1961-06-16

Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I simply wish to inform the house that agreement has been reached to provide an additional $50,000 worth of Canadian wheat to Burma under the Colombo plan program. This additional grant raises to $400,000 the amount of wheat which Canada has made available to Burma under the 1960-61 program.


THE BUDGET
Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave to table copies in English and in French of the annual budget white paper. For the convenience of hon. members as well as of subscribers to the reports of this house, I move that the budget white paper be published as an appendix to today's Votes and Proceedings and also as an appendix to the Hansard report of Tuesday, June 20.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. John Pallelt (Peel) moved:: That the special committee on the War Measures Act appointed Tuesday, June 13, 1961, be composed ol Miss LaMarsh and Messrs. Aiken, Baldwin, Deschatelets, Fortin, Kucherepa, Mandziuk, Martin (Essex East), Matheson, McPhillips, Paul, Pitman, Roberge, Spencer and Stewart.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Donald Methuen Fleming: the first reading of Bill No. S-28 (from the Senate) to amend the Trust Companies Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


LOAN COMPANIES ACT
Donald Methuen Fleming: the first reading of Bill No. S-29 (from the Senate) to amend the Loan Companies Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


URANIUM
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce whether he can inform the house of the reasons for the adjournment of the discussions with the United Kingdom of the uranium contract after four days, I believe.


Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Discussions were held on Monday and Wednesday on the ministerial level and on Tuesday and Thursday on the official level as to the details. At the end of that time it was decided that Sir Roger Makins would return to the United Kingdom for consultations with his government, leaving several of his officials here to continue consultations with Eldorado Mining and Refining on technical matters. As indicated in the press release yesterday, he will be returning at a mutually convenient date to continue these discussions. I might emphasize that these discussions have been adjourned only, and will be continued as soon as possible.


EUROPEAN COMMON MARKET
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. D. Morton (Davenport):: Has the
Prime Minister any comment to make on the report that Mr. Duncan Sandys will be coming here from the United Kingdom to discuss the common market situation?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, there was a reference over the radio to the effect that the Right Hon. Mr. Sandys, secretary of state for commonwealth relations, would be here next week or within the next ten days to discuss

Inquiries of the Ministry in general the problems connected with the common market being joined by the United Kingdom. That report was incorrect. He will be coming a little later, at a date to be determined. I mentioned the other day that I thought he would be here some time in July.


Lester Bowles Pearson: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is it a fact, as I think the Prime Minister indicated in his reply, that when this visit takes place there will be discussion concerning the problems arising out of the United Kingdom joining the European common market?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, there will be general discussion in regard to that matter and the inferences, the results, the implications and the like. Also, of course, there will be a canvassing of the attitude to be taken by the government of Canada toward the necessity of preserving and maintaining our rights under existing trade agreements within the commonwealth, and of our position that there should be no unfair interference with or diminution of Canada's existing trading rights.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the
Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the government to take advantage of this opportunity to discuss with the representatives of the United Kingdom the possibility of Canadian association with these European economic developments?


John George Diefenbaker: In that connection, Mr. Sandys would not be particularly interested, nor would the British government.


INQUIRY AS TO SEIZURE OP EXPORTS BY CANADIAN CUSTOMS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Richelieu-Vercheres asked me whether I was yet in a position to make a report concerning the seizure of an export shipment for Cuba. Upon inquiry I learned that the matter is still under investigation and I am, therefore, unable to make a report at this time. I assure the hon. member, however, that I shall make a report as soon as one is available.


STRAWBERRIES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Fraser Valley asked me a question concerning the importation of strawberries into British Columbia. I now wish to 

advise that this specific report referred to by the hon. member has been investigated. As the hon. member knows, the British Columbia processors ordinarily import strawberries to supplement local supplies. Imports are currently being received at the prevailing price in the United States. It is reported to me that the delivered cost of these berries to the processors during the first half of June is somewhat higher than the price being paid for local berries.
I wish to inform the hon. member that if any British Columbia strawberry producers feel that the value of imported berries is unduly depressed, they should request the horticultural council to make application to the Department of National Revenue for assistance under the provisions of section 40A (7B) of the Customs Act which the government makes available to protect growers against low seasonal values for imported products.



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul Hellyer (Trinify):: I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister say whether it is his intention to make the Bladen commission report public at any time?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the answer is in the affirmative.



DEFENCE PRODUCTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Raymond O'Hurley (Minister of Defence Production):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Nipissing asked the Prime Minister whether he would look into tender No. 43-1-1977-D which closed on June 5, 1961, and give the particulars to the house.
This was a tender relating to plumbing pipe and pipe fittings, and was issued by the Ottawa district office of the Department of Defence Production. The low tender was submitted by Emco Limited at a price of $573.09. The products offered by Emco Limited were partially of Canadian manufacture and partially imported from the United Kingdom. The next lowest tender was submitted by Crane Limited which quoted $578.14 and offered products entirely manufactured in Canada.
The policy relating to procurement of defence supplies is as follows. With respect

to head office contracts, that is all contracts involving major production or procurement programs, every effort is made to ensure maximum Canadian content. For many of our most important contracts only Canadian manufacturers are invited to bid. In many other areas, preferences are given to Canadian contractors.
With respect to district office contracts, which normally relate to off the shelf items and where tenders are restricted to local manufacturers, jobbers, wholesalers, distributors and agents, the low bidder meeting the specifications is invariably selected. The district offices of the Department of Defence Production placed 130,000 contracts in the fiscal year 1960-61. It is obvious, therefore, that with respect to this very large number of contracts the only practical purchasing rule is to award the contract to the low bidder.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Bonavisla-Twillin-gale):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister of Agriculture whether the government has yet been able to make up its mind about the compensation that he promised nearly two months ago to the potato growers in Prince Edward Island?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, when the government does make up its mind it will be announced in due course.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I could ask the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys whether the government has yet made up its mind about any one project on which to spend the $1,500,000 that he announced as long ago as May 30 would be used for employment in Cape Breton.


Hon. Paul Comlois (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: Yes, Mr. Speaker. An announcement will be made by the Prime Minister very soon.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur):: I should like to ask the Prime Minister or the house
Supply-Public Works
leader if they could indicate whether it is the intention at this session to go ahead with the measure to consider means of encouraging the youth of Canada in amateur athletics, as set out in the speech from the throne.


John George Diefenbaker: The answer is yes, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member for Skeena is here, I shall be glad to deal with the question of privilege he raised the other day.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Call in the member.


Mr. Marlin (Timmins):: He is not in the
house, Mr. Speaker.

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



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

[Stage Direction]
329. General administration including a grant of $2,000 to the Canadian good roads association, $10,667,720.
The Chairman:: This item will be found at page 67 of the blue book and the details at page 452.


Mr. Peters:: Mr. Chairman, last evening I had been mentioning some problems on the estimates of the Department of Public Works. I should like to congratulate the government in this connection, but I think I should not really congratulate them because in my opinion they got into this situation by accident rather than by design. I refer to the field of housing in which the government now finds itself.
If it had not been for the money that was put into housing by the federal government several years ago there just would have been no home building at all in Canada. It was an indication that something was wrong with the source of the money upon which we were depending for the expansion of our housing industry in Canada when the government- and certainly this is true of the Conservative government-had to go into the field of lending of money for housing.
I do not think this has been a bad move; I think it has been a very good one. Indications are now apparent that other interests would like to put money into housing and that there will be an expansion of credit, and mortgage money particularly, available for housing. This has been a good thing. If this government have done anything to solve the unemployment problem across this country, probably their greatest effort has been in the field of housing. The fact that the federal government did put money into housing when money was not available from other

Supply-Public Works
sources and when no building was taking place in other fields has meant a great deal of employment in the housing industry itself and, second, in the service trades that depend upon the housing industry.
This brings us, of course, to another problem that has now developed. The minister has indicated that he is going to unload a large number of mortgages now being held by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. It is my opinion that this in itself may not be a bad thing either. However, I think we are going to have to look very carefully at this matter, and for this reason we have been watching very closely one of the bills on the order paper being sponsored by a private member. This bill is in connection with secondary mortgages and the handling of mortgages by means other than those by which they have been handled in the past. We have been interested in this, and I have satisfied myself that this government is not invading the field that the minister has indicated he is going to leave open for industry and the financial interests to take part in.
I only want to make this suggestion. The federal government has not done a bad job in housing. It has not hurt the government; it has not hurt the Conservative party, and I think it has been good for the country. Therefore I think it behooves us to give consideration to going into this matter more deeply, rather than getting out of it entirely. For this reason I hope when the minister brings in the resolution that will indicate a bill is in the offing for the establishment of a secondary mortgage field, he will give consideration to a crown corporation handling secondary mortgages. I believe it is highly essential for the development of Canada that we take the profit motive out of the mortgage field and the interest that is available when going into such an important field as national housing. The lower the rate of interest on that money, the more money is available and the easier it is to obtain. In this way we would have the largest amount of money available for housing, whether it be through secondary mortgages or the original Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation loans. Both tend to increase housing development in Canada, and this is a vital necessity even now.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the minister for the work his department has done recently in the construction of some of the very lovely small federal buildings. I was very pleased to have the opportunity of attending the opening of a post office, in the company of the hon. member for Cape Breton South, in my riding two weeks ago, and

should like to state that it is a very lovely building. It is very modern and designed to serve the needs of that community for some time in the future. I feel there was a good deal of foresight in the planning of this building, in that it has been designed in such a way as to allow for a good deal of expansion without, at the same time, creating a future white elephant. If expansion does not take place as quickly as has been anticipated I feel that building can still be used in an efficient way.
The construction of this building also created extra employment in that area during the wintertime, which has been a tremendous advantage to the people of that community. I am very pleased that this government, through the Department of Public Works, has seen fit to provide this type of opportunity to various communities, because this has been of tremendous help in providing employment for a number of people in this country.
I suggest there are many other fields of endeavour in which this department should take part. There are many problems in my own area of which I am aware and which I should like to bring to the attention of the department when considering the relevant votes. However, at this time I should like to comment in a general way in respect to the government's building activities in the Ottawa area.
While it is fine for an hon. member to say in this house that there are $17 million worth of government buildings in his riding-and I refer to the constituency of Russell-I do not feel it is necessarily a good thing. The centennial of Canada's confederation is not far away. I feel that this country has now reached that stage where Canadians can be proud of it, and that now is the time for us to review and correct the haphazard building program that has been followed in the city of Ottawa.
At the outset I should like to say that I do not believe the central experimental farm should be developed as a land assembly scheme upon which government buildings should be built in haphazard fashion. I realize that certain ministers of the crown would like to see many types of government buildings built on that farm, but I believe the experimental farm has served and is serving a useful purpose, and should not be cluttered up with departmental buildings of all types. I suggest the government should use some foresight in its planning and location of government buildings, so that over the period of the next 50 or 100 years this city will be developed in a manner and style in which we as Canadians can take pride.
The city of Ottawa itself is the national capital of Canada and should not be developed

as an industrial city but as a national capital. I realize that the federal government must compensate this city for the industrial losses which will accompany the development of the city as a national capital, but I suggest the federal government must have some authority as well as interest in this type of development program of development which is being followed at this time has resulted in the location Wellington street in order that at least the administrative headquarters of each department of government may be located there. The program of development which is being followed at this time has resulted in the location of many administrative buildings in the outlying areas of the city.
I feel this is a mistake on the part of the government. For instance, an individual coming to Ottawa with the intention of perhaps discussing a contract with the officials of the Department of Public Works will have difficulty in locating the officials of that department. I suggest he will probably have to take a taxi on a tour through Tunney's pasture and various other government building locations before finally arriving at the new public works building in the area of Hog's Back. I know I have difficulty locating these officials even by telephone from my own office, and therefore suspect that a subcontractor from an area such as Timiskaming, perhaps the city of Kirkland Lake, being a stranger in Ottawa would have great difficulty in locating the officials of the department in which he is interested.
In making this suggestion I realize, of course, that many of the operations of different departments cannot properly be located close to parliament hill. I do not suggest that the technical services provided by the department of research, for example, should be located in downtown Ottawa, but at least the administration offices of that department could be located there.
If the government did expropriate all the property along Wellington street it could accomplish two things. It could rid that district of the slum areas which exist there, and could centralize the administration buildings of all departments of government. An individual visiting this city could then easily locate the officials of this government without the necessity of taking a taxi on a grand tour of the city. I believe an individual wishing to consult a deputy minister should not be expected to travel to the outskirts of the city in order to do so. After all, Canada is no longer a small country, and should have a national capital designed after the examples set by other nations of the world. I suggest the location of government buildings in Washington provides a good example for us to follow. That city has been designed and developed as
Supply-Public Works
the national capital of the United States. Here in Ottawa there exist all kinds of slums, industries, government departmental buildings, in all areas.
I suggest that the officials responsible for the development of Ottawa as a national capital should consult with the officials of the city of Ottawa in order to work out an efficient and effective plan for the development of the national capital. I seriously suggest to the minister for his consideration a program of expropriating the property along Wellington street so the administrative offices of this government could be centrally located. I also repeat my suggestion that the experimental farm be maintained as an experimental farm. I suggest the operation of that farm has been of great benefit to many people of this country over the years, through the development of better seeds and so on, and has provided solutions to various other agricultural problems which have existed. I suggest that a great deal of beneficial research and development has been carried out as a result of the operation of this farm. I strongly suggest this should not be a land assembly plan. I dislike very much going out to the experimental farm and finding that the federal government has erected a new building there because it had not bothered to expropriate additional land.
I should like to raise another problem with the minister. The minister may say it does not come under his jurisdiction. It is somewhat like the argument we had last night on the roads to resources program. I am speaking of the port of Moosonee. On page 11 of the report of the Department of Public Works we find the following statement:
As in previous years, members of the branch made several on-site surveys of various harbours. The interdepartmental group, consisting of senior officials of the Departments of Public Works, and Transport, continued to investigate major harbour requirements.
The people of northern Ontario are greatly interested in the survey now being carried out jointly by the federal and provincial governments having to do with the development of a northern salt water seaport, the only salt water seaport the province of Ontario can have. I refer to the port of Moosonee. The potential of that area is exceedingly great. Some of the largest iron ore deposits in the world are there. The potential of other minerals in the Moosonee area is great. We are very interested in seeing a comprehensive and legitimate survey conducted there.
In northern Ontario we have a railway owned by the provincial government. It was originally called the northern Ontario development railroad, and was built to open up the resources of northern Ontario. For many years

Supply-Public Works
Colonel Reynolds, the chairman of this railroad-he is now getting to be a very old man -pushed the idea of a salt water port at Moosonee for the development of northern Ontario.
This is not a pipe dream; it is a feasible thing. I believe that on many occasions the chairman of the railway used it for political purposes. I am quite sure that most of the politicians in northern Ontario have used it for political purposes. I have. I make one exception; the hon. member for Cochrane has never used it for political purposes, and it is in his riding. But I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. member for Cochrane is very interested in the port of Moosonee. He has been going there for many years, and is well aware of the potential of the area.
A survey has been made. Press reports indicate that the minister has given assurance that the report will be made very shortly. Last night I looked up references in Hansard. The last one, which was a month old, indicated that the minister would be willing to bring in a report on the survey within a month. I presume the report of the survey is now available and that the minister's department has participated in it.
I think these things should be done by the federal government. I am not too pleased about anything the provincial government does in this field. In the field of harbours, lakes, navigable waters, and so on, the provincial government has shown a very narrow minded and provincial attitude toward those developments. It has decided that any waters throughout the province should be used for provincial parks and that those provincial parks should cost a great deal of money if you wish to visit them. Three years ago it cost you $1 to go to a provincial park in Ontario. Now it costs you $3 to go to a provincial park for the season. It costs $1 to stay in a provincial park.
Most of our navigable waters in northern areas that originally came under the jurisdiction of the federal government are now administered by the department of lands and forests of the provincial government. I strongly suggest that the minister keep his hand in this particular field, because it is my opinion that we get better utilization of some of our natural resource development if it is handled by the federal government than we do from the provincial government, particularly in those fields in which both governments are interested.
I should like the minister to give a full report on what is going to happen at Moosonee. We know it is an extensive development proposition. It is a proposition that would have a high labour content and would do a great deal for the development of that area.

It also has a national defence aspect because if an enemy force was going to land it would find it most advantageous to come in through Hudson strait, Hudson bay and down through James bay, and it would then be fewer than 600 miles from the main industrial city of Canada, namely Toronto. If for no other reason, we should develop this port for defence purposes.
However, in my opinion defence is only an excuse. It is something I would use with the minister as an argument because the government seems to give consideration to this type of argument. If we developed our resources in that area we would increase our secondary development, because we would be serving the communities and the industries which would develop from the use of the natural resources. This would carry far more weight with the people of northern Ontario and I think the people of Canada in general than anything else.
This proposed development has been a political football. It has been kicked around for a long time. I have been there; I have looked at the terrain. I am no engineer. I do not know whether it is feasible or not, but I do know this. If the port is feasible it would do a great deal for the people of northern Ontario. It would mean new life for Kirkland Lake and for all the towns along the Ontario Northland Railway. It would add new life to the agricultural development which is taking place in the little clay belt. It would mean a tremendous development program in probably the largest undeveloped agricultural area in Canada today, the great clay belt which covers nearly all of Cochrane north. In my opinion all these things would take place if a port is feasible and could be developed at Moosonee.
The survey which is being done under the direction of the minister's department is of such importance that it will give guidance toward the development of the resources of northern Ontario for many years to come. If it is at all possible to develop a seaport in northern Ontario, then it should be developed and the minister should give not only his assistance and his guidance but his whole-hearted support. I see the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources in his seat, I do not know whether an opportunity has been afforded to him so early in his term of office to visit the area of northern Ontario of which I am speaking, but if he does visit it I am sure he will be impressed with the resources that are available in that area. This was part of his predecessor's vision. It is a part of the vision that is possible of realization. It is part of the vision that is feasible. It is quite within

the realm of development in the next few years as the kind of community that his predecessor spoke of, namely development much farther north.
What will be done hinges on the reply of the minister. I hope he will find his way clear to give consideration to this development at this time. The people of northern Ontario are frightened at the situation which is developing. They see their basic industry, gold and silver mining, reaching the stage where most mining companies are nearing the end of the properties they are now working. They have not been able to obtain any assurance from the government that there will be an increase in the price of their product, so this development is a vital nec-cessity. If they are to plan for a constructive future they are going to have to take into consideration the availability of a market not only south from their communities but north as well.


Mr. Macquarrie:: Mr. Chairman, there is much I should like to say about the minister's estimates in this committee, but given to brevity as I am I shall have to put in capsule form some of my thoughts about what the minister has done in the area which I have the honour to represent. We are very pleased with the continuing major programs in the Wood islands area, which has become a very important point in our transportation link with the province of Nova Scotia. If, as we hope, a new boat is placed in that run there is no reason why there should not be night service, and the Department of Public Works would be called upon to do even more in the way of providing facilities.
The hon. member for Timiskaming spoke about housing. We in Prince Edward Island are just beginning to take advantage of some of the federal opportunities in the housing field, and we look forward to most helpful developments along this line.
A project very close to our hearts at the present time is the construction of a new railway wharf, as we call it, at Charlottetown. The present one is being overtaxed by the increase in shipping which has come about in recent years in Prince Edward Island. At the present time our trade, especially with the northern ports along the St. Lawrence, is expanding greatly.
In Prince Edward Island we are looking forward to a great celebration in 1964. Many people, we hope, will be coming to Charlottetown by boat, and I hope the minister's new wharf will be completed at that time.
I listened with interest the other night as the hon. member for Halifax spoke about an event that took place there nearly 100 years ago. I might say, of course, that the event
Supply-Public Works
he spoke of was a mere postscript to the Charlottetown conference of 1864 which planned the confederation of this great country. The Minister of Public Works is involved now, however, in that question which down through the years has been the most important political and economic question to the people of Prince Edward Island. I refer to a transportation link between our province and the mainland, between Borden and Cape Tormentine.
It was this very question of transportation which assumed major importance in the confederation negotiations of 1873, and the province of Prince Edward Island exacted from the dominion government a guarantee of continuous and efficient communication. There has been much discussion about this in the years that have passed. In 1903, for instance, for 40 days and 40 nights nobody travelled to Prince Edward Island. No mail came or left, and when the Prince Edward Island members eventually got to Ottawa they had something to say about this situation. In 1907, from three o'clock in the afternoon of one day until one o'clock the following morning, the subject of Prince Edward Island transportation was before this chamber.
The Minister of Public Works need have no fear that we shall discuss it that long on this occasion, but he has become involved in this historically significant, politically potent and economically vital factor because of the survey for the causeway. I suppose he would hardly expect me to be on my feet for any length of time without mentioning the causeway. I should like to take this opportunity now to say what I have said to him privately, how much the people of Prince Edward Island appreciate the visit by his very able and competent deputy minister, General Young, who came to Charlottetown about a year ago, spoke to a group of citizens there and gave a most excellent and lucid report on the causeway survey up to that time.
We are very anxious that this matter be pressed forward with all the speed possible having in mind the tremendous technological and scientific considerations which must be involved in a project of such magnitude and such originality. We realize that it is a tremendous undertaking. At one time we were hearing stories about remedial measures that must be taken with respect to various parts of the shore line on the south shore of Prince Edward Island. Indeed, at one time I heard that one area which would be destined for inundation was the area around the very beautiful community of Victoria which happens to be my home town and birthplace. In this instance I had no desire to become a postdiluvian survivor. However, we learn from

Supply-Public Works
the reports so far made that this matter has been dealt with and the problem has been taken in stride.
I was tremendously impressed a while ago when I went to the national research council and saw the model study. I knew this was an engineering project of great magnitude but to see it visibly before me, to have it explained by some of the finest engineers not only in Canada but in other parts of the world as well, was a most valuable educative opportunity. We in Prince Edward Island may sometimes be regarded as impatient about the causeway survey. We are quite aware that great sums have been expended and much research has been done. If, however, the Minister of Transport will provide us with another new car ferry to replace the Prince Edward Island, this will contribute to an abatement of our impatience but not to the lessening of our interest or our desire for this up-to-date communication link.
When the time comes I think it will be easy to prove the economic feasibility of the causeway. As one looks at the tremendously rising cost of ferries he will see that the demand for service will require more and more boats, and the more boats that are put in service the higher the cost will rise. With the development of a land link between our province and the mainland, one could predict that with the increasing traffic the unit costs would go down.
That there is an extensive increase in traffic I need hardly point out. As late as 1943 we had coming to Prince Edward Island in one year 9,539 automobiles. In 1960 this had risen to 171,540. There is every indication that the season ahead of us will be our finest tourist season yet. As more and more people learn the glories of our province we can predict that on an ever ascending scale we shall have people wanting to get to Prince Edward Island and sad to have to leave it. Therefore we will require the most up-to-date transportation link possible.
I believe that the most up-to-date link will be a causeway. We realize the magnitude of the project. While at times we may be impatient, our impatience will be abated, as I say, if we have a new boat. I know that the minister and the officials who are working with him will want to make no mistake. We got quite a shaking in Prince Edward Island last winter. It was the worst winter we have undergone since 1903 or 1905. There is some uncertainty as to which was the worst. There is still some ice not too far removed from the gulf area. The heavy formation of ice which remained there month after month would certainly have to be one of the factors, and an obvious factor, in the

consideration of building this tremendous and imaginative link of our province with the mainland.
I am convinced of the seriousness of the study being undertaken. I am convinced of its magnitude, although as a layman I would not pretend that I understand all the ramifications. I know the minister will persevere in this effort, and that every possible avenue will be explored in examining the economic and engineering feasibility of this project. I do not suppose we could have it ready for 1964 for our celebration, so we might be content to wait for the other confederation celebration in 1967.
There is much more I might say about the initiative the minister has demonstrated in his department which has meant so much to the people in my province, but I am content to rest my case on the causeway at this moment. I know the minister has heard a great deal about the causeway from hon. members from Prince Edward Island, and no doubt the hon. lady from that province who recently joined us will present her views to the minister shortly.


Mr. McMillan:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to bring up a matter that is of great interest to the hon. member for Niagara Falls and to myself, having to do with the deepening of that part of the Welland river between Port Robinson and Chippawa on the Niagara river. In years gone by this part of the Welland river formed part of the Welland canal and therefore was navigable. Today it is filled up, and I doubt that even small barges could navigate this part of the river.
I have received many representations recommending this. Recently I received representations in this respect from the township of Crowland, copies of which I have sent to the minister. In years past when Niagara Falls was part of my riding I received representations from the chamber of commerce of that city and from different plants in the area. I might say that the Welland river crosses under the Welland ship canal at Welland through an aqueduct. For some miles the Welland river and the Welland canal run closely parallel.
Some years ago representatives of the Niagara Falls chamber of commerce came to Ottawa and proposed the construction of a dock at Port Robinson which would serve both the Welland river and the Welland canal. In other words, these two streams are sufficiently close that the same dock could serve both of them. If one were constructed goods could be unloaded from boats in the Welland canal to ships on the Welland river and vice versa.
As I have indicated, this part of the Welland river was at one time part of the Welland

canal. When the canal was first built it ran from Port Dalhousie to Port Robinson. There was a lockage into the Welland river. In later years, of course, a cut was dredged from Port Robinson to Port Colborne and the Welland river was deserted as far as navigation was concerned. There are a number of plants situated along this river at the present time. I have been told that these would make use of waterborne traffic. This area is an excellent location for the settlement of industry.
In making representations to the government concerning the dock the chamber of commerce presented an outline of an ideal situation, namely to have a lockage between the Welland canal and the Welland river at Port Robinson. At the time the representations were made we were told that the government did not have any money. I suppose it is accurate to say that the government has less money today that it had then. It is therefore perhaps futile to press for this lockage project at this time. I would, however, urge the minister to look into the situation with a view to bringing about conditions under which we might have navigation in this part of the Welland river.
(Translation):


Mr. Bourbonnais:: Mr. Chairman, in the few
minutes at my disposal, I should like to deal with the trans-Canada highway which runs through my constituency.
Last January, I stated publicly that the building of the trans-Canada highway by way of He aux Tourtes would cost from $9 to $15 million more than the route proposed previously through lie Perrot and Dorion.
At that time, neither plans nor specifications had yet been drawn up to enable the provincial minister of highways, the Hon. Bernard Pinard, to submit specific estimates for the new route going through lie aux Tourtes. Therefore, in order to have this change in route approved by the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Walker), in Ottawa, Mr. Pinard sent him a telegram which reads as follows:
(Text):
Following the Information given to your Mr. Williams, assistant deputy minister, and to your Mr. G. T. Clarke, concerning the route of the trans-Canada highway at the western end of Montreal island could you wire me immediately your authorization to announce officially the new route which is to go through lie aux Tourtes instead of lie Perrot. This will help me very much in the preparation of my estimates for the next fiscal year. The change recommended in the route may save your government several hundred thousands of dollars.
(Translation):
So the reason put forward by Hon. Mr. Pinard to have the route changed, was to enable the federal government to make substantial savings.
Supply-Public Works
A minister of the Quebec provincial government who defends the interests of the federal government! That is unique.
Last January 17, before the change in the route was made public, I telephoned the Hon. Rene Levesque, the Minister of Public Works for the province of Quebec who is responsible for the construction of bridges.
I told him that if he wanted to build a bridge between the island of Montreal and the Vaudreuil-Soulanges riding by going through lie aux Tourtes, he would have to secure beforehand the authorization from the federal departments of public works and transport.
I added that such an authorization could be obtained-


Mr. Walker:: Would you be so kind as to speak louder?
(Text):
I have asked the hon. member to move over. We are experiencing difficulty in hearing him.
(Translation):


Marcel Bourbonnais: When I phoned the Hon. Rene Levesque at Quebec on January 17 last, I told him that, if it was his intention to have a bridge built over the Ottawa river between the island of Montreal and He aux Tourtes, he would have to get permission or authorization from the Department of Public Works and the Department of Transport, in Ottawa, for the simple reason that the Ottawa river is a navigable river.
At that moment, the provincial government thought that, if the bridge was built there, a causeway could be erected at the eastern end and another one from lie aux Tourtes, which would have considerably reduced the length of the bridge.
I pointed out then to Mr. Levesque that such a project would bring dangers of flood from the Prairies river as well as from the Mille lies river. Moreover it would have an influence on the water level in Montreal harbour, while diverting the water from the Ottawa river.
Well, Mr. Chairman, that is what I told the Hon. Rene Levesque on January 17 last for the sole purpose of giving him a good piece of advice so that he would not look foolish in making the statements he intended to make.
He replied that I did not know what I was talking about, that I was no engineer and that it was his business.
A few days later, it was announced that the route would go through lies aux Tourtes

Supply-Public Works
instread of lies Perrot. On the first of February last, I made a public statement which appeared a few days afterward in La Presse.
In that letter, I gave some particulars on the additional work which the new route would involve and it is only following that article that borings were undertaken by the minister of public works of the province of Quebec, on the Ottawa river.
It is since then also that work on the trans-Canada highway has been stopped, that is to say plans have not been drawn up, specifications are not ready, and I think that the minister will admit that work on the trans-Canada highway in the Vaudreuil-Soulanges district will not start this year, precisely because the route was changed, that the lie aux Vaches route, which had been recognized on November 28 last when the federal and1 the provincial governments signed an agreement with regard to the trans-Canada highway was abandoned. Moreover when that route was changed, the data or recommendations of certain engineers in the province of Quebec were found not to be in accordance with the facts.
With regard to the lie aux Tourtes route, it was discovered that the bottom on which piles could be erected is at 40, 60 and even 80 feet below the water-level, whereas for the lie aux Vaches route, the solid ground which could carry the piles, is found at about eight to 10 feet below the water-level.
Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to hold up the house any longer with this matter, but as the federal government has agreed with the province to settle the issue of the trans-Canada highway, and as an amount of $22 million is now available to the province of Quebec for the building of that highway, and as the worst traffic problem in the province of Quebec, outside Montreal, is precisely found between lie Perrot and Dorion, I think it is imperative that the federal government and the government of the province of Quebec get the work started on the trans-Canada highway in the area I represent.
Recently, the provincial government offered to take over the Soulanges canal. It promised certain developments for sportsmen and fishermen in the area. But so long as the problem of the trans-Canada highway has not been solved in the constituency of Vaudreuil-Soulanges, I think it would be unwise and indeed would show a lack of foresight to carry out developments for the benefit of sportsmen while the major traffic problem remains unsolved, because development will be impossible in my constituency until it is solved.

I therefore urge the Minister of Transport or the Minister of Public Works to do their utmost to persuade the provincial government or the provincial minister of highways to get the work started as soon as possible on the trans-Canada highway and on the bridges, whether it be at lie aux Tourtes or lie aux Vaches.
(Text):


Miss LaMarsh:: I am rising in order, first, to add some remarks to those of the hon. member for Welland with respect to a proposal which for some years has been placed before the department, as to the deepening of the Welland river and ultimately locking it into the Welland canal system in order to provide a navigable waterway into the heartland of the area which I have the honour to represent.
Along the Welland river, which at present is a broad and pleasant stream but of no assistance to industry in the area, there are several major industries. One has been located within the past year within the riding of Welland; I refer to the Ford of Canada glass plant. In addition, there is a very large plant which was built by this government during the war years and was later acquired by North American Cyanamid, Limited. There are two other major industries, and all these industries have a substantial transportation problem.
While the Niagara area is perhaps the shining diamond in the golden horseshoe, as southern Ontario has been referred to, not only because of its natural wonders but also because of its industrial development, it is hampered considerably in its industrial development by the lack of transportation facilities. It has not benefited from the development of the seaway, and under the present situation it cannot benefit from it. However, if there were to be constructed a locking device to lock in the Welland river and the Welland canal, this would open cheap water transportation to major industries located along the canal by permitting them to get into the St. Lawrence seaway system.
It is my understanding that over the years representations have been made to the minister and his predecessor by municipalities both in the riding of Niagara Falls and the riding of Welland, and also that representations have been made by chambers of commerce and interested individuals. So far as I am aware, no study has ever been made on the governmental level as to the cost of such a development. But since I know that

the minister responsible for this department is particularly interested in the development of southern Ontario, and since I know that he is a part of a government who have confessed that their greatest interest is in the expansion of this country, I suggest that a study might be made in the department with a view to assisting this area by the development of this proposal.
There are other matters in the riding of Niagara Falls which have already come to the attention of the minister. One of these was raised by my predecessor in the years 1957 and 1958; and during the hiatus of a few months last year when my riding was not represented, the hon. member for Lincoln was kind enough to continue the matter until I was elected. I refer to the representations which have been made to the Department of Public Works by the municipality of Crystal Beach. Crystal Beach is a village located on the lake. It is perhaps one of the greatest tourist attractions of a man made nature in my riding. It is a small village in the wintertime but develops greatly in the summertime. I am informed that the banks in the area have estimated that something in the order of a quarter of a million dollars in United States currency comes into the country as a result of operations there.
Within the past year or so the municipality has made great exertions to extend its facilities for tourists, particularly tourists from other countries. Over the past two years representations have been made to the Department of Public Works with a view to having a breakwater installed in order that a small boat harbour or marina might be constructed at Crystal Beach. In this particular area there are many very fine sand beaches and there is a great deal of small boating. However, nowhere in the area is there a location where they may harbour.
Representations have been made over the past few years, and most recently over the past winter, to the department. They have suggested that a consultant be called in to clear the matter of sewage disposal in the area. The municipality has constructed a new road right down to water level and has made strong representations, as I said, under the aegis of the then warden of the county of Welland, a noted friend of the government, and also through the hon. member for Lincoln in order to have this marina brought about. If the minister is interested in the development of what I think has become the third greatest industry in Canada, namely the tourist industry, I suggest that for a very small expenditure on behalf of the people of Canada a very large return can be obtained by assistance in the construction of this breakwater and small boats harbour.
Supply-Public Works
I can tell the minister that I will be making representations from time to time on this matter. I have photographs which I am sure are already in his files. There will be delegations here from time to time. We intend to press the minister for this installation. I would hope that he would see the benefit that would accrue to the area and to the country generally from a small expenditure.
I venture to make these representations to the minister because he is known as the most sweet tempered, most considerate and most thoughtful man in the House of Commons. I think this is demonstrated by the fact that in the public works estimates for the whole province of Ontario for this year, Niagara Falls rejoices in having the second largest commitment.
I shall have some remarks to make later when other items are called. However, I wish to congratulate the minister on having demonstrated so clearly that party bias or partisanship is not at all a factor in his make-up. Notwithstanding the fact that Niagara Falls riding has been well represented in the past by those of my political persuasion, the minister has seen fit to put in his estimates this year the sum of something in excess of one third of a million dollars expenditure in my area. For this the minister has my gratitude.


Mr. Coates:: Mr. Chairman, first of all I should like to extend to the minister my sincere thanks for the tremendous assistance he has provided me and my constituents, especially in the Springhill area, by seeing that they are to be given a new federal building, thereby indicating to the people of that town that they certainly have not been forgotten by the people in Ottawa, especially those in the minister's department, and that we believe they will continue to progress and attain a stable economy, which they certainly deserve.
I should also like to thank the minister for the tremendous assistance he has provided the fishermen in my area through harbour improvements that are now under way at Spencer's Island, Parrsboro and Wallace, and which are to be under way shortly at Mala-gash, Joggins and Port Greville. There is no doubt that these improved harbour facilities will be of tremendous value to the fishermen in their work.
May I at this time bring to the minister's attention the need for a new fishermen's wharf at Pugwash. I know the minister has given favourable consideration to this matter, but has been delayed awaiting the decision of the salt mines there as to the loading of salt on vessels which will then take this product to other areas of Canada and

Supply-Public Works
the United States. I would, however, urge upon the minister the need for making a decision with regard to the fishermen's wharf. Certainly the fishermen of this booming community are in need of better facilities and I feel they should have them at the earliest possible date.
I should now like to turn to another matter of great importance to all people in the maritime provinces. I refer to the Chignecto canal and the report which the people are awaiting in this regard. I know there were delays in establishing the committee that was to consider the reports prepared for the Chignecto canal committee. In this regard I wish to commend the minister for his attitude on the selection of personnel for this committee. Certainly it would not have been right or proper to have people who had already committed themselves to this project then being placed on the committee to determine whether or not it was feasible.
I do not think the reports when completed could have been given that regard that will now be possible with the civil servants who are there to assess this matter in an impartial manner and determine whether or not the construction of the canal is feasible. I do, however, want to point out to the minister that we are very anxious to see this report completed and provided to the public in order that they might decide whether or not this is the type of project that should be proceeded with immediately. I personally am most anxious to see whether the report that was prepared for the Chignecto canal committee is sound and whether the proposals set forth therein can be confirmed by this committee.
If it should be that the findings of this interdepartmental committee of officials of the federal government and the government of New Brunswick do not confirm those set forth in the reports prepared for the canal committee, there must be a reappraisal of the whole matter. However, if the earlier reports are confirmed I feel that we must give very serious consideration to the immediate construction of the canal. In this regard I would certainly appreciate the minister's comments on where the committee's work now stands and just when we "will have a report available on this very important and urgent matter.


Mr. Howard:: Mr. Chairman, I just have a few brief general remarks to make at this time, one of them having to do with the total amount of money estimated to be expended this year compared with the estimates of this department for other years. I refer to the 1957-58 estimates. These are the main estimates, and I am not taking

into account the various supplementary estimates that have been introduced during these particular years. In 1957-58 we discover that the main estimates of the department totalled $145 million. I am just speaking in round figures rather than giving the exact amount. You will recall, Mr, Chairman, that the estimates for 1958-59 had perhaps something to do with an election that was also in the offing. For that year we find this department boosted its estimated expenditures to $172 million. This is not taking into account statutory items, which also increase and change from time to time.
In the fiscal year 1959-60 the estimates remained substantially the same. There was a slight increase, to $173 million. Then in the last fiscal year, 1960-61, they undoubtedly felt the influence of Mr. Coyne in this department. As least, if we can take at face value what the Minister of Finance said the other day, it is undoubtedly Mr. Coyne's fault that we had a decrease in the estimates of this department to $147 million, practically back to the figure for 1957-58. You will also remember, Mr. Chairman, that this was undoubtedly connected with those large blue pencils which the Minister of Finance passed out to all the departments of government when he wanted to balance the budget, and in fact I think initially balanced it, at least on paper, to within $12 million.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, he was going to be $12 million over.


Frank Howard: Yes, he would have a few dollars in his pocket. Of course subsequent events proved just how inept and wrong was the Minister of Finance, when he came along for the last fiscal year with five separate sets of supplementary estimates and we found that the original $12 million that he had estimated would be cash in the pocket, as it were, really ended up as a great indebtedness. I am quite sure that the activities of Mr. Coyne caused this curtailment and foolishness on the part of the Minister of Finance, who is thinking in terms of a balanced budget primarily to paint a picture of economic development in this nation. We are now considering the estimates of public works for the present fiscal year.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The year of expansion.


Frank Howard: Yes, for the year of expansion. We find that the amount to be expended by the Department of Public Works has increased by $20 million over the amount for the last fiscal year. Next Tuesday evening, when the Minister of Finance presents his long awaited budget, perhaps we will learn something more about the so-called expansion which is to take place. I am not sure how much faith we

can place in that budget, in view of the past mistakes and blunders which have been made. However, there is an indication in the increase in the estimates of this department, to be expended on various projects, totalling $166 million, that some expansion will take place, and one can draw all kinds of conclusions regarding the necessity of this type of program.
I have very often considered the operations of the departments of public works, federal and provincial, as election operations, because these departments often delay the commencement of projects in various areas until such time as they coincide with an election. In this way the government is able to create the impression in the minds of the voters in the country that it is stepping into the economic field and providing measures of assistance, and that all one has to do is vote for that party and the building, wharf or whatever the project happens to be will be commenced.
I have also considered these departments of public works as kind of pork barrel departments. I do not indicate that is the case in this instance, but in the past I have considered this department of public works as being one that can be dipped into from time to time for political purposes. Perhaps the activities which have taken place recently in the province of Quebec will be the last of this kind that we will see.
The Department of Public Works is engaged in a field of activity which economists have recently classified as social capital activities; that is, public money being expended in regard to such things as roads, bridges, federal buildings, docks, shipping facilities and the like. In this regard we had an announcement from this government some time ago to the effect that in order to assist the economic conditions of various depressed areas, it was necessary to engage in what is classified as double depreciation to attract the establishment of industries. In considering this field of social capital activity one finds that the amount of social capital is inadequate and its use in many respects is obsolescent, particularly in view of the rapidly expanding urban areas.
We are in a continuing danger of choking out economic growth with congestion, pollution, the development of slums, and with the effects of deficiencies in vital public services and amenities. The bottlenecks appear to lie in the methods of financing, in lack of planning, and in the difficulties of achieving effective co-operation between the three levels of government.
That statement appears in the fifth report of the special committee of the Senate on manpower and employment, which can be found in the Senate Hansard of June 14, at page 876. I use it to succinctly point out the feeling which exists in many part of this
Supply-Public Works
country that there is a great deal to be desired in respect to activities in this field of so-called social capital.
The Department of Public Works expends a great deal of money in this field of social capital activity. However, it was the Senate of this country which commenced a study in regard to unemployment because this government failed to give that question proper consideration, and, in fact, even rejected suggestions last session that there was a necessity for considering the unemployment situation. The committee of that other place felt that the role of government in this field of social capital investment was in many respects obsolescent because of the development of slums, congestion, pollution and the like.
I suggest that we review the expenditures to be made by this department with a view to determining what effect these expenditures are liable to have upon our economy. Surely the government must realize-it has in past years, as has been indicated by explanations given to this house in glowing terms regarding the expenditure of moneys for housing development to meet unemployment situations -what effect the expenditure of this money in all the activities carried on by this department has had on the growth and expansion of our economy. I think we should analyse this situation to see what effect the spending of these moneys has on our economy, and to find out whether that committee on manpower and employment is accurate in its analysis of the situation.
As I have said, the report of that committee suggests that the bottlenecks appear to lie in the methods of financing, in the lack of planning, and in the difficulties of achieving effective co-operation among the three levels of government. I do believe there has been a lack in planning in this regard. I think this was illustrated by the Minister of Finance when he brought down his balanced budget last year, which indicated that he had slashed left and right with his pencil, curtailing the expenditures of the Department of Public Works to the point they were in 1957-58, without any regard whatsoever to the effect upon the economy and without any regard to the necessity and desire of getting into the field of expansion of social capital investment.
This lack of planning appears again this year, indicating that we were in error last year in accepting the advice of the Minister of Finance, because the economic situation worsened rather than improved. We now find there is an expansion in the proposed expenditures of the Department of Public Works, which I suggest has been adopted to

Supply-Public Works
correct the situation. I suggest we should explore the activities of the Department of Public Works particularly with regard to the co-operation which exists, or does not exist, between that department and the other two levels of government. I suggest we should search for methods of attracting industry to depressed areas so as to bolster the economy as much as possible. We have entered this field to a limited extent by the creation of double depreciation, although I feel this will not in itself be sufficient. I agree with the statement contained in the report of the committee of that other place, which reads as follows:
The consequences of technological changes and the effects of declining industries are so large that little can be accomplished with marginal and small scale remedies.
This is what the Senate manpower employment committee said about the double depreciation effort of the government. In fact they made another reference, as follows:
Sporadic incursions into this problem and random flourishes are not going to bring results.
I think that is what we have with respect to this government and this department, sporadic incursions and random flourishes in all fields of activity in which this government engages, and the end result is not very beneficial to the economy or to respect for government or anything else. It breeds a degree of contempt for a government that has not the foresight to look past the end of its nose, and then when it suddenly discovers it has made an error it engages in an attempt to blacken the name of a public servant, as happened a few days ago, and lay all the blame on him.
I should now like to turn to the question of the trans-Canada highway, which comes under the Minister of Public Works also and which is in part a social capital investment. If my memory serves me, the original intention was to have the trans-Canada highway completed in 1956. By a subsequent change it was supposed to be completed by the end of December of last year. It is now expected that it will be completed by the end of December, 1963. In fact we have had three target dates for the completion of the trans-Canada highway. We have also had three or four different changes and increases in the amount of money which the federal government may contribute toward the construction of the trans-Canada highway. The amount has been increased from $150 million to $250 million and then to $350 million, and now I believe parliament has authorized that up to $400 million may be contributed toward the cost of the highway. We have also had an alteration in the formula from the original

50-50 basis to a 50-50 plus 90 per cent of 10 per cent of the mileage respecting the national parks.
The report of the trans-Canada highway for last year is a bit more cagily drawn up, and I imagine this reflects the attitude of the minister. In previous years the report was pretty definite and said that the highway would be completed by a certain time, and so on. I notice that the report is not quite that definite now, but speaks in terms of hopes and expectations for the coming year. I think this is more correctly aligned to the facts than the reports of previous years.
The trans-Canada highway itself, as should have been expected when it was originally conceived, has run into some formidable problems. One can build highways in the province of Saskatchewan much quicker and at much less cost than in some parts of British Columbia. I am sure a highway can be built in Manitoba at much less cost than along the rocky shores of Newfoundland, or in some parts of northern Ontario. All these different geographical conditions contributed greatly to the delays, postponements, extensions of time, increases in the amounts of money and changes in formula that were found necessary in order to complete the trans-Canada highway and make it a first-class coast to coast paved route.
In the four western provinces, with the exception of one part of British Columbia, we appear to be rushing toward the completion of the highway. On page 4 of the report for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1960 some figures are given. I am sure these figures have changed since the publication of this report and the minister will undoubtedly indicate, or perhaps already has indicated in detail what the situation is in those provinces. I would point out that in the four provinces there is a total of-I had the total here, Mr. Chairman, but I cannot find it. In any event, of the total mileage in the four western provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, only 42 miles are indicated as not passable. There are 164 miles which are not paved and 152 of those are in British Columbia, the most notably difficult section being through the Rogers pass area.
The minister's predecessor, who is now the Secretary of State for External Affairs, when discussing this question a couple of years ago said in effect that it was not the intention of the government to abandon the contracts or agreements with respect to the trans-Canada highway once the highway had been completed. I read into that that it was at least the intention of the minister's predecessor to extend the present system or

agreements respecting the trans-Canada highway to other east-west highways. I hope this is still the situation so far as the present minister is concerned, because in northern British Columbia we-and when I say "we" I include everyone in the area, boards of trade, the unions, chambers of commerce, community associations and individuals alike- have been concerned with the development, building, completion and reconstruction of highway 16 and the extension of that highway eastward from Prince George to Jasper in Alberta, in order that we might have in that area an east-west access to our friends in the prairie provinces instead of having to go north to Fort St. John and Dawson Creek, although they are delightful places to visit, or south to some other part of the province.
If we are thinking in terms of this social capital and the need to engage in this sort of thing, now would be the time to do it; for if ever it was appropriate for the federal government to make overtures, as it were, or to get in touch with at least the four western provinces-and I mention those only because I am more familiar with them than I am with central Canada or the east in so far as highway building requirements are concerned- and indicate that the federal government is willing to participate financially with them in the construction of a so-called second trans-Canada highway, or a northern trans-Canada highway, running east-west along the general latitudes which cover Prince Rupert, Prince George and the like, this is the time.
There is one more reason for this, Mr. Chairman. It is not only the fact that we like to have fine black-top highways there, instead of gravel and earth highways and so on. There is also the question of our relationship with the United States and the state of Alaska, because they also are becoming more involved in tourism and in travel through their particular part of the country, and especially along highway 16 out to Prince Rupert. There is a possibility that within a year or a year and a half the Alaska government will build a so-called marine highway, or will build a number of ferries which will in fact carry automobiles and passengers to the ports of the Alaska Panhandle. Because the southern starting point of the service will be Prince Rupert, which is also the terminus of highway 16, I think it is most desirable that the federal government participate financially with respect to highway 16 as soon as possible. I should like the minister to indicate what is happening in this regard.


Douglas Mason Fisher: Mr. Chairman, I should like to be able to give the minister the time he deserves, but I only have five minutes to
Supply-Public Works
bring up two points that affect his department. I asked a question which was answered in the house on February 15, 1961, as found on page 2062 of Hansard. My question was:
How are the design contracts or awards given to architects by the Department of Public Works?
I should like the minister to note this question fairly closely, because I think I got a poor answer. The second part was:
Has the department received or noted any communications or views since 1957 which have been critical of the procedure in awarding commissions to architects?
This is the answer I received to these two questions:
Mr. Speaker, the answer to part 1 of the question is, on approval of the minister and authorization of treasury board. In answer to part 2, no such communications have been received by the department.
I want to draw the attention of the minister to a magazine that I would assume some of his senior officials would look at. It is the Canadian Architect. I think it is the main magazine in the field in Canada; and in the issue of December, 1960, there is an article entitled "Architecture's Big Clients". Then there is another article entitled "Five Years of Public Works". If they do not express views that are critical of the assignment of architects' commissions in the Department of Public Works, then I cannot read correctly. I should like to put one brief paragraph on the record to indicate the nature of the criticism. It reads as follows:
What is significant about this whole study is that the situation outlined in our April, 1957 issue, a relatively few architects receiving an extremely large proportion of the money that the Department of Public Works has to spend on architects' fees, continues to exist. We would certainly not press for D.P.W. jobs to be allotted right down the list of firms, alphabetically, one by one; nor do we deny that D.P.W. may well find it more convenient, or more satisfying, or more anything else, to work with one architect rather than another. We simply wonder if the department has really found the best way of awarding commissions, in view of the large amounts of public money it disburses and the fairly large number of competent architects who would like to do buildings for the government and are not doing so now.
All other considerations aside, a public building costing three or four million dollars or more is surely a proper subject for national or provincial competition. The department would certainly avoid a lot of criticism if such large commissions were awarded in this way; to our knowledge, only one of the 50 big buildings was so commissioned, and it was not built according to the winning design even then. We strongly recommend, therefore, that the department hold competitions for its big buildings, and we will continue to make this recommendation as long as the situation detailed here continues.
I do feel that those are certainly views that should have come to the attention of the department and the people in charge of architects' commissions. They certainly set
6452	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Public Works
up a criticism and give an analysis of which I would have thought the minister and the deputy minister would have been fully aware. I should like the minister to explain why this particular view was missed, and what reaction he and his officials have to these opinions expressed in what I understand is a reputable magazine. If it is, then I think this is a fairly serious criticism which should be answered.
The other point I want to bring to the attention of the minister is quite simple. I should like the assurance from him that the department is doing its best to police the fair wage section of the contracts that exist between it and its contractors. At the lake-head we have a higher wage level than other parts of the country because of the pulp and paper industry. When outside contractors bid on public works jobs in our part of the country, and they quite often do so, they are not prepared to pay the going rate in the area. I have found that the fair wage office of the Department of Labour has been remiss in keeping these matters up to date, and we have a succession of disputes and difficulties.
The other factor is that these contractors, because they cannot get tradesmen in our area to work for the rates they offer, bring in men from outside. Having regard to these two aspects of public works contracts, I should like the minister to explain to us just how they are policed and how much vigour is put into the policing of them. The word "police" may be unfortunate, but I think the minister knows what I mean.
As I said when I started, I regret that I cannot give the minister the attention I should like to give him. I wanted to deal with this loving article about him where he is rated as the scrappiest man in the cabinet. We have a sort of Jekyll and Hyde personality here. In Rosedale he is Uncle Dave, yet he says that here he finds it hard to control his bitter tongue. I assume that some time during the discussion of these estimates, Mr. Chairman, we will see something other than the Uncle Dave aspect.


David James Walker: I should simply like to remark that the hon. member may have had some experience with bitter tongues during his encounter with Donald Gordon this morning in the railway committee.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m. 
(Translation):
Mr. Caron:: Mr. Chairman, the mood of the day appears to be more serene, and the minister has not opened the door to matters of the past, so I hope we will be able to discuss the present and the future without any interference.
Yesterday, I heard the minister state in his opening remarks that he expected the work to start soon on the new national library. I am very glad to hear it. Indeed, the need for it has been felt for some time. I realize that such things cannot be done overnight. Paris was not built in a day, nor will Ottawa.
A national library is a necessity in a capital city which has two universities. The students in those institutions need to have places where they can do research work and prepare for the future.
When I attended the University of Ottawa, students could go to the Carnegie library. Despite its limitations, this library was of great service, and enabled us to complete the subjects taught to us and even to learn things not included in the curriculum.
That is where I learned that under the French regime, in Canadian history, the greatest man who ever came to Canada from France was Jean Talon. Perhaps he did not have the glamour of Frontenac or Champlain, but he was a man of peace.
Moreover, he did not come to Canada to get rich in the fur trade. He came to build up a civilization and to ensure the welfare of his people.
He was the first to organize a great settlement scheme, and a great network of roads. It was thanks to his action that thriving communities sprung up between Quebec and Montreal.
This modest library, therefore, was of great benefit to us. The new national library will have an even greater impact because it will provide a means for more elaborate research.
We must not forget that in the final analysis, the purpose of a college education is to create personal working habits and to open up vistas in more than one field. Former students, having become adults, will find new sources of wisdom in this library.
Buildings erected in the vicinity of the parliament buildings should not detract from their style. There are several such buildings that we can admire, and they give Ottawa real architectural beauty.
This is also true of Quebec city, whose buildings are of a distinctive style.

In my view, the design of buildings in Ottawa should harmonize with the main building, namely the House of Commons. Their design should therefore reflect something of the past, and should not be too modern.
The customs building, on MacKenzie street, for instance, is rather attractive; the Chateau Laurier also fits in well with the parliament buildings.
Union station, however, is a monstrosity. If it is the intention to build something along those lines, let us at least hope it will be built away from the centre where it cannot be seen by visitors.
The confederation building, the justice building, the supreme court building, the veterans affairs and the trade and commerce buildings, are all very fine. As they are federal buildings, I hope that in co-operation with the national capital commission the Minister of Public Works will see to it that this style we like is continued.
However, in the building field, I note that there are about 15 projects which will be carried out within the coming years, and not a single one is to be erected on the Quebec side, in the district marked out for the national capital district. Yet, some buildings were erected miles away from the centre of the city, whereas, on the Quebec side, in Gatineau and Hull constituencies, there are marvellous sites very close to the center of the national capital and the parliament buildings which are not being used. Buildings need not necessarily be erected in my riding; there are excellent sites in Gatineau.
Part of the district is now being used as a national park. But there are other magnificent sites where federal buildings could be erected.
Why is construction of national buildings on the Quebec side being delayed? I do not, and cannot understand it. I hope the minister will try to discuss those things with national capital authorities and with the national capital commission, so that, in the immediate future, some sites might be found on the Quebec side for buildings worthy of our capital which is not limited to the city of Ottawa but comprises an area of about 30 miles. In that 30 mile area, there are possibilities for buildings which would indicate that we too are part of the Dominion of Canada, since our return of June 22, 1960.
I know that the minister has hardly mentioned the subject until now, because it is rather difficult, as there is no adequate bridge for people to cross over to our side of the river. But as the building of a new bridge has been decided, I hope that the minister will be encouraged to put up some new buildings there. Speaking of the bridge, we were 90205-6-407
Supply-Public Works
informed that agreements had been signed between the province of Ontario, the province of Quebec, the cities of Hull and Ottawa and the federal government. We also learned that engineers have been looking over the situation so as to pick the location and work out the cost of the bridge. But we have not heard anything since. I hope that the minister will be in a position to tell us, in his reply to various questions put to him, if all borings are completed, if the necessary engineering work is on the way, whether it is going to be a high-level or low-level bridge because, as I said in this house, if we are-and the day will come whether we like it or not-to dredge the Ottawa river as the Richelieu river is bound to be dredged, now is the time to plan for that.
No bridge is built for two days, 10 years or 20 years; it is a project which must last even for hundreds of years; then we might as well plan for it right now.
It could be argued that the other bridges are not high enough. Well, if we build another low-level bridge instead of having four or five bridges to raise, there will be five, six or seven.
As I said a while ago I asked for information about that and never got any answer. I hope that we shall be told whether this will be a high-level or a low-level bridge. If the decision is to be in favour of a low-level bridge, perhaps the minister could inform us whether the fact that the Ottawa river is bound to be dredged has been considered, and if so, perhaps he could tell us, in the event that a high-level bridge is to be built how this dredging can be done when we find that the only place where some kind of a harbour could be developed considering the ground level is Hull since the shore on the Ottawa side is too steep. We could also be told on what side the seaway should be extended to reach Deschenes lake, and then Rapide des Chats to continue up north to lake Timiskaming and finally to the French river.
We should be given that information, and if the department has not yet started any survey to that effect, I submit that the time has come to ask the engineers to set up an engineering commission, to look into the best method of deciding not only upon the type and site of the interprovincial bridge but also consider future bridges that are to be built as a result of this Ottawa river development which is bound to happen some day, in 10, 15 or 20 years from now, because no region such as this can be left undeveloped along the Ottawa river between the cities

Supply-Public Works
of Hull and Ottawa right down to the Montreal area, as long as it is possible to do so through industrialization which could supply work to thousands of people.
We should also like to know whether it would cost less to build a suspension bridge or whether it would be better to build one on piles. If the bridge is going to be on piles, we should be told to what depth they will be sunk. I have heard it said that on the Ottawa side, the first pile will have to be driven 125 feet below water level because there are 90 feet of water and about 30 feet of soft soil before reaching bedrock.
Those are things we could and should know. If the department has not yet started working on this I hope it will soon get going so that the house may be better informed.
One thing I should like to say about that bridge, is that we have been asking for it for quite a while. As early as 1955, I brought pressure to bear with the then minister of public works and he told me at the time that the bridge could not be built before the parties concerned gave their consent. The governments of Ontario and Quebec and the municipalities of Hull and Ottawa have exchanged correspondence for months, even years. One day, the Quebec premier said to me: If the federal government want bridges, let them build some themselves. In the face of such a negative attitude, it was difficult for us to proceed.
I then asked that the correspondence between the federal government and the government of the province of Quebec concerning the bridge be produced; my request was complied with on July 14, 1960. At the time, a letter which the city of Hull had sent to Mr. Diefenbaker on September 24, 1958, was produced. Then, a letter from Mr. Claude Gauthier, secretary to the Prime Minister, addressed to Mr. Leblanc, the Hull city clerk and dated October 1; a letter from mayor Thomas Moncion of Hull sent to Mr. Diefenbaker on January 19, was also tabled at that time; a letter dated February 6, 1959, in which Mr. Claude Gauthier, secretary, replied to mayor Moncion's letter. Then a letter dated March 18 which the Hull city clerk, Mr. Leblanc, sent to Mr. Diefenbaker on behalf of the municipality and with which he enclosed a resolution passed by the municipal council concerning the bridge. There is also the letter which secretary Claude Gauthier wrote to Mr. Leblanc on March 24, 1959, to acknowledge receipt of the resolution. And here is the letter which mayor Armand Turpin wrote to the Prime Minister on February 10, 1960, to stress once more the necessity and urgency of building such a bridge.

Here is another letter. On February 29, 1960, His Worship Mayor Turpin received a letter from the Prime Minister's office with regard to the communication he had sent.
On December 13, 1957, Mr. Young, deputy minister of public works, mentioned the possibility of extending Montclair boulevard and the Interprovincial bridge.
On February 10, 1960, there is another letter from Mr. Turpin. I am sorry, I note that it is a translation of a letter written in French by Mr. Turpin. The other documents are only translations.
And in all that correspondence, we find that Quebec authorities were not definitely against the project but did not seem overly interested.
Once again, I asked the minister for some information, which was supplied on April 27, 1961. Here again we have letters, especially one written by Mr. Winters in 1955.
The first motion for production of papers read as follows:
(Text):
A copy of all correspondence, telegrams, contracts, agreements and other documents exchanged between the federal government, the provincial governments of Quebec and Ontario, and the municipal governments of Hull and Ottawa since June 1, 1957, concerning the construction of a bridge over the Ottawa river between the cities of Hull and Ottawa.
(Translation):
The second motion for production of papers referred to-
(Text):
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, contracts, agreements and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the provincial government of Quebec, since November 15, 1955, concerning the construction of a bridge over the Ottawa river-
(Translation):
And there we have documents dating prior to the year 1957. As a matter of fact, there is a letter dated September 27, 1955, in which the then minister of public works, the Hon. Mr. Winters, invited the premier of Quebec, Mr. Duplessis, to come and discuss the building of a bridge. On September 30, the premier answered Mr. Winters that he hoped to be in Ottawa soon and to be able to discuss the matter with him.
On October 19, 1955, Mr. Winters wrote again to the Hon. Mr. Duplessis, asking him to meet with those primarily concerned with matter and more particularly with the Ontario premier and the Ottawa and Hull municipal authorities.

On October 31, 1955, Mr. Duplessis informed Mr. Winters by telegram that he had tried to phone him but without success, Mr. Winters being out of town. Mr. Duplessis was advising him he could not attend the meeting but that he would delegate a representative.
On November 10,	1955, the Hon. Mr. Winters sent a very long letter to Mr. Duplessis, giving him a detailed account of the action taken following discussions on the matter of the bridge with representatives of the province of Ontario and the cities of Ottawa and Hull.
On November 15, Mr. Duplessis replied to Mr. Winters thanking him for the information received and saying that he would consider the matter.
On January 13, 1957, Mr. Winters wrote a letter to Mr. Duplessis on all the points discussed since with those interested in the building of the bridge, briefing the premier on the situation.
On February 28, Mr. Winters wrote again to Mr. Duplessis:
(Text):
On November 10, 1956, I advised you that it was proposed to set up a committee to consider the matter of rearranging the approaches to the existing bridges between Ottawa and Hull, and the possible location of an additional bridge, as well as preliminary estimates of cost. An invitation was extended to you to have a representative on this committee.
The committee has now reported and, for your information, I am enclosing a copy of the minutes of their last meeting held December 14, 1956, as well as a copy of the consultant's report in which a recommendation is made for the construction of a new bridge.
I would welcome any comments you might care to make on this proposal.
Yours sincerely, Robert Winters.
(Translation):
On April 17, Mr. Winters wrote again to the Quebec premier. It was only on April 6, 1960, that a meeting was suggested, that the letter from the present Minister of Public Works was sent to Mr. Barrette who had then replaced Mr. Sauve as leader of the Quebec government; that was in April 1960. This is what the present Minister of Public Works said:
(Text):
My dear Premier:
I wish to refer to your letter of March 22 to Prime Minister Diefenbaker in regard to the above meeting.
I note with pleasure that representatives of the province of Quebec will attend.
I am also writing to the designated representatives of the province of Ontario and the mayors of Hull and Ottawa suggesting that the meeting be held in room 356-S of the House of Commons at 10.00 a.m., on Thursday, April 28, 1960.
Would you please let me know if this is agreeable to you.
(Translation):
And here we have letters and telegrams sent by the present Minister of Public Works 90205-6-407i
Supply-Public Works
to convey his regrets for the delay in settling this problem. In fact, on April 22, 1960, the minister informed Antonio Barrette, premier of Quebec-
(Text):
Regret delay in replying to your letter of April eighth to Prime Minister. Would advise that two cabinet ministers from Ontario as well as mayors of Ottawa and Hull have indicated they will be present. Representation from your cabinet would be most welcome.
(Translation):
Here is another letter from the present Minister of Public Works to Antonio Barrette:
(Text):
On February 24, 1960, the following motion was passed in the House of Commons:
"For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, contracts, agreements"-
(Translation):
It is about the motion for the production of papers which I have in hand now, asking for permission to make certain letters public.
Here is another letter of June 15, 1960. (Text):
Following your letter re producing correspondence Hull-Ottawa bridge. We have no objection to the production of this correspondence in the House of Commons.
(Translation):
On July 20, 1960, the present Minister of Public Works sent a letter to Mr. Rene Levesque, minister of public works in Quebec, informing him of the steps taken, mentioning the meetings that had taken place and asking him to continue the work already undertaken.
Then, the federal deputy minister of public works wrote Mr. Branchaud, chief engineer with the Quebec highway department, as follows:
(Text):
Reurtel meeting Ottawa-Hull inter provincial bridge will take place Thursday September eight ten a.m. room 238-S House of Commons Ottawa. This information was forwarded to the hon. Mr. Levesque in our letter July twenty as Quebec department of public works was only department represented at April meeting. Mr. Levesque was requested to advise if that time and date was satisfactory and also to forward names of those attending. Please advise-
(Translation):
Then there was another letter and a telegram sent by the present deputy minister to the Quebec minister of public works, Mr. Levesque.
Mr. Marc Picard sent a letter to the present deputy minister of public works:
(Text):
Department of Public Works. Sorry we did not find letter from hon. Walker re meeting Ottawa-Hull bridge for September. Agree meeting on September eight ten o'clock room 238-S House of Commons. Will be present hon. Rene Levesque minister of public works; Herve Gauvin, deputy minister; P. A. Dupuis, chief engineer, and myself. Marc Picard, technical adviser.

Supply-Public Works (Translation):
There we realize that things start moving. And the exchange of correspondence continues between the minister, the deputy minister and the provincial authorities. There is much activity, much action, because the urgency of that construction is realized.
When I asked for that correspondence and when it was produced, the minister said:
(Text):
While I am on my feet, Mr. Speaker, may I take this opportunity of adding that Quebec was brought into agreement for the first time on participation in the financing of the bridge by the government of former Premier Barrette.
(Translation):
Even though I looked through all the documents I had, which I had received from the Department of Public Works, I could not find a single letter, telegram or note to substantiate the minister's statement. The only two letters received from Mr. Barrette are the one I read a moment ago authorizing the production of the documents and this one, which was also addressed to the Prime Minister, like the first one, and which reads as follows:
(Text):
Pursuant to my letter dated the 22nd ultimo, I am pleased to inform you that Mr. C. R. Laberge, deputy minister of public works, and Mr. Georges Cote, director of surveys and cadastre services, department of lands and forests, will represent the province of Quebec at the conference to be held in Ottawa for the discussion of the project of a new bridge on the Outaouais river, between Ottawa and Hull.
If this conference should be at the ministerial level, I will delegate a member of the cabinet as my representative.
With my best personal regards, I remain- (Translation) :
And those two letters have been produced after the production of the other documents and not at the time of the first request, which goes back to July 14, 1960; and they had been sent to the Prime Minister in March and April 1960. I cannot understand why they have been added to those documents after their production. But the minister was wrong in saying that the premier of Quebec, Mr. Barrette, had been the first to agree to share financially in this project. I do not criticize Mr. Barrette for not having had the opportunity to do so during his tenure of office, for as soon as he became premier of Quebec, following many changes, it was logical to call an election.
But I cannot accept that he is the one who came to an agreement. Even if the minister says there was an agreement concluded over

the phone, that does not constitute an agreement to a financial sharing, because such agreements are not made over the phone. So, I suggest there must be a letter that could be shown to that effect.
I challenge the minister to produce one document which would prove that Premier Barrette was the first one to agree to share financially in the building of that bridge.
I am asking for the actual facts. I am asking for the tabling of documents which could prove that fact. But there is nothing to confirm that Premier Barrette had offered to share financially in the construction of that bridge. Such a statement saying that Premier Barrette was the first to agree to share financially in the construction of the bridge might mislead the population.
(Text):
-I take this opportunity of adding that Quebec was brought into agreement for the first time on participation in the financing of the bridge by the government of former Premier Barrette.
(Translation):
It does not exist. And if there was a telephone conversation note of it should have been taken in order to prove that it had taken place. We do not have to take the minister's or anybody else's word for it.
I have here the documents produced. These are the documents that we should have and I submit that the minister did not have the right to relate facts that I consider inaccurate since they are not borne out by the documents I asked for.
I hope, in spite of all that, that the minister will continue to step up things so that the interprovincial bridge be built before 1967, that is as early as possible, in two or three years maybe, so as to allow not only for a more complete development of the city of Hull, but also of Ottawa. Furthermore, it should be recognized that the bridge is urgently needed. I hope that the minister will shortly be able to give us better news than what we have been given so far.


Mr. Ricard:: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to delay in any way the passage of the estimates of the Department of Public Works. However, I should not like to pass up this opportunity of expressing my appreciation to the minister and to his departmental officials. I must add that I can always count on an immediate, prompt and intelligent co-operation on the part of the minister and every member of his staff.
I thought I should take a few minutes of the time of the house to say a few words, because I want to put on record certain facts

of common knowledge that are at variance with the suggestions of hon. members opposite that nothing has been done in the Department of Public Works since the Conservative government came to power.
My hon. friend from Levis (Mr. Bourget) will certainly have a hard time convincing the people of the riding of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot that it has not been a good thing for them as well as for the rest of Canada to have a Conservative government in this country and, consequently a Conservative minister at the head of the Department of Public Works.
The only evidence I need in that respect is the speech just made by the hon. member for Hull (Mr. Caron), who tried for a halfhour to say that if the interprovincial bridge is built, it will not be thanks to the present Conservative government.
He repeated many times that all the efforts which were made until now to bring about the construction of a bridge between Hull and Ottawa, had led nowhere-


Alexis Pierre Caron: I do not make it a habit of trying to contradict the hon. member when he speaks. However, I never said the Conservative government had done nothing because, in fact, the government started the work. I simply stated that the minister had no right to say that it was Mr. Barrette who had been the first to reach an agreement. That is all I said.


Mr.   Hicard@: Mr. Chairman, when the hon. member for Hull had the floor, a while ago, and was saying that the minister had lied, I came very close to getting up but I have shown him the courtesy that he claims he has for others and I remained silent.
But I think he had no right to state a few minutes ago that the minister was wrong in saying that the premier of Quebec, Mr. Barrette, was the one who had brought the negotiations to a head on this matter.
The country at large and in particular the province of Quebec are quite aware of that fact, which seems to be unknown to the hon. member for Hull.
At the next election, the people of Hull will consider the situation in its proper light and we shall see what will happen.
I refer again, Mr. Chairman, to remarks made by the hon. member for Levis who said it had not been a good thing for my riding to have in the house a Conservative representative since June 10, 1957.
Supply-Public Works
That is a surprising statement coming from the hon. member for Levis, who is himself an engineer and who moreover was the parliamentary assistant to the minister of public works under the former administration.
In the St. Hyacinthe-Bagot riding, retaining walls had been built along the Richelieu and Yamaska river. In St. Charles on the Richelieu, from 1936 to 1957, that is under the 21-year Liberal administration, a wall 2,381 feet long, costing $58,806, was built.


Mr. Johnson:: Friends of the former government must have had properties in the area.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Quite probably. In St. Denis, a retaining wall 2,207 feet long was built at a cost of $44,487. In St. Joseph, $3,443 was spent on a wall 250 feet long.
I am coming now to the years 1958, 1959 and 1960. Let us see what the Tory party did in three years for the St. Hyacinthe-Bagot riding: St. Charles, at a cost of $54,582, retaining walls over a distance of 1,577 feet. At St. Denis, the expenditure was $83,467, for retaining walls 3,416 feet long.
At St. Joseph, $77,082 was spent on retaining walls 2,500 feet long.
For this year 1961, appropriations by the Department of Public Works amount to $110,000 for St. Charles and to $143,000 for the village of St. Denis.
Mr. Chairman, if you add up all those amounts, you get, after 21 years of Liberal administration, a total distance of 4,838 feet and a total value of $106,036 of retaining walls erected on shores damaged by navigation.
During the last three years, that is since the Conservative party took over, retaining walls have been built in my riding over a distance of 15,933 feet at a total cost of $469,131. I need not point out that those projects have provided employment for my constituents.
For all his long-winded statements, declamations and rantings, the hon. member for Levis will not succeed in making the people of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot believe that the present member did not obtain for his constituency more than the former Liberal regime, palsied by inertia, ever provide for his county.
In the matter of federal buildings, Mr. Chairman, thanks to the co-operation of the

Supply-Public Works
present Minister of Public Works, my constituency has obtained two post offices, one in the village of St. Germain of Graham and the other in St. Pie.
Furthermore, preparations are about to be completed for the construction of a federal building in St. Hyacinthe, which will house the federal services of the constituency of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot.
Since the beginning of the century, there has not been any federal construction in that constituency.
The election of a Conservative government led by a prime minister with foresight who has the welfare of the nation at heart was needed before my riding obtained what it needed.
Mr. Chairman, I would now like to talk about a matter which does not come directly under the department whose estimates we are now discussing. And I do not talk about the forthcoming construction of a tunnel.
Mr. Chairman, since I want to save you the trouble of calling me to order, I will immediately ask the Minister of Public Works for another post office building in St. Damase an up-and-coming parish of my constituency. The local farm and poultry co-operatives have an excellent reputation and are a credit to the industrious and clever spirit of our people.
According to the Postmaster General, postal revenue in that place exceeds $3,000 and I believe that the good people of St. Damase fully deserve a new post office.
I also want to deal for a few minutes with the activities of the present Conservative government in the field of housing. Mr. Chairman, it is a known fact that since the Conservative government came to power, it has set itself to improve the National Housing Act. Under the Liberal administration, when an individual wanted to build a house, the maximum loan available to him was only $12,800, while today it is $14,200. Here again, the hon. member for Levis (Mr. Bourget) will be hard put to convince the Quebec people that the coming to power of a Conservative government was not a happy event.
I should also like to call the minister's attention to the trans-Canada highway and to ask his co-operation in this regard. At the present time, plans are under way in my riding with respect to a section of the trans-Canada highway. The new route planned

by the Quebec government will bring about an unfortunate situation; in fact, the best ancestral lands in my riding will be cut up.
Last week end, some farmers came to see me and urged me to use my influence in order to convince the proper authorities to spare their farms, both in the main concession of La Presentation parish, and in one concession of St. Thomas d'Aquin parish.
If the present plans of the Quebec Liberal government are carried out, it will be disastrous, because the best farm lands of my riding will be cut in two.
Mr. Chairman, men and women, dedicated farmers, and God knows there are none to spare in Quebec, have urged me in a sobbing voice to make representations on their behalf.
I therefore urge the Minister of Public Works to try and convince the Quebec minister of highways to spare that part of my riding which is the most beautiful and the most productive, and to please adopt the former proposed route.
Mr. Chairman, as member for the riding of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot, it is my duty to sound the alarm. If this project for highway No. 9 through the St. Hyacinthe riding is carried out, it will be a disaster. For years to come, these farmers will bitterly regret having abandoned their land under such intransigence and misunderstanding. And, once again, Mr. Chairman, I urge the Minister of Public Works to be good enough to bring the Quebec highway minister to reason, to kindly save this lovely part of the Quebec garden which includes the lands of the main concession of La Presentation parish and also other concessions in St. Thomas d'Aquin parish.


Mr. Deschatelets:: We are going to build elevated highways just to please you.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: No, there are other methods available.
I would not want to resume my seat, Mr. Chairman, without saying a few words about the awarding of contracts. A well established policy in the department is to call for public tenders. I have no complaint about that. I think public funds should be spent in the best interest of Canadians. But matters are going a bit too far, because of the ignorance of some caretakers.
In the town of St. Hyacinthe, in my riding, two or three plumbers were asked to tender for repairs amounting to $10, $12 or

$15. Now, not a single hon. member who is intelligent and has his own interests at heart would bother three or four contractors and ask them to bid for so measly an amount. People in charge should have the latitude to make their own decision and ask a particular contractor to do the work.
I would also ask the minister to consider the possibility of limiting calls for tenders on contracts for $25,000 or less to contractors in the constituency. In each constituency there are qualified contractors who can properly undertake any kind of contract for plumbing, joinery, heating or electricity, required by the department. I am saying this in all frankness, it is most annoying for a taxpayer, who pays taxes to the town and contributes to the economic life of the community, that contractors 100, 125 or even 200 miles away be invariably awarded contracts which actually should have been awarded to local residents.
Therefore, I ask the minister not to follow the example of the government of the province of Quebec and enact legislation restricting all contracts for amounts of $25,000 or less to political supporters who are invited to bid. What I am asking is that those contracts of $25,000 or less be restricted to local contractors and that they be awarded following a public call for tenders.
Mr. Chairman, I would not want us to commit the same sins as the present Quebec government. After claiming throughout the last electoral campaign that there would no longer be any patronage, they are the very ones who, more than ever, have introduced patronage in the province of Quebec. I am only asking the minister to reserve to contractors of ridings concerned contracts for $25,000, or less. I am not asking the minister to follow the example of the Quebec department and to award those contracts to selected contractors, friends of the party. I do not want that, because I do not believe it is in the best interests of the people. What I ask is that those contracts be restricted to contractors of the constituency. I feel quite at ease to say here that, in my constituency and in the ridings of my hon. friends here, there are honest and qualified contractors who can do the work which the Department of Public Works wishes to have carried out.
Before I resume my seat, Mr. Chairman, I should like to repeat that, even if he raises his voice, the hon. member for Levis will
Supply-Public Works
not succeed in making the people of the province of Quebec forget that in 1946-47, the Liberals spent $147.5 million for public works whereas, the Conservatives have earmarked $220 million for public works this year.
Nor will the hon. member for Hull convince the people that he does not have the fullest confidence in the ability of the present Minister of Public Works when he gets down on his knees to recommend that the interprovincial bridge be built as soon as possible.
That, Mr. Chairman, is the most eloquent testimonial of the unlimited confidence the Liberals have in the present Conservative government. The latter will certainly prove them right in the future.
(Text):


The Deputy Chairman:: Shall vote 329 carry?


Mr. Pitman:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words before this vote carries. One thing we have appreciated about the minister is his refreshing candor. I can remember last fall when we waited in vain to hear what the government was going to do about unemployment. We were very surprised when nothing appeared in the speech from the throne.
Then we listened to speech after speech claiming there was no unemployment. Finally, this minister made a speech on the radio on the program "The Nation's Business" in which he admitted there was unemployment. He admitted there was a serious problem and it would take a while for us to solve this problem. If we have no reason for being appreciative of anything else that this hon. gentleman has done, I think those of us on this side of the house have cause to be appreciative of this moment of truth which seemingly came to the Minister of Public Works although it failed to come to his colleagues. For that reason, we tend to forgive him when sometimes in the house he uses two lines of argument which seem to conflict as has been indicated by the fact that he stands up and, with what we regard as a refreshing flourish, once again reads out the number of housing starts for the last month. Then, he tells us what a wonderful thing this is because it is providing more employment. Then he turns around and tells us that, really public works do not provide very much employment, and public works will not solve the unemployment problem.

Supply-Public Works
We believe that down in his heart he knows that public works do provide a great deal of employment in the long run. They have the general effect of increasing the social capital. They have the long term effect of increasing the impetus toward a healthy economy in other sectors as well as the public sector. In his own heart, he knows that a really dynamic program of low cost housing subsidized by the federal government would do a great deal toward solving unemployment.
I think he knows that if the dominion bureau of statistics tells us we are going to need 10 major universities in the next 10 years, if these were constructed by his administration that would do a great deal to help unemployment. I think this minister will undoubtedly claim that I am being very unrealistic. However, this morning the Prime Minister said that the government is going to do something about the athletic achievements of the youth of this nation. If the Minister of Public Works embarked upon a program of building recreational centres across this country, that too would aid in reducing unemployment. It is for this reason we, in this corner, have a great deal of respect for this hon. gentleman, even though he sometimes astonishes us by suggesting he really cannot do very much about unemployment except provide a few pick and shovel jobs once in a while. I believe the minister feels that if he were given the opportunity he could devise an imaginative, ingenious, dynamic program, and that is what we are hoping to see.
In so far as the local scene is concerned I am afraid I cannot, at this time, put forward any suggestions that the minister might take home with him to think over during the week end. I should like to say we have one or two very interesting new federal buildings. The one federal building which houses the post office, as well as other offices, is one of the most attractive buildings in the community. However, when they built the unemployment insurance offices they constructed perhaps the ugliest building in the community, which is unfortunate. I believe. that this building has had a tremendous amount of use, but the same level of architectural excellence was not achieved that was the case with the post office building. My colleague suggests that it is the ugliest and the busiest building.
However, we hope that we will soon see the minister letting quite a few contracts in my area. We understand we are to have
an airport, and although I realize this does not come within his jurisdiction, nevertheless we expect to see some action being taken by the public works department in that area.
I should like to bring to the attention of the minister one or two problems that have been brought to my attention by the people of my constituency. One of them is really a repetition of a subject referred to by the hon. member for Nipissing, and that is finding a means of providing N.HA. mortgages for older houses. I have spoken about this to the minister in private, and other people have spoken to me about it. I feel that we have drowned ourselves in a program of construction of two and three bedroom bungalows. We are wallowing in these bungalows. We need now a more diversified approach to the whole problem of housing. After the war a great many young families bought these bungalows, and they now want larger homes. Because of the difficulty of financing them, they are unable to obtain these homes. I feel such action would have a tremendous effect upon the economy as a whole if the minister could find some way of solving this problem.
I realize that this is a distinct problem. I realize there is a problem of priority. I realize a problem is presented by the fact that people might use these mortgages in a way in which they would be using national funds for purposes which even we in this corner would find it hard to justify. However, I believe the minister has the ingenuity to get around these things. Perhaps we could take a tip from the Farm Improvement Loans Act. Let us set up some method of screening people in order to determine what the use of these mortgages will be, and only give mortgages to people who have a real justification. I am sure that with the amount of energy the minister has displayed in the past he can get around this difficulty. I am hoping that very soon we will see a dynamic answer to this problem of mortgages for older homes, so that we can get these larger familities who are now in bungalows moved into the older, larger homes without virtually bankrupting themselves by so doing.
The second problem which I have mentioned, but which I should like to go over once again, is this matter of land assembly. We, in Peterborough, have more land assembly areas than any other community in Canada. I should like to commend the minister and his department upon what has been achieved in connection with these land assembly projects. We need more of them so that we can give cheap land to people who want to build houses. However, I am going to suggest that we need greater federal control over these projects. We have people buying land under

the land assembly system and they put up houses which could not, even by the greatest stretch of the imagination, be called low cost houses.
The land assembly idea-that is the dominion, provincial and municipal governments going together and buying up a large amount of land, then selling it virtually at cost to people-is a first class example of democracy at work. I believe this was the original concept. However, I wish there could be a little more control over it so that the people who really need low cost housing can gain through the land assembly system, and not have larger, more luxurious homes being placed upon this land to the detriment of the people who want to put up low cost houses.
There are a great many interesting items under this minister's control. One is fire prevention. I notice that this minister is giving $5,000 to the Canadian joint fire prevention publicity committee. This is an area which I think needs a great deal of attention. I am sure that when this item is called there will be a great many members who will have something to say about it.
Another item of interest is housing research and community planning. This, too, will require some discussion. This is one of the major areas to which we in Canada need to devote our energies. What kind of communities do we want? What kind of planning do we need? Many visitors come to our country and say our communities not only lack character but they lack any form, any planning whatever. I think this is something on which we should now get busy very quickly. I hope this item is going to be sufficient to provide the kind of planning which is necessary in these communities all across Canada.
I believe this minister has a tremendous opportunity to make this country a better place in which to live, and I am sure he is going to accept that challenge.


Mr. Granger:: Mr. Chairman, before asking for additional public works for my riding, I should like the minister to know that I am not ungrateful for the work which has been done, and which is in the process of being done in my constituency. I am particularly pleased that a decision has been reached to reconstruct the wharf at Botwood. The reconstruction of this wharf will fill a long felt need in this important shipping port. The wharf at Goose Bay is nearing completion. Other projects scheduled for this year at Jackson's Arm, Harry's Harbour, L'Anse au Clair and L'Anse au Loup are jobs which need to be done. Progress is being made on the new Canadian National dock at Lewisporte. But while I am indeed grateful for the work 90205-6-408
Supply-Public Works
which is being done in my riding, I feel that I must point out the need for additional public works in Grand Falls-White Bay-Labrador, with its long sea coast and its maritime activities. I should like to speak particularly about Labrador.
As I have had said previously in this chamber, and I hope hon. members will bear with me if I repeat it, Labrador is an extremely important source of fishery products today, and its importance is increasing all the time as more and more of the fish plants in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia depend upon fish caught in Labrador waters. Not only is Labrador important to the province of Newfoundland and to the economy of the whole of the Atlantic provinces but it is, of course, of the greatest importance to those people who live in the villages along its coast. It is a well known fact that small marine works encourage the fisheries. Small marine works such as small wharfs and breakwaters permit the fishermen to operate when otherwise they could not do so. These works extend the period of the fishing season and the benefit which accrues to the fishermen and to the economy as a whole is far beyond the small amount of money it takes to provide these small public works.
Some work has been done on the Labrador coast but I would request more attention for these small communities along the coast of Labrador and more of these marine works which will make it easier and more practical for those who live in these fishing communities to carry on their avocations. A number of additional works are needed. I will not attempt to list them all. From time to time I have written to the minister's department with regard to them. However, I think of the coastal villages of Makkovik, Square Islands, Georges Cove, Capstan Island and others where the need for wharves or community stages or both exist and where an investment in small marine works will unquestionably bring real dividends. The waters of Labrador are extremely productive and there is no doubt that these marine works will enable the productivity of these places to be increased. I would ask that the minister give careful and sympathetic consideration to increasing the amount of money spent in Labrador.
In northern Newfoundland some dredging is required at St. Anthony, Goose Cove and Englee. A wharf at Roddickton which was partly reconstructed needs to be completed. A wharf for Goose Cove should be considered and wharves for Miles Cove and other places in Green bay. There are also other places where the need for marine work is equally acute. I would express the hope that northern Newfoundland, Labrador and the rest of that

Supply-Public Works
part of the coast of Newfoundland included in my riding would be given sympathetic and careful attention by the Minister of Public Works. A small dredging operation is required at Lewisporte at Mussel bay where an expenditure that may be more than a few hundred dollars would reduce the distance which the fishermen are obliged to go in order to discharge their products.
I mentioned earlier that the cost of some of these projects is low compared with the service that they render. In that connection I think of a small job that was done at Shoe Cove last year which cost very little. A small breakwater which consisted mainly of filling up with concrete a gap between two rocks has made it infinitely easier for the fishermen of Shoe Cove to carry out their operations. There are many places like that where comparatively small expenditures result in making fishing ports of much greater use to the fishermen and, in the long run, enabling them to increase their catch and the total production of fish.
With respect to community stages may I say this. Although I mentioned this matter on the estimates of the Minister of Fisheries, as the Department of Public Works builds them I think it proper that I should make some reference to them here. The program of building community stages undertaken by the federal Department of Fisheries and Department of Public Works has more than justified the decision to build them. These community stages are of inestimable value to the fishing settlements in which they have been built. They provide premises from which to fish and places in which to handle gear. They bring fishermen together so that they can deal more effectively as groups rather than as individuals. By and large they have given a considerable impetus to the fisheries.
I might add here that, in my opinion, in a country such as ours with a growing population, not only should new industries be developed but old ones should be expanded. There is no doubt in my mind that the community stages program resulted in an expansion of the fishing business and that they will continue to be used more and more as time goes on. I would express a sincere hope that this program will be continued and that a community stage program will be planned to be carried on year after year until all the communities which require them have been supplied with them. There is nothing of greater importance in the whole program of public works than is the building of these community stages. Again they provide an instance in which comparatively small amounts of money provide really great and worth-while returns.
Since the last estimates of the Minister of Public Works were before the committee for consideration, two small post office buildings have been erected in Glenwood and Norris Arm in my riding. They fill a need which has been acute for a long time. I wish to mention here that I should like to see a number of these small buildings erected in my riding. I would mention again the need for a post office building in Happy Valley in Labrador, a community which has needed such a building for a long time and in which the need now is greater perhaps than it ever was. I would hope that before the year is out some action would be taken to provide a public building for the community of Happy Valley. I would also revert to the need for dredging in northern Newfoundland. I have every reason to believe that this matter is under review by the department and I would express the hope that a favourable decision will be arrived at.
One of the great requirements of the province of Newfoundland is the completion of the trans-Canada highway. A large section of the trans-Canada highway passes through my district and the completion of this highway is placing a very great strain upon the finances of the province. In view of the fact that Newfoundland and the Atlantic provinces in general have a severe transportation handicap by the very nature of their geographical position, I suggest that it would be only fair for the Department of Public Works to build at their cost, or to undertake the major part of the cost of completing the trans-Canada highway in the Atlantic provinces.
The completion of the trans-Canada highway by the federal Department of Public Works, or the greater part of the cost of it being paid by the federal government would provide something in the way of compensation for transportation handicaps in that area. It seems to me this would permit the provincial governments concerned to devote more funds to building secondary roads in remote areas. This aspect of the completion of the trans-Canada highway is one which I have mentioned before. I hope the idea has not been lost sight of by those who have charge of the trans-Canada highway program.
Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, those who live in the more fortunate and wealthier parts of Canada cannot properly appreciate the great need for additional transportation facilities in places where these facilities are somewhat restricted. At the same time it may be difficult for those living in central Canada to realize the great value and the utterly vital importance of small marine

works to the economy of coastal towns and villages. But these needs are very real in the Atlantic provinces.
These needs are very evident to everyone who lives in my riding, which includes a great northern area. When the minister and his officials sit down to make up their estimates in regard to what should be done during the coming year all over this vast area of Canada, I would like them to bear in mind that considering the value of some of these works, the cost in dollars and cents is actually very small. The cost of a wharf or a small breakwater is very small indeed compared with the utility it gives, compared with the increase in production which it makes possible and the increased standard of living which results.
I would ask again that the Minister of Public Works and his officials keep in mind the relative importance of these small marine works, remembering that where a small wharf is built it enables the fishery to carry on when otherwise perhaps it would not be possible to carry on and that it has been proven that where these works have been allowed to disappear, the returns to the fishermen have fallen off. I would ask the minister and his officials to keep in mind that the real, economic advantages and the improvement to living standards brought about by these small works are away beyond the relatively small cost involved.


Mr. Simpson:: Mr. Chairman, there are a few brief remarks I should like to make at this stage of the estimates of the Department of Public Works. First of all I should like to congratulate the minister and thank the departmental officials for the consideration which has been given to northern Manitoba in the form of post offices, alterations and improvements to federal buildings, and particularly in C.M.H.C. housing loans, which up until this time we have encountered some difficulty in procuring for that area. Things have been improving immensely over the past year and a half and many of the areas are now receiving the benefits of central mortgage and housing loans. I should also like to thank the department for the consideration they have given northern Manitoba in the construction of many small docks and wharves.
However, my prime purpose in speaking on this particular subject today results from some very disturbing news items which have appeared in Manitoba newspapers these past few days. Articles have appeared in the Winnipeg newspapers and in the Manitoba weeklies which have resulted, apparently, from a visit to northern Manitoba of the 90205-6-408i
Supply-Public Works
newly elected leader of the Liberal party in Manitoba, Mr. Gildas Molgat.
Although I must say there are some aspects of Mr. Molgat's report with which I agree, I do take violent exception to others which in my opinion leave the inference that nothing whatsoever has been done in respect to the very important projects and problems which exist at Churchill, Manitoba. According to a report contained in the Winnipeg Free Press of June 13, upon his return to Winnipeg Mr. Molgat reported:
The government has frozen the sale of all new lots in town for the past two years while provincial and federal authorities carry out studies on the planned move.
That is, the planned move of the town. The article continues:
Word of the impending action was brought to Winnipeg Tuesday by provincial Liberal leader Gildas Molgat, who has just returned from a tour of the north. Mr. Molgat said he plans to raise the issue at the special summer session of the legislature.
That is, the Manitoba legislature. For Mr. Molgat's information, and wishing him all success in any assistance he may be able to give in solving the problems of Churchill, I would like to say that this will definitely not be the first time, if he raises the matter in the Manitoba legislature, that the problem has been raised there. I wish to assure him that both this federal government and the present government of Manitoba have been working in co-operation over the past three to three and one half years on this particular problem. Mr. Molgat says that the situation at Churchill is an intolerable one at this time. That is one of the points with which I agree. The situation is very bad and I sincerely hope that something can be done about it in the near future.
However, I do believe that the article leaves the impression with the people of Manitoba that nothing is being done and that the recommendations have been pushed under the rug. That is not the case, and I should like to state to the committee at this time that Mr. Molgat is specifically referring to a situation which is being studied, and that is, whether the town should be relocated or redeveloped at its present site. I suggest that Mr. Molgat has failed to report to the people of Manitoba in regard to the assistance which has been forthcoming for the past four years.
I can recall when I first went to Churchill to find out what the people's complaints were in that area that there were three or four specific problems involved. Those problems primarily were in respect to the establishment of a sewer and water system, adequate power supply, and the hard surfacing of the road to the army camp. They also wanted to have a new water supply system. For the

Supply-Public Works
benefit of Mr. Molgat and those individuals who are interested I should like to place on the record at this time the statement that, due to the co-operation between the provincial and federal governments, some of these projects-in fact most of them-have already been accomplished, yet I cannot forget the fact that there is one very serious problem in that area.
A new water system, which has been the subject of requests on the part of that town for many years, is now under construction and should be in operation within a few months, at least by the end of this year. Incidentally, the cost of that new water supply system, which will benefit not only the army camp, the national harbours board and other federal government establishments and the town itself, is in the neighbourhood of $967,000. This project is being carried out under an arrangement between Department of Public Works, and the Department of National Defence.
One of the other projects of interest to the people of Churchill, as expressed at the time I first visited the town, had reference to their increasing power requirements. At that time the townsite was being supplied power by the national harbours board. However, the national harbours board unfortunately could not supply sufficient power to meet the requirements of the town. Through an arrangement made with the Manitoba power commission, in which the government of Manitoba, as well as the Department of National Defence played a large part, an arrangement was agreed upon under which anyone in the Churchill townsite area using power is now able to get sufficient power at a greatly reduced rate, compared with what was previously being paid.
The people also asked to have the road to the army camp hard surfaced. Last fall this road was hard surfaced between Fort Churchill and the townsite at a cost of approximately $135,000.
I realize that this particular problem regarding the final decision as to whether the townsite is going to be relocated or re-veloped at its present site is of great importance to the people of Churchill at this time. Mr. Molgat's report gave me the impression that he felt nothing was being done at Churchill but I should also say that additional wharfage is being constructed at the port of Churchill at the present time at an expenditure of something over $5 million. That is another project which the people of that area have been requesting for many years.
Mr. Molgat has criticized both the provincial and the federal governments for the length of time that has been taken to complete

a study in regard to the town. I have on many occasions felt that this study was taking a great deal of time. I know that it is hoped and anticipated that this very necessary study will be completed before the end of this year at which time, I feel quite certain, both the provincial and federal governments will be in a position to meet and agree in regard to the possibility of servicing a new townsite, if that is the decision, or putting services in at the present site.
It is my understanding that the first part of the report of that study, which is now being conducted, indicates the desirability of relocating the townsite at a site approximately five miles from the present townsite. If that desirability is borne out by further study I am quite sure that the work which is being carried out by the two governments concerned will be realized and that an arrangement can be made to provide the necessary services for the people of Churchill.
As I have said, I agree with some portions of Mr. Molgat's report of his visit to Churchill, particularly that portion regarding the extreme necessity for action being taken at the earliest possible moment. However, I very definitely feel that both governments are at this time doing everything within their power. It is my hope that the study will be completed as quickly as possible and that the two governments concerned will arrive at an early agreement.
Mr. Chairman, before resuming my seat I should like to refer to one other project for northern Manitoba. I would respectfully request the minister to give consideration at the earliest opportunity to the desire and necessity of federal buildings being located at the new townsite of Thompson. This town is growing very rapidly and I am sure that the departments of this government will require office space in the area, so I again ask the minister to consider the possibility of building a federal government building there.


Mr. Winch:: 
Frank Howard: He knew it a couple of days later.


Harold Edward Winch: He knew it when he made the statement. I knew that by the look on his countenance, the sardonic look in his eye and the curl of his lips. But, Mr. Chairman, about three and a half weeks later the by-election was held. May I tell the Minister of Public Works that his statement was used by the Conservative supporters of the hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich. The gentleman to whom the minister referred in his answer on May 4 has been returned and is now the hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich in this house by the grace of a majority of just over 500.
The Minister of Public Works should make it clear to the committee whether the statement he made prior to the by-election was just a bribe, a political statement, or whether, it having paid off, something is going to be done about the reeve and about the construction of that breakwater. It does not appear in the estimates this year. This may be understandable because I presume they were printed-they must have been-prior to May 4. Since no mention of it is made in the estimates, I think we can rightfully ask the minister whether there is to be a supplementary estimate brought down for the construction of this breakwater. The minister owes it to the people of Esquimalt-Saanich, to the people of British Columbia and to this House of Commons to assure us that the statement made on May 4 was not just made for the purposes of the by-election. The minister ought to tell us that he is going to follow through with it and that we shall have a statement from him either now or when we reach the particular item on whether construction is to proceed. If it does not proceed, then the minister stands guilty of bribery through using his office for by-election purposes. I would not want the minister to be criticized nor condemned in that way. This is the only reason why I remind him of the brief he received in April and the statement he made on May 4. I realize that if we wait until we get to the specific item we sometimes get this answer, "Why did you not let me know about this before; it may take a little while to find the answer?"

Supply-Public Works
There is one other matter that I should like to draw to the minister's attention at this time in the hope that either now or when we get to the item dealing with Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation he will comment on the matter that I shall now deal with. I was quite disturbed when a few months ago I was told by contracting firms in the construction industry that they were almost at a complete loss to know what were the actual requirements as to housing standards for construction coming under Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. They told me that it is practically impossible for anybody in the construction industry to know what are the minimum required housing .standards.
I was so intrigued by that information that several weeks ago I wrote a letter to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation asking them to let me have their regulations concerning housing standards. I appreciate the fact that they sent me the information I requested by return mail. I hold in my hand now a document entitled "Housing Standards", which gives the minimum requirements for plans, construction and materials in respect of detached and semi-detached houses, duplex and semi-detached duplex houses and row housing. The date of issue is January, 1958. This document, which sets forth the minimum standards for housing, is some 116 pages long.
I can understand why it takes 116 pages to set forth the minimum C.M.H.C. housing standards as outlined for them by the division of building research of the national research council. But I draw to your attention, Mr. Chairman, the fact that this 116-page document has been amended three times without consolidation. I also have in my hand what is termed amendment No. 1. It is a 7-page document amending the original document to which I referred a few moments ago. I also have here amendment No. 2. This is a 16-page document amending amendment No. 1 and also amending the original document on minimum standards. I also have here amendment No. 3 which is 24 pages long. It amends amendment No. 2, amendment No. 1 and the original document. Section after section is amended which means that you have to tie them together, and I can certainly understand why many firms in the construction industry have told me that they defy anyone in the industry and the inspectors of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to tell them exactly what the rules and regulations are with respect to minimum standards under C.M.H.C. There are 47 pages of amendments to amendments to amendments to the original document. Just how inefficient can people be?

I want to be absolutely honest. I understand that for months Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has been working on a revision and consolidation for the purpose of producing a new book on housing standards. I cannot quite understand why it takes months to do that. I understand further that the book is not ready yet for the printers and the industry.
As the minister knows, I was in the construction industry for many years so that I think I know whereof I speak to quite an extent so far as construction is concerned. I am most disturbed by some of the reports now being circulated as to changes being contemplated in the new revision. It has come to my attention that there are suggestions with respect to lowering the standards of construction of housing built under the National Housing Act. From information that has come to my attention I know that consideration is being given to the lowering of the quality of lumber by one grade. I know that the widening of the distance between beams and joists is under consideration.
I want to draw to the attention of the minister the need of a consolidation of the minimum standards so that not only contractors but the corporation's own inspectors will understand what the minimum standards are. In addition, to my mind it is of the utmost importance that there should be no lowering of standards in the new revision. We want to have homes that will not deteriorate to a considerable extent after a few years. In certain circumstances lowering the quality of the lumber by one grade is not good and widening the centre to centre distance between joists and beams is also not good. I believe that those recommendations were made by the construction association. I hope the minister will not allow building standards to deteriorate.
Because of the terms of the act under which the mortgage is repaid over a period of 25 or 30 years before people can own their homes, I hope that in the interests of good housing construction standards will be maintained, that the quality of lumber will be maintained and the distance between joists, beams or studs will be properly maintained. I sincerely hope that now or when the specific vote is under discussion the minister will tell us what is being done about the consolidation of the regulations and the maintenance of standards for the well-being of future home owners.


Mr. Loiselle:: Does the minister want to speak?


David James Walker: Go right ahead.
(Translation):


Gérard Loiselle: Supply-Public Works
The following day, in the absence of the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Nowlan), the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Monteith) replied as follows:
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for St. Ann asked whether I was aware of certain comments of the chairman of the board of directors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation with respect to the search for a suitable location in the city of Montreal where C.B.C. operations will be consolidated. I did notice this report, and I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that a final decision has not been taken with respect to the location described in the question, as both the city and the corporation have decided to study one or more additional locations before deciding on the matter.
What most surprised me when I heard the minister's statement, Mr. Chairman, was that in February 1960, after a serious study had been made of the situation, the C.B.C. had accepted this location in principle. This was over 18 months ago, and now the C.B.C. is considering whether it really should locate in this area. If government officials are that slow in reaching a decision, how can you expect this organization to function properly?
Every aspect of this location has been thoroughly considered, and the city is prepared to expropriate, but now everything is held up by the C.B.C.'s inability to reach a decision. I therefore ask the government, through the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Walker), to tell us yes or no whether it intends to accept the land made available to the C.B.C.
In the affirmative, the municipal authorities will be encouraged to build houses elsewhere for the displaced people, not to mention the fact that this will improve this section of Montreal. In the negative, then a new study should be made to find the best way to deal with the situation. Such a study should not be allowed to go on indefinitely, as this would slow down the development of that section.
I would also ask the minister, in considering requests from any administration, whether it would be possible to eliminate all the red tape, because it can hold up action indefinitely, as in the case of the C.B.C. scheme, which has come to nothing after 18 months, despite the fact that an agreement had practically been reached at the time.
It seems to me that the various departments of government should be more diligent and speed up the examination of petitions from municipal governments. For instance, a petition from the city of Montreal concerning a new construction project on the boulevard des Trinitaires in the west section

of Montreal, must have reached the minister's desk by now. At present, the land is vacant and belongs to the city. All that is needed is the approval of both the provincial and federal governments before a housing project is started there consisting of 250 to 300 housing units. If that project is carried out, the city will then participate in another project whereby people could be provided with living accommodation.
What I mean, Mr. Chairman, is that the government should not delay in replying to municipalities in order to help them to make better use of the National Housing Act. (Text):


Mr. Taylor:: I should like to make a few suggestions during the passing of the estimates of the Minister of Public Works. Recently in a Vancouver paper there appeared an article written by Mr. Cliff MacKay, the financial critic, and it said this:
Signs indicate that this country needs a five-year plan of economic redevelopment. Cities can and do have five-year plans to clear slums or channel traffic. But the nation itself seems to he chained to an economic system based on a 365-day budget with an occasional baby budget thrown in to tinker with the more obvious mistakes.
It went on to ask what kind of way is that to deal with problems which have been building up ever since the end of the last war. The main suggestion that the editor is making here is that there should be a comprehensive five-year plan for proper economic development. Prior to the appearance of that article in the Vancouver paper, I had a similar plan in mind and I took time to write a 24-page report which I called a seven-year program for appropriate development of a number of projects in the Vancouver area. I am not going to deal exhaustively with that lengthy report at this time. However I wish to say that I would appreciate having, at an early date, an interview with the minister's officials in order to discuss this very lengthy document. I feel that many of the suggestions contained in the report would be most welcome in my area. The report deals with a number of projects in which the federal government already has an interest in the city of Vancouver. The report deals with a proper long range development of the Jericho beach area and also with the proper development of an area in which the R.C.A.F. at present carries on operations at the south end of Burrard bridge. My report deals with the re-activation of the Boundary Bay airport, an area which is much needed by small plane owners in the city of Vancouver and

surrounding areas. The report also deals with the much needed all-purpose coliseum which would be of major interest to the Department of Trade and Commerce. The report also deals with the necessity of housing the operations of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation under one roof in the city of Vancouver. At the present time the operations of the corporation are carried on in some six different buildings in a most uneconomic fashion. The report which I drafted also deals with the unification of the network of railroad lines which lead into the Vancouver area and it sets forth what the Canadian National Railway Company and the Great Northern Railway Company could do, for example, in uniting their present depot. The report also deals with the international airport, a matter which I hope the ratepayers of the city of Vancouver will resolve this coming week.
In particular I should like to deal with another breakwater in addition to the one which was referred to by the hon. member for Vancouver East today. He spoke about a much needed breakwater and I support his remarks to the fullest extent. We need, the San Juan breakwater on Vancouver island. However, at the same time we also need a breakwater which has been long advocated by many people in the Vancouver area. I refer to a breakwater which is to be constructed either at Locarno beach or to the east of Jericho beach or closer in to the downtown area at the south end of the Burrard bridge.
We are a port city. Our people go down to the sea in ships. Every winter and certainly every spring pictures appear on the front pages of our newspapers showing small craft that have been washed ashore during a sudden squall. Every time those pictures appear, the city officials again suggest and1 cry out for a proper breakwater. There is an ever increasing number of small craft owners. In a city which will have approximately one and half million people by 1980, according to what the forecasters say, we certainly need now and will need even more in the future a proper breakwater in the area to which I have referred. In correspondence with the minister's department it was reported as follows:
Tentative studies have been carried out on such a project and two sites were actively considered. They were at Jericho beach and Spanish banks. The Spanish banks site had been more particularly referred to as the Locarno beach area. The tentative plans call for a combination rock and sand fill of about 2,000 feet in length starting from the shore near Blanca street, then carrying a rock mound parallel to the shore and eastward to a point in front of Locarno Park. The area behind this protection would be dredged for floats and a mooring basin. The plans call for accommodation for approximately 1,500 boats.
Supply-Public Works
The previous minister of public works, the present Secretary of State for External Affairs, indicated that the senior government would contribute $1 million to the construction of the breakwater to which I have referred. I do hope that when the minister is commenting upon this proposed breakwater he will once again say, as his predecessor said, that the $1 million is still available provided, of course, that the city of Vancouver and the province of British Columbia make an equal contribution. At least if we have his assurance that the $1 million is available from the federal government we will continue to press for equal grants from the province of British Columbia and from the city of Vancouver.
I do not necessarily advocate that the breakwater be located at Jericho beach or Spanish banks, or even near the south end of Burrard bridge, but I do strongly recommend that we have a breakwater on the south side of English bay. The Kitsilano ratepayers' association, which is an association in my own riding, passed a resolution as follows:
That the Kitsilano ratepayers' association go on record as supporting the proposed breakwater at Locarno beach with a marina for small boats.
There has been an impressive number of other organizations recommending the construction of a breakwater in this area. Therefore I hope the minister will say that the senior government is still prepared to make a contribution of $1 million toward that much needed project.
Then there is another matter which comes within the minister's field concerning the False creek area, which is in the Burrard riding. The problem of the proper development of the False creek area has been under consideration for some 30 years and I would like to feel that during the time I am able to represent the Vancouver-Burrard riding suitable progress will be made in the appropriate development of False creek.
This area has been praised as a secondary harbour with first-class industrial sites, and it has been damned as a polluted waterway and an ugly and dirty eyesore that should be, according to some, eliminated once and for all by filling it in. Its shores are lined by industry, as the minister knows, and harbour experts say it is on the whole poorly laid out; land is being used to a fraction of its potential, which means not only a loss of good sites and misuse of a potentially good waterway, but a loss of tax revenue to the city.
The minister's department comes into this project because there is a considerable amount of dredging to be done in order that we can properly develop this secondary harbour in Vancouver. It is necessary, so the planners

Supply-Public Works
say, to establish a 300-foot channel and development of industrial sites up to that channel as part of a long range program. As I see it, the factors which make False creek a target for criticism at the present time are:
1.	There is inefficient and uneconomical use of the land which is considered prime industrial property with road, rail and water service.
2.	The road system around it and into it is inadequate.
3.	The old Kitsilano trestle located just east of Burrard bridge blocks the False creek entrance to all but small boats. There is only IJt feet of water at the swing span at low tide and deep dredging is impossible. This railway bridge was the first creek crossing, was finished in 1886 and is still used by the B.C. electric railway.
4.	The water is polluted and this area, bordering on the downtown and spanned by major traffic routes, is an eyesore.
I understand that the minister's department has carried on extensive dredging operations in that area during the past year. I hope that when this item comes up for consideration later in the minister's estimates he will indicate what the dredging operation has proved so that we can now properly plan the future development of the False creek area.
I would also like to feel that the minister and the other appropriate minister concerned will in due time consent to a change of name for False creek. The name which I suggest is Kitsilano bay or Kitsilano harbour. I sometimes have difficulty, because its name is False creek, in conveying to the officials of the Department of Public Works that it is in fact playing a very useful purpose in the Vancouver area and will in the future play an even more important role as Vancouver's secondary harbour.
If because of the fact that there is a hodgepodge of interests in the whole area agreement cannot be reached among the ownerships, I suggest that perhaps the only answer may be for the government to take action and assume power similar to that in relation to metropolitan areas and proceed to set up a commission to get the job done. Possibly some public authority should be set up at an early date in order that there can be proper development of the area. Mr. Chairman, may I call it five o'clock?


Gordon Campbell Chown: Order. I understand the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate has a question for the house leader.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, perhaps I may ask the house leader, just before the committee rises, whether these estimates will

go on tomorrow. I think it would be helpful to hon. members to know this.


Mr. Churchill:: Mr. Chairman, these estimates will be taken up tomorrow, but I hope they do not go on all day.


John Whitney Pickersgill: If they do not, what will the minister call after them?


Gordon Minto Churchill: The estimates of the Department of National Revenue.


Gordon Campbell Chown: Order. It being five o'clock, in order to permit the house to proceed to the consideration of public and private bills pursuant to section 3 of standing order 15, it is my duty to rise, report progress and request leave to sit again later this day, or at the next sitting of the house, as the case may be. Agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Progress reported.


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



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Murray Douglas Morton: Mr. Speaker, in order to expedite the passage of certain private bills and in order that they may be given consideration in committee next week in anticipation of perhaps an early adjournment of the house, it has been agreed between the parties by unanimous consent that notwithstanding standing order 15 (3) as amended, the house deal with the items listed on today's order paper under private bills and that public bills be dealt with on Tuesday next, and that the said private bills be dealt with in the following order as shown on page 12: item Nos. 7, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 6 and 10.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I should just like to confirm that that is also the understanding on this side.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, that is agreeable to this party also.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it then agreed that during this hour private bills shall have precedence and on Tuesday next during the corresponding hour public bills will have precedence? Is it also agreed that the order for private bills today shall be as requested by the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. Morton)?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Do I understand that the order suggested will be a continuing order of the order paper or is it for today only?


Mr.   Morion@: It will be a continuing order.


Mr. Speaker:: Then the order will have effect when private bills are called again.



PRIVATE BILLS


Mr. W. G. Beech (York South) moved: the second reading of Bill No. S-23, respecting the Canadian Legion.


Mr. Speaker:: Pursuant to standing order 105 this bill should be referred to the standing committee on miscellaneous private bills.


William George Beech: Mr. Speaker, because of the non-contentious nature of this bill I wonder whether it could be given second reading and then discussed by the committee of the whole rather than be referred to the committee?


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, that procedure is quite agreeable to this group because we wish to facilitate the passage of this measure.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Speaker, I have had quite a few calls from members of the Canadian Legion in respect to this bill to the effect that there are too many organizations adopting the word "royal" as part of their name, in Canada, and I wonder whether the bill could be sent to the committee in order to give me time to confer with these individuals?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on miscellaneous private bills.

Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breton South) moved: the second reading of Bill No. S-19, respecting the Cumberland Railway and Coal Company and the Sydney and Louisburg Railway Company.
He said: Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that I will not take too much time of this house at this stage, but I should like to draw hon. members' attention to the fact that under the merger, which we hope will take place, protection will be provided for the 200-odd pensioners who had previously been employed by the Cumberland Railway and Coal Company. This bill will bring the Sydney and Louisburg Railway Company under the jurisdiction of the board of transport commissioners, so it can take full advantage of the Maritime Freight Rates Act. Other than explaining the bill to that extent, I should only like to say that this is not contentious, and that there has been no objection raised.
Private Bills


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member who sponsored the bill was kind enough on another occasion to provide us with a rather detailed explanation in writing of the purposes of this bill and the beneficial effect that it will have to the parties concerned. We are quite happy to support the bill now before us.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.

Murray Douglas Morton: the second reading of Bill No. S-20, respecting the Canadian Council of the Girl Guides Association.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to change the name of the girl guides association in view of the fact that it is now an independent group. The present name, the Canadian Council of the Girl Guides Association, was adopted when this organization was in fact a branch of the Girl Guides Association with headquarters at London, England. Since that time the Canadian association has become independent of the parent body and a member in its own right of the world association of girl guides and girl scouts. It is, therefore, appropriate that the name be changed so as to avoid complications encountered by suggestions that the Canadian association continues to be part of the British association.
The second purpose of this bill is to do away with the limitations in respect of the amount of property which can be held by that organization, which is $250,000. This organization is acquiring property and is asking that there be no limit on the amount entitled to be held.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, on an earlier occasion we passed a somewhat similar bill dealing with the Boy Scouts Association of Canada. Some very commendable words were used at that time in relation to the activities of the boy scouts association. I am quite sure these same words and thoughts can be applied to this association. On that earlier occasion the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge) indicated that he had been an old scout of some standing, and thereby added interest to the discussion in respect of that bill. I spoke to that hon. member recently and he indicated that he has also been interested in guiding girls and, from that point of view, perhaps he will also support this bill with great gusto.

Private Bills


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on miscellaneous private bills.

Mr. Murray Smith (Winnipeg North) moved: the second reading of Bill No. S-18, to incorporate Ukrainian Evangelical Baptist Convention of Canada.
He said: Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to me to have the honour of sponsoring this bill in this house. I should like to inform hon. members briefly of the work of the Ukrainian Evangelical Baptist Convention.
The work of Ukrainian Baptists in Canada began in Winnipeg in 1902. As immigrants from the Ukraine flowed into Canada from the year 1900 onward, further churches were established, in western Canada at first, and later on in other parts of the country. The convention of Canada has two local conferences, one with its centre in eastern Canada and the other with its centre in western Canada. The headquarters of the conference in the east are at Toronto and the headquarters of the conference in the west are at Saskatoon. The convention represents more than 7,000 Baptists of Ukrainian origin. There are more than 500 pupils attending Sunday schools conducted by the convention. There are 21 organized churches, with an adult membership of more than 800. In addition there are some 25 mission stations where services are held periodically. There are 10 ordained ministers and 10 missionaries.
The churches are located as follows: One in Montreal, Quebec; five in Ontario; three in Manitoba; three in Saskatchewan; six in Alberta, and three in British Columbia. The mission stations are scattered throughout Canada.
The convention owns a periodical called the Christian Herald, which is the organ of the convention. It is published in Winnipeg.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on miscellaneous private bills.

Murray Douglas Morton: the second reading of Bill No. S-25, respecting the Canada Permanent Trust Company.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to authorize the Canada Permanent Trust Company to merge and amalgamate with the Toronto General Trusts Corporation and to authorize Canada Permanent Mortgage Corporation, which holds all of the shares of the Canada Permanent Trust Company except directors' qualifying shares, to invest in the whole or any portion of the shares 
of the amalgamated company and to exchange shares of the Canada Permanent Trust Company for shares of the amalgamated company.
General legislation enabling such an amalgamation to take place is provided for in the loan and trust corporation act, chapter 222 of the revised statutes of Ontario, 1960, but no corresponding general legislation has as yet been enacted by parliament. The enactment of the present bill is therefore necessary before the proposed amalgamation may be effected.
It may be of interest to note that the parent body of the Canada Permanent Trust Company, namely the Canada Permanent Mortgage Corporation, was incorporated in 1885 under the British building societies act of upper Canada with the name of Canada Permanent Building and Savings Society. Later, by a special act of the parliament of Canada passed in 1899, the parent company was incorporated with the name Canada Permanent and Western Canada Corporation. Then in 1927 this company acquired the assets of the Brantford Trust Company and in 1949 acquired the assets and business of the General Trust and Executors Corporation of Halifax. At the present time it is known as the Canada Permanent Trust Corporation, which has an authorized capital of $15 million, of which $2 million has been fully paid up.
The Toronto General Trust Company was first incorporated in 1872 by act of the provincial legislature of Ontario. However, this Company did not commence business operations until February 3, 1882. These two companies have had a lengthy period in the financial operations of this country. I understand that the locations of these corporations complement each other in that by the amalgamation there will not be very much duplication of offices and in that in the area where there are no Canada Permanent Trust offices there are Toronto General Trust offices.
I suggest that if there are any questions to be asked they could better be asked in committee.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Will the hon. member permit a question. What will be the name of the new firm?


Mr.   Morion@: This is shown in clause 1 of the present bill. It is the Canada Permanent Toronto General Trust Company. The French name will be Compagnie de Fiducie Canada Permanent Toronto General.


Alexis Pierre Caron: Mr. Speaker, again the use of the word "Canada" may give people the impression that this is a company under the control of the government. There is a danger in that and I would oppose the use of the

word "Canada" in the name of the new company. If it was an old company and was still in existence and was to carry on I would not object; but I think the word "Canada" or the words "National Canadian" or anything of that kind should not be in the name of any corporation so that people would not get the impression that the corporation belonged to the government of Canada. For this reason I believe we should ask the company to change the name so that it will be acceptable to everyone.


Murray Douglas Morton: I suggest that this can be discussed fully in committee.


Frank Howard: It was my
understanding that the hon. member for Davenport would not be in the position of closing the debate. I saw, sir, that you had not stirred yourself and therefore I thought I was fully protected.
I notice in the bill, Mr. Speaker, there are some of what one might consider to be protective devices, in that the legislation does not come into effect except upon proclamation by the governor in council, following tests to be made by the government of the province of Ontario and assented to by the lieutenant governor of that province. Therefore I feel it will be some little time yet before the actual amalgamating company which is named in the bill can come into being.
I think this is something that should be dealt with at this time, Mr. Speaker, in a preliminary way before it goes to the committee. I took the trouble to look into the Financial Post survey of industrials for 1960 to see what the relative positions of the two companies, the Canada Permanent Trust Company and the Toronto General Trusts Corporation, were with respect to the trust companies structure in Canada. We And that in the year 1959 the total assets listed for the Canada Permanent Trust were $177,493,368. The total assets of the other trust corporation which is mentioned in the bill, which will be a party to the agreement, were in 1959, $576,547,704. Once these companies have amalgamated and without taking into account the relationship which the third parent company, that is Canada Permanent Mortgage Corporation, will have, but taking into account only these two firms or companies which are to amalgamate, we see their total assets in 1959-undoubtedly they are larger now- are $754,041,012, or about three quarters of a billion dollars in total assets.
In the last couple of years we have seen two or three other mergers, amalgamations or acquisitions of one company by another in the trust company field. For instance, in 1958 Western Trust Company was acquired by
Private Bills
Guaranty Trust. In 1959 Okanagan Trust Company was acquired by Royal Trust. I think this will perhaps be the third amalgamation or merger in the trust company field in the last two or three years. It would place the amalgamated company sought to be established by the bill in the position of being at least the third or, depending on its relationship with the Canada Permanent Mortgage Company, perhaps the second largest trust company in Canada in terms of listed assets.
I should like to give some indication of what would be the relative positions of these two or three larger companies of which the amalgamated company would be one. In the 1960 Financial Post survey of industrials some 28 companies are listed in the trust company field, and following this merger there would be 27. Of the total of 27 and taking into account what is proposed under the bill, we find that three of them, the amalgamated company, the Royal Trust Company and the National Trust Company will have assets greater than those of all the other trust companies combined. Thus, in terms of their assets, these three companies will be in a rather powerful position compared with all the other companies.
I worked out the figures very roughly and I have them here. The total of 28 companies last year had assets of approximately $6,200 million and the amalgamated company to be established under the bill, the Royal Trust Company and the National Trust Company will have assets of approximately $3,800 million.


Mr. Macdonnell:: Will the hon. member permit a question?


Frank Howard: Certainly.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I think the hon. member will agree with me, and I suggest he might make this point, that when he speaks of the assets of these companies the vast bulk of these assets belong to other people and are merely held by these companies as trustee or agent, involving no ownership on their part.


Frank Howard: I quite agree that that is probably correct. One of the purposes of a trust company is to hold things in trust for other people. I was not saying that these were earned assets as in the case of life insurance companies. I was pointing out that in terms of assets held these three companies will be in the position of having total assets greater than the total assets of the 24 other companies in Canada taken together, as shown in the 1960 Financial Post survey of industrials.

Private Bills
The survey also lists loan companies alongside trust companies and there is a relationship between loan companies and trust companies. With respect to the bill before us, there is a relationship in that, as is mentioned in the bill, the Canada Permanent Mortgage Corporation holds all of the shares of the Canada Permanent Trust Company except directors' qualifying shares. In looking at the list in the Financial Post survey I see there are cross-references as to holdings by one company in another. The Royal Trust Company is not isolated from the loan company in that one lends money and the other holds money in trust because I understand that a trust company holding money in trust is able to invest in certain types of securities in some instances which brings a return to the person for whom they hold the money in trust.
The point is that in the past few years there has been one merger after another of trust companies and we now have another which will result in the National Trust Company, the Royal Trust Company and the amalgamated company having assets greater than the assets of all the other companies taken together. I am wondering whether this is not a matter that should be explored rather fully in the committee. We certainly explore these things through the combines investigation branch under the Combines Investigation Act although the act does not cover the field of finance with the exception of insurance rates. The provision of services, as it were, and loans are excluded from the Combines Investigation Act although the act deals with monopolies, oligopolies and price fixing situations in the field of commodities and sales.
I wonder whether this is not something that the committee should not explore more fully to see whether we are getting into a dangerous position in Canada. I think that this perhaps should be done when we find three corporations of this type with assets more than all the others put together and when we are moving more and more towards larger and larger trust companies with the number of active trust companies becoming less and less.
I do not raise this matter in the same way as I would if the corporation involved were in the field of production and sale of commodities or consumer goods or something of that nature. I think this matter is in a different field but it concerns the money of individuals. In one case they entrust their money and in the other case they buy something. In the one case prices may be fixed by arrangement and in the other case some mutually agreeable arrangement may be worked out which is not truly beneficial to

the financial situation in Canada. I am not trying to say that in this instance I see arriving on the scene some huge corporate octopus which is going to engulf the entire financial field or drive other trust companies out of business by acquisitions, mergers and the like, eventually leading to a situation where only a few companies have practically all the trust assets in Canada.
I raise this matter because I think it should be considered by the committee. There is a move here in the same direction that has taken place in other fields involving mergers such as the sugar industry, the beer industry and so on. There is a move in the direction of larger companies, greater assets and a smaller and smaller number of companies with the concentration of authority, as it were, in the hands of fewer and fewer people. I think this matter must be looked at rather seriously from the point of view of ensuring that the interests of people who have money with trust companies and the interests of the country as a whole are protected to the fullest extent possible.
The growth of monopolies and oligopolies is not always detrimental. A monopoly per se is not detrimental but the manner in which it operates may be. These are some things that I think should be looked at seriously by the committee to ensure that the trust company situation in the financial world is protected, that these other relationships are protected to the fullest extent possible, that investors are protected and that the general public are also protected. These various interests should be protected from activities that might be directed-I am not saying they will be-toward controlling more and more such assets, activities which are not in keeping with the good sense that we now expect of trust companies.
When the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. Morton) introduced the bill, he said that it would allow the amalgamated company to have offices that will fairly well cover the country. I understand that one company now has offices in one area and another company in another area. The bill will allow the amalgamated company to carry on operations in a broad field. I would certainly appreciate from the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. Morton), who is sponsoring the bill and who has a knowledge of the corporate structure of trust companies, some indication of his views on what I have said, namely whether or not when the officials of the company are before the committee they will be prepared to deal with this specific point.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: should like to make one comment on the remarks made by the hon. member for Hull

(Mr. Caron) with regard to the use of "Canada" in the name. I do sympathize with him in the feeling he has that the name should be safeguarded and that it can, on occasion, give rise to misunderstandings. I would submit, however, for his consideration that in this case it is somewhat different. The Canada Permanent has had the name "Canada" for nearly a century now and it would, therefore, be very confusing and indeed a rather serious matter to ask a company with such a long time and honourably known name to change it. In addition, I would think it is so widely known, and for such a long time, that the chance of there being any confusion as to the reality of the situation, in other words the chance of anyone being misled into thinking it was anything but what it is, is very slight.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, it is rather ironical that I should have the opportunity this afternoon to say a few words about a company such as the Canada Permanent Trust Company. My early recollection of this company is rather unfavourable. Certainly if I had been asked 25 years ago to support this measure, I would have turned it down without any questions asked.
I should like, however, to refer to the situation which produced this feeling. My first association with this company was when we bought a farm from that organization. This was during the depths of the depression, and the farm had originally had a mortgage against it for a small amount. However, because of the structure of this company, they compounded the interest on the amounts that were due and before long there was $10,000 owing on this farm. If this is still the practice of this company, the committee should give some consideration to it because I am still opposed to it. Fortunately, my father was able to obtain a loan and we bought the farm at a lower price than that amount.
As I say, this incident occurred in the depths of the depression. Probably the relationships of the farmers and the Canada Permanent Trust Company in northern Ontario were highly unsatisfactory. People who had homesteaded farms and who had borrowed small amounts of money on these farms, then found that the interest was compounded at a time when payments were not made, and were not being made anywhere across the country. Those people who had mortgages with Canada Permanent Trust Company, because of this practice of compounding the interest, in most cases lost their farms. At one time this company probably had as much farm land in my area as was owned by all the farmers put together.
Private Bills
This company seems to be expanding rather quickly. Their net earnings have been something over 11| per cent. This would seem to indicate a very healthy situation at a time when repossessions are probably small in number and when defaults on payments are very small. I believe the committee would be well advised to look into this matter of compounding the interest on arrears. If this is still the policy of this company, then I believe the committee should take steps to see that the matter is corrected. We have now a much more humane method of handling this situation in so far as other kinds of financing are concerned. It would seem to me that we could develop, without much difficulty, a much better system than this compounding of interest. It was not advantageous to the farmers in my area, and I am sure it was not advantageous to the Canada Permanent because, while the farmer lost his farm the Canada Permanent lost its reputation and a great deal of money in that area. The company has not returned to the area to any extent since the depression.
For these reasons, I believe the committee should give consideration to this matter. I am unable to say whether or not the Guaranty Trust has followed this practice. However, I feel that when these companies are asking parliament to increase the amount of mortgage money under their control, then we should be very cautious about permitting a practice that has, in the past, had serious repercussions. In my opinion, this practice has created hardship for the mortgagee through no fault of his own. He was not responsible for causing the depression. In my area, many people who had homesteaded, built their own farms, lost them, even though the amount owing was small, because of this practice of compounding the interest on the arrears.


Mr. Speakman:: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not see anything in this bill concerning interest rates, and I wonder if the hon. member is not straying a little from the subject.


William Arnold Peters: The point I am making is that I have not much objection to this company growing. I would object, however, to this company amalgamating or joining with another company if these provisions relating to interest were still in the act of incorporation of this company, and if they were not corrected.


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


Murray Douglas Morton: In so far
as the comments of the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) are concerned, I think

Private Bills
perhaps the mere combination of companies would add to the investment power and usefulness of the service of these companies. If there were too many of these companies coming together and we found the number of companies diminishing, then perhaps we should consider the problem of monopoly. I think the company officials would be able to discuss that problem with the hon. member when they come before the committee.
With regard to the matter brought up by the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters), I would suggest to the hon. gentleman that if he looked in the clauses of most mortgages he would find a penalty clause providing for compound interest. The policy he attributes to Canada Permanent is not one attributable to that company alone. When he is speaking of Canada Permanent, he is speaking of the parent company of the company in question here. I would suggest that the hon. member check with other firms before he brings up the matter in committee.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on banking and commerce.

Murray Douglas Morton: the second reading of Bill No. S-22, to incorporate the Acadia Life Insurance Company.
He said: Mr. Speaker, this is brought about in that the Acadia Insurance Company is now operating under incorporation of 1862, chapter 77 of the Nova Scotia statutes as the Acadia Fire Insurance Company. Then later, in 1953, bill No. 52 was passed by the Nova Scotia legislature adding to the name of the company as described in chapter 89 the words "and in French" "L'Acadie, Compagnie d'Assurances". They have been operating a general insurance business. This company is wholly owned and operated by the Phoenix Assurance Company Limited of London, and because of their going into the life assurance field the inspector of insurance has advised that it would be better if the company operated under two companies. Therefore the present company is being incorporated to deal with the life insurance but it will be owned by the same parent company and the directors of Acadia Insurance Company will be the directors of Acadia Life Insurance Company.


William Arnold Peters: May I
ask a simple question as to the ownership. Does this mean that, under clause 3, immediately this amount of $1 million will be raised from the parent company rather than from stock distribution on the market?


Murray Douglas Morton: That is my understanding.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the house ready for the question?


Some hon. Members:: Question.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on banking and commerce.

Paul Léo Maurice Johnson: the second reading of Bill No. S-26, respecting the congregation of the Sisters of the Holy Family of Bordeaux in Canada.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on miscellaneous private bills.

Murray Douglas Morton: the second reading of Bill No. S-27, respecting Guaranty Trust Company of Canada.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to authorize an increase in the capital stock of the company from $5 million to $10 million. I believe also in clause 2 permission is given to the company to use, in addition to the name of Guaranty Trust Company of Canada, the name Compagnie Guaranty Trust du Canada, which is the French version of their name. This company is a wholly owned Canadian company. It has over 2,200 shareholder residents in Canada from coast to coast. It was first founded and started business in 1925 after incorporation in Windsor, Ontario. The company continued to operate with one office until 1934, when it chose the most important city in Canada, namely the city of Toronto,-perhaps I should not put it that way-in which to open its second office. The company operated two offices until 1940 when it acquired the assets of the Fidelity Trust Company of Ontario which had an office in Niagara Falls. This acquisition provided the company with a third office in the province of Ontario. Since that time the company has grown. The company now has 15 active offices. It hopes to extend its operations before the end of the current year and that it will have 20 offices. At the present time there are approximately 300 employees on the payroll and additional employees, of course, will be added. This company has also participated in taking mortgages under the National Housing Act. I understand they hold in excess of $27 million in mortgages which have been acquired under this act over a period of time. If there are any questions that any of the members would like to ask

concerning this company now, or in the committee, I shall be glad to try to answer them.


Frank Howard: Before the hon. member takes his seat I wonder whether he can answer two questions. One is this. What page is he reading from?


Mr.   Morion@: I was referring to some of the notes that were taken from the proceedings of the other place, at page 769.


Frank Howard: Can the hon. member also indicate what is the par value of the shares?


Mr.   Morion@: It would appear that originally the shares of this company had a par value of $100; but in 1949 these shares were split, 10 for one, into shares having a par value of $10. This was done in order to permit a wider distribution of ownership in the company by small investors in Canada.


Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, before you put the question may I say this. As may be recalled, just by way of accident more than anything else, this is one of the companies I mentioned when we were considering Bill S-25. I mentioned it then, in an incidental way; and as I say, just by coincidence, the same company happens to have reference here. May I say first that earlier the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. Morton) as I understand him, in effect said yes, that we should concern ourselves about the growth of monopolies and the like but that it was not of too much concern at the moment; that perhaps after a while, if it got to be a problem of fewer and fewer companies in this field controlling more and more assets, then we should concern ourselves about it. He said it really was not a problem at this time. That is generally what I understood him to say.
While it may not be a problem at this time -and I am not suggesting that it is a problem, apart from the fact that, as I said, three companies own more assets than do all the other 24 put together which fact to me puts them in a unique and powerful position-I think it is something that we should continue to keep under review, especially in this field where the combines investigation branch has relatively little jurisdiction apart, as I understand it, from the question of insurance itself as a service. The rest of its activities are in the commodities and con-summer goods fields and relate to price fixing and other unfair trade practices.
This particular company acquired Western Trust Company in 1958, so it is a company which is into this field of merging and it is one with which we should concern ourselves. Its growth as a company is demonstrated by the fact that originally the shares
Private Bills
were at $100 par value and were then split ten to one. One of the reasons given by the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. Morton) was that this allowed small investors to invest in the company. This is somewhat the same reason that is given for other companies splitting shares, except that they relate theirs to their market value. Then when the shares get too high on the market it does not look good for them to have it that way and they engage in a stock splitting business to make it look as though the company is not faring very well and is just holding its own.
I would imagine the Guaranty Trust Company has done relatively well over the years. In fact, according to the 1960 survey of industrials, in 1959 it had total assets of some $220 million. It does not indicate in here, except perhaps by way of subtraction, what the assets were of Western Trust Company which was acquired a year before, but we notice that in the one year period the assets of this company increased by some $35 million. Whether or not this reflects the position of Western Trust Company is very, very difficult to say. However, in 1957 it had assets of $142 million. Therefore in one year we see a jump of about $40 million in assets, and the next year an approximate increase of $35 million in total assets, with earnings per share running around $2-$1.95 to be exact.
We should look at this question in terms of the growth of the corporate structure, and I think we must all be on guard to ensure that in fact these groups do not become laws unto themselves outside of the operation and the control of parliament, which is really the only agency which is able in any marked degree to protect individual members of society against the hugeness of the corporate structure.
The purpose of this bill being to double the capital stock of the company-which is in fact what it does by increasing it from $5 million to $10 million-indicates to me that perhaps Guaranty Trust has a good perception of what may exist in the future, because I am sure they do not want just to double their capital stock for the fun of it; there must be some purpose behind doing this sort of thing.
It would be interesting to find out just what this particular company has in mind in doubling its share capital because, as I have said, it seems to have been doing fairly well under the old capitalization of $5 million, which I gather has been in existence since 1925, although I may have misread the explanatory notes. Since 1925 the company has had a $5 million capital structure. During that period of time it has built up these assets in a rather marked degree. As shown

Business of the House
by the survey ol industrials, over the last two year period this company has increased its total assets from $142 million to $220 million, or almost an $80 million increase. This represents a 50 per cent or 60 per cent increase in total assets over a two year period.
I think that if we looked at the figures of this company next year we might find it is in an even more advantageous position and anticipates quite an additional growth in its assets. This would mean that the more this company grows, the more it will be brought into relationship with the three companies I mentioned earlier, and perhaps the four of them will control even larger and larger amounts of the total assets of all the trust companies in existence in Canada.
I think this is something we should continue to be on guard against to ensure that the corporate structure does not get into the position of being a private law unto itself, with the individual having relatively little protection against its activities.


Mr.   Morion@: Mr. Speaker, briefly-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I must inform the house that if the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. Morton) speaks now, he will close the debate.


Mr.   Morion@: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member referred to the company having a capitalization of $5 million since 1925. The record will show that in 1925 it had a capitalization of $500,000; in 1947 it was increased to $1 million, and in 1949 to $5 million.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on banking and commerce.

Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, the business for tomorrow will be the estimates of the Department of Public Works, followed by the estimates of the Department of National Revenue.
For next week the forecast of business runs this way: Monday and Tuesday legislation, with the budget debate coming at 7.30 on Tuesday evening. Wednesday will be
legislation or estimates; Thursday and Friday the budget debate, and Saturday estimates.
For Monday and Tuesday the legislative items which are on the order paper will be taken up, with the exception of Nos. 3, 4 and 5. There will be some other legislative items appearing on the order paper tomorrow and in Votes and Proceedings tomorrow. Therefore tomorrow at six o'clock I will give the order in which these items will be taken up on Monday and Tuesday.


Mr. Chevrier:: Mr. Speaker, I wonder
whether I could get some information on the legislative items that are likely to be discussed on Monday and Tuesday so that we may hold ourselves in readiness. The house leader has already mentioned those matters that are now on the order paper, save and except Nos. 2, 3 and 4, but could the house leader give any indication as to what other items may be on tomorrow so that we will know what we may expect on Monday and Tuesday?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Speaker, I excepted Nos. 3, 4 and 5. There are the two bills from the Senate which received first reading today; there are two bills mentioned in Votes and Proceedings, which will be on the order paper tomorrow. They are an act to amend the Criminal Code, and an act to amend the Railway Act.
In Votes and Proceedings tomorrow and appearing on the order paper on Monday will be an act to amend the National Energy Board Act, and a resolution dealing with the construction of the Pine Point railway. Those two items which I have just mentioned will not be ready for debate until Tuesday.


Lionel Chevrier: Does it follow from that there will be no legislation dealing with the governor of the Bank of Canada next week?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Unless it appears in Votes and Proceedings by tomorrow it would not be available for discussion on Monday or Tuesday.


[Stage Direction]
It being two minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.

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


Mr. Howard: Are employees and staff members of the national commission for UNESCO appointed pursuant to advertised competitions?
Answer by: Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):
The pertinent powers of the Canada Council in connection with the national commission for UNESCO are set forth in section 8,
16, 1961	6479
Questions
subsection 2 of the Canada Council Act, which reads as follows:
"The governor in council may assign to the council such functions and duties in relation to the United Nations educational, scientific and cultural organization as he considers desirable."
On June 14, 1957, order in council P.C.
1957-831 provides, in part,
"That the Canada Council shall provide the secretariat for the national commission . .
The Canada Council is not an agent of Her Majesty but the Canada Council Act provides the manner in which the council is to report to parliament annually.
The government has no power to ask the council to reveal information such as is asked for.

Saturday, June 17, 1961