we have such confidence in the north of Canada, with all its mineral richness and also, in that particular area, the tremendous reserves of timber and agricultural products, that I think the government would have been justified in building the railway. However, we are fortunate enough that there are proven reserves of lead and zinc which are ready to be developed, which development is going to be undertaken by Pine Point Mines, a subsidiary of Cominco. I think we got a very good deal from this new mine both for the government and for Canadian National Railways, and I recommend it to the committee.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, the minister has not dealt with the question which I put to him. He did give the method and the manner in which the Department of Transport will handle this money, by setting aside an estimate. But my question to the minister was this: what will the taxpayer get for the maximum amount of $86 million that is being invested by the government? I think the committee is entitled to know that.
Then, what provision is being made for servicing that capital? What provision is being made for interest during construction, because this railway will not be completed until 1966? Therefore as the railway is constructed large sums of money will have to be provided. Whether it will be $25 million at the end of the first year and $20 million at the end of the second year and so on, I do not know; but the government does not manufacture that money. The government will have to borrow it and will have to pay interest on it.
I think the committee is entitled to know, (1) what will the taxpayer get for this capital amount of money that is being invested in the line? Then (2), what provision is being made for servicing the capital; and (3), what provision is being made for the interest during construction?


Léon Balcer: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member asks, what is the taxpayer going to get for this investment? First of all, this is going to be a brand new railway which will become an integral part of the C.N.R., and as such any profit on that line will serve to reduce the deficit of the C.N.R., which is a crown-owned agency and for which the taxpayers of Canada have to put up the money to cover the deficit each year.
With regard to how the money will be paid, I think clause 5 is quite clear. It says:
The subsidy hereby authorized shall be paid to the company out of the consolidated revenue fund by the payment from time to time, at the
Canadian National Railways direction of the governor in council upon the report of the Minister of Transport as to the mileage of railway line constructed or to be constructed, of such amounts, in such manner and subject to such conditions, if any, as the governor in council deems expedient.
I think it is quite clear here that the governor in council will decide in what manner and subject to what conditions these payments will be made, how the debt will be serviced and how the interest will be met. It will be all done by order in council, as is set forth in clause 5.


Lionel Chevrier: Then from what the minister has said, am I right in assuming that all the taxpayer can expect to get back is the amount mentioned in clause 6(a), namely, a maximum of $20 million.


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to interfere-


Lionel Chevrier: I should like to have an answer if I may.


Gordon Campbell Chown: I did not hear an answer from the minister to the last question asked by the hon. member for Laurier. I saw him nod his head.


Gerald William Baldwin: The hon. member for Laurier asked a question. It was not a question seeking specific information lying exclusively within the knowledge of the Minister of Transport. It was a question which, I think, any member of this house with a little reasonable understanding of what is involved should be able to answer, and I propose to answer it.
The question was: what does the taxpayer get. It seems to me the grand old man of the Liberal party Sir Wilfrid Laurier who said "the twentieth century belongs to Canada" would turn in his grave if he heard these trifling and petulant quibblings on a question of this kind. Here is a railway which is going to open up a brand new empire and before we get through I propose to submit very briefly, perhaps later on in the proceedings, some of the statements which appear in the record of the Manning royal commission concerning the assets of the area which will be contributing to this line of railway. As a matter of fact, I think this will probably be one of the last great railways ever built on this continent.
The taxpayer is going to get (a) a line of railway built to the Pine Point mine which is at this time of sufficient importance to justify the company in spending a total of almost $40 million at Pine Point itself and at Trail, in addition to the large and substantial sums which will be contributed by the others concerned. The taxpayer will receive (b) the benefits which will naturally arise from the bringing into production of an area lying from 40 miles north of Grimshaw to Hay River with
8878	HOUSE OF
Canadian National Railways tremendous resources in agriculture, timber, fishing, natural gas and petroleum. This is not a speculative proposition. These things have been, to some extent, found, and they have been the subject already of some development. They have waited for one thing only -the construction of this railway. The province of Alberta has stated that it will not open up new townships or land in this particular area unless and until some provision for transportation is made. This was the statement made to the Manning royal commission on behalf of the Alberta government, and the same statement has been made to me by officials of that government charged with the responsibility of the settlement of this area. When this railroad is built, and as it progresses, there is no doubt that thousands of new townships will be established and land opened up for cultivation. The same applies to timber. Surely, any national development on this scale which brings into production resources of this order is bound to have the effect of reducing the capital cost of this railway.
Evidence was given before the standing committee about which the hon. gentleman spoke that both the railway company and the mining company had made certain calculations as a result of which they felt that the rates which are to be charged, and which are referred to in the schedules to the agreement, should be sufficient to repay the operating and maintenance charges of the railway. Anything else above that is bound to result in a reduction of the capital sum. If some hon. members want it put in dollars and cents, that is what the taxpayer is getting. What is of far more importance are the benefits which will derive from the opening up of this region. Moreover, when this railroad gets to the south shore of Great Slave lake it will make available at substantially reduced prices, goods, commodities and services whose cost, up to the present time, has been at a substantial level. This high cost of goods and services have had the effect of holding back to some extent the expansion of development in the mining area in the Northwest Territories. The minute this railway gets to the port of Hay River hon. members will see an acceleration in the rate of development which will, I think, be of tremendous benefit of the whole country. These are not pipe dreams. I have been up there and talked with these people.
I think that is a fair answer to the hon. member for Laurier. He asked a valid question and I have, I think, given him a reasonable answer.


Lionel Chevrier: Perhaps I might say just a word in connection with what the hon. member for Peace River has said. He has


attempted to give an answer covering what is generally done in connection with a developmental railway. We all know what the practice is in connection with such railways. However, he has not given the answer to the questions about the amortization of the capital and the servicing of the debt and the interest during construction. These are substantial matters. I simply say that there are on the record three questions to which I have not received satisfactory answers.
I go on, now to another question. It was stated in the committee that the title to this line would be with the Canadian National Railways although the government would pay for it. My question is: what is being done by the government to protect its interest of between $75 million and $86 million less the subsidy paid by the Pine Point Company, with the C.N.R. in reference to its investment? Here is a sum of between $75 million and $86 million which is to be put into the construction of this line. Have the C.N.R. and the government arrived at an agreement, first, about the capital investment and, second, about the roadbed and all the real estate, the title to which will go to the C.N.R.?


Léon Balcer: As I said earlier, the government is building the railroad from Grimshaw to Pine Point. The railway is going to become part of the C.N.R. system. It is going to be operated by the Canadian National Railways and it is going to be built by the railway company; it will become, also, the property of the C.N.R. As far as the government is concerned there will be, first of all, this $20 million capital payment by the users of this line. In addition, the taxpayers will get as a return for their contribution a reduction in the C.N.R. deficit. There will be a net contribution to the C.N.R. system, and that contribution will provide for the carrying charges on the capital investment. As I said, this line will become part of the Canadian National Railways system which is a government-owned corporation and as such it will still be the property of the Canadian public and the Canadian taxpayers.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, when the C.N.R. provides a service for the government, the government pays for that service. The estimates of the Department of Transport are replete with items for subsidies representing services which the C.N.R. provides to the government and the people of Canada. The government pays for those services by subsidies under a vote in this house. Now converse action is taking place. What provision has the government made to protect its $75 million to $86 million? From the answer which the minister has given it would appear that the

government has provided no protection but has simply said that if there is a surplus it will be used to reduce the deficit of the C.N.R.
The question that occurs to me is this. Did the officers of the C.N.R. or the Northern Alberta Railways study this project for and on behalf of the government, or did anyone else do so?


Léon Balcer: At what time?


Lionel Chevrier: Did the C.N.R. make a study of the economics of this project and then recommend it to the government?


Léon Balcer: Yes, Mr. Chairman. That is all a matter of history. All hon. members of the committee know that both railways were asked if they were interested in building such a line and both said that it was not economically attractive to them. The government had the courage to decide that it was worth building such a railway. That is why the government asked the C.N.R. to build the railway line and operate it. The government will pay for it. The government has enough confidence in the north of Canada and in the future of the nation to be sure it is a good undertaking. By developing this virgin part of our country we are rendering a great service not only to future generations but to the present one.


Lionel Chevrier: The minister has not replied to my question, so I shall restate it. Did the government make a study of the economics of the project or did the C.N.R. make one? That is what I wish to know.


Léon Balcer: Both did. I mean the government made a study before proposing this measure to the house. In addition to that we asked a royal commission to investigate which of the two routes would be the better one. The majority report indicated the western route would be superior. The government then decided to proceed. We have also asked the C.N.R. to make a land survey of the route and that survey which is very encouraging is progressing rapidly. By December next we will have the results of that survey and the C.N.R. will be able to go ahead with the construction of this important railway.


Harold Edward Winch: At both the resolution and second reading stages, hon. members of this group supported this measure in principle. It is axiomatic that we will support any proposal which is constructive, which aids in the development of Canada or which results in supplying employment to our people. Although one supports the principle of a bill there is a responsibility on hon. members of the committee to question the grounds upon which the government reaches its conclusions and I am on my feet for that purpose at
Canadian National Railways this moment. I was prompted to rise because of the intriguing statement made by the minister a moment ago when he said the C.P.R. was not interested in constructing this railroad.
The government is interested in developing the north and therefore it asked the C.N.R. if it would construct the line. The government is prepared to pay a subsidy of up to $86 million. Can the minister tell us why the C.P.R. was not interested?
As I understand it, 78 per cent of the Pine Point company is owned by Consolidated Mining and Smelting and over 50 per cent of Consolidated Mining and Smelting is owned by the C.P.R. It would therefore appear that the chief benefit will accrue to the C.P.R.


Léon Balcer: Nonsense.


Harold Edward Winch: On what basis is the government prepared to pay the subsidy? What benefits will accrue to the C.P.R?


William Moore Benidickson: It appears as though the railway will be undertaken for the benefit of C.P.R. shareholders.


Harold Edward Winch: Private enterprise is one thing, but it appears that the taxpayers of Canada are now being asked to subsidize the C.P.R. That is precisely what has happened. Will the minister explain the situation and make clear on what basis the government has decided that this is a correct way to proceed?
I invite the minister to tell us of the analyses made of the ore reserves in this area. I have examined the two volumes of the report of the royal commission on the Great Slave lake railway and have read a number of other reports. I find there is nothing conclusive. Estimates of the reserves range from a few million tons to 20,000 million tons. That is a vast difference. Has the government any factual information?
Is there any indication that it is more feasible in the development of this ore to transport the ore hundreds of miles across northern Canada to Trail than it would be to construct a development point at the site? We are investing the people's money and are entitled to ask the minister on what basis the government reached certain conclusions.
Another logical question is this. Since the subsidy is basically for Pine Point which is controlled by Consolidated Mining and Smelting located at Trail and Kimberley, is one not entitled to ask if all the reserves held by Consolidated Mining and Smelting in the British Columbia area have been used?


An hon. Member:: So that is what is eating the hon. gentleman.

Canadian National Railways


Harold Edward Winch: Are all the reserves of Consolidated Mining and Smelting at Kimberley and Trail under development? Is it true that Consolidated Mining and Smelting has within range of British Columbia a mountain of ore that has not yet been touched on which they hold leases? These are the questions we should have liked to ask in committee when an opportunity was provided to direct such questions to people connected with Consolidated Mining and Smelting, but unfortunately we did not know the committee was meeting. I do not know how it happened but we did not know anything about it until after the meeting was held. Otherwise I can assure the minister we would have been there. I do not want to hold up this measure unduly but I think the minister has a responsibility to give us information as fully as possible with respect to why they reached the decision they did and why we are not going to have full development in the north if we have 20,000 million tons of ore reserves in this one area? Is it going to be shipped because there is not lead and zinc at Trail? Why is it being done by subsidy when the company basically involved in the last analysis is the Canadian Pacific Railway? We are just asking for information. At the same time, we do not want to be misunderstood. We support any constructive recommendation for the development of the northern part of this country.


William Moore Benidickson: You mean you do not
support it.


Lionel Chevrier: Is the minister going to comment?


Mr. Browne (Vancouver-Kings way):: Mr. Chairman, I have heard the question posed a couple of times as to what the people are going to get for the $86 million that is going to be invested in this railway. The first thing that comes to my mind is that they are going to get a railway that was promised them by the Liberal party 30 years ago but which the Liberals never quite got around to building. That is the first thing that I can see they are going to get.
From some of the other remarks that have been made I can see that we have the same kind of mentality on the part of some people that there was in this country in the 1870's when the railway to open up western Canada was being proposed. At that time there were many people who did not think it was of any very great importance and wanted to know what the taxpayers were going to get for their money. I think we should consider that this railway is not a railway to open up a mine or to open up any one particular community. It is a railroad to open up the northern part of this country in line with the policy that was outlined by the government,

a policy to which it committed itself and for the carrying out of which it received a mandate from the peeople of this country.
When we look at the matter from a purely dollars and cents point of view, certainly there is nobody in the house who would even be able to estimate what the returns to the country will be when the railroad has opened up that part of the country. We can see some of the benefits that will come about. We can appreciate that there will be an increase in the gross national product as soon as the mine at Pine Point is opened. I do not think there have been many projects started in Canada on such a basis as this one, namely a guarantee that the railroad is not going to lose any money with a private company having guaranteed in writing enough business to underwrite the cost of operation and maintenance of the railroad line. I do not think that the country has ever been in the position before of undertaking such an important development with all the costs being underwritten to this extent.
In addition to the increase in the gross national product that will result, there will, of course, be taxation thereon from which the federal treasury will benefit. I know it was estimated a number of years ago by the commissioner of the Northwest Territories, who presented a brief to the royal commission on Canada's economic prospects, that the business available then would result in an increase of $3J million in direct taxes payable to the federal treasury by the one mine that at that time contemplated starting operations. Since that time it has become quite apparent that there is going to be a good deal more business. When he made his estimate for the benefit of the royal commission the commissioner pointed out that was the direct financial return from one source and that all the other things involved would also result in the federal treasury receiving increased tax payments.
Then there are the benefits to the 77,000 people who live in the Peace River area. I am sure that the development of agriculture in that area will be of great benefit to this country and cannot be measured in dollars and cents. The bill represents the carrying out of a commitment that has been made by governments to the people in that area over the years, but this is the first government that has had the courage to make a decision and proceed with the opening up of the north. That is just what the government was elected by the people of this country to do.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, there are one or two things to which I thought the hon. member who has just spoken would have

replied but he too went off on a tangent to tell us about the developmental aspect of this railway.


An hon. Member:: There have to be
tangents.


Lionel Chevrier: It seems that the only way in which the bill is going to be justified is by tangents and not by answers to the questions we have put from time to time. The hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway stated that the Liberal administration had promised this railway for 30 years but did not build it. However, the present government seems to have been unable to make up its mind whether the eastern or western route should be followed or when the line should be built notwithstanding that Canadian National Railways recommended the western route from Grimshaw as far back as 1954 and again in 1956. Those are the facts. The hon. member states that the government received a mandate from the people of Canada to build this railway. In this form? Under this agreement? I say without hesitation that the Liberal party would never have built this railway under the terms of this agreement.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Lionel Chevrier: If there was ever a onesided agreement, it was this one. If high-priced lawyers ever prepared an agreement, it was those who appeared on behalf of three of the parties to this agreement.


William Moore Benidickson: You mean outside the crown.


Lionel Chevrier: Who appeared on behalf of the government? Whom did the government have to protect the interests of the taxpayers? Whom did the government have to protect this tremendous amount of money? I asked the minister during consideration in the railway committee as well as during the proceedings in another committee why there had been an increase in the cost. In 1954 the cost as estimated by Canadian National Railways was $50 million to $55 million. In 1956, two years later, the estimate was the same. What were we told when the matter came up in the committee? The witness, Mr. Purves, presented an estimate of $75 million plus 15 per cent or a total of $86 million. He was asked how they arrived at that estimate and he said that Major Charles made the survey. Did we hear Major Charles? Why was he not called as a witness to indicate how the estimate was arrived at? We were informed that he was on the site. He was not there to tell us how the estimate was made. Neither was there anybody from the engineering department.
90205-6-560
Canadian National Railways
It was amazing to me that no one appeared from the engineering department of Canadian National Railways to tell us first of all about the economics of the line and then about the manner in which the estimate was arrived at. We were simply told that the estimate was fixed on the basis of the data that Major Charles had in July of 1961. We do not know what data or additional data Major Charles had so far as the estimate is concerned last Thursday, three months later. It seems to me that the witness should either have given this information himself or, if he was not able to do so, the person who prepared the estimate should have been present.
Then, I ask the minister, is this the way to prepare an estimate? We were told that no borings were taken to substantiate the estimate. Mr. Purves says that borings were being taken when he was up there two weeks ago, but the estimate was not based on any borings. I wonder what the Minister of Public Works would say if an estimate were made of any public works project and the house were asked to vote a sum of money, but there had been no borings made?


Léon Balcer: That is precisely why we have the survey. You can be sure, Mr. Chairman, that the survey will give us an opportunity to pay exactly the correct amount of money for every mile of railway that will be built; that is all there is to it. There is not a single man in Canada who could estimate, four months in advance, exactly how much per mile the railway is going to cost. We are giving an estimation, and the estimation was made by Major Charles who is considered to be the most experienced officer in any railway company in Canada in so far as this matter is concerned. This gentleman has given us this estimation, and it is upon this estimation that we have based the amount of money shown in the schedules to this bill.
There is no mystery about it.


Lionel Chevrier: Is the minister going to answer my question?


Léon Balcer: The hon. member for Laurier seems to want to leave the inference that we are throwing money away. The hon. member does not have to worry. There will not be one cent paid over and above the amount of money needed to carry out that undertaking, following the survey which will be completed in December.


Lionel Chevrier: I am worried-


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member has said-


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, I have the floor and I am not going to yield. I yielded to the minister because I thought the minister was going to reply to my question.

Canadian National Railways


The Acting Chairman (Mr. MacEwan):: Has
the hon. member for Peace River a point of order?


Gerald William Baldwin: No, not a point or order but I want to correct what the hon. member said.


Lionel Chevrier: If the hon. member does not have a point of order, then I am not yielding the floor.


Gerald William Baldwin: I want to correct a statement made by the hon. member.


Lionel Chevrier: If the point of order is merely the correction of a statement which I have made, then the hon. member can correct it after I have sat down.


Howard Russell MacEwan: The
hon. member for Peace River says he has a point of order, and if so I will hear him on that.


Gerald William Baldwin: The hon. member made an inaccurate statement when he said there is nothing in the transcript of evidence given before the standing committee on this point.
I should like to quote from page 250 of the minutes of evidence of the committee, as follows:


Gerald William Baldwin: I have a question supplementary to that. Is it not correct that the first opportunity the C.N.R. had to prepare anything close to an estimate was following the preliminary reconnaissance made by Major Charles in 1957? I understand Major Charles went up to make a preliminary reconnaissance of both routes in 1957?


Mr.   Purves@: I suggest both of these reconnaissances were merely preliminary reconnaissances and nothing else.


Gerald William Baldwin: I understand that, and Major
Charles, giving testimony before the Manning commission, made certain that point was understood, and in giving evidence based on 1956 and 1957 figures he emphasized this was very preliminary and the cost might be in the neighbourhood of $65 million at that time.


Mr.   Purves@: That is right.


Howard Russell MacEwan: am afraid I cannot agree that the hon. member has raised a point of order. I recognize the hon. member for Laurier.


Lionel Chevrier: I was dealing with the question of the estimate and the minister said in reply that I should not be worried. Well, I am worried and I have every right to be worried as a member of the opposition on behalf of the taxpayers of this country. I am worried because of the form and nature of the contents of the agreement. I asked the minister repeatedly how the estimate was arrived at. The minister said, how could we give an estimate when we have not even made a survey? This has been our point all along. The minister should have brought an estimate here and have had a survey ready before

going on with this measure and asking parliament to vote substantial sums of money which might even reach $100 million.


Léon Balcer: You want to put the thing off for another six months.


John Ferguson Browne: That is Liberal policy; call it off.


Lionel Chevrier: The point that is being made, sir, is this: Before coming to parliament and asking parliament for this tremendous sum of money there should have been an estimate made based on something; Major Charles should have been told to complete his survey so that parliament would have an idea of the amount of money involved in this project. According to the answer the minister has given me, it looks now as if it might not be $85 million-


Léon Balcer: It will probably be less.


Lionel Chevrier: I think parliament has a right to know just how and on what basis this estimate has been made; that is the taxpayers' interest and no one seems to have bothered about the interest of the taxpayers.
Here, we have four parties to the agreement. There is the Canadian National Railways which is interested in one thing and one thing alone. This is the policy upon which the railway has operated all along, namely to make sure it will get from the freight rates and from the movement of traffic a financial position that will not be a deficitory one. In this case, the Canadian National Railways, through its officers, has said it will have a small surplus. The minister has added that anything over and above that will go in reduction of the deficit of the Canadian National Railways.
Then, the Pine Point mine comes in, and they certainly come out of this agreement all right. They have to pay in any event to move their concentrates. They will pay $7.75 per ton annually for a period of ten years, and they will also pay a subsidy on account of the capital investment made by the government. But is there any assurance that they will pay the $20 million? Where in the agreement is there any assurance that the full amount of $20 million will be forthcoming from Pine Point?


Léon Balcer: The bill does not say that, either.


Lionel Chevrier: No, but it is a good thing for the taxpayers to know.


Léon Balcer: Everybody who reads the bill will know.


Lionel Chevrier: I do not think the bill, in any way, shape or form gives any idea of

the terms of the agreement. Well, I was going on to say that the third party involved is Consolidated Mining and Smelting. They will put up the cash, they will put Pine Point mines in funds. The Canadian Pacific Railway, together with Canadian National Railways, will divided the traffic as between Edmonton to Calgary; Calgary to Tadanac and Tadanac to the B.C. ports.


Léon Balcer: Just to keep the record
straight-


Lionel Chevrier: I am not giving the minister the floor. I gave the minister the right to reply when he interrupted me before, and then another hon. member got the floor. If the minister wants to reply to my questions, I will yield.


Léon Balcer: All right.


Lionel Chevrier: I put three questions to the minister and he has not replied to them. If the minister wants to interrupt me to answer questions, I will yield. A moment ago I yielded and he proceeded to make a speech; then, somebody else got the floor. I am being interrupted continually. I have no objection to being interrupted when a question is being answered, but thus far there have not been answers to these questions.
I asked the minister, upon what basis did the government proceed before it invested this money. I asked the minister whether Canadian National Railways had produced a report, and he said yes they had, and the government had studied it. Is that not right? Canadian National Railways produced a report and the government, I take it, acted on the report of Canadian National. The minister nods his head. Here you have Canadian National Railways, in this case an interested party, interested in getting a return out of the line, making a recommendation to the government, but where are the government's own advisers in this matter in respect to the taxpayer?


Léon Balcer: The government was right there.


Lionel Chevrier: Pardon?


Léon Balcer: The government was a party to this agreement. If my hon. friend will read the agreement he will find that the first party to this agreement is Her Majesty the Queen in the right of Canada as represented by the Minister of Transport. My officers, my economists and my lawyers were representing the government in all the dealings in connection with this agreement and they have successfully obtained all kinds of guarantees, special treatment, special rights and so on. They made this agreement one of
90205-6-560J
Canadian National Railways the best that could be entered into by the government for the building of a railway and it also protected at the same time the Canadian National Railways. They also obtained from Pine Point mine and Cominco all kinds of agreements for a quantity of concentrate to be shipped every year. It is a tremendous amount, being 215,000 tons for 10 years. I think it is quite a large undertaking. This was obtained by the lawyers of my department representing the government as a party to this agreement. My hon. friend says this is an agreement between three parties, namely Cominco, Pine Point and the C.N.R., that the three of them were interested. Very well, the three of them were interested. However, the government was interested and the government was present at each and every one of these discussions and the government dictated the form of the agreement. At all times the government was there to protect the taxpayers of Canada.


William Moore Benidickson: The government pays the loss.


Lionel Chevrier: I have a great deal of respect, as my hon. friend knows, for the officers of the Department of Transport. No one has more respect for them than I have and I am sure the minister has the same respect because he is in daily contact with them. However, the point that I am making is this. In so far as the government is concerned, it did not get the proper protection for the investments that it should have obtained under the circumstances. The point I am making is that three of the parties to the agreement over and above the government, or over and above the crown, looked after their interests. They made sure that they would be protected, the one by getting a surplus out of the operation of the line if such should be the case, the other by getting the line to bring its ore from Great Slave lake down to a market, with very little expenditure. As the hon. member for Vancouver East put it a moment ago, why did not the Canadian National Railways build this line?


Gerald William Baldwin: They are doing so.


Lionel Chevrier: I can tell you why they are not building it out of their own funds Why did not the Northern Alberta Railways build it, represented by the C.P.R. and C.N.R.? Why did not the C.P.R. build it? No one wanted to build this line because they had looked at the economics of it. If the government wanted to build the line, as it had a perfect right to do and as was promised, in my opinion it should have built it, but on terms different from these. It should have

Canadian National Railways protected its investment, something which under the circumstances it did not do.


Léon Balcer: A few minutes ago while the hon. member was speaking and when I tried to correct him for the record, he said that the C.P.R. and the C.N.R. were going to share from Grimshaw to Edmonton and from Edmonton to Calgary and then the C.P.R. would be alone from Tadanac.


Lionel Chevrier: It is the N.A.R.; I was mistaken.


Léon Balcer: It will be a joint operation from Grimshaw to Edmonton and from Edmonton to Calgary it will be only C.N.R. and the C.P.R. from Calgary to Tadanac. The C.N.R. line between those two points will not get a single ton of traffic.


Erhart Regier: Who said that?


Léon Balcer: It is in the agreement. My hon. friend says that neither the C.P.R. nor the C.N.R. wanted to go it alone on this undertaking. That is quite true. There is no secret about that matter. These railway companies are facing difficult times and they must run their railways in an economic fashion. It is hard for them to decide to build a railway of this size without government support. The government decided to go ahead for the reasons that have been expressed in such a clear fashion and with such forward looking spirit by the hon. member for Peace River a few moments ago and the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway. As to Pine Point mine, of course, it is a subsidiary of Co-minco-


William Moore Benidickson: 


Léon Balcer: -and Cominco is also a subsidiary of the C.P.R. But I can tell the committee this. As far as the advantages of the C.P.R. are concerned, they are practically nil compared with what the C.N.R. is going to get out of this line.


William Moore Benidickson: Explain.


Léon Balcer: I will explain. The C.N.R. is getting 438 miles from Pine Point to Grimshaw. It is going to get half of the Grimshaw to Edmonton traffic, all of the Edmonton to Calgary traffic and all that the C.P.R. will get is from Calgary to Tadanac.


William Moore Benidickson: What are the revenues projected per year?


Léon Balcer: If my hon. friend will go back in Hansard to what was said earlier at previous stages of this legislation he will find the answer to his question. My friend the hon. member for Laurier said that Pine Point was getting some advantages of this and that. Of course, Pine Point will have the opportunity to ship lead and zinc from its mine. However,

Pine Point is going to invest $21 million in this mine. I should say that $16 million is going to be spent at Trail by Cominco for an expansion to their smelter. The plant at Pine Point will cost Pine Point mines $21 million. This is an outlay of $37 million which will give work to a number of Canadians. At the Pine Point plant you will have 600 Canadians who are going to be employees there. In Trail there will be 300 more. Also the manufacture of equipment for these two undertakings will require 2,200 man hours. All told the construction of this undertaking means 7,700 man hours. I think it was really worth the effort the government put into the planning of this railway.
To go back to what my friend the hon. member for Laurier said on the estimates, may I say this. Of course, we should like to see the estimates as low as possible. However, we want to be realistic and in the schedule we have put the closest estimate we could have at the time. Since then we have received very encouraging preliminary reports from the survey that is being carried on by the C.N.R. for the government of Canada. These encouraging reports lead us to believe that the construction of the line might be less expensive than we had thought. On the other hand, I do not want to be overly optimistic. That is why we stick to the amount that was estimated by our engineer or rather the C.N.R. engineer, namely Major Charles. They are going to pay $7.75 a ton which means quite a surcharge on the normal rates they would normally pay for traffic on that line. They have also agreed to pay another surcharge, which will vary. It will not be over $20 million but with the present prices of lead and zinc it will mean something over $12,500,000 for the government of Canada. Therefore I think Pine Point Mines are not getting any favoured treatment. They are requesting us to put up a huge amount of money and also to take some risk. The government is taking some risk in this enterprise. I think it is a good risk. Cominco, Pine Point, C.N.R. and C.P.R. are all taking a risk, but it is a good risk.
These people are all Canadians. They are taking a chance on the future of Canada, and I think they are right. There is no special treatment for anyone in this matter. I think it is a very good project and whatever calculated risk we are taking in this matter, I am confident that the future will show the government was right in coming before this house to ask for the money to build such a development railway.


Mr. Creaghan:: Mr. Chairman, I have only a few words to say on clause 1 of this bill. First of all, after hearing the debate this

evening it seems obvious to me that two points have been made by the opposition. The first seems to be that the Liberal party is opposed to the development of the north of this country. Second, it is particularly opposed to the expansion of the C.N.R.
I am not going to say anything about the first point but I wish to say a few words about the expansion of the C.N.R. The written agreement has been studied by the officials of the railway, and the railway is apparently in complete agreement with it. The railway wants to expand and this government is giving the C.N.R. every encouragement and, if necessary, financial assistance. If a few more agreements like this had been negotiated during the 22 years of Liberal rule, probably the C.N.R. deficit today would be very small or non-existent.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, oh.


William Lawrence Marven Creaghan: We would probably have no deficit. In addition, we would have a great many more people working for this crown corporation. I do not think it makes much difference whether the C.N.R. floats a bond issue which is guaranteed by the government or whether the government does so itself. The railway is owned by the government; therefore we are going to own the roadbed and any improvements that come therefrom. New jobs will be open to all Canadians not only during the course of construction but during the maintenance and operation of the line.
It would seem to me to be very improper for a bill of this type to be introduced if the line was going to be owned by Canadian Pacific. However, as the line is going to be owned by the C.N.R., and as the C.N.R. is owned by the government, which is the taxpayers, I do not see why we cannot proceed and pass this bill.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I am very glad you recognized the hon. member for Westmorland before you recognized me, because he advanced some additional arguments which I think carry us a little further into the Alice-in-Wonderland economics which seem to characterize this bill.
Before I come to that, however, I should like the minister to deal with this point. Much of what I have to say depends upon whether I understood him correctly to say that the C.N.R. would get enough to cover the service on the investment, by which I presume he means a reasonable rate of interest on the $86 million.
The minister is asking the treasury of Canada to invest $86 million, of which we might get back $20 million. At the present prices of lead and zinc, the minister just said we would get back $12J million. But nobody is going to guarantee those present prices;
Canadian National Railways they would depend on whether the full allowance was mined, and there is no guarantee of that. The company just says it hopes to ship 215,000 tons-


Léon Balcer: There is a guarantee that there will be 215,000 tons of concentrate every year for 10 years. If there is less than that, the company is going to pay the rate on it just the same. So this guarantee is there.


John Whitney Pickersgill: If I misunderstood, I will come to that matter.


William Moore Benidickson: Is the C.N.R. investing anything?


John Whitney Pickersgill: No, it is all invested by the government.


William Moore Benidickson: It is invested by the taxpayers.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The minister has not answered the question to which I really want an answer. As I read the agreement, the C.N.R. is to get a freight rate of $7.75 a ton, which would be sufficient to cover the cost of operations, which I understand means the running charges-


Lionel Chevrier: Operation and maintenance.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -and the cost of maintenance, which I understand means the C.N.R. would keep the line up and would not allow it to depreciate. But that is all I understand by "operation and maintenance". I thought the minister said this rate was also calculated to give them enough to service the $86 million investment. I should like to know whether I am right or wrong about that before I continue.


Léon Balcer: Mr. Chairman, for the sixth time I am very pleased to say that the taxpayer gets his return through a reduction of the C.N.R. deficit. There will be a net contribution to the C.N.R. system. The net contribution to the C.N.R. system will provide for the carrying charges on the capital investment.
I want to repeat that the advantage to the taxpayer is through a reduction of the C.N.R. deficit. Whenever the C.N.R., which is a crown-owned company, has a deficit the taxpayer is called upon to pay for that deficit. Under the present agreement and the present bill, whatever surplus there is on this line will contribute to the lowering of the C.N.R. deficit and so improve the position of the Canadian taxpayers in regard to that deficit.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I must say, Mr. Chairman, that if that is all the minister meant by the service on the investment I am not a bit surprised that no railway company is willing to contemplate building this railway, because as I read this agreement the only hope of

Canadian National Railways getting anything more than a very tiny surplus over and above operation and maintenance is from some other shippers than Pine Point Mines.
If there were all the other traffic that would justify this proposition economically I do not think any railway would have hesitated to go into it. Therefore one can only assume that the best railway economists in the country have all concluded that this is not the kind of investment they would recommend to any one of the investing public. In other words, what seems to me very clear is that the taxpayers might get back, of the $86 million-there is no assurance that they will-only $20 million. In other words-


Léon Balcer: They might get more.


John Whitney Pickersgill: They might get more, but when you consider what the-


Léon Balcer: I know you have no confidence in the north of Canada, but we have.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I will tell the minister right now that I have no confidence in hot air, whether it comes from Prince Albert or Three Rivers. I have a lot more confidence in hard calculations, and I would be much more impressed if Mr. Crump told me this was a paying proposition than if the present Prime Minister told me that, and, I think most businessmen would too.


William Moore Benidickson: The C.P.R. is not in this.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The hon. member for Van-couver-Kingsway talked about the fact that there had been no development of the north until this heaven-sent government appeared in 1957. That is the most unadulterated rubbish, because when my friend the hon. member for Laurier who is sitting beside me was minister of transport he brought measures into this house to build a railway in northern Manitoba which is paying and which goes a long way north. This was a big undertaking. He brought in a bill to build a railway across a good part of northern Quebec.


Mr. Speakman:: And is that a paying proposition?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Not entirely, but the house was told exactly what it would cost. We were told it was a development railway and that there would be the expectation of certain deficits of a relatively modest character.


James Stanley Speakman: Modest? $76 million?


John Whitney Pickersgill: If anyone wants to compare the propositions let them put the arithmetic clearly down and not toss about casual figures. Moreover it was during the period when my hon. friend was minister of transport that the Quebec North Shore and Labra-

dor Railway was built. It was true that no taxpayers' money went into the construction of that railway. It was built by private enterprise as a private enterprise, but it was built because we had the kind of government which ran the affairs of this country in such a way that investors had confidence.


Mr. Ricard:: You had another government in Quebec also.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, and now under the present government of Quebec another railway is being built by private enterprise.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Started by the previous government.


William Moore Benidickson: Formerly there were low rates of interest on the capital.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The plain fact is that we have had a tremendous amount of northern development ever since the second world war in all parts of the north and this has been a very good thing. It will be a good thing if we can keep on having it-


An hon. Member:: Then let's go.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -as long as it is soundly based; as long as there is to be some return commensurate with the effort. As hon. members know, there are a great many people in this house who represent other parts of the country which are underdeveloped, and if the taxpayers in these years in which we have such huge surpluses as the Minister of Finance is reporting year after year-


William Moore Benidickson: Deficits.


John Whitney Pickersgill: -if the taxpayer has to spend another $66 million on which the government expects no direct return whatever, there will, naturally, be that much less to spend in other directions. The government does, of course, expect some indirect return but it expects to have none of that capital back and not a cent of interest on that $66 million.
The hon. member for Royal knows that this $66 million would build two thirds of the Chignecto canal. It would more than build the whole of the Gaspe railway which has been talked about since confederation, if the taxpayers of Canada were willing to pay out such a sum with no direct return. There is no doubt there would be many indirect returns from the building of the Gaspe railway, and I believe there would be both direct and indirect returns from the construction of the Chignecto canal. That $66 million would go a long way toward giving Newfoundland a standard gauge railway. It would be sufficient to pave the whole of the trans-Canada highway across Newfoundland. It

would be sufficient to build the Guysborough railway, which has been promised by a good many governments in years past, many times over.


Mr. Keays:: May I ask the hon. member a question? Since when has he become interested in the railway in the Gaspe peninsula?


John Whitney Pickersgill: All my life I have tried to interest myself in every part of Canada I knew anything about. I must say I have found that taking an interest in parts of the country in which I did not live as a boy seems to have done me no harm.


Mr. Bell (Saint John-Albert):: When was the harm done?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, I think the hon. member for Saint John-Albert can score there. I shall not even attempt to reply. It is such a rare occasion when the hon. gentleman has a chance.
I think we have to look at this thing cold-bloodedly. As I said on the resolution stage, it is only five years since in this chamber the opposition, some of whom are now sitting on the treasury benches, fought tooth and nail against a loan, not a gift, of $80 million-not $86 million but $80 million-at a very good rate of interest with the best possible security, a loan backed by the Tory government of Ontario to build a pipe line across the whole country to boost development and maintain the growth which, up until 1957, we had in this country and which has been sadly lacking ever since. What would the opposition of that day have said if it had been proposed that the treasury should give this $80 million to that company to operate a pipe line without provision for any direct return? Yet this is the proposition which is before us. As the minister has told us, on this $66 million there is to be no direct return and there is no prospect of any ultimate return sufficient to cause any investor to expect any of his capital back.


Egan Chambers: At least a Canadian company.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The C.P.R. is a Canadian company. The hon. gentleman had better look to see who holds the securities and stock of the C.P.R.


William Moore Benidickson: About 35 per cent owned in Canada.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a matter of fact, what are you going to say to any other company which has a lead and zinc mine too far away to be exploited because of transportation difficulties which comes along and says: "To develop our mine, please build us a railway and put in $66 million. We might pay back
Canadian National Railways $20 million and we shall pay a little higher than the usual freight rate for a few years. We shall not absolutely guarantee that $20 million, but if we sell enough zinc and the price is good enough that is what you wil] get."
We did not know these things on second reading. We asked the minister questions and we got equivocal answers. I did suspect some of these things, but I could hardly believe it possible that a proposition of this kind would seriously be placed before any parliament. The minister says this will probably be the last great railway to be built. I am afraid it will. That is precisely why we are asking these questions. We are doing so because it should not be the last railway to be built. I say this for two reasons. I do not think we should make a firm decision to build this railway until we have better evidence than we have been given up till now that there is going to be a tangible return. I do not say that the railway itself has got to make money and repay interest on the capital investment directly. I do not go that far. But I think that just as was the case in connection with the Chibougamau railway if there is a certain ratio between the cost and what you are getting, that is all right. But I say that when the ratio reaches the proportions it reaches in this proposition it is going to be very hard work for hon. members, no matter to what party they belong, to go into their constituencies-except, perhaps, Peace River- and defend this proposition.


Gerald William Baldwin: What about the Northwest Territories and Mackenzie river?


John Whitney Pickersgill: My hon. friend refers to Mackenzie river. I suppose that if the minister came along and said he would spend $66 million in my constituency it would be awfully tempting. Even if I could not justify it on national grounds it would be extremely tempting. I can tell the minister that if his colleague, the Minister of Fisheries, or the Minister of Public Works, would spend $1 million in my constituency, doing as much for the fishermen as this railway is apparently going to do for Consolidated Mining and Smelting, those fishermen would have a much better chance of making a living than they have at present.
This is a tremendous amount of capital for the taxpayers of Canada to be investing on the security in a single mine. That is really what the proposal is, that we put $66 million into the Pine Point mine. We receive none of the profits. We might get some carrying charges and we might have some Canadians employed who otherwise would not be employed, at least in the Pine Point mine, but I venture to say that if the minister went
8888	HOUSE OF
Canadian National Railways to the best half dozen economists or financiers in Canada and said-I will take the lowest figure; I am trying to be fair about this and completely non-partisan; we will all have to answer for this if a mistake is made-"the Minister of Finance has $66 million which he does not know exactly what to do with; he is thinking of building a railway from Grimshaw to Pine Point; is that the best way in which he could use $66 million to develop Canada and provide employment?" not one who did not have a personal interest would recommend this particular use of that sum of money.
That is the question that faces us at the present time. We are responsible to the Canadian people in the 263 constituencies in this country, not just in one or two. We are spending here money which in one way or another will have to be collected from the taxes of people all across the country. Once we embark on the railway and have it half built we cannot very well stop, although there have been governments that did that sort of thing in the past as many hon. members know full well. As I said, we will not be able to stop but will be required to complete the railway. Before we proceed we really ought to be very sure that this is the best use we can make of $86 million at a time when we are contemplating a deficit in the treasury this year of between $600 and $700 million. This money is not going to grow on trees. The Minister of Finance will have to go out and borrow this sum. As the minister has told us he is not going to receive any interest on it. He may recover some $20 million or some part of that $20 million and he may get in indirect ways an inflow into the treasury but no greater inflow than that which would be received if private investment were involved. This is a tremendous piece of socialism, to put it bluntly; that is what it is. It is also very clearly a tremendous gamble in which the mining company does not stand to lose and in which the C.N.R. has fixed up its statistical position all right, but fixed it up at the expense of the Canadian treasury. This is a gamble in which every contingent risk is taken, not by private investors which are supposed to take risks but by the treasury.
This tremendous amount of money is going to be spent in a great area. Nobody would like to see this done more than I would. Nobody would like to see any development more than I would. I do not think any hon. member feels any differently about it. However, we are trustees and this is not our money we are using. This money is to be collected from the fishermen on the Atlantic coast, from the farmers across the nation, from the workers in our cities-


Mr. Horner (Acadia):: From the way the
hon. member has been talking lately I did not know he realized that there were farmers.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, Mr. Chairman, I probably lived on a farm just as long as the hon. member did because I am about twice his age.


An hon. Member:: And have half his wisdom.


Egan Chambers: It is time the hon. gentleman got the hay out of his hair.


John Whitney Pickersgill: To my way of thinking we need a great deal more justification of an investment of this character than we have in a vision or a belief-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: The hon. member did not even have enough vision to accept the proposal for the Saskatchewan dam.


John Whitney Pickersgill: That has very little to do with the subject under discussion, but the hon. member, of course, is quite right in saying that many people shared the same concern about the Saskatchewan dam. I do not ever remember meeting anyone who did not think the Saskatchewan dam would be a wonderful thing and I think it will be, but-


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Your party did not give a dam.


John Whitney Pickersgill: An hon. member said that our party did not give a "dam". That is quite true in more senses than one. We took the view when we were in office that we were the trustees of the treasury of Canada, that it was our duty to try to look after the taxpayers' money with the same prudence we would employ in looking after our own money. No doubt part of the reason the annual expenditures of this country have increased by over $1 billion in four years is that we have successors who have not taken the same view of the taxpayers' money.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: You have to spend money in order to earn money. If the hon. member had ever been a farmer in any real sense he would realize that.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Most farmers I used to know in the days when I knew something about farms were very concerned about saving their dollars when they had any to save, which was not always the case.


William Moore Benidickson: They do not want the government to spend their dollars.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I do not wish to be diverted and I hope to come back to my point. It seems to me that everyone is agreed on this matter in principle but we also have this difficult proposition to decide, whether or not there is going to be a national return for a

minimum of $66 million and what appears to be a maximum of $86 million of the taxpayers' money on which there is to be no interest paid and in respect of which, except for the difference between $66 and $86 million, no part of it is ever to be paid back.


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few brief comments. The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate commenced his argument by saying that he was making certain assumptions. Let me say that he has argued his assumptions very ably but his assumptions were all wrong.
The hon. member, as have other hon. members, proceeded on the assumption that this is a railway solely for the purpose of opening up a mine. I propose to refute that argument in specific detail.
In 1929 the Liberal party first raised the question of this railway to Great Slave lake. The Hon. Charles Dunning, then minister of railways, said: "I shall live to see this railway completed to Great Slave lake before I die." The Liberals placed in the statute relating to the Northern Alberta Railways a clause giving permission for this railway to be built.
If the railway had been built at the time it should have been built it would have cost far less than it will now cost. The hon. member for Laurier mentioned the figure of $50 million. I venture to suggest that if the railway had been built right after the war as it should have been it would probably have cost less than $40 million. If it had been built then there might well now be half a million people in that part of the country. The Northwest Territories could have developed to a stage that would have caused a tremendous expansion in our gross national product. There lies the fault of the previous administration. I am sorry that hon. members of the opposition have shut their ears and have refused to listen to the pearls of parliamentary wisdom which the minister has cast before them. I have some regard for the Liberal party, but the speech that the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has just made will go far to cause the few remaining members of his party now crouching in fox holes in the northern part of this country to burrow even deeper.
I was in Yellowknife a short time ago. For the last few years that part of the country has been pausing in its development. It has been standing still simply because there is a stage in the opening up of an area when the cost of the necessary goods, commodities and services laid down becomes too great to justify development. This is something that the hon. member and 90205-6-561
Canadian National Railways his party might well have dealt with if they had done between 1948 and 1952 or 1953 what we are now doing.
I should like to deal very briefly with a remark made by the hon. member for Vancouver East. He cannot have been listening too well to his leader who has been criticizing the government for attempting to do bad things to the crown corporations. I was amazed to hear the hon. member advocate construction of this railway by the C.P.R. rather than the C.N.R. There is a reason for construction by the C.N.R. When Northern Alberta Railways was created in 1929 the people of the north country were bitterly opposed to it. They requested and petitioned that this 1,000-mile railway stretching into the northern regions of British Columbia and Alberta should be operated by Canadian National Railways because they knew that a period of development would be required which might well be attended to and looked after much better by the national railway company with respect to which the government might be able to exert some measure of persuasion.
In my opinion the people of the northern part of Canada are much happier that this new railway is going to be built by the C.N.R. I think this is their desire. I have been in touch with them and I know what they are thinking and saying. This decision will meet with their approval. There is a division of freight haulage between the two railway companies with which the minister dealt. For approximately two thirds of the distance over which the ore from Pine Point will be carried to its destination it will be transported on the railway lines of the national system while for the remaining one-third transportation will be over C.P.R. lines.
The hon. member for Vancouver East suggested the construction of a smelter. I spoke about that the other day. I should like to seee a smelter built at this time but in my opinion the economics of the situation do not justify that now. The situation in Trail at this time is that the economic operation of the smelter can only be carried on provided some 200,000 to 250,000 tons of lead and zinc concentrates are made available within the next two or three years. If that is not done, the operation will not continue to be economic. People will be laid off and it will be necessary for the company to go outside of Canada and purchase custom concentrates in order to maintain operations at a high economic level. That is not a major reason, of course, but it is a reason which the house must take into consideration, the maintenance of high employment so far as this operation is concerned.

Canadian National Railways
There is another point which I think hon. members of the opposition who have spoken have forgotten. I refer to the revenue that will accrue to the railway company not from this line itself, which we can call the incremental increase, but the revenue which will accrue to them on their main lines. A substantial amount of money will accrue to Canadian National Railways from the ore it will carry from Grimshaw to Calgary. Substantial revenue will also accrue to Canadian National Railways from the supplies it will transport to Pine Point. Substantial revenue will accrue to Canadian National Railways from the large amount of lumber it will haul from the area north of Grimshaw to eastern Canada.
Hon. members of the opposition have suggested there is no basis on which the government could have proceeded. The Manning royal commission sat for almost one year. There are several thousand pages in the transcript of the proceedings. They contain in great detail a full and ample account supported by the best witnesses who could be obtained and by briefs submitted by hardheaded business people from Vancouver, Edmonton, Montreal and the northern part of the country. The evidence all went to the root of the issue and indicated that in addition to the minerals which would be transported from Pine Point there would be other sources of revenue.
One of the commissioners, Mr. John Ander-son-Thomson, is a hard headed Scotsman who holds degrees as an engineer and as a surveyor. He has spent 25 to 30 years in the northern part of Canada and knows the country like the palm of his own hand. I had the privilege of appearing before the commission for almost five months and I heard the evidence submitted. The report is contained in a volume which is available to all hon. members and I am surprised that more of them have not read it. As found on page 83, Mr. Anderson-Thomson is dealing with agriculture and has this to say:
If half the potential arable land was developed together with more intensive cultivation of existing farms, tonnage to the railway would increase from 50,000 tons to 200,000 tons annually. This tonnage would include the incoming traffic. It would be reasonable to assume a subsidy on export grain to bring the rate up to 50 cents per 100 pounds giving a gross revenue to the C.P.R. and C.N.R. of $2 million per annum.
On page 86 of the report the same commissioner gives an estimate with regard to lumber. The estimate is based on statements made by the Alberta department of forestry which carries on a scientific inventory of the forest resources of this area. He indicates that if the total potential of the annual allowable cut is developed, and I do not anticipate that this will happen at once, of course,

there will be a total yearly revenue to the two railway companies of $3,600,000.
These are not the submissions of people who are biased. They are the findings of a responsible commissioner made after listening to the evidence brought before him and other members of the commission. They cannot be ignored. I know that the government has had reference to the evidence which was presented. I might say that a brief was presented to the commission by the commissioner of the Northwest Territories and a brief was also presented by Northern Alberta Railways on behalf of both the railway companies. These people knew what was involved. As a result of all these briefs and representations, here are the findings. I suggest that hon. members of the opposition take the time to read this report because in it they will find answers to all their questions.


Erhart Regier: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make only a few brief remarks on this matter. However, I was amazed to hear the hon. member for Westmorland say that the Liberals had always been opposed to the expansion of the Canadian National. All hon. members know I am not a supporter of the Liberal party. However, I have been in this house long enough to have heard on innumerable occasions when the Conservatives were in opposition and also when the Conservatives were in office, the Conservatives being the great supporters of the Canadian Pacific Railway. I feel that for any hon. member to say that the Liberals have been opposed to the expansion of the Canadian National is misrepresenting history in every sense.
Now, this particular extension of the Canadian National has the support of this group, Mr. Chairman. I do not want to cause any doubt about that; we support the bill now before us. However, we support it basically because there are tens of thousands of people living in the area that is going to be served by this extension of the railway, a number of whom have been living there for 40, 50 or 60 years. They moved into this territory on the distinct understanding that railway was going to be built to serve their needs. It is for this reason we support the bill now before us. We do not support it because of the needs of the mining industries located in the southern part of British Columbia and owned by the Canadian Pacific. We support it because of the farmers and the owners of lumbering industries in the region involved who are going to derive great benefit as a result of this extension of the railroad into northern Canada.
We are very suspicious, however, as to the reason the government has decided, at this particular time, to build this extension of the

Canadian railway system, from Grimshaw to Pine Point. We would immediately agree that a railway line ought to be built from Grimshaw to Fort Vermilion, but we fail to understand why it has to be built all the way up to Pine Point. If it is going to be a profitable undertaking, then I feel the Canadian Pacific would have decided to build this railroad. However, because the undertaking is of doubtful value, the taxpayers of Canada are being asked to build it.
I agree that the taxpayers of Canada ought to build it in so far as it is going to serve the settlers and the industries along the way. However, I do not for one moment believe that the taxpayers ought to be asked to subsidize the mining industries located down in Trail, British Columbia. There is no guarantee that this railway is going to operate at a profit. I have no particular quarrel with that aspect, if this railroad is going to meet our commitment to the settlers living in the Peace River area of Alberta. I believe it is up to the taxpayers to build a railroad to service the agricultural and lumbering interests in the area. However, if the extension up to Pine Point involves this railroad in a risk, then I feel that those who stand to benefit ought to run the risk, and that the Canadian Pacific ought to build this line.
We are going to support this bill. We are happy that the government has decided on the western route as opposed to the eastern. The construction of the eastern route might have pleased the people of Saskatchewan and of northeastern Alberta, but would have been much less satisfactory to the majority of the people who have an interest in this extension of our railways system. I say once again that in so far as this railroad extension is going to serve the interest of agriculture and lumbering we feel that in view of the promises that have been made over the past 40 or 50 years, the Canadian people owe it to these settlers to build this line. However, when it comes to building the line as far as Pine Point in order to deliver ores, we have severe reservations.
We feel that once again the government, this Conservative government, is being the willing stooge of the Canadian Pacific Railway. It is using the taxpayers' money in the hope of cashing in on the good will of the farmers and the lumbering interests. Over the years we have heard our Prime Minister, when he was in opposition, plead the cause of the Canadian Pacific until his heart really bled. We have seen the decisions rendered in relation to T.C.A. and C.P.A., and we have seen innumerable other respects in which this government has been a staunch defender of the Canadian Pacific. Once again, we have reason to suspect that it is not really the 90205-6-561i
Canadian National Railways lumbermen of northwestern Alberta, it is not really the farmers of northwestern Alberta, about whom this government is concerned, but it is the interests of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Even the Canadian Pacific seems to be in doubt about the economics of transporting ores from Great Slave lake down to Trail because that railway is unwilling to run the risk involved in constructing the line. The taxpayers of Canada, therefore, are being asked to be the goats.
Nevertheless, Mr. Chairman, in the interests of the farmers and those engaged in lumbering in northwestern Alberta, we are going to be very happy to support this bill with the reservation that we feel once more this government has bled its heart out for the welfare of the Canadian Pacific as opposed to the public interests.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: I just want to speak very briefly on this matter, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I am particularly concerned about the narrowness of the viewpoint of those hon. members of the opposition who have spoken tonight. In so far as the interests of the Canadian people in general are concerned, I should like to draw to your attention the first paragraph of Bill No. C-126 which has apparently escaped the attention of hon. members.
It states:
In order to establish transportation services to and from mining properties in the area of Great Slave lake, in the Northwest Territories, and otherwise to assist in the development of northern Canada, the governor in council may provide for the construction-
I emphasize that line, "and otherwise to assist in the development of northern Canada".
Again in the draft agreement which has been presented to the committee and in the preamble speaking about the development of the railway they say: for the purpose of providing railway service for the development of the northern region of Canada. Again, to emphasize and reiterate, as it appears that is the only way in which to get the point over to members of the opposition, I should like to refer to the minister's statement as found at page 8504 of Hansard of September 18. In summing up the advantages of this particular railway he said this:
In other words, the proposed railway would be somewhat different from most branch lines constructed in recent years which were designed to service one mine or a group of mines. Its purpose, in fact, is to open up a whole new region.
The Great Slave lake railway will therefore be for the general development of the north.
The reason I wish to draw this matter to the attention of the committee is the fact that, coming as I do from British Columbia, I can say that we also share in the Peace River

Canadian National Railways block a block that has a population of some 70,000 people. We are also very fortunate in having the Pacific Great Eastern railway which connects Vancouver with the Peace River area up to Fort St. John. I think that it is the first stage of the development of further expansion of the north by converting by present methods a vision into a reality. I feel that members of the opposition have ignored the fact that it is approximately 40 miles or 50 miles from Fort St. John to Grimshaw, or in other words, the connecting up of the Pacific Great Eastern Railway with the Great Slave lake railway.
I bring this matter to the attention of the committee for this reason. If we take the average cost, which is approximately $171,000 per mile of development, I think that at a cost of well under $1 million, this connection could be made with the Pacific Great Eastern railway which taps the lower Vancouver area or the lower Vancouver mainland, an area with a population of approximately 1 million. I think the Pacific Great Eastern itself has shown its success as I believe the completion of the P.G.E. developed the lumber business to a point where it was ten times what it had been before the P.G.E. was completed to the north.
I mention this matter because it has not been drawn to the attention of the committee. We have had briefs during the course of this year and submissions from the province of British Columbia, the British Columbia and Yukon chamber of mines, the city of Dawson Creek, the north Vancouver board of trade and the Vancouver board of trade. They have shown their tangible interest in the development of that great area. 1 think this is one of the factors that must be considered for by developing this railway to the north and eventually looking towards the future expansion of the P.G.E., we are also helping the development of British Columbia as well as Alberta. I feel that members of the committee should support this extremely important bill, taking the long range viewpoint.


Erhart Regier: Before he takes his seat I wonder whether the hon. member would allow me to ask him a question?


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Certainly.


Erhart Regier: Is he aware of the fact that the British Columbia government has refused to connect the P.G.E. to this proposed extension? It is a matter, I believe, of less than 100 miles. Yet it consistently refuses to bridge the gap as it were in order to enable the province of British Columbia to get any benefits at all out of this development.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: I thank the hon. member for the question but perhaps I should put it in proper perspective. It is true that there is opposition from the province of British Columbia to going across the border because of certain difficulties coming under the Railway Act. However, the province of British Columbia and the premier are quite anxious to have it connected up. I am looking forward to a time in the future-and I hope not too far in the future-when there can be a further connection from Grimshaw to Fort St. John, whether it is accomplished by the C.N.R. or whether under some company is brought up to the province of British Columbia and then the connection will be provided by British Columbia. From the way in which the hon. member has stated the matter I think he is angry in a sense but there is this difficulty of coming under the board of transport commissioners as far as the Pacific Great Eastern is concerned. I am sure that my good friend the premier of British Columbia would be very anxious to have a connection from Grimshaw to Fort St. John.


Mr. Matheson:: In speaking briefly to Bill No. C-126, I would point out the difficulty of some of us sitting on this side of the chamber in that we do not have confidence in the economic judgment of this government; nor do we have any reason to believe that this project, in the form in which it is presented to the committee tonight, is the result of any economic analysis or contract in any way having in mind the general interest of Canada.
In reply to interrogation the minister has answered that certain inquiries and investigations were made by governmental experts. If he made that statement, I know that would be so. On the other hand, we are mindful of the fact that when the present leader of the government was in opposition and campaigning he made precisely these pronouncements, namely that this project was economic, that all this was desirable, that this was his vision and that this would be one of the things he would do if he presided over the government of Canada. I refer to the Montreal Star of April 26, 1957:
With a declaration that "this is a time for planning for greatness in Canada's future" Mr. Diefenbaker urged that the national policy of Sir John A. Macdonald for developing the West be adapted to changing times and applied to the northland.
"The North with its vast stores of hidden wealth is ready to come into its own" he said. "The wonder and challenge of the North must become our national consciousness. All that is needed is an imaginative policy which will open its doors to Canadian initiative and enterprise.
Almost in the same terms he expressed himself in his opening campaign address

delivered in Massey Hall in Toronto on April 25, 1957, with the same slogan "The New Frontier Policy". This was a policy declared far and wide before it was analysed. It was a slogan before there was any economic or indeed geological study to substantiate or support it.
I take very strong issue with the conclusions from some of the suggested economic studies which have been later put forward by other members of this committee. I put it to you, Mr. Chairman, that in other economic prognostications the right hon. gentleman now holding the position of Prime Minister has been quite wrong; and that the Minister of Finance in the budget address of March 21, 1957, one of the rudest budget addresses in the history of our parliament gave a firm commitment for a balanced budget. We in the course of these last years know how completely imbalanced his own budgets have become.
We recognize the fact that the entire Northwest Territories, whose southerly boundary is approximately 50 miles north of Skagway, Alaska, have a population approximately the same as that of my small home town of Brockville, namely something under 20,000 people. I refer to my own small town paper the Recorder and Times which has an article headed "Relief Payments Here Hit Record High Level". I will not read the article in detail. It is to be found in the issue of September 22, 1961.
We all believe in development but we believe also in proportion. If this government is able to present a bill which presents possibilities for future development which are perhaps not entirely economic but which offer some prospects for people on the frontier well and good. Incidentally, I may say that we may not have these people for long because as the hon. lady presiding over the Department of Citizenship and Immigration knows, the present picture seems to indicate that our population is moving out of Canada. I put it to the committee that even if this were not entirely economical we might be quite interested-


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Chairman, may I ask the hon. member to what he is referring? I do not remember ever making any such statement.


An hon. Member:: He is just talking, as usual.


John Ross Matheson: Mr. Chairman, I do not think I referred to any comments made by the hon. lady. Perhaps she was reading her newspaper and did not hear the earlier part of my remarks.
Canadian National Railways


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Chairman, I think the hon. member should explain himself. I have been listening carefully to what he has said-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Fort six thousand people left this country in the last year.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: But I did not say that. The hon. member said that.


John Ross Matheson: With respect, Mr. Chairman, I think the record will bear out that I made no such assertion.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Only insinuation.


John Ross Matheson: I had no intention of making that assertion. It was simply my intention to state that the pattern of movement of people is not to Canada at the present time; it is from Canada. There has been a reversal. At this particular moment in history we come to the situation where we must examine an interesting part of the frontier, with perhaps tremendous possibilities in the future, and with 20,000 people there now. We are asked to put $86 million into this project, or perhaps it will be $125 million, because we have not had any firm estimate in support of the cost. We have no idea what the cost of this railway will be to Canada.
Also, when we examine this agreement, which we have only had an opportunity to examine within the last few hours, we find 17 pages of extremely complicated drafting, with a great deal of mathematics in it. I have been unable to discover where there is any benefit to the chief contracting party, Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada. The preamble says:
Whereas the government desires the construction of a line of railway from a point at or near Grimshaw, Alberta, on the Northern Alberta Railway's line, to Great Slave lake,-
That is almost in the language of the present Prime Minister as he started his campaign at Massey Hall in 1957. But we see nothing else in the 17 foolscap pages of this document to suggest that Her Majesty the Queen gets a penny out of this project now or in the future. All we hear about is more dream or vision, and we have serious unemployment to cope with in the populous parts of Ontario and Quebec and in the east and in the west. This sounds to me somewhat out of proportion.
Again, when we look at this agreement we find four contracting parties. As other hon, members have mentioned, we have a situation where Her Majesty gets nothing now and nothing in the future, at a time of enormous public deficit, perhaps the largest deficit we will have in Canada's history.
The contracting party, Canadian National Railway Company, will probably not lose very

Canadian National Railways much. It cannot, surely, gain anything substantial except at our cost. Pine Point Mines Limited is 78 per cent owned by Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company which is 50 per cent owned by C.P.R. which is 30 per cent owned by the Canadian people.
Who is getting this great big give-away? This is one of the things we have to be concerned about. If we look back just a few decades in history we will recall that one of the worries about the development of the west was the extent to which Conservative governments were developing this kind of project by a process of give-away. We believe in development. We think there has to be a development of the northlands. But there has to be a bit of quid pro quo in this matter. If there is not any clear benefit coming to Canadian people, I think frankly we have a duty to stand up at this time and say so.


Léon Balcer: Vote against it.


John Ross Matheson: I ask the minister whether this perhaps should not be reconsidered.


Egan Chambers: Do your thinking before you start.


John Ross Matheson: Mr. Chairman, does the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George have a question?


Egan Chambers: I just suggested the hon. member should do his thinking before he starts to speak, instead of now.


John Ross Matheson: I thank the hon. member. I think perhaps he should take this into consideration, that he is somewhat at an advantage in this situation because we on this side of the chamber received this 17-page document at approximately five o'clock tonight.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: It was available last Thursday in committee.


Léon Balcer: It was available last Thursday, and if the hon. member for Leeds had asked the hon. member for Laurier, he would have had a copy.


John Ferguson Browne: You
caught up with things very quickly this time.


John Ross Matheson: I personally wrote the Minister of Transport because I was unable to obtain a copy anywhere else. He told me that a copy would be forthcoming. But it was not forthcoming. I had to borrow a copy at approximately seven o'clock tonight, and I spent all the time available to me reading this document three or four times, and I still do not understand it.


An hon. Member:: Hire a lawyer.


John Ross Matheson: I challenge the minister to explain it to this committee. I do not believe he is capable of explaining it because I do not think there is a lawyer in this house who understands the details of this agreement and can explain it item by item. I say this with great seriousness. I know the minister is a man learned in the law but this is something that has been drafted over a period of approximately one year, or possibly more, by people who were interested in three particular corporations, Canadian National Railways, Pine Point Mines and Consolidated Mining and Smelting. I think those interests have been manifestly well represented, but I question whether the crown has been represented in this particular matter.


Léon Balcer: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I think the inference in the remarks of the hon. member is absolutely unfair. This is the second time an hon. member has risen and said the crown was not represented and this agreement has been a sort of big deal between three corporations. I resent that inference very much and I think it is absolutely unfair.
As I said earlier, all the discussions were conducted by officers of the Department of Transport, and I ask my hon. friend, if he does not understand the agreement why does he not just stop there? He should take a look at other agreements and he would see they are not as good as this one.


Lionel Chevrier: He will never see one like this.


Léon Balcer: As far as Pine Point Mines is concerned, they are of course ready to take the risk and they are going to put up $21 million. They are also going to pay a very high surcharge. Also, they are going to pay an extra capital charge, which is not usually paid in these circumstances.
I resent very much the inference that the government has allowed this agreement to be a big deal between two or three companies. It is not that at all. This is a project for the development of the northern part of Canada. It just so happened that there was a mine there and it helps us to finance this great project that will develop the northern part of Canada.


John Ross Matheson: Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank the minister, who indicates that this question has been very thoroughly studied.


An hon. Member:: Hire a lawyer.


John Ross Matheson: I suggest to the minister that it would have been extremely helpful if a document of this complexity had been

made available to this side of the chamber at a time when it could have been examined with some thoroughness.


Jay Waldo Monteith: It was.


John Ross Matheson: The minister referred to the fact-


Lionel Chevrier: It took two years to draft. Why should we not have had it before?


John Andrew W. Drysdale: Do you want two years to look at it?


Lionel Chevrier: We have not even got the committee proceedings.


John Andrew W. Drysdale: You were there.


John Ross Matheson: The minister indicated that the mine would benefit as a result of the development of this particular railway. We heard just a few days ago from the hon. member for Gloucester that a large and important mine, with a very high grade ore of both lead and zinc, had been closed in Gloucester, Northumberland county, for the past four years. We heard nothing from the minister with respect to the projected earnings. We heard nothing from him with respect to the likelihood of this ore being able to secure a guaranteed market. The fact is that we have no economic foundation for this venture at all. All we have is an agreement. The people of Canada do not benefit in any way.
I very seriously wonder what our duty to Canada is in these circumstances; whether trusting only in the slogan of the dream for the north, we should pass this bill.


Gordon Campbell Chown: Shall clause 1 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
On clause 2-Competitive bids or tenders.
James Stanley Speakman: Mr. Chairman, clause 2 says that the railway shall adopt the principle of competitive bids or tenders. I should like to suggest to the minister that these tenders be broken down into smaller tenders so that they can be given to smaller companies rather than one large company. They could not then let out subcontracts and in this way profit both from their tender and from the work of the subcontractors. I should like further to suggest that these contracts have inserted in them a definite clause to protect any subcontractors who might be employed.


Gerald William Baldwin: May I ask the minister if he would give serious consideration to the possibility of making some commencement with the work of construction before the winter is over? I wonder if he would take up this point with the C.N.R.
Canadian National Railways
Second, having in mind that this line will go through an area where there are large numbers of Indians, I wonder whether the C.N.R. could be requested to have the contractors see to it that as many Indians as possible are engaged to do all the work which can be done with regard to cutting out the line of survey and so on.


Léon Balcer: I think those are two excellent suggestions. The crown company which will be building this railway has assured me that they intend to do their utmost to start the physical work as soon as possible. They have pressed forward the work of the survey so that it will be finished much earlier than had been expected. They are anxious to see the physical work started as early as possible.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clause 3 agreed to.
On clause 4-Subsidy to Canadian National Railway Company for construction of railway.
Lionel Chevrier: The minister gave no indication of how the interest on this capital investment is to be provided. He did say, however, that in accordance with one clause in the agreement provision is made for a service charge. I think that was the expression used. The mine will be paying about $12 million which would, I take it, go toward the reduction of the sum invested. I just want to bring to the minister's attention that this $12 million will just about wipe out the interest charges during construction. Has the minister given any consideration to that?


Léon Balcer: To what? What does the hon. gentleman wish to know?


Lionel Chevrier: I want to know if any provision has been made by the government for the payment of these interest charges during construction. I have already pointed out that they are considerable. Indeed, they are going to wipe out this $12 million which will be paid by the mine on account of the investment.


Léon Balcer: I have nothing to add to what I said earlier. As far as the amount of money paid by the taxpayers is concerned, it would be represented by the decrease in the deficit to the C.N.R., and that is all. This railway is going to be financed by an estimate of the Department of Transport.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before this clause carries I should like to ask the minister if there is any provision here for the appropriation of any money, or whether there will be a vote in the estimates to provide the C.N.R. with

Canadian National Railways money for the building of the line. The expenditure is apparently limited to $86,250,000 but it seems to me that none of this authorizes the expenditure of one cent and that it will be necessary, before money can be spent, for funds to be provided under an appropriation act or in some other way. Can the minister say if that is correct?


Léon Balcer: That is correct.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clause 5 agreed to.
On clause 6-Agreement required.
Lionel Chevrier: The minister said a moment ago that the C.N.R. had been asked to build this line with its own capital but was not interested and that this applied to the C.P.R. as well. I understand, too, that the Northern Alberta Railway were also asked to build this line and that they, too, turned the idea down, I take it on economic grounds. Can the minister give us any idea of the amount of traffic in concentrates which either of those three companies said was requisite in order to make this line an economic project.


Léon Balcer: No, Mr. Chairman, I do not know that figure. At the present time a minimum of 215,000 tons is guaranteed by the mine. As to the tonnage which would have to be carried to make this project economically feasible, I cannot give the committee that information at the present time. It is a figure for the economists to work out.


Lionel Chevrier: Has consideration been given to this within the minister's department? It takes 215,000 tons of concentrates annually over a period of ten years at a freight rate of $7.75 a ton to provide for the operation and maintenance of the line. How much more would it take to pay for the amortization of the capital, let alone the servicing of the capital and the interest during construction? Has that been given any consideration by the officials of the department? Have they worked it out on a mathematical basis similar to the manner in which the freight rate was worked out? Would it not then require, to amortize everything, something in the neighbourhood of 800,000 or 900,000 tons of concentrates per year over a period of 25 years, not 10 years?


Léon Balcer: That is quite possible. I know that the economists in my department have worked out all these figures, but I have not got them with me. I do not disagree with the hon. member, but what I wish to say is that this line is not being built exclusively for one mine. The line is being built in order to bring about the development of the whole area, and the government has full confidence that in ten years from now the
[Mr. Pickersgill.l
amount of traffic coming from sources other than the mine will be enough to justify the confidence which it has placed in this undertaking.


Lionel Chevrier: After this railway is built, then, other mines may well be shipping ore, as the minister sees it. Then if any other mines ship concentrates, the Pine Point mines immediately cease to pay the $7.75 per ton rate and go back to the normal rate so that the other mines will be sharing the burden. The conclusion I reached in this connection is that the heavier the traffic which will move over the line the less the Pine Point mines will have to pay. Is that not a fact?


Léon Balcer: That is right. There is a clause in the agreement that the Pine Point railway will not be discriminated against. If another mine uses the railway, the normal rate up to $7.75, will be diminished by the same amount so that the other mines will also bear part of the surcharge. This does not mean that neither of the two mines will pay a surcharge. It means that the surcharge will be spread among other mines that will receive the same benefit as Pine Point will receive.


Lionel Chevrier: Does this means that Pine Point may not have to pay the $20 million?


Léon Balcer: That is not the same thing. The hon. member is talking about a rate of $7.75. On top of that there is a surcharge which is based on something else, and this Pine Point must pay whether or not there is another mine.


William Moore Benidickson: Regardless of any ultimate freight will Pine Point pay $20 million over a course of years on a capital expenditure which has been estimated as being in the neighbourhood of $75 to $80 million, or even greater? Will Pine Point mine, a subsidiary of Consolidated Mining and Smelting, eventually under any circumstances pay $20 million?


Léon Balcer: In the agreement and in the bill there is a provision for the mine to pay this capital contribution which could reach a maximum of $20 million.


William Moore Benidickson: But it could be less than $20 million if some other mines in the area developed traffic.


Léon Balcer: No. This special capital contribution by the mine to the government represents a definite undertaking by Pine Point which does not vary if other mines use the railway for their concentrates. It is only the surcharge between the normal charge and the $7.75 which will be spread

among Pine Point and all other mines that might develop if the railway is built.


Gerald William Baldwin: I wonder whether the minister would advise me if it is correct to say that under clause 4 of the agreement only if the total of all freight and other merchandise carried over the railway exceeds $6 million in one year would there be a lowering in the rates? My second question is this. Is it not a fact that in so far as the special transportation subsidy , is concerned the formula is shown in schedule B which may be examined by hon. members? The formula is based on the average value of the ore and concentrates for which there is a specific charge as set out in the formula in schedule B. There are a number of different contingencies which are set out in that formula.


John Whitney Pickersgill: In reply to the hon. member for Laurier the minister said he had no doubt that his officers, assuming there were no other shippers, would be able to tell us how many tons of concentrate would require to be shipped in order to cover the service and amortization of the capital and to recover the interest, but that he did not have these figures with him. Will the minister undertake to get those figures for us? It seems to me this is a very important point.
I am not saying there will not be other traffic as well. But this is one way of measuring probable traffic to see what prospects there are of the C.N.R. deriving enough out of this to make it indirectly a paying proposition. I certainly would like to see it made a paying proposition. I would support it to the hilt if anyone could show me that it would come anywhere near that.
In a qualified way the minister assented to the proposition advanced by the hon. member for Laurier that it would be 800,000 or 900,000 tons instead of the 215,000 which is over four times what they are being asked for over a period of years.
I believe we ought to have an indication other than merely the minister's expression of confidence that traffic will be available in approximately that volume. I do not necessarily refer to traffic in concentrates but to lumber and any other commodities that might be shipped. This railway will not carry passengers nor will it carry much package freight in an area where there is already a highway, as anyone who has had much experience of highways and railways knows. It is likely that this railway will carry only bulk cargo of one kind or another. I believe we ought to have a much harder estimate.
When we resume in committee tomorrow the minister should tell us what the estimate of the cost to the treasury is based upon including projected rate of interest they are working on. There must be an estimate
Canadian National Railways available from the Department of Finance which is going to have to put up the money. We should have an estimate of the cost to the treasury from whatever time construction of this railway commences until 1966-or possibly earlier-and considering the speed at which this government moves, even if the government were in office and had much to do with these things at that period, I would say later would be a better guess than earlier.
In any event a certain amount in the millions will have to be put up every year to a maximum of $86 million on which there is going to be no return at all because the railway will not be in operation. It is going to cost the Minister of Finance a lot to get that money. I think we ought to know what the estimate is of what that is going to be and what the estimate is of what it is going to be for a reasonable interest and amortization into the future, so that we will have a clear picture of the whole thing before we are asked to make final disposition of the matter. Would the minister endeavour to give us those figures tomorrow?


Léon Balcer: Mr. Chairman, may I say I think it would have been appropriate had the hon. gentleman opposite asked those questions when the bill was before the committee.


William Moore Benidickson: We did not know the
facts.


Lionel Chevrier: We could not do so when we did not have the agreement.


William Moore Benidickson: The minister did not give us the agreement.


Léon Balcer: My hon. friends had the agreement.


Lionel Chevrier: Surely the minister could not reasonably expect that we could digest an agreement of that character which took over a year to draft when we were before the committee.


Léon Balcer: Mr. Chairman, let me say to my hon. friends in the opposition that I am sorry to have caused them so much trouble as a result of this agreement. We produced the agreement as I am sure hon. members opposite wished us to and apparently it has been the source of all the troubles of the opposition. The next time we will stick strictly to the bill and it will be much simpler. We will not have all the problems we have at this time.
I probably did not clearly understand what was sought by my friend the hon. member for Laurier. I believe I said that probably the
8898	HOUSE OF
Canadian National Railways economists in my department must have considered the tonnage figures and related material. If the figures are available I will do my utmost to produce them for the committee tomorrow.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, just before we call it ten thirty might I thank the minister for undertaking to produce this information and thank him also for his discourse on the rights of parliament and the opposition, which was so like his leader's observations when he sat on this side of the house.


Jay Waldo Monteith: Nasty, nasty.


William Moore Benidickson: Factual, factual.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Lionel Chevrier: May I inquire what the business will be for tomorrow?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Four items, Mr. Speaker. The first would be the continuation of the bill we have just been dealing with, Bill No. C-126, the Pine Point railway. The second would be Bill No. C-122, the dominion-provincial tax collection agreements. The third item would be the estimates of the Department of Finance and the fourth item the estimates of the Department of Transport. There would also be the divorce bills when they have been returned to the house after consideration by the standing committee.
At 10.34 p.m. the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to special order.

Tuesday, September 26, 1961