1961-03-08

EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


Hon. Howard C. Green (Acting Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, on February 17 the Prime Minister announced that Right Hon. Harold Macmillan, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, accompanied by Lady Dorothy, would be paying a brief visit to Ottawa on April 7 and 8. Hon. members will have heard with great pleasure on today's news broadcast that the visit is now to be of longer duration. As a result of talks which Mr. Diefenbaker had yesterday in London, the dates of the visit are now arranged for April 8 to April 12.
Mr. Macmillan and Lady Dorothy will be the guests of Their Excellencies the Governor General and Madame Vanier during their stay in Ottawa. As they are arriving here on a Saturday it is planned that they shall spend a quiet week end, which will then be followed by two days of talks with ministers on questions of mutual concern.
The United Kingdom Prime Minister will be arriving in Ottawa from Washington, where he will just have completed talks with President Kennedy. As the right hon. Prime Minister said in the house on February 16 when he first expressed the hope that Mr. Macmillan might visit Canada, it has become a welcome custom that whenever the United Kingdom Prime Minister has visited the president of the United States for consultations, he has almost invariably visited Canada either before or after. Such visits are not only useful but give us a great deal of pleasure, and I am sure all members of the house will welcome the news that Right Hon. Mr. Macmillan and Lady Dorothy have found it possible to spend a few days with us here in Ottawa.


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure all members of the house will have welcomed the statement made by the Acting Prime Minister. I know that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and his wife will receive the warm welcome which is traditionally accorded prime ministers of the United Kingdom, and I hope their stay in Canada will be both useful and pleasant.


Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, since the visit of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is to be of longer duration, and since parliament will be in session for part of that time, I would hope that it might be possible for the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, as I suggested earlier, to address a joint session of both houses of parliament.
I would think these talks could be very useful, particularly on the return of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from the United States. As we all so well know, there are many urgent outstanding world problems that require the attention of the leaders of the world. I am certain that discussions between our own Prime Minister and Prime Minister Macmillan regarding trade questions and questions involving the peace of the world would be particularly useful following his discussions with President Kennedy.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the house will bear with me with regard to the suggestion made by the hon. member for Assiniboia to the effect that Mr. Macmillan should be asked to address the members of the Senate and House of Commons. I am not yet in a position to announce whether that will be possible, but I am hoping it will be.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to inform the house that the regulations providing for special capital cost allowances have been printed and are being distributed today to members of both houses and other interested parties. These regulations provide that accelerated depreciation may be claimed in respect of most types of assets acquired after December 31, 1960, if the assets are used in making a product not previously produced in Canada or in a surplus manpower area. Such assets are eligible for double depreciation for one year on the basis of the capital expenditure incurred for such equipment. The extra allowance can be applied in any of the first three years after the asset is acquired.
Companies acquiring assets which they believe may be eligible for special capital cost allowances should communicate with the depreciation certification branch, Department of Trade and Commerce, Ottawa. Copies of

Labour Conditions
an explanatory memorandum, the regulations and application forms will be sent to them. This material is available in French and English.
Municipal or area authorities wishing to have their localities or areas designated as surplus manpower areas should communicate with the Department of Labour, which will be responsible for receiving and studying such applications.


Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the Minister of Trade and Commerce will not expect us not to be surprised by the announcement he has just made, in view of the reply he made to me last week when I asked him if he was going to have anything to do with this program. He said no.


George Harris Hees: No.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Later the Prime Minister informed the house that the Minister of Labour would be charged with the administration of this matter and, indeed, in that connection the Minister of Labour did make an announcement, not satisfactory, of course, in content; but now we are told by the Minister of Trade and Commerce, notwithstanding his disclaimer, that he is in fact going to have something to do with this program which we should have an opportunity of discussing at the earliest possible moment.
I can only say, Mr. Speaker, that until such time as we have given further study to the announcement made by the minister, the fact that he has made this announcement only indicates the confusion and uncertainty on the government benches.


Hazen Robert Argue: We are
glad the government is showing some progress, in that it has now announced in a more specific way certain terms of the policy that was first indicated in this house some days ago. We make the suggestion, Mr. Speaker, that the formula requires further study; that it should be a formula which would allow this kind of depreciation in localities where there is a surplus of workers today, in depressed areas, and it should be much different from the formula which was announced in this house. In applying this formula the government should make certain that the main depressed areas of this country can comply with this double depreciation provision.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, in speaking to this announcement the hon. member for Essex East-


Mr. Chevrier:: On a point of order Mr. Speaker, Your Honour decided the other day very clearly in connection with other
[Mr. Hees.l
statements which were made that once the minister had made a statement and there was an opportunity for reply, there should be no further opportunity for re-reply.


Mr. Speaker:: That is correct. I am not sure why the minister is rising, but I shall find out in due course.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I might use the device used every day by the members of the opposition, when they rise on questions of privilege, to clarify an erroneous statement made by the hon. member for Essex East. He claimed that I said something the other day which I did not say-


Lionel Chevrier: That is not privilege.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. If the minister feels that a misinterpretation has been put upon his statement I have said before, and I repeat, that he, as any member, has the right to rise to correct an erroneous interpretation which has been put upon a factual statement. If it is limited to that I do not think I should prevent him from making that correction. However, it is well settled that he would not be in order simply to reply to a comment which had been made on the original statement.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, when asked that question some time ago by the hon. member for Essex East I said that it had to do, as I remembered it, with the designation of surplus manpower areas. At that time I said that was not my responsibility but the responsibility of the Minister of Labour, and that, of course, is the case. My responsibility and the responsibility of my department is to deal with new products and new processes, and I have never for a moment said that was not a responsibility of my department.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, on March 1 I advised the house that it had been decided to send three officers to Petawawa to look into the matter of the Canadian Guards regimental sailing club. As a result of this investigation it would appear that some degree of compulsion was used to secure the payment of membership fees in the club, and that the information sent to headquarters, on the basis of which I answered questions in the house, was not accurate.
These are both serious matters which warrant a more formal investigation. The chief of the general staff has convened a board of inquiry to inquire into and report upon allegations of irregularities regarding membership

in the Canadian Guards sailing club and the accuracy of the reports submitted in that connection. In fairness to all concerned, I do not believe that any further statement should be made until the results of this inquiry are known.


Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, do I understand that the view of the minister now is that there was some evidence of compulsion, and that he therefore is now ordering a further investigation in that regard?


Douglas Scott Harkness: If the hon. member will read my statement when it appears in Hansard I believe the situation will be quite clear. I do not think there is any need for me to make any further statement in regard to the matter.



REPORT ON CONFERENCE TO EXPEDITE MOVEMENT THROUGH PACIFIC COAST PORTS

Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to give the house an interim report on the conference held in Vancouver on Monday and Tuesday and continuing today with regard to expediting the movement of grain through west coast ports. There were some 40 senior officers representing 18 different organizations in attendance, and it is my belief that this was a perfect example of a productivity council in action. The grain gathering companies from the prairies, the two great railway companies, the two labour unions affected, the merchants exchange, the grain exchange and the government agencies concerned pooled their information, and as a result I believe I am able to say now that there will be an increase ranging from 15 to 25 per cent in the movement of grain out of these ports in the next few months.
I was asked at the meeting to correct an erroneous statement by the hon. member for Vancouver East which appears in Hansard for last Wednesday, the day I announced the conference. At that time he said, as found on page 2593 of Hansard:
It is many, many years since there have been any extensions to the port of Vancouver. As a matter of fact, the facilities of the port are less now than they were as a result of a fire many years ago. The facilities lost then have never been replaced.
I simply want to say at this time that when I was in Vancouver I was given enough information by people there who are very proud of their port to indicate that this statement was wrong, and I will give the hon. member all the statistics I have to that effect. I simply want to say that there have been many facilities added to the port in the last few years, including storage for grain 90205-6-176
Grain Shipments
to the extent of an additional capacity of three or four million bushels.
Finally, may I say that I think the conference will result in a permanent body being set up for liaison and the co-ordination of the movement of grain through the western ports. A permanent body will also be set up, I hope, to handle public relations that involve several organizations.


Harold Edward Winch: On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister to tell us what additional facilities have been added in the past few years.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps the hon. member would ask his question on the orders of the day.


Harold Edward Winch: I certainly will, sir.

On the orders of the day:


Harold Edward Winch: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Is he in a position to report to the house on the recent conference in Vancouver relative to the loading and shipping facilities in the port of Vancouver, especially with reference to wheat? Can he advise the house what recommendations were made as a result of the conference he called, and his reaction to those recommendations?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: First of all, Mr. Speaker, the person making the recommendations to the conference was the Minister of Agriculture. I asked the representatives of these 18 organizations to see what they could do about speeding up the movement of grain through west coast ports in view of the market situation. I suggested several things to them and they promised their co-operation. The meeting broke up into committees yesterday afternoon and those committees are continuing to meet today and possibly tomorrow. I will not know until the meetings have been completed just what final steps will be taken. However, from what I heard yesterday I believe I can assure the house that the suggestion I made of an increase of 15 per cent to 25 per cent in shipments through the port will be realized.


Lionel Chevrier: May I ask
a supplementary question of the minister. Has he any comment to make on the recent complaints concerning the movement of wheat out of the port of Vancouver, namely that one ship was delayed 28 days in loading, while three Russian ships had been waiting 11 days before they could be loaded? The delay in the first case cost approximately $30,000.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: In answer to that question I may say that the handling of grain through any port is a very complicated

Grain Shipments
business. Before the conference I was under the impression that there was a lack of coordination in the handling of this movement as among these 18 organizations, but I think the conference established that these things can be ameliorated.
In so far as the tie-up of ships a week or 10 days ago is concerned, I think that can be explained to some degree by the fact that a number of ships arrived at once. As an illustration of this point, may I say that today we expected five ships to enter the harbour. They did not come because of storms on the Pacific. They are expected in today or tomorrow, but there are three berths lying idle today. We are not loading to maximum capacity. These things cannot be prevented by any amount of planning. What we are trying to do is to set up a permanent liaison group which will funnel information to all the groups concerned so there will be no tie-up for which we can be held responsible for lack of planning.


Lionel Chevrier: Will the minister comment on statements made in Vancouver that the government, not the board, made the sale to the Chinese, and the government failed to advise the board about these special requirements?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I do not think the press reports are altogether accurate. We made the announcement publicly in the house, which would be the first official warning they would have of the sale. The responsibility in the next stage would be that of the agents hired by the Chinese resources company to make known when these ships were going to arrive. A responsibility then would devolve upon the Canadian wheat board to berth these ships at the various berths where the grades required were available. Of course it is the responsibility of the board to get these grades into the port ahead of time.
I believe that as a result of suddenly moving the port up to capacity a number of things happened about which we have heard. I cannot guarantee that there will not be more of these tie-ups. It is my judgment that there will be more than we have had in the past, because we are trying to use the facilities to maximum capacity and when you do that there are bound to be these tie-ups.


Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: I wonder if I could ask the minister a supplementary question. Can he say whether representatives either from the city or from organizations in Prince Rupert were invited to this particular conference?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: The representatives who would take care of the interests of the elevators in Prince Rupert were the national harbours board, which handles the whole operation in connection with the harbour, and the board of grain commissioners which operates the elevator at Prince Rupert. I did receive a telegram from the mayor of Prince Rupert, and I should like to assure the hon. member that Prince Rupert will be used to full capacity this year.


Harold Edward Winch: May I ask a supplementary question. Can the minister inform us whether the reported statement is correct that Canada would have been able to sell more wheat to Asian countries if the port of Vancouver had been able to handle it? This statement appeared in newspapers, and I wondered if the minister would say whether or not it was correct.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Yes, I think the statement is generally correct, and for this reason. We received more orders for delivery through Vancouver than we could handle, and had to try to divert these orders to other ports.


Harold Edward Winch: May I take advantage of a most unique opportunity and direct a question to the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, the Secretary of State for External Affairs, the Acting Prime Minister, and ask him whether, in all his capacities, he has noted the answers given by the Minister of Agriculture as to a conference held in Vancouver. May I further ask the hon. gentleman whether in view of the answers which were given to the effect that certain sales have been lost by Canada because of the lack of facilities-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member's question seems to present a glimpse of the obvious, because the Acting Prime Minister sat through all these proceedings with the rest of us.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the order: Government notices of motion:
March 6-The Minister of Agriculture-The following proposed motion:-
That the standing committee on agriculture and colonization be empowered to continue its inquiry into the question of prices of farm machinery as recommended by the said committee in its fourth report presented to the house July 28, 1960, and that the committee's minutes of proceedings and evidence with regard to this inquiry at the last session be referred to the said committee.
Mr. Speaker:: Pursuant to section 2 of standing order 21, this government notice of motion stands transferred to and ordered for consideration under government orders at the next sitting of the house.



STARRED QUESTIONS


Mr. Hellyer: 1.	Is it the intention to dispense with the position of receptionist at Sunnybrook military hospital, Toronto?
2.	Have any representations been received on this point?
3.	If so, from what organizations, and what reply has the government made?


Mr. H. F. Jones (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs):: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes.
3.	The united council of veterans associations of Hamilton and district. The reply given was that the decision was made only after very careful consideration of all the factors involved.
"edition speciale"-moderator's travelling


EXPENSES
Mr. Tremblay: 1.	Does the moderator of the program ''Edition Speciale", televised on the French network each Sunday night, receive special remuneration for travelling expenses?
2.	If so, what is the amount of such remuneration?
(Translation):


Mr. M. J. A. Lambert (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the first part of the question is no. As far as the second part is concerned, there is no answer.
(Text):


C.B.C. BUILDING, MONTREAL  ALTERATION TENDERS
Mr. Tremblay: 1.	Has the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation invited, during January 1961, public tenders for alteration work to its building located at 1425 Dorchester boulevard, Montreal, Quebec?
2.	If so, what are the names of the tenderers, what is the amount of each tender, and to whom was the contract finally awarded?
(Translation):



THE C.B.C.  PUBLIC TENDERS

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 170-Mr. Tremblay:
Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the first part of the question is the following: Four companies were invited to submit tenders. With regard to the second part of the question, the answer is that the following companies have been invited to submit tenders: Cook & Leitch, Deschamps & Belanger, Raymond Matte, Robert M. Miller.
90205-6-1764
Starred Questions
The contract was awarded to the lowest tenderer: Cook & Leitch.
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation feels that it is not in the public interest to reveal the amounts of the tenders received. (Text):



CKY-FM, WINNIPEG  PROTESTS

Mr. Benidickson: 1.	How many communications have been received by the board of broadcast governors from (a) known T.V. service persons wanting to instal antennas, and (b) other persons, protesting that approval of an application by CKY Winnipeg, for FM broadcast rights on frequency 103.1 might interfere with reception by viewers in Manitoba from Pembina, North Dakota, T.V. station KCND?
2.	Which frequencies other than 103.1 might be provided under international treaty arrangements or otherwise for assignment by the board of broadcast governors to a Winnipeg area applicant seeking a licence for a frequency modulation station?
3.	(a) Has the board of broadcast governors received any information that a new U.S.A. defence radar station near Baudette, Minnesota, will be utilizing an FM frequency likely to interfere with T.V. reception from Channel 7, Winnipeg, to the detriment of Canadian T.V. viewers in the Rainy river district of Ontario? (b) if so, does the board of broadcast governors understand that a decision respecting frequency 103.1 unnecessarily inconsiderate respecting United States T.V. station KCND, North Dakota, would tend to nullify Canadian protests to the U.S. government against the proposed American use of a frequency at Baudette, Minnesota, that would eliminate reception at Rainy river of T.V. programs from a Canadian source?


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Speaker, the answer to this question is rather lengthy and I would ask the permission of the house to have the reply printed in Hansard without reading it.


Mr. Speaker:: Does the house give its concurrence to the suggestion of the hon. parliamentary secretary?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The text of the above reply is as follows:]
1.	The board of broadcast governors has received six letters and three telegrams, one of which was signed by 52 radio and television dealers from known T.V. service persons wanting to instal antennas and 85 letters and petitions and 62 telegrams from other persons protesting that approval of an application by CKY, Winnipeg, for FM broadcast rights on the frequency of 103.1 megacycles might interfere with reception by viewers in Manitoba from Pembina, North Dakota, T.V. station KCND.
2.	I am advised by the Department of Transport that the following frequencies other than 103.1 megacycles would be available to any person making an application for an FM station in Winnipeg:

Starred Questions
Channel Number	Frequency-Mc/s
221	92.1
232	94.3
252	98.3
272	102.3
The foregoing are in accordance with the present international agreement.
It is possible that additional channels could be allocated if needed but there would have to be special negotiations conducted with the U.S.A.
An applicant seeking a licence for a frequency modulation station selects a channel for the station on the advice of his broadcast engineering consultant, usually from the list of channels available. Some channels are more desirable than others from the standpoint of freedom from interfering effects and this can be taken into account by the engineering consultant.
3.	Although the board of broadcast governors understands that a new U.S. military radar station is being built near Baudette, Minnesota, it has no information as to the technical aspects of this station. These matters would be in the responsibility of the Department of Transport and the Department of National Defence and any formal information on the station would come to the board through the Department of Transport.



AUTAIR HELICOPTER SERVICES LTD.  CONTRACT

Mr. Chevrier: 1.	Did Autair Helicopter Services Limited obtain a contract or contracts from the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys for the continental polar shelf project and for topographical work in 1960?
2.	What was the amount of such contract or contracts?
3.	How much was paid to Autair Helicopter Services Limited in 1960?


Hon. Paul Comtois (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: This question is in three parts, Mr. Speaker. The answer to part No. 1 is that Autair were awarded one contract for helicopter services required on the polar continental shelf project in 1960.
The answer to part 2 is, estimated $183,500.
The answer to part 3 is $137,551.36.



Mr. Chevrier: 1.	Has Autair Helicopter Services Limited a contract or contracts from the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys for the continental polar shelf project for 1961?
2.	If so, were tenders called, and who were the other tenderers?
3.	Did Autair submit the lowest tender?


Paul Comtois: Mr. Speaker, this question is also in three parts. The answer to part No. 1 is, no. A letter of intent was, however, sent to Autair on February 23, 1961 pending, and subject to, final consideration by the treasury board who, on March 2, 1961, approved our proposal.
The answer to part 2 is that we do not call tenders in those cases where rates are filed with the air transport board. We do, however, review the rates of all companies considered capable of performing the service before making our selection.
The answer to part 3 is that an economic assessment of the applicable air transport board rates and associated costs made by my department indicates that the services of Autair would result in the lowest over-all cost to the government of Canada.



AUTAIR HELICOPTER SERVICES LTD.   TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY

Mr. Chevrier: 1.	Has Autair Helicopter Services Limited a contract or contracts from the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys for a topographical survey in northern Canada?
2.	If so, were tenders called, and who were the other tenderers?
3.	Did Autair submit the lowest tender?


Paul Comtois: Mr. Speaker, the question is again in three parts. The answers given to the previous question, namely No. 174, apply to this one also.



GATT-ADJUSTMENTS FOLLOWING CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT

Mr. Benidickson: Which contracting countries signatory to the general agreement on tariffs and trade up to the date of reply, have intimated to Canadian government representatives in Canada or abroad, that they will expect Canada to negotiate compensatory tariff adjustments or give trade concessions, in the event that the Customs Tariff is amended in accordance with the terms outlined in a resolution therefor introduced by the Minister of Finance on December 20, 1960?


Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minisier of Finance):: To use the language of the question, Mr. Speaker, I would say that "no contracting parties signatory to the general agreement on tariffs and trade ... have intimated to Canadian government representatives in Canada or abroad that they will expect Canada to negotiate compensatory tariff adjustments or give trade concessions in the event that the Customs Tariff is amended in accordance with the terms outlined in a resolution therefor introduced by the Minister of Finance on December 20, 1960".

There have been discussions, as I think I intimated on an earlier occasion, with both the United Kingdom and the United States governments concerning the significance of the proposed amendment. Some of these discussions actually date back to the time before the terms of the proposed amendment were made known.
The United Kingdom government has intimated that it will be interested in the administration of the proposed amendment, and reserves whatever rights it may possess.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS LONG DISTANCE CALLS


Mr. Marlin (Essex East): 1.	What precautions are taken by the government and by the Department of External Affairs to ensure privacy and secrecy in long distance telephone calls between Ottawa offices and Canadian missions outside of Canada, particularly at the United Nations?
2.	Has the Canadian government a private telephone line to the Canadian mission at the United Nations, or must long distance calls go through the United Nations switchboard?
3.	Has any instance been reported to the Canadian government of a leak of private or secret information as a result of telephone discussions between government officials in Ottawa and members of Canadian missions at the United Nations, or elsewhere?
4.	If so, what were the circumstances, and the location, in any such instance?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the various parts of this question are as follows:
1.	Telephone communications, including those extending beyond Canada generally are considered to be insecure. Users of the telephone, therefore, are cautioned not to discuss sensitive classified matters on this medium of communication. There are, of course, adequate and secure means by which the Canadian government communicates with its representatives abroad, including the Canadian delegation to the United Nations.
2.	The answer to both parts of this question is no. However, when delegates receive telephone calls at the United Nations headquarters, these obviously go through the United Nations switchboard.
3.	The answer is no.
4.	This question has been answered by my reply to question No. 3.


C.N.R. PENSIONS, RETIRED EMPLOYEES
Mr. Argue: 1.	How many retired employees of the Canadian National Railways are in receipt of pensions of less than $25 per month?
2.	How many are in receipt of only the basic pension of $25 per month?
3.	How many are in receipt of non-contributory service pensions (a) $25.01 to $29.99 per month
Starred Questions
(b) $30 to $39.99 per month (c) $40 to $49.99 per month (d) $50 to $59.99 per month (e) $60 to $69.99 per month (f) $70 to $79.99 per month (g) $80 to $89.99 per month (h) $90 to $99.99 per month (i) $100 to $124.99 per month (j) $125 to $149.99 per month (k) $150 or over per month?
4.	How many are in receipt of pensions in part basic and in part contributory (a) $25.01 to $29.99 per month (b) $30 to $39.99 per month (c) $40 to $49.99 per month (d) $50 to $59.99 per month (e) $60 to $69.99 per month (f) $70 to $79.99 per month (g) $80 to $89.99 per month (h) $90 to $99.99 per month (i) $100 to $124.99 per month (j) $125 to $149.99 per month (k) $150 or over per month?


Hon. Leon Balcer (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, the answer to this question is in the form of a statistical table. I wonder whether it could be printed in Hansard.


Mr. Speaker:: Does the house give its concurrence to the suggestion made by the minister?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The statistical table referred to above is on p. 2776.3
U.s. RESTRICTIONS ON TOURIST IMPORTS


Mr. Badanai: 1.	Has the government given any consideration to the effect which the lowering of the exemption of returning American tourists from $500 to $100 has on Canadian business?
2.	Is the government considering some representation to the Washington administration with regard to this legislation, especially in view of our unfavourable trade balance with the United States?


Mr. E. L. Morris (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, there is nothing to add at this time to the answer given by the Prime Minister when he replied to a similar question on February 7, as recorded on page 1795 of Hansard.


R.C.A.F. REPAIRS, FAIREY AVIATION PLANT, VICTORIA
Mr. Badanai: 1.	Have any representations been received by the government from the labour unions in Victoria, B.C., requesting that R.C.A.F. planes be serviced for repairs at the Fairey aviation plant, Victoria, B.C.?
2.	If so, what bodies have made such representations, and what reply has been given by the government?


Hon. Raymond O'Hurley (Minister of Defence Production):: Mr. Speaker, the answers to the two parts of the question are as follows:
1.	Yes.
2.	Representations have been made by the Victoria labour council and by the international association of machinists.
I wish to have printed in Hansard copies of telegrams and letters addressed to the Prime Minister and myself and the answers


CLASSIFICATION OF PENSIONS PAYABLE TO RETIRED EMPLOYEES BY CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS AT DECEMBER 31, 1960
[Stage Direction]
Non-Contributory	Contributory
C.N.R.	pension plans	C.N.R.	pension plans	I.C. and P.E.I. Rys. employees provident fund	G.T.R. superannuation fund	Total number of pensions payableMonthly Pensions Payable	Pre-1935 Plan	1935 Plan	Total	1935 Plan 1959 Plan	Total	Under $25.00	1	172	173	78	80	158	331$ 25.00 (Basic pension)	18	2,70S	2,726	23	-	-	-	23	2,749$ 25.01 to $ 29.99	5	747	752	302	46	-	1	349	1,101$ 30.00 to $ 39.99	8	598	606	926	213	229	1	1,369	1,975$ 40.00 to $ 49.99	8	335	343	640	402	150	1	1,193	1,536$ 50.00 to $ 59.99	7	129	136	321	474	155	-	950	1,086$ 60.00 to $ 69.99	3	55	58	172	603	192	2	969	1,027$ 70.00 to $ 79.99	2	31	33	91	706	214	-	1,011	1,044$ 80.00 to $ 89.99	2	11	13	66	810	213	4	1,093	1,106$ 90.00 to $ 99.99	1	9	10	37	826	216	4	1,083	1,093$100.00 to $124.99	1	13	14	34	1,960	634	14	2,642	2,656$125.00 to $149.99	1	7	8	10	1,616	588	6	2,220	2,228$150.00 or over	2	5	7	4	3,533	1,537	23	5,097	5,104Total	59	4,820	4,879	2,704	11,269	4,128	56	18,157	23,036
Note: In a number of cases the above figures do not indicate the total pensions payable to employees for railway service. Pensions payable by the C.N.R. to international employees (service in both Canada and the United States) relate to their service in Canada only. Such employees also receive annuities payable under the U.S. railroad retirement act or the social security act for service performed in the United States. For example, in the group receiving pensions of under $25 from the C.N.R., there are over 60 former international employees who also receive U.S. railroad retirement or social security annuities in respect of C.N.R. service rendered in the United States. The balance of this group consists of employees who elected early retirement (before age 65) with reduced basic ($25) pensions, and employees who had very short service and small contributions.
2776	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Starred Questions

that have been forwarded to the international association of machinists. I would ask to have this correspondence printed in Hansard.
Mr. Speaker:: Will the minister indicate the extent of the correspondence?


Mr. O'Hurley:: Five pages, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that the correspondence asked for in this question be printed with the answer?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
(Editor's note: The correspondence referred to above is as follows:)
January 18, 1961-Telegram to the Prime Minister from Mr. Angus Keiller, president, Lodge No. 456, I.A. of M., c/o Fairey Aviation Company of Canada Limited, Patricia Bay airport, B.C.
"It is come to our attention that twelve Neptune aircraft based at Comox BC will be flown out of the province for painting at Victoria airport Fairey Aviation has all the men and facilities for carrying out this work as you are aware the unemployment situation in the Victoria district is acute and if Fairey Aviation were forced to close due to lack of military work it would be disastrous as most of our members are employed by Fairey Aviation the only aircraft overhaul plant on Vancouver Island would you sir on our behalf intervene to divert at least some of this work to Fairey Aviation trusting this meets with your favourable consideration."
January 26, 1961-Telegraphic reply from the secretary to the Prime Minister to Mr. Keiller*
"With reference to your telegram of January 18 I would advise you that the awarding of the contract for the painting of eleven Neptunes based at Comox was decided as the result of competitive tenders and the lowest tenderer is being awarded the contract stop all firms in the western area who are considered to be in a position to complete this work satisfactorily were invited to tender and in each case the firms were suffering from serious cut-backs in employment stop the competitive tender is the normal way for the Department of Defence Production to do business stop I can assure you however that with respect to any other work that may arise which Fairey Aviation at Patricia Bay are capable of carrying out this company will be invited to tender under the normal practice stop"
Starred Questions
January 18, 1961-Letter from Mr. A. W.
Toone, secretary treasurer, Victoria labour
council to Hon. Raymond O'Hurley:
"This council has in the past requested the allocation of work on behalf of the Department of National Defence to the plant of Fairey Aviation Company of Canada Limited, Sidney, B.C. may we again urge that consideration be given to this.
We are given to understand that painting, servicing and overhauling of aircraft of the Department of National Defence in this area is sent out of this province to be done, when the facilities for such work are available at the Sidney plant within a very short distance of the aircraft base.
Over the years, this plant has obtained the required tools and experienced personnel to deal with such work, without which both the industry and the jobs will be lost to this area, with the resulting increase in unemployment.
In view of the overall economy, we believe that this industry should be encouraged on Vancouver Island, and every effort made to maintain the craftsman in employment.
We therefore trust that favourable consideration will be given to the allocation of work to this plant; and we look forward to your assurance in this regard."
February 6, 1961-Reply letter from Hon.
Raymond O'Hurley to Mr. Toone-
"I have your letter dated January 18, 1961, in which you request that consideration be given to the allocation of defence work to the plant of the Fairey Aviation Company of Canada Limited, Sidney, B.C. You refer specifically to a recent requirement for the painting of eleven Neptune aircraft which, as a result of competitive tender, was allocated out of your area.
In reply I would state that as this requirement had never previously been carried out by any of our western contractors it was decided by my department that the requirement should be thrown open to competition. An additional consideration leading to this decision was the progressive decline in workload, with resultant lay-offs, at all plants west of and including Winnipeg. My department was of the opinion that a competitive tender would serve a dual purpose, in that it not only would result in the utmost in economies, but would also bolster the morale of the contractors concerned by affording them an opportunity to gain additional work on their own merits. The Fairey Aviation Company of Canada Limited was one of three companies invited to tender, but quoted a figure considerably higher than the lowest tenderer, who was ultimately selected to perform the work.

Starred Questions
We concur in your general comments concerning the overall economy of the area, and in particular to the need for ensuring that the Fairey Aviation Company of Canada Limited be given every opportunity to compete for such work as they are qualified and equipped to perform. You have my assurance that these considerations will always be borne in mind by my department when dealing with future requirements in your area."
February 1, 1961-Letter to the Prime Minister from Mr. A. W. Toone, Victoria labour council-
"I enclose a copy of a letter sent from this office to the Honourable Raymond J. M. O'Hurley, Minister of Defence Production, to which I have received no reply to date, but which will give you information on the subject matter of this letter.
The telegram sent from your office to the International Association of Machinists, Local 456, has been drawn to my attention and, in view of this, I hasten to write to you, urging that work be allocated to this plant of Fairey Aviation Company of Canada located at Sidney, B.C.
I am sure that you will understand our concern that this plant be given every opportunity to continue in operation; and trust that you will give urgent and favourable consideration to the above, and that, in the future, Fairey Aviation at Patricia Bay will be given every opportunity to tender on any work which they are capable of carrying out."
February 7, 1961-Reply to Mr. A. W. Toone
on behalf of the prime minister's office by
Claude Gauthier, secretary-
"I wish to acknowledge your letter of February 1st to the Prime Minister, enclosing copy of your letter of January 18 to the Minister of Defence Production with regard to the award of a recent contract for painting Neptune aircraft.
Please be assured that your representations have been noted and forwarded, at Mr. Diefenbaker's suggestion, to his colleague, the Minister of Defence Production. May I also repeat the assurance which was given in my telegram to the international association of machinists, local 456, that with respect to any other work that may arise which Fairey Aviation at Patricia Bay are capable of carrying out; this company will be invited to tender under the normal practice."


NATIONAL DEFENCE-TRANSPORT OF SUPPLIES TO PATRICIA BAY
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 181*-Mr. Herridge:
1. What firm or person has the contract for the hauling of defence department supplies from Comox to Patricia Bay?

2. Are building materials destined for Patricia Bay first shipped to Comox and then back to Patricia Bay? If so, what is the reason for this arrangement?
Mr. Egan Chambers (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence):: The answer is as follows:
1.	There is no contract between the Department of National Defence and any particular firm for the transportation of material from Comox to Patricia Bay.
2.	Records of the department do not indicate any recent shipments of building materials from Comox to Patricia Bay. If the hon. member has some information about a particular case he would like investigated, the department would be happy to look into such a matter for him.


T.C.A. LANDING FEES
Mr. Badanai: 1.	Is Trans-Canada Air Lines charging landing fees at Canadian airports?
2.	If so, what is the charge for aircraft such as Viscounts, Jet air liners?
3.	What are the landing fees charged to foreign air liners (a) Viscount class (b) Comet (c) Jet?


Léon Balcer: The answer to part 1 of this question is that Trans-Canada Air Lines do not operate any airports and consequently do not impose landing fees.
The answer to parts 2 and 3 is that aircraft landing fees charged to air liners by the Department of Transport are based on rates per thousand pounds gross take-off weight and vary depending on whether the flight is domestic, transborder or transoceanic. The following fees will be assessed for the aircraft in question:
Maximum
Gross
Take-off	Trans-	Trans-Weight Domestic	Border	oceanicViscount	64,500	$16.25	$ 16.25	$ 86.45DC-8	287,500	86.40	100.80	434.90Comet 4	162,000	48.60	56.70	244.65


BORDEN-TORMENTINE FERRIES
Mr. Pickersgill: 1.	What is the target date for the completion of the new motor vessel under construction at Halifax for the Borden-Tormentine ferry service?
2.	Has a name been chosen for this vessel and, if so, what?
3.	How many motors will the vessel have, and what is the horsepower rating of each?
4.	How many propellors or screws will this vessel have?
5.	Will it be possible to transfer all the power to one propeller or screw?
6.	How many motor vehicles will the vessel accommodate, and on what length per vehicle is the accommodation calculated?
7.	What is the over-all length of the vessel, and what is the draft?

8.	Will the vessel be equipped with rails for the transport of railway cars?
9.	How many motors has the motor vessel Abegweit, and what is the total horsepower rating?
10.	How many propellers or screws has the Abegweit, and can all the power be transferred to one propeller or screw?
11.	How many motor vehicles will the Abegweit accommodate, and on what length per vehicle is this accommodation calculated?
12.	What is the over-all length and draft of the Abegweit?
13.	How many motor vehicles will the S.S. Prince Edward Island accommodate?
14.	On what length per motor vehicle is such calculation based?


Léon Balcer: The answer to this question is as follows:
Part 1. November, 1961.
Part 2. No.
Part 3. Four propulsion motors, each 1,300 shaft horsepower.
Part 4. Four. Two forward and two aft.
Part 5. No. Full power (2,600 horsepower) can be obtained through two propellers either forward or aft, the power through one shaft being restricted by the 1,300 horsepower design limit in each propulsion motor.
Part 6. Sixty six 18.0' vehicles.
Part 7. 279'6" over-all length. Load draft 13'.
Part 8. No.
Part 9. The Abegweit has four propulsion motors, each 3,850 shaft horsepower for a total of 15,400.
Part 10. Four. Full power (7,700 horsepower) can be obtained through two propellers either forward or aft, the power through one shaft being restricted by the 3,850 horsepower design limit in each propulsion motor.
Part 11. Seventy 18.0' vehicles when carrying 16 railway freight cars.
130-18'0 vehicles when carrying no railway freight cars.
Part 12. 372'6" over-all length. Load draft 19 feet.
Part 13. Thirty five vehicles when carrying ten railway freight cars.
Seventy five vehicles when carrying no railway freight cars.
Part 14. Eighteen feet.
Any further information may be obtained from the architects.


LIMITATIONS UNDER TAX-SHARING ARRANGEMENT
Mr. Pickersgill: In the tax-sharing arrangement provided in the legislation of 1956 and accepted by the government of Quebec, is there any limitation on the constitutional right of that province to levy and collect any tax it would have the right to levy under the constitution?
Starred Questions


Donald Methuen Fleming: I draw your attention, Mr. Speaker, to the form of this question, which reads:
In the tax-sharing arrangement provided in the legislation of 1956 and accepted by the government of Quebec, is there any limitation on the constitutional right of that province to levy and collect any tax it would have the right to levy under the constitution?
I presume that by his reference to the legislation of 1956 the hon. member means the Federal-Provincial Tax-Sharing Arrangements Act, but you will note, Mr. Speaker, the statement that "the arrangement provided in the legislation" was accepted by the government in Quebec. I am not aware of any arrangement accepted or any agreement entered into by the government of Quebec in pursuance of that legislation. On the contrary, the province of Quebec did not enter into any tax rental or collection agreement under or in pursuance of the terms of that particular statute.


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Bonavisia-Twil-lingaie):: I rise on a question of privilege. The hon. gentleman read the question correctly, then substituted a word which is not in the question. He substituted the word "agreement", which has nothing to do with the question whatsoever, for the word "arrangement". The hon. gentleman is perfectly well aware that the government of the province of Quebec did accept that arrangement and has been receiving equalization payments, and I suggest it would be desirable if, instead of misrepresenting the question, the hon. gentleman would answer it.


Mr. Speaker:: There seems to be some difference of opinion about the facts, if facts are involved. It seems to me that the question asks for an opinion, and perhaps it should not have been accepted for the order paper at all.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The comment of the hon. member cannot pass unnoticed. The province of Quebec did not enter into any arrangement in pursuance of the terms of that legislation, and no play on words can change the fact.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I say Quebec did not accept any arrangement under the terms of that legislation.


Mr. Speaker:: I think this matter should probably be deferred to a time when a debate can take place on it, because there seems to be a very distinct difference of opinion as to the facts.

Motions for Papers MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COVERAGE INSTRUCTIONS-FORESTRY
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 61-Mr. Racine:
For a copy of coverage instructions C-411, C-440 to C-444 inclusive, and of any amendments thereto, with regard to employment in forestry, as contained in the new insurance coverage manual issued in October 1955 by the unemployment insurance commission, together with the corresponding instructions contained in the insurance coverage manual issued in January 1950.
Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: This is a request similar to one which appeared on the order paper under notices of motions for production of papers last week, and I can only offer my objection to it based on the decision of the unemployment insurance commission that the instructions which go out to the staff and which, taken together, constitute the manual of instructions, are of a confidential and private nature dealing with matters of internal administration which it would not be in the public interest to produce.


Mr. Speaker:: In view of the explanation given by the minister, does the hon. member in whose name the motion stands wish to proceed?


Mr. Racine:: I withdraw my motion.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.


OTTAWA-EVACUATION PRIORITIES IN EVENT OF NUCLEAR WAR
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 72-Mr. Regier:
For a listing of names and addresses on a priority basis of all those people who are supposed to be moved out of Ottawa to a supposedly safe place of refuge in case of a nuclear war.
Howard Charles Green: I dealt with this notice of motion on Monday. The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam is in New York and I understand he will not be back for some weeks. I wonder if this notice could now be dropped.


Mr. Speaker:: I appreciate the difficulty, but perhaps it could stand until the return of the hon. member. I think it is irregular to drop a motion from the order paper without the consent of the sponsor.


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: A question such as this might stand on the order paper for weeks or months. Would it not be proper either to vote on it now or to drop it? The hon. member concerned could reintroduce it upon his return.


Harold Edward Winch: According to my present information the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam is now in New York attending the United Nations
(Mr. Speaker.]
general assembly meeting, but I understand he will be back within a period of not more than two and a half weeks. It is therefore only a question of waiting for about two or three weeks.


Howard Charles Green: I explained on Monday why the government cannot give this information, and I thought all the members of the house were satisfied.


Mr. Brunsden:: On a point of order, as I recall it this question arose the other day and the hon. member who sponsored it agreed to withdraw it. I think, therefore, it would be proper for one of his colleagues to endorse such action today.


Mr. Speaker:: I think the hon. member has misunderstood the situation. Where a motion stands in the name of an hon. member who is absent it would be improper for the house to dispose of it without his concurrence, and the appropriate course which seems open is to allow the motion to stand even though that may cause some inconvenience. Perhaps it could stand until the hon. member returns.


Harold Edward Winch: I can assure Your Honour that the hon. member will be back in about two and a half weeks.


DISCONTINUANCE OF STEEL STATISTICS
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 73-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence and other documents exchanged between the government and any person, organization, or industry since January 1, 1960, regarding the discontinuance of publication of statistical material, relating to steel operating rates and steel producing capacity, by the dominion bureau of statistics.
George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, some doubts have been raised as to whether tabling of the information requested would be a violation of section 15 of the Statistics Act. Would the hon. member be agreeable to this motion standing until this point has been investigated?
Motion stands.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS, CASUAL EMPLOYEES
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 74-Mr. Roberge:
For a copy of a resolution of protest addressed by the chamber of commerce of St. Charles de Belle-chasse to the Minister of Labour, with regard to unemployment insurance benefits denied to casual employees, and a copy of the minister's reply thereto.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 75-Mr. Pickersgill:
For a projection for the fiscal years covered by the new federal proposal of the document entitled "Hypothetical illustration of provincial receipts

Division
for 1962-63 under federal proposal assuming growth of 5 per cent per annum in yields of standard taxes" which was made public on February 23, 1961, in connection with the proposal made to the federal-provincial conference.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, by this motion the hon. member is asking for the tabling of "a projection for the fiscal years covered by the new federal proposal of the document entitled 'Hypothetical illustration of provincial receipts for 1962-63 under federal proposal assuming growth of 5 per cent per annum in yields of standard taxes' which was made public on February 23, 1961, in connection with the proposal made to the federal-provincial conference."
There is some ambiguity here, Mr. Speaker, in referring to this document described within the quotation marks. I tabled yesterday the document that is described within the quotation marks, and it appears in the appendix to yesterday's Hansard at page 2765. That document was made public at the time of the conference a few days ago. If the words in the resolution, namely "which was made public on February 23, 1961" apply to the projection and not to the document, then I must say that the projection was never made public. Mr. Speaker, there were many calculations and projections on various bases that were prepared within the federal Department of Finance for the use and instruction of the delegates of the federal government to this conference. They were not made public; they were not made documents of the conference; they were not handed to the provinces; and there are very good reasons why these documents, having been prepared for the use of ministers, should not be made public. It would not be in public interest to do so.


Mr. Speaker:: In the light of that explanation would the hon. member wish to withdraw and rephrase his motion with a view to clarifying the issue?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I do not really think that there is any ambiguity, and I can clear that point up at once.


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. gentleman is satisfied with his motion I shall put it. I just raised the question whether he wanted, in view of the explanation, to withdraw and reintroduce his motion.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I understood, sir, that the motion had not yet been put, and wondered if I might be permitted, as the minister was permitted, before the motion was put to make some explanation indicating precisely what I had in mind. If I might be permitted to do that I think I can-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I think it would be in order for the hon. member, in view of what the minister has said, to explain what he meant by the motion before it is put to the house. If any hon. member wishes to raise a contrary view on a point of order I will hear it; otherwise I will hear the hon. member.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, what I was seeking to get by this motion was simply the figures comparable to those in the document which is in Hansard of yesterday-the minister was good enough to make them public, and I thank him-for each of the four following years in the top part of that table, because any judgments that we might wish to make would be based upon those figures. I think it is clear enough what is meant by the motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Does the minister accept or reject this motion with the explanation?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, for the reasons I have given the government cannot accept this motion.


COMMONWEALTH CONFERENCE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Acting Prime Minister whether he can give the house some indication of the nature of the draft declaration of human rights which the Prime Minister has stated 
in London he will be introducing into the current session of the commonwealth prime ministers' conference?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, this is not my understanding of the situation. In the course of an interview upon arrival in London I think there was some discussion about the question of a declaration of rights but I do not believe there was any statement that such a declaration was going to be introduced.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am judging from the press reports, all of which gave that impression. So may I ask the Acting Prime Minister whether such a declaration is to be introduced by the Canadian Prime Minister?


Howard Charles Green: I am not in a position to answer that question at the moment.


THE BUDGET
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. I wonder whether the minister is able to inform the house when he expects to make his main budget statement to parliament?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, it is quite obvious it is going to be later than usual. I would be in a position to indicate that it would be at an earlier date than I now can so indicate if we had made rapid progress in the house with the measures put forward in the supplementary budget of December 20.


Lionel Chevrier: You have been holding them up yourself.


Donald Methuen Fleming: No, no. The opposition know the reasons. Quite a long time has been spent on these measures and, however the opposition may feel about them, the fact is that the longer the time spent on those measures the later necessarily will be the presentation of the main budget. Beyond that I cannot say anything at the present time. The sooner the business arising out of the supplementary budget is disposed of, the sooner the main budget can be introduced.


Hazen Robert Argue: Can the minister say whether this means that the budget will be introduced after the Easter recess?


Donald Methuen Fleming: It is a certainty, Mr. Speaker, that it would not be possible now to introduce the budget prior to the Easter recess.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. C. Henderson (Cariboo):: Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Labour tell the house the circumstances of Mr. Glen Exelby, who was depicted in the main role of the C.B.C. program "Close-Up" last night, and inform the house whether the national employment service is doing anything to secure employment for him?


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member was good enough to give me notice of his intention to ask this question and I checked immediately with the unemployment insurance commission office at Hamilton. They inform me that Mr. Glen Excelby is on file at their office. He registered there for employment on September 9. He had quit his previous employment as a salesman at $6,000 per year and had given the reason that there was "no future". On November 29 he was referred as a salesman at $350 per month to Service Steel and Engineering in Hamilton and worked there from December 13 until January 30 when he was laid off.
At about this time he answered an advertisement put out by the C.B.C. requesting a white collar worker for a television program. Apparently he was successful in obtaining this employment and I am informed that it was remunerative to the extent of $25 per day during the shooting of the program which, including rehearsals, lasted for a number of weeks.
On February 24 the unemployment insurance commission office in Hamilton offered Mr. Exelby a position as a foreman at Frost Metal Products which he turned down. He said at that time that he was considering three other offers and also indicated that he was not anxious to accept a position in view of the forthcoming appearance of the television program. I was informed this morning, Mr. Speaker, that as a result of his appearance on the program he has had offers of work in Montreal, Hull and Sudbury. He has informed the Hamilton unemployment insurance commission office that he will review the offers which have come to him as a result of the program and if none is satisfactory he will once again apply for work. I am very sorry that the program did not reveal these facts also.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the minister whether the facts he has just stated have been brought to the attention of the Canadian Broadcasing Corporation and, if so, has
Inquiries of the Ministry the minister received any observations from the corporation in connection with this program?


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, if the C.B.C. wants any real facts before launching upon a program of this kind they can easily obtain them.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a supplementary question may I ask the Minister of Labour whether he brought these facts to the attention of his colleague, the Minister of National Revenue?


Michael Starr: The Minister of National Revenue is away from Ottawa at this moment. I have ascertained these facts from our unemployment insurance commission office in Hamilton.


Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breton South):: I should like to inquire of the Minister of Labour if the advertisement put out by the C.B.C. in respect of this telecast required a white collar worker to fill in on this particular program.


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, I personally did not see the advertisement. The information I have given to the house was supplied to me by the unemployment insurance commission office.


Edwin William Brunsden: Will the minister take into consideration the question of advising his colleague, the Minister of National Revenue, that the facts he has produced in this house should be promulgated through the C.B.C. in refutation of the program last night?


Mr. D. V. Pugh (Okanagan Boundary):: should like to direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Labour. Will the minister ascertain whether or not this person reported his employment with the C.B.C. to the unemployment insurance office in Hamilton?


Michael Starr: I can ascertain that.


Mr. Grant Campbell (Stormont):: In the
absence of the Minister of National Revenue may I ask the parliamentary secretary this question. I regret that I have not been able to give notice of it. The question is this. Do all C.B.C. extemporaneous interviews require several weeks of coaching?


Mr. Speaker:: If the question were one of direct responsibility, I think perhaps it would not be so urgent that it might not go on the order paper. However, as it is a question for the C.B.C., perhaps the parliamentary secretary would take it as notice.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Speaker, that is a matter within the technical competence of the C.B.C. We will make inquiries?



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. H. McMillan (Welland):: I should like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister. Senator John Sparkman, of the committee on foreign relations in the United States, announced that the processing of the treaty between the United States and Canada concerning the co-operative development of the water resources of the Columbia river basin would start before the United States senate at 10 a.m. this morning. My question is, when will the government place this matter on the order paper so that consideration may be given to it by the parliament of Canada?


Howard Charles Green: The situation with regard to the Columbia has already been explained to the house on more than one occasion within the last few weeks. As yet, there has been no agreement reached with the province of British Columbia.



REQUEST FOR LIST OF OUTSTANDING RETURNS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if I could ask the Acting Secretary of State what progress has been made in preparing the list of returns which have not been completed, a list which the Secretary of State agreed nearly two weeks ago to compile.


Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Acting Secretary of State):: I have asked for this information but as yet I have not received a report. I will pursue my inquiries.



INQUIRY AS TO FURTHER SALES TO CHINA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lester Bowles Pearson: I should like to ask the Minister of Agriculture whether he is in a position to answer now a question I addressed to his parliamentary secretary regarding the Canadian wheat delegation in Hong Kong visiting Peking in connection with wheat sales to that country.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: I am very sorry but I do believe that in the public interest I can say no more than

I said in answer to the hon. member a short time ago. We did have representatives in that area. They are now back in Canada, and other representatives are going out shortly.



REPORTED U.S. LOBBY FOR TARIFF AGAINST CANADIAN BREAD

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. N. L. Spencer (Essex West):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. In view of the fact that it has been reported that a group of bakers have renewed a campaign or lobby in the United States congress seeking to obtain the imposition of a tariff against the importation from Canada of Canadian-made bread, will he inform the house whether he is aware of this report and whether representations and a protest will be made to the proper authorities through the usual channels?


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the ever alert member for Essex West for bringing this matter to my attention on behalf of the bakers of the city of Windsor to whom it is a real problem. I can assure him that my department is looking into the matter. I hope to have a satisfactory answer to give to him very shortly.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the ever alert Secretary of State for External Affairs if he will be good enough to make representations to strengthen the obviously weaker representation that might be made by his colleague the Minister of Trade and Commerce.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, I think we have already been working on this problem.



PROPOSED U.S. RESTRICTIONS ON TOURIST IMPORTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. R. Garland (Nipissing):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister. It is based on a Canadian Press report originating in Washington on Monday to this effect:
A congressional committee has deferred action on President Kennedy's proposal to reduce the maximum duty-free allowance on tourist goods to $100 from $500-
And these are the important words:
-to permit further clarification of the Canadian position.
Can the minister say what position, if any, the government is taking on this important question, and what action has been taken to date.


Howard Charles Green: This question was also taken up with the United States government some time ago.


John Richard Garland: I have a supplementary question. In view of the fact that the minister responsible, namely, the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources who I regret is not in his place today has said that this proposed legislation would have little effect, and in view of the fact that when the Prime Minister was in Washington on February 20 he said that he had heard of no objection by Canada, can the minister not say what position or attitude the government is taking? Is it opposed to this imposition?


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister dealt with this question on February 7. The hon. member will find that at page 1795 of Hansard. My department is following up on this particular question and we will do whatever is possible in order to see that nothing is done which will harm Canada.


John Richard Garland: From that reply, can we take it that the government is opposed?


Mr. Speaker:: Order.



USE OF U.S. MADE FOOTBALLS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jack Wrallen (Branlford):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Is the minister aware of the fact that the directors of the Canadian football league recently decided to use a football manufactured in the United States, notwithstanding the fact that from the inception of this game in Canada the ball, hand manufactured and hand sewn by A. G. Spalding and Sons in Brantford-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member will have to pay an advertisement tax if he continues his question. It is not really a matter relating to the administrative responsibility of the minister, even though it may be very interesting to the hon. member.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might answer the question asked by the hon. member for Brantford.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: If the minister says it is part of his administrative responsibility and that I have been in error I will allow him to answer it.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, anything that involves the jobs of Canadians is very much of interest to my department.
Inquiries of the Ministry
I have been made aware of this situation by the hon. member for Brantford who gave me notice of this question. I want to assure the house that I am very much interested in this problem and that I am seeking further information in order that I may discuss the matter with the Canadian football league. The hon. member for Winnipeg South informs me that he is taking the question up with the commissioner of the Canadian football league in Winnipeg. I might add that from my own experience I always found the Canadian football to be 100 per cent satisfactory under all conditions, and I am sure all Canadians will agree that Canadian made sporting goods should be used in playing Canadian games, particularly when they are well made and fairly priced as in the case in question.
(Translation):



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Maurice Bourgei (Levis):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Public Works, I should like to ask his parliamentary secretary whether the report on the urban renewal study conducted in Quebec city during 1959 and 1960 has been referred to the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and if so, whether copies of that report will be tabled in the house.


Mr. Y. R. Tasse (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, I should like first to thank my colleague from Levis for giving me notice of this question.
After making inquiries of the CM.H.C., which is subsidizing this study, I have been informed that the commission which had been instructed by Quebec municipal authorities to look into the matter of housing and urban renewal in that most beautiful and interesting city has not yet submitted its report.
As to the second part of the question, I shall bring it to the minister's attention.
(Text):



TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the

Inquiries of the Ministry Minister of Transport with regard to a problem that is a football between the government and the transport board. In view of the announcement that it is the intention of the Canadian Pacific Railway to abandon the Coquihalla subdivision of the Kettle Valley railroad; and in view of the united opposition of all the municipalities, organizations and persons affected in southeastern British Columbia; will the minister inform the house if the government intends to take any action to prevent this further failure of the company to recognize its responsibilities to the people of southeastern British Columbia?


Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, an application to abandon the operation of its Coquihalla subdivision has been filed by Canadian Pacific Railway company with the board of transport commissioners.
The board, according to its rules of practice, is allowing the prescribed time for submissions of those opposed to the application and for the railway company's reply. Following receipt of these, the board expects to hold a public hearing in the matter.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Léon Balcer: Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday last the hon. member for Kent, New Brunswick, asked if it is the intention of the Canadian National Railways to cease making major repairs to first class cars in Moncton.
The management of the railway advise that substantial reductions in revenue passenger miles over the past 5 years have brought about a corresponding substantial decrease in repair requirements. The acquisition of newer equipment has lengthened the average shopping cycle for passenger cars. In light of this it is the intention to gradually discontinue heavy repairs to passenger equipment at Moncton. Light passenger repairs will continue to be performed. The men so engaged in the heavy repair work are being transferred to freight car and other work. The matter is now in the discussion stage with the appropriate employees' representatives.


Mr. W. L. M. Creaghan (Westmorland):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. Is the minister aware that as recently as February 18th the C.N.R. at Moncton announced that the space presently used by the passenger car shop and the freight car section would now both be used for the conversion of 200 steel frame box cars to livestock units; that coaches were to be converted to bunk and


feeding units and that smaller box cars were going to be converted to work equipment? In view of that fact, I wonder whether the minister would ascertain from the C.N.R. if this announcement made in Moncton on February 18 has any relationship with the suspension of major repairs at the Moncton shops to heavy passenger equipment as anticipated in the minister's answer today.


Léon Balcer: I shall be very glad to make that inquiry.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. E. Nixon (Algoma West):: I should like to address a question to the Minister of Fisheries. Will the minister make a statement to the house soon as to what program his department has prepared in order to deal with the lamprey problem? I am especially interested in-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I think perhaps the hon. member is anticipating something that might be dealt with on the estimates. A question was asked a few weeks ago about that matter, but it is properly a matter to be dealt with on the estimates.



INDIAN AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Frank Howard: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration of which notice was given. I wish to ask with regard to the present status of any resolutions by the Indian bands in British Columbia requesting that section 96(a), subsection 2, of the Indian Act be brought into force and the names of the bands which have submitted such resolutions.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, about 20 resolutions have been received from the bands. In accordance with subsection 5(b) of section 96(a) of the Indian Act six of those resolutions have been forwarded to the attorney general of the province. Some of the others had to be returned to the bands concerned for redrafting. When these are received in the appropriate form they in turn will be forwarded to the attorney general of the province of British Columbia. The resolutions which have been forwarded were from the Tsitsk band of the Babine agency; the Bella Coola band of the Bella Coola

agency; the Kincolith band and the Metla-katla band of the Skeena river agency; and the Canyon city band and Gitlakdamix band of the Terrace agency.


Frank Howard: I wonder if the minister would accept my congratulations for having wound her tongue around those difficult words with such facility.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Joseph James Martin: May I
direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Now that the second portion of the United Nations general assembly has begun, would the hon. gentleman tell the house what he considers to be the prospects for the resumption of the 10-power discussions on disarmament?


Howard Charles Green: It is too early yet for an accurate forecast to be made as to the date on which negotiations will be resumed or the forum. As the hon. member knows, there has been a considerable relaxation of tension and I think there are reasonable prospects that the United States and the Soviet Union will be willing to enter into negotiations on disarmament later in the year.
As far as the present session of the general assembly is concerned, the Canadian resolution co-sponsored by 19 countries is still in good standing and it calls for an early resumption of negotiations. It also recommends the appointment of an impartial chairman, possibly a citizen of Switzerland, and the setting up by the United Nations disarmament commission of ad hoc committees to assist the negotiators.
We are not yet certain when disarmament will be discussed in the general assembly but the whole disarmament picture looks considerably brighter today than it did before Christmas.


Mr. Marlin (Essex Easi):: Can the minister tell us when the three-power talks with regard to the cessation of nuclear tests are likely to be resumed?


Howard Charles Green: The date is not yet certain either, but they will be resumed at a much earlier date than the talks on general disarmament. I hope it will be only a matter of a few weeks before the nuclear test talks are taken up again.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Lester Bowles Pearson: May I direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs and ask him whether the Canadian position with regard to nuclear weapons remains as it was established last December, when the Canadian delegation accepted the Irish resolution on this subject?


Howard Charles Green: Canada supported the Irish resolution directed against the spread of nuclear weapons. That was in December, and at that time our spokesman at the United Nations explained that this position could not be held indefinitely but would depend on what progress was made in bringing about disarmament and a relaxation of tension. That is still the situation.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Does the Acting Prime Minister consider that holding a position from December to March is holding it indefinitely?


Howard Charles Green: The Leader of the Opposition can be quite sure that the attitude taken by Canada on this question will be eminently reasonable and fair.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Richard Garland: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Can the minister say what progress is being made toward the establishment of a secondary mortgage market in Canada?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I think the hon. member is raising a somewhat general issue affecting government policy which he can hardly expect to have declared in answer to a question on the orders of the day, particularly at this time of the afternoon.



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT


[Stage Direction]
"postmark"
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Azellus Denis (St. Denis):: I wish to direct a question to the Postmaster General with reference to a magazine entitled Postmark, printed by the Queen's printer, in which I see three pictures of the Postmaster General together with the pictures of six Tory members of parliament. My question is this. Has this magazine any purpose besides the carrying on of Tory propaganda at the expense of the hon. gentleman's department?

Tariff Board Act


Hon. W. M. Hamilton (Postmaster General):: The purpose of the magazine is to keep postal employees informed of what is going on in the post offices. If it so happens that the Postmaster General and other hon. members supporting this government take an interest in postal affairs and take the trouble to see what is happening, that is going to be reported. If the hon. member for St. Denis were to put his foot into a post office once in a while we should be glad to report that, too.



TARIFF BOARD ACT


Donald Methuen Fleming: the second reading of Bill No. C-74, to amend the Tariff Board Act.


Mr. W. M. Benidickson (Kenora-Rainy River):: I do not intend to add at length to the remarks I made concerning this legislation when we were considering the resolution yesterday. On December 20 the minister indicated that the board had before it in addition to the normal number of appeals from the Department of National Revenue a substantial number of references covering a wide range of industries. The hon. gentleman listed some six or seven, I believe, and he referred to eight in his remarks yesterday. I would assume that the tariff board has, perhaps, completed its studies with regard to some of the subjects mentioned in December and perhaps the minister could give us, when we get into committee, a list of the references which are presently before the board in an incomplete state, the eight to which he referred last night.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I would be pleased to do that.


William Moore Benidickson: The tariff board, as we all know, has been doing a tremendous amount of work. The creation of a second panel should be encouraged so as to keep up with the work that is suggested it should do. I think it is much preferable to have tariff studies of representations made in a public way as they are through the tariff board after public notice of the hearings is given across the country than to have our changes in tariffs upward or downward depending upon the representations made secretly or privately to a minister of the government.
I think the tariff board, by the exhaustive studies which it has produced and which are printed, has impressed those individuals who read the studies in regard to the thoroughness with which these investigations are generally carried out. The minister has indicated that this increase in the board will accelerate the progress of the work which is

necessary. I think those associated with me in this party will likely support the bill.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, the bill sets out in some detail the provisions that were forecast in the resolution. The tariff board will be given the power to sit as two panels simultaneously, and there is a provision allowing the chairman to direct that any inquiries under section 4 may be made by any member or members of the board designated by him. It appears obvious, therefore, that when the measure is passed and becomes law the board, both in dealing with appeals and in making certain inquiries, will be in a position to do a much larger amount of work. We still feel that this bill cannot be separated from the other changes that are being made in the customs tariff having to do with the definition of goods of a class or kind, and that the insertion of the word "approximately" will mean that the tariff board will have a host of applications to deal with that it would not otherwise have. This seems a part of the government program, to change the rules on tariffs in such a way as to provide higher tariffs for a much larger range of goods. This underlines something we have suspected for a long time; that the present government is following an old traditional Tory policy in providing a higher level of tariffs.
When the measure was being discussed in committee certain questions were asked of the minister and I hope that he will give the house the information that was asked for at that time. He was asked how many applications before the board have to do with the question of class or kind and I hope that he will inform the house as to the statistics in this regard. I feel this kind of information should be brought before the house. I believe we are entitled to receive it and I hope that in closing the debate the minister will take the opportunity of presenting it.


William Hector McMillan: Mr. Speaker, I am interested in receiving that information which the former speaker has referred to. I believe the Minister of Finance said yesterday that 69 cases were awaiting appeal and I would like to know how many of those refer to class or kind goods.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker-


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


Donald Methuen Fleming: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Flynn in the chair.
On clause 1-Constitution of board.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Welland asked how many of the 69 appeals now pending before the tariff board concern cases where the class or kind definition is involved. I am informed on inquiry that there are 17 such cases and three other cases where this question may possibly be involved either directly or indirectly.
The hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River asked for a tabulation as to the eight references pending before the board. They are as follows, Mr. Chairman:	No. 120 is the
chemicals reference. The hearings on this important and very comprehensive reference began in 1960 and will probably continue throughout 1961 and perhaps beyond. The second is No. 123, the radio, television and electronics reference. No. 125 is the textiles reference: there have been several reports received from the tariff board in this regard but the reference is not complete as yet so far as reports are concerned.
The next is No. 127, in relation to nails. The hearings on this reference have been held but the report has not yet been submitted. The next is No. 128, a reference concerning engineers' and architects' plans, drawings and blueprints. The hearings in regard to this reference were held last month, but of course the report has not yet been received. No. 129 is the reference on tableware and glassware for decorating. The hearings on this reference are scheduled to commence on March 20.
The next is No. 130, a reference concerning machinery and equipment for use in the mining industry and the oil and gas industries. The hearings on this reference have been scheduled for May, June and September next. The next is No. 131, a reference respecting oilseeds, vegetable oils and related products. The hearings have not yet been held in this regard. Obviously the plans in relation to the scheduling of these remaining references will depend of course on the passage of the present bill and the ability of the tariff board then to commence sitting in two panels.


Mr. Mcllraith:: Is the minister in a position to indicate the extent to which he envisages the increased work of the tariff board will arise out of references from the government or from an increased number of appeals?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Chairman, I am not in a position to indicate any further references at this particular time. I have given the committee a full report as to the backlog
Tariff Board Act
of both the references and appeals now on the board's docket and awaiting adjudication.


George James McIlraith: What I am seeking to get at is this. By the 1956 amendment and this amendment we are really more than doubling the capacity of the board. I wonder whether the minister would care to project his opinion as to how much of this increased capacity would be used in dealing with references, and how much with the appeal side of the board's work.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It is very difficult to answer that question with any degree of precision, Mr. Chairman. I cannot foresee what may be the situation a year from now in respect of further appeals or further references, but it is quite apparent that the work load of the board has been increased very substantially. The committee is aware of the number of references that I have directed to the board in the last three years and eight months, and several of the references to the board have been extremely heavy. The chemicals reference which has been pending for several years is one of the largest ever directed to the board and it is anticipated that from the time the hearings commenced until the report of the board might be expected, as long as two years might be consumed.
The textiles reference was of very large proportions. It is nearly concluded but it has occupied a great deal of the time of the board.


George James McIlraith: I take it from what the minister has said there are no particular references that he proposes making to the board that will require this enlargement. He is enlarging the board to meet the general increase in work which is anticipated as opposed to some particular matters which he intends to refer to the board.


Donald Methuen Fleming: If the hon. member would look at the discussion we had yesterday he would find that I explained that the immediate reason for asking parliament to enlarge the board is that the board may more quickly reduce the very large backlog of work now standing on its docket. It is so large a backlog that there is going to be, I think, prejudice resulting from delays unless this action now proposed is taken to enlarge the board so that it may sit in two panels.
This measure is the outcome of my discussions with the chairman of the board who has been greatly concerned over this backlog. It has been a matter of some anxiety to him that these cases should be piling up and that he, in arranging the work of the board, is compelled to confine the sittings of the board to one panel. He has given me to understand that there may be some considerable delay
*

Tariff Board Act
in disposing of the cases now on the docket, both references and appeals, unless the kind of help that this bill promises is forthcoming.


George James McIlraith: I thank the minister for his explanation but I think he will appreciate-if he will recall it-than in previous years, and I think each year, I made it clear that it was a desirable step to enlarge the board, but I did wish to get it clearly on the record that it was a requirement arising out of the ordinary work before the board for this to be done.
There is one other point, if I may make reference to it, concerning this clause, and it arises out of the proposed new section 3, the latter part of the clause. Can the minister advise us whether it is intended that the first vice-chairman or the second vice-chairman, as the case may be, should preside at sittings of the board in the absence of the chairman? There is a little confusion as to this.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I think the answer to this is to be found in subclause 3 of clause 3 of the act as it is proposed to be amended by clause 1 of the bill. The arrangement of the work of the board and the decision as to what members shall be designated to constitute the two panels is, of course, a matter for the chairman. The arrangement of the work of the board is, of course, eminently a matter for decision by him. It is, I believe, his intention that the first vice-chairman should ordinarily preside over the second panel and he, the chairman, should preside over the first panel to be set up.


George James McIlraith: May I just pursue the point a bit further. There is one very small aspect concerning the matter, and it has to do with the part of clause 3 coming immediately after (2)(c), which reads in this way:
-and the chairman shall preside at any sittings of the board at which he is present and shall designate one of the vice-chairmen or other members to preside at any sittings of the board at which he is not present.
What I am coming to is this. I should hope that the chairman would in his absence designate that the first vice-chairman or the second vice-chairman should preside at any sittings of the board in those circumstances; but as I read this clause it leaves him quite free to designate any other member of the board to act as chairman in his absence, and I would hope that that would not happen because it could be the sort of thing that would weaken the administrative authority of the first vice-chairman or the second vice-chairman, as the case may be. It is on that narrow point, a very narrow one, admittedly, that I should like clarification.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I would invite the attention of the hon. member to the provisions of subclause 3 which provide that:
If the chairman is absent or is unable to act or if the office is vacant, the first vice-chairman has and may exercise and perform all the powers and functions of the chairman, and if the chairman and the first vice-chairman are absent or are unable to act or if those offices are vacant, the second vice-chairman has and may exercise and perform all the powers and functions of the chairman.
As I also indicated, Mr. Chairman, it is the indicated intention of the chairman ordinarily to designate the first vice-chairman to preside over the second panel in ordinary cases.
Now, there must, of course, be some flexibility in these matters. Illness can overtake the chairman or the first vice-chairman and that is the reason why flexibility is retained. It is retained because of the duty that rests on the chairman to arrange the work of the board, but ordinarily, when the board is at full strength, you will find the chairman and two other members of the board sitting in the first panel and the first vice-chairman and two other members of the board sitting in the second panel.


George James McIlraith: Subclause 3 at the bottom of the page does not seem to deal with the point I raised, but the minister's explanation seems to set out a wholly satisfactory procedure in these cases. I should like to draw his attention to what may be a looseness of wording in the part I quoted, as follows:
-and the chairman shall preside at any sittings of the board at which he is present and shall designate one of the vice-chairmen or other members to preside at any sittings of the board at which he is not present.
In other words, there is no limitation whatever on the circumstances in which he can designate, we will say for the purposes of argument, the newest member of the board to sit as chairman of the board in his own absence even although the vice-chairman and the second vice-chairman are available. It is a small point.


Donald Methuen Fleming: This language was written in a deliberately broad form because of the need of allowing flexibility and because of the responsibility that rests on the chairman for organizing the work of the board. We have a very capable chairman. I think all hon. members have confidence in the chairman of the board. I have had some high compliments paid to the board and to Mr. Audette by persons who had occasion to appear before the board as now constituted.
There must be flexibility here. It would be very easy to conceive of a situation where, let us say, the chairman, the second vicechairman and one other member of the board are sitting on a reference in panel No. 1 and

the first vice-chairman and two other members of the board are sitting in panel No. 2. Let us say the first vice-chairman is taken ill. It is not possible to disturb the composition of the first panel in the middle of what might be a quite extended and involved reference in order to take the second vicechairman out of that panel so that he may then preside in the second panel. It might be only a temporary situation. Under these circumstances it might be necessary for the three other members of the board to be designated by the chairman to constitute the second panel. In that case I presume that ordinarily if the first and second vice-chairmen are not available for that second panel for such reasons as I have suggested, the chairman would designate the next senior member to preside in the second panel.


Mr. Hellyer:: Can the minister give any indication as to how soon after the bill becomes law the new members of the board will be appointed?


Donald Methuen Fleming: I would hope reasonably soon because the chairman has been making some tentative plans in the hope that parliament would be passing this measure, and it would be my hope that the appointments could be made soon after the bill has received royal assent, if it pleases the two houses of parliament to approve it.


William Moore Benidickson: I should like to ask the minister what the present salary schedules are. I notice that we are creating a second vice-chairman for the first time. Will this involve any margin of salary beyond that of an ordinary member?


Donald Methuen Fleming: The present salaries are as follows: the chairman of the board, $16,900; the two vice-chairmen, $14,500 each, and members of the board $13,500 each. The bill does not make any change in the salaries, of course. The two vice-chairmen will become respectively the first vice-chairman and the second vice-chairman under the new measure and the new members would be entitled to the salary of members of the board, namely $13,500, until such time as that might be changed.


William Moore Benidickson: With reference to subsection 8 under subclause 2, what advantage is there in adding the word "functions"? We have had reference to the word "powers" before but now we are adding the word "functions". What is the addition of that word going to mean?


Donald Methuen Fleming: On a study of the present act the draftsman thought that this was a desirable enlargement. I do not point to anything of a specific nature, but it was
Tariff Board Act
considered that the present expression referring to powers was not as broad as it might be and that the word "functions" should be added to indicate more broadly the responsibilities of the board and the way the board operates.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
On clause 2-Inquiry made by one or more members.
William Moore Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, under the old subsection 8 of section 5 of the act it was previously deemed advisable to stipulate that at least two members would serve in the conducting of certain inquiries. I recall that those inquiries included inquiries relating to enhancement of prices or inquiries equivalent to those under the Combines Investigation Act. Under the amendment I notice that the chairman is not obliged to assign at least two members to inquiries of that kind and instead is seemingly given the discretion to assign only one member of the tariff board to such inquiries although parliament previously thought that inquiries of this type were of such public importance that at least two members of the board should sit in those circumstances.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The hon. member is aware that under the present statute one member can hold inquiries of certain kinds. In other cases two members are required to constitute a board for the purposes of the inquiry. As the hon. member is aware, it has been the practice after such a hearing for the whole board to participate in the decision.
So far as references are concerned, of course, the board has operated as a full board. Not fewer than three members have sat on the references. Again, the slight modification that is contained here is designed in the interests of flexibility and of trying to make the best use of the available manpower of the board having regard to the volume of work. It is not the intention of the board to reduce the size of panels conducting inquiries in pursuance of references.
As a rule, the appeals have been heard by one member of the board sitting alone and then the board as a whole has made a decision, but the hearing has been conducted by one member of the board. Therefore the modification that is made here is a very slight one indeed. It should not be taken as intended to do more than provide a slightly greater measure of flexibility and should not be interpreted as indicating any intended departure from the practice of the board according to its present procedures.


William Moore Benidickson: It is obvious, Mr. Chairman, that there must be some departure because under the old wording the chairman

Tariff Board Act
was bound to assign at least two members of the board if the inquiry related to combinations which enhanced prices or was an inquiry similar to those under the Combines Investigation Act. The third type, to which I did not refer before, is inquiries into matters referred by the cabinet.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I think the hon. member has overlooked the fact that since the legislation to which he has now referred was passed we have had a revision of the Combines Investigation Act and that power of inquiry has been vested in the restrictive trade practices commission. I think that is probably the explanation.


William Moore Benidickson: There are still two other types of inquiries which previously required a minimum of two members to preside over them.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am told that these other instances have practically never occurred.


William Moore Benidickson: I wanted to know why we were making it possible for the chairman at his discretion to have a single member preside over inquiries such as those to which I have referred, but if the minister indicates that these inquiries are no longer common and that he has given careful consideration to this matter I will not raise strong objection.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:: When shall the bill be read a third time, now?


John Whitney Pickersgill: By leave.
Mr. Fleming (Eglinton) thereupon moved the third reading of the bill.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Before the bill passes, Mr. Speaker, I should like to draw attention to certain observations which were made yesterday by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) during the discussion of the resolution. The hon. member said, as reported on page 2727 of Hansard:
-I suggest that this Is part and parcel of a Tory high tariff policy that is being implemented day by day to the great detriment of the people of this country.
Then, after an interruption by another hon. member, he went on to say:
Therefore, we feel that this legislation is unnecessary, or that if it is necessary it is made so by these other bad policies of the government which are increasing the burden of the work on the tariff board and the number of appeals that will be made. We believe that we are justified in opposing the resolution and the legislation to follow because in so doing we are opposing the government's high tariff program.

I omit the comment made by the hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Bell), but he can make it again if he so desires.
Then, at page 2737 the hon. gentleman is reported as saying this, in making a reference to the position taken by the official opposition:
I suggest that class or kind cases are likely to constitute a very substantial portion of appeals and references to the board. With the sweeping change in the definition a deluge of appeals on this very point will come before the board in the future. Members of the Liberal party say they are against the change in the definition, the widening of the rule, and they have proved they are against it, but they are prepared to facilitate the evil consequences of widening the rule by voting for the minister's measure and without having the necessary information. I think this is an indication of complete irresponsibility on the part of the official opposition.
In view of this statement, sir, I must say that I was astonished to find, after having been called out of the house for a moment or two during second reading, that second reading had been completed. I am informed that the hon. gentleman did say, "on division" when the measure passed. The hon. member said:
We beleve that we are justified in opposing the resolution and the legislation to follow because in so doing we are opposing the government's high tariff program.
In view of the hon. member's assertions about this very deleterious measure I expected we were going to have a real crusade against this bill by the hon. gentleman and his friends. It is rather astonishing to find that the lion of yesterday has become the lamb of today.


Mr. R. H. Small (Danforih):: Mr. Speaker, I would have liked to have had something to say yesterday about this measure, but since the minister was anxious to get the bill through I remained silent. Now that the matter has been raised by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, I will take advantage of this opportunity to say something about the bill. I have listened to the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) make continual references to Tory protection and high Tory tariffs, as if there were some stigma attached to them. I have no apology to make to the minister or anybody else in this house because I believe in a certain amount of protection through tariffs and quotas. I do not believe there is anything to be ashamed of in that.
I am continually being beseeched to do something about the importations coming into this country from Japan, west Germany and other low wage countries which are undermining certain manufacturing industries in our country. I do not believe the hon. member for Assiniboia is presenting the point of

view of labour. The hon. member also makes continual references to GATT. I have always questioned the value of the vague benefits that have been attached to GATT so far as this country was concerned. We went along with it and we gradually reduced the tariffs imposed by this country. We now find that we have probably gone too far and there should be a change in policy; we should raise our tariffs on certain things coming into this country.


Mr. Depuiy Speaker:: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member but I must say that if he is replying shortly to any argument that had been advanced by an hon. member, his remarks are not entirely relevant to the bill under consideration. However, although I would have no objection to a short reply I must indicate to him that the only purpose of this bill is to increase the number of members on the tariff board. A discussion of the whole policy of tariffs at this time, therefore, would be irrelevant. I would think that the hon. member has strayed from the subject of the bill under discussion and has also strayed a little bit from his own place in the house.


Harold Edward Winch: Stay with this bill, because I support one and I oppose the other.


Robert Hardy Small: I must apologize, sir, but I thought we were still in committee of the whole. I had forgotten that we were considering third reading.
You, sir, have said that the bill relates to the matter of appointments to the tariff board. However, the hon. member for Assiniboia continually referred to the fact that the measure was introduced for the purpose of raising tariffs. He said that the tariff board was going to be used as the machinery for increasing tariffs. I thought I should like to refute the statements by the hon. member that this is the position this party takes.
However, we have no apology to offer for the fact that we did have to increase some tariffs and will do so in the future. If the hon. member will examine his own position in so far as agriculture is concerned he will find that with the agricultural prices stabilization legislation, deficiency payments, storage of grain, the Crowsnest pass freight rates, acreage payments, all these benefits and assistance amount to nothing less or more than protection. I am not opposed to them, and I am happy that agriculture has been granted these benefits. However, I would say that when he starts to talk about protection and high tariffs he should examine his own situation because those things I have mentioned amount to a high tariff policy and can be
Civil Service Act
regarded in no other way, and labour should be informed of this free trade policy of the new party.


Mr. Depuiy Speaker:: The motion is for third reading of Bill No. C-74, shall the bill
pass?


Hazen Robert Argue: On division.
Motion agreed to on division and bill read the third time and passed.



CIVIL SERVICE ACT

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, March 7, consideration of the motion of Mr. Fleming (Eglinton) for the second reading of Bill No. C-71, respecting the civil service of Canada.
Mr. J. T. Richard (Ottawa East):: This legislation, designed to improve the Civil Service Act, is most important because more than ever before a good civil service is absolutely essential to good government. The need for properly qualified civil servants can be attributed primarily to the increasing role of government with the result that we have to rely more and more on a number of experts, highly qualified administrators. Their position and prestige should be consistent with their new importance. The complex issues which government has to face require the advice of highly qualified people, although ministers must always take responsibility for public administration decisions on policy matters.
In parallel development our Canadian universities and other institutions have been producing for several decades an increasing number of experts in the social sciences and in various fields of government activity with the result that while the need for expert advice was growing rapidly in the government service, the number of Canadians highly qualified to meet that need was also increasing.
It is widely recognized that the Canadian civil service is one of the best in the world. It is composed at all levels of men and women who are well qualified to perform their important functions, who are devoted to the service of their country and entirely loyal to the government of the day; and those who give loyalty and service have a right to expect confidence, support and encouragement, conditions that will make them more effective.
The quality of our civil service is also due to our legislation which has been based since 1918 on the merit principle. The adherence to that principle has enabled the Canadian government to attract to the service highly qualified people in various fields who have decided to make a career in the public service and who very often refused better paid careers outside it.

Civil Service Act
Although the Civil Service Act has proved to be of great value to the civil servants and to the government over the years and has provided a general framework which has led to good relations between the government and its employees, experience has shown that the legislation enacted in 1918 needed to be changed in several respects in the light of the important changes in the role of government which have occurred in Canada since the end of world war II. As a matter of fact, there have been practically no changes since 1918. That is why at the beginning of 1957 the then prime minister, Right Hon. Mr. St. Laurent, asked the members of the civil service commission to review the act and the regulations and to examine the role of the commission in the machinery of government and to prepare a report including recommendations as to desirable changes to be made to our legislation.
It is a cause for uneasiness that so many top officials have left the public service in order to teach in universities or to work in industry or other professions. Whatever the reasons given to explain those resignations, they faced us with a disquieting situation; highly qualified personnel are leaving, and as a result serious damage is being done to the efficiency of public administration.
One cause of uneasiness has been the delay of the government in introducing legislation following the publication of the Heeney report. That report was presented to the government in December, 1958. Its recommendations were detailed and concrete, and legislation should have been introduced in 1959 for final consideration during the 1960 session. However, the government has delayed the introduction of its legislation until March 1961.
Another source of concern is the fact that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming), not the Secretary of State (Mr. Dorion), is the government spokesman on matters related to the civil service and is introducing this bill. As we all know the Secretary of State has always been responsible to parliament for those matters. The fact that the Minister of Finance has become the champion and the defender of the civil service, after his performance on the salary issue last year, is a surprise to us and I am sure it is a source of concern for all government employees. At some stage during this debate I hope the minister will explain why he and not the Secretary of State is introducing this legislation.
We on this side of the house want to express our gratitude to Mr. Heeney and his two colleagues Miss Addison and Mr. Pelletier, for the most valuable report they have prepared on the subject of this legislation. We

believe that their report will provide a most useful basis for the discussion and appraisal of the government legislation which is now before us.
The Heeney report contains recommendations regarding all aspects of the civil service including its relations with the government. I am sure that all of us in this house will agree with most, if not all, of the eight objectives set out in the report as the basis for this new legislation. The commission has made specific recommendations regarding organization and classification, compensation and allowances, recruitment, selection, appointment and promotion, transfers, discipline, appeals, the veteran's preference, languages, qualifications, and exemptions from the Civil Service Act, et cetera. That is all very well.
While we will want to discuss all the provisions of the bill, we intend to put special emphasis on the definition and the clarification of the rights of civil servants. I well recall that in a speech made before the institute of public administration of Canada in 1959, a member of the commission, Mr. Paul Pelletier, has this to say on this matter:
-Since 1918, federal civil servants have had no legal rights whatever, except two. The first is referred to in section 45 of the Civil Service Act which provides that civil servants shall, on a mandatory basis, be granted certain statutory holidays. The second was only granted in May, 1953, with the enactment of the Public Service Superannuation Act-and that is the civil servant's contractual entitlement to pension under certain conditions. But otherwise, the civil servant has no statutory rights. He is not entitled to his pay cheque until it is in his pocket. He can legally be dismissed without cause and without notice. X would not wish to suggest for one moment that civil servants are dismissed frivolously. Quite the contrary. Nor would I suggest that any civil servant is in any kind of danger of not receiving his fortnightly pay cheque at the appropriate time. But the fact remains that his statutory rights are virtually non-existent. The commission felt that at the present state of our constitutional development civil servants should be given certain statutory rights.
We on this side of the house completely agree with that statement. We also feel that in this respect the bill does not go far enough, and at a later stage of the discussion we shall make specific proposals to the government regarding a fuller recognition of these statutory rights of civil servants.
I do not intend at this stage to discuss all the provisions of the bill. We intend to postpone this detailed consideration until the proposed legislation has been considered by the special committee. For the time being, I wish to confine my remarks to one issue only-an issue which I consider to be basic-

namely, the question of collective bargaining, or, as I would prefer to call it, collective negotiation.
The lack of statutory rights is well illustrated by the way in which salaries in the civil service are determined. In 1959 the civil service commission decided to reconsider the salary question. After consultation with the staff associations and with the assistance of its pay research bureau the commission recommended to the Minister of Finance that a general increase in salaries be granted. After long delays, the minister announced in October that he could not accept the commission's recommendation. No adequate reason was given by the minister in justification of his stand. The report of the commission was not released, with the result that civil servants could not even know what increases in salary had been recommended by the commission and refused by the Minister of Finance.
Such a situation is intolerable in Canada and must be remedied. But the present bill does not provide any adequate improvement in this respect. I shall not refer in detail to clause 7, though the minister did refer to it last night, except to say that consultation is possible and can be initiated by the staff or by the minister.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Or by the commission.


Jean-Thomas Richard: If the minister does not object, I will read the clause:
The commission and such members of the public service as the Minister of Finance may designate shall from time to time consult with representatives of appropriate organizations and associations of employees with respect to pay and other terms and conditions of employment at the request of such representatives or whenever in the opinion of the commission or the Minister of Finance, as the case may be, such consultation is necessary or desirable in the interests of the civil service or the government.
This is not satisfactory. Even if under this new provision the staff associations were to be placed in a position to initiate consultations this new prerogative will be ineffectual. Consultations will never be a substitute for genuine negotiations. How are the civil servants to know that the government had adopted a course which requires consultation? The time has come to face the issue of collective bargaining squarely and frankly. In our country all municipal employees, including policemen and firemen, have obtained the right to collective bargaining. In the federal field the majority of the employees of crown corporations already enjoy such a right. But ordinary civil servants have no right whatsoever in this respect. This has become a serious anomaly and an unfair discrimination.
90205-6-177
Civil Service Act
In Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand the right to collective bargaining has been granted in one form or another to civil servants.


Mr. Bell (Carleton):: By statute?


Jean-Thomas Richard: Yes.


Richard Albert Bell: That is quite wrong.


Jean-Thomas Richard: Civil Service Act
their respective positions which must be in the hands of the tribunal at least 21 days before the hearing. The tribunal is thus well briefed on the substance of the case.
Procedure at the hearing is not overly formal. Each side has one spokesman who is assisted by a group of advisers. The spokesman for the claimant is first in reading his statement of the case. This is substantially what was submitted to the tribunal in advance except that in reading it there is an opportunity to amplify some points and amend any errors or inconsistencies that might have been overlooked. Members of the tribunal may interject questions during the course of the presentation. The claimant is followed by the spokesman of the other side, who usually begins by reading his statement of the case and ends with a rebuttal of the main points advanced by his opposite number. The first spokesman is then permitted to make his rebuttal. The hearing is adjourned and a written award is transmitted to the parties in due course.
According to Professor Frankel, more than 600 cases have been brought before the arbitration tribunal since 1925 and all but 25 awards were unanimous.
The Whitley council system, as applied in Great Britain, may not be completely suitable to Canadian conditions. This experience of 30 years shows, however, that the right to genuine negotiations and arbitration in the civil service is compatible with our system of parliamentary democracy and is conducive to good relations between the government and its employees.
The views of the official opposition on this most important issue can be summarized as follows:
1.	We believe that the present Canadian system which provides only for consultations is completely inadequate to protect the fundamental right of the civil service for participation in collective negotiations, while our view is that the right to strike should not be granted to the civil service and that a strike should not be tolerated in the government service.
2.	We believe that civil servants should be granted the right to joint negotiations and arbitration provided that the supremacy of the parliament is safeguarded.
3.	We do not intend at this stage to put forward a concrete and detailed proposal which would embody those rights but we will suggest such a system, if necessary, when we reach the committee stage.
4.	We firmly believe that this most important issue should be considered objectively and carefully by all hon. members of this house and that it should not become the subject of a partisan controversy.
The bill is one of the most important that can be submitted to any parliament because its purpose is to provide for the efficiency and the integrity of the civil service which is so essential to modern democracy. I want

at this stage to quote the conclusions of Professor E. N. Gladden's book entitled "Civil Service or Bureaucracy".
The nation needs more than ever before a civil service capable of the highest devotion and sacrifice to its service and this presupposes an esteem, on the part of those who serve, much higher than exists today. We need a body of civil servants even more efficient than those of a past age and this presupposes professional standards far above anything visualized before. The officials of the future will need higher qualifications to deal with much more difficult tasks and situations. They will need to combine a sense of political impartiality as high as ever with an awareness of the world only achievable through the maintenance of a living interest in all that goes on in life in the broadest sense.
Such ends can no longer be achieved through a narrow oligarchic system admirably suited to a Platonic world. In the new civil service there will have to be embodied the principle of equal opportunity toward which the wider community is gradually moving. The community will not get its new civil service on the cheap, but from its efficiency it will derive an economy that mediocrity will never produce. Bureaucracy, whether of the efficient or the inefficient variety, will be dear at any price, as all history shows. Above all the new civil service, like the new world, will only emerge on the wings of a more liberal understanding.
Mr. Speaker, we intend to study the bill very carefully and see to it that the best possible legislation is approved by parliament. We owe it to the civil service to do so and in so doing we feel that we will render as well a great service to all Canadians who have been throughout the years so ably and faithfully served by a civil service second to none in any parliamentary democracy. (Translation):
Mr. Speaker, this legislation should contain special instructions with regard to the use of the French language. This being a bilingual country, it is essential that the qualifications for positions requiring some knowledge of French or English be specifically stated.
A bilingual applicant should not find himself in an inferior position. An applicant must obviously retain his right of writing in his own language an examination for a position where a knowledge of his language is required, but after all, it seems to me that when an applicant is qualified in both languages, he should have priority over the others.
(Text):


Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming):: Mr. Speaker, we are indeed pleased to again have this bill before parliament and to note with interest some of the comments that were made by the minister. We are aware of the fact that the civil service in Canada has been built up from a very small beginning some years ago to a necessarily large but efficient force and that any change in the Civil Service Act must be studied carefully.

I am sure we are all aware that the civil service has done a service to Canada, and will continue to do so, but will be able to operate only in as effective a manner as is allowed under the legislation. I believe that we will find many faults in the suggested proposals and the operation of the act as it will be enforced because over the years the situation has changed very dramatically. I believe the foremost thought in the minds of parliamentarians at the time the Civil Service Act was last amended in 1919 related to the providing of a protection against political patronage. In spite of this government and previous governments the question of political patronage has not been a threat to the effective operation of the civil service that it was many years ago.
We are now faced with a changed time and a changing situation which might allow patronage to exist in the civil service. Patronage or a tendency to patronage generally exists in large organizations and therefore the necessity is self-evident for a strong grievance procedure, strong protection and strong agreements.
We believe that some change must take place in the operation of the civil service commission itself. It might even be suggested by the civil service commission that if it were to function as the representative of management in relation to wage negotiations and conditions of work, then it would not serve a useful function at all. The government is indicating in the changes it is making that the trend and the tendency may be toward delegating negotiating authority from the civil service commission itself to the departmental heads. I strongly suggest to the minister that this would not be a satisfactory situation. I suggest that in increasing the authority of the departmental heads we are opening the door to patronage in the civil service.
Patronage itself, even in a political sense, is not dead, Mr. Speaker. We all know that the messenger service and some of the other staffs around the House of Commons fall within the purview of patronage, and that you have to talk to a certain member to receive a job even as a messenger. I think these instances are remote and very few in number. I believe that in this respect the civil service has done a remarkable job in remaining beyond the field of political patronage. With this thought in mind, we strongly recommend that the government give a great deal of attention and active consideration in the committee to setting up a much stronger negotiating position and grievance procedure for its employees. If we delegate more authority to the deputy ministers and allow the 90205-6-177J
Civil Service Act
deputy ministers to delegate their authority down through the ranks-which is sure to happen-then difficulties will arise which will be very difficult to solve. In the civil service we should have the same kind of relationship between the employee and the government of Canada as exists in any other type of plant in industry.
We are all aware that the situation in the civil service has been changing in the last number of years. Changes have been taking place which were not contemplated when the act was last amended in 1919. Part of this change has to do with promotions and the opportunities for promotions. When a department or a section of a department, was very small it was quite possible for a junior clerk coming into the department to look into the future and foresee the time when he could be the head of the department, how he could rise in his position and eventually reach the post of deputy minister. We are all aware, I am sure, of the special technical training that is essential to enable a man to fill some of the higher technical positions in the civil service. Because many of these positions are technical in nature it makes promotion difficult within the division.
One of the problems within the civil service, as I have heard it discussed, is the lack of opportunity for promotion of many employees in the lower ranks. When a job within a division is posted or advertised many of the employees are not concerned because they have not the training to fit them for that position. No opportunity is available to permit them to obtain the type of training that would put them in a position to compete with members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police or the armed services.
In the armed services we have given, at government expense, training in skills and specific trades to many of the personnel. When a competition is advertised the people who have been trained at government expense can make application for that appointment, and in many instances they will have a better opportunity to get the position than someone lower down the scale in that particular division for the simple reason that opportunities for training are not available to the civil servants, as they are to those in other services who are quite often in direct competition with them.
It has been suggested on many occasions that this type of training be instituted by the departments themselves; that opportunities should be made available to the civil servants to avail themselves of training to fit themselves for job promotion. What happens is that those who are not fitted for promotion at the present time drop whatever desire they may have had for saying that they are white

Civil Service Act
collar workers and therefore are obviously in a preferred position. They now realize that they have a job of which the hours of work, the pay and the fringe benefits are the main features. Therefore they are insisting now, and they are going to increasingly insist in the future more than they did in the past on fair and reasonable terms and a much closer relationship between civil service rates of pay and fringe benefits and those of organized labour.
Unless we are willing to provide the machinery and set up opportunities to permit them to better their own station, and also handle negotiations in a much better way than we have in the last two or three years where hand-outs coming from the government pretty well dribbled down to one section of the civil service and then to another we shall find the civil servants very dissatisfied. These are not the types of negotiations or arrangements that we wish to have or maintain within the civil service.
This matter has been discussed in other countries. I think we should be very proud of the civil service and the job that they have done, particularly when we compare their pay with that received in other countries. New Zealand, Australia, Britain and many other countries have done a great deal more than Canada in establishing a workable type of pattern under which the civil servant feels that he has some rights; that his is not a patronage job; that he cannot be removed because somebody just does not like him; and under which he has grievance procedures which can handle his complaints on a fair and reasonable basis. We in Canada have been lax in this regard, but we have achieved a high degree of satisfaction from our civil service without doing some things that as a government we should have done.
In England in 1923 the Whitley council was established. It is known as the Whitley system. Under this system they have operated with satisfaction in so far as their relations with the government are concerned. Australia and New Zealand have developed similar methods of grievances and contract procedures. I believe that now is an exceptionally good time for the government to examine what has been done in those other countries, and then do something for Canadian civil servants.
One of the reasons that is always advanced as to why we cannot do right by our civil service in relation to grievance procedure and collective bargaining procedure-this has become an important factor-is that many more people are now in the class in which the civil servants felt they were many years ago, that is, they felt they were unique. Recently we

have seen instances of industrial unions trying to organize bank employees, for instance, and to organize employees in the offices of companies where the unions have for many years had a bargaining relationship with respect to the industrial plants of these companies.
When someone says that there should be a grievance procedure, that there should be some direct method of negotiation with the employer, someone will immediately say that if the employees do not get what they want they will go on strike. Although the civil service associations have requested direct negotiation with the employer and the establishment of a grievance procedure, not one of these associations has ever asked for the right to strike if the differences of opinion involved cannot be settled. This right has not been sought and is not contemplated. When people raise the issue that to grant these requests would only result in strike action I think they have not given too much consideration to what has been done in other countries or to what has been done in this country with relation to white collar workers.
I think we should look at what the advantages would be if each employee felt he had the right to negotiate directly with his employer, the right to certain protection under a contract which would not be laid down for him by the civil service commission but which would be a contract in whose negotiation he had some participation and as a result would have some direct interest in the contract under which he was working. I believe the committee will give very serious consideration to the whole matter in relationship not only to what is being done in other countries but also what is being done in respect of employees in other fields of endeavour similar to the civil service of Canada.
Some consideration should be given to the situation as it has developed in some of our provinces. In Saskatchewan, for instance, civil servants have the right to collective bargaining procedures. They have the same right to the benefits of collective bargaining that other employees throughout the province have. This right has not resulted in any serious disruption of the civil service in that province, its relationship with the government of the province or its immunity from political interference.
We are certain that many of these matters will be discussed in the committee. I was pleased that the minister outlined his reasons for introducing the bill last year. I am also pleased that he listened to the representations that were made from many quarters and withheld the bill until there would be an opportunity for it to go to a small select committee which would be able to hear all arguments and make a decision that would not be

completely a government decision but one that would take into consideration the views of the various associations and unions representing civil servants and the views of those who are not now immediately within the scope of the civil service.
There will be an opportunity for these organizations to appear and I am quite sure that this will result in a better act which will not only benefit the operations of the government but will make civil servants themselves feel that they have a greater say in their affairs and an enhanced opportunity for advancement with the result that they will have an increased desire to remain within the sphere of the civil service.
(Translation):


Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolielie-L'Assomplion-Monicalm):: Mr. Speaker, at the outset of my remarks, I should like to refer to the brief submitted to the Prime Minister of Canada (Mr. Diefenbaker) by the conseil de la vie franpaise with regard to the ratio of bilingual or French-speaking Canadians in the federal civil service. Allow me to quote part of this brief:
Since 90 per cent of bilingual civil servants are French Canadians and since, at the same time, the number of French Canadians in the civil service is only half of what it should be, it follows that in large sections of the public administration bilingualism is non-existent to such an extent that the language of communication within the departments is the English language and that the French Canadian taxpayer is often hard put to be served in his own language.
In our humble opinion, an even more serious result stems from the influence of the civil service over the administration of Canada and the very life of the nation. Because the majority of civil servants have no knowledge whatsoever of one of the official languages and cultures in our country, the French speaking citizens are ruled according to standards of thought which are exclusively English. It is no surprise, therefore, that they are increasingly being excluded from the federal administration, the public services, the armed forces and the large crown corporations. In short, they are being deprived of the place to which they are entitled in their own country.
Drastic reforms are necessary if Canada is to remain a bilingual and bicultural country, a country where Canadians of French origin will feel at home. Such reforms have been suggested on various occasions. We shall not go over them today. In the circumstances, one can readily understand that the French Canadians are hardly attracted to the federal service, in view of the fact that entry requirements are based exclusively on English standards and that they must give up their language in the actual performance of their duties.
Mr. Speaker, let me quote another excerpt of this brief:
Nine departments have shown an increase of 2.3 per cent in the number of French Canadians, as compared to the total number of employees between
Civil Service Act
1951 and 1958. In 1951, French Canadians represented 10.3 per cent of the total staff of these departments, and they reached 12.6 per cent in 1958.
Mr. Speaker, I shall now give the list of
those departments: veterans affairs, agriculture, the Auditor General, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, fisheries, national revenue, secretary of state, labour, national film board.
On the other hand, the proportion of French-Canadian employees has dropped in 15 departments.
The discrepancy is 3.6 per cent. Strange, but in the departments where the number of French-Canadians has increased, their contribution which was 10.3 per cent in 1951 became 12.6 per cent in 1958. In the departments showing a decrease, their contribution went down from 12.5 per cent in 1951 to 8.9 per cent in 1958, almost in reverse proportions.
Those departments are the following: external affairs and, if I may be allowed a digression here, I would point out that the proportion of bilingual Canadians within the Department of External Affairs is quite poor. You know who for many years was deputy minister of external affairs and later became Secretary of State for External Affairs.
I continue:	citizenship and immigration,
trade and commerce, civil service commission, national research council, national defence, finance, printing bureau, justice, mines and technical surveys, post office, resources and economic development, national health and welfare, transport and public works. As far as the crown corporations are concerned, their shortage of bilingual or French speaking employees is appalling.
They can hardly be found In such crown corporations such as the Canadian National, the air transport board, the Bank of Canada, Canadian Arsenals, the industrial development bank, Atomic Energy of Canada, the department of insurance. They are non-existent in the Department of Trade and Commerce and in the finance department.
Those remarks, based on the brief submitted by the conseil de la vie franchise, are made for the sake of national unity and not out of any narrow-mindedness.
I am confident that government authorities and the civil service commission will undertake to correct this situation which constitutes a liability as far as national unity is concerned. By correcting this anomaly, we could more easily represent Canada to other nations as a bicultural and bilingual country.
I wanted to make those few remarks, and I should like to add this. I would be remiss in failing to point out that apartheid is not confined to South Africa; it is also found in the civil service generally. It may come as a surprise to some hon. members that in certain departments it is considered wrong to speak French; French-Canadian civil servants have to use the English language among themselves. That should not be.

Civil Service Act
It would therefore be well to investigate the matter with a view to exposing the situation and seeing that justice is done.
Indeed, I feel it is unthinkable that such a situation should be allowed to exist. If I am correctly informed-and I made a serious inquiry in the matter-I ask that the situation be looked into so that an end may be put to what I consider to be discrimination against one of the two official languages of this country.
Mr. Speaker, I think this bill concerning the civil service is not only timely, but overdue. The act has not been amended for the last 40 years. It was time that this government did something about it because there are very few acts in our statutes that have not been amended for the last 40 years.
This was not our job, Mr. Speaker, but since our predecessors have been neglectful on that point, this government has to take action.
I am not telling anything new when I say that all is not to the best in the federal	civil
service. Every	year, many	of our	best	civilservants leave	the federal	service	and	takeup other jobs.	This is not	normal.	Nor	is it
normal to let them go without doing anything to keep them, unless we want to maintain some sections of our public service as sanctuaries for complacent mediocrities.
However, in considering this very important bill, I believe the time has come to smash certain idols in the civil service, to cut down to size some of the demigods of high officialdom who think they can do anything because of their permanent status, and finally to reveal some of the scheming that cripples efficient administration and puts the whole civil service to shame.
Mr. Speaker, efforts are made to attract able people into the civil service. Why not first try to keep those who are already in the service, instead of treating like outcasts people who have proved their ability in related fields and who are scoffed at, ridiculed and deceived in the civil service, often by backward and incompetent officials.
I am not usually violent, but my association, two years ago, with the standing committee on estimates, enabled me to get acquainted with certain problems of federal administration. I took that opportunity to investigate matters and question people, and what we learned was not too nice. However, that unrewarding and disappointing work gained me

the confidence of many civil servants who, in the hope of getting some improvement, took me into their confidence.
I received many letters and telephone calls, and many visitors. Some of those civil servants were acting from fear because they were afraid of reprisals in case it should be known that they had discussed their problems with a member of parliament. And I know that some section heads-not the more clever ones-will say: What does that member know about the civil service? What right has he to stick his nose into our business? To those people let me say in the first place that I was a civil servant myself for several years, during which I met, like anywhere else, men who were worthy of confidence, but also some very poor officials who were unworthy of the government's confidence. Let me also say that as an elected representative of the Canadian people, I have a right to know what goes on in the civil service and that it is even my responsibility to make sure that the government uses the people and the funds voted by parliament to give this country the first class service it deserves.
If the civil servants are not treated fairly by their superiors, they do right to talk things over with their representatives. It is our business to preside over the public welfare and to redress grievances. And I have known enough distressing cases to assure you that the need is there.
I have therefore been informed of many cases of injustice and maladministration brought to my attention by civil servants. Some of them were perhaps inclined to exaggerate, but most of them had a healthy attitude but were driven to desperation by the lack of understanding, indeed the incompetence of their superiors. I am under the impression that while our civil service includes an overwhelming majority of very good employees it also includes a distressing minority of political creatures who are an obstacle to efficient public administration and who tend to create a general atmosphere of fear and oppression. That must be stopped. An act of parliament, whatever its merits, will be of no avail unless we can change the morale of the civil service, unless we get rid of the deadwood, steeped in inefficiency and favouritism.
We have some very good civil servants, but there is a long way between that and blissfully accepting the hackneyed claim that it is the "best civil service in the world". That I cannot believe in view of the things I have been told in confidence.

I am quite prepared to admit, Mr. Speaker, that those may have been special cases. That was my own reaction at first. But today, I am convinced that there is in the public service a clique whose leaders are found among the political creatures who never could stomach the defeats of 1957 and 1958. I will not mention names at this time, but my colleagues know as well as I do about the wall that stands in our way whenever we try to get information or find out the reasons for a particular appointment or promotion. There are people there who protect themselves, people who care little about the efficient administration of public affairs but are more concerned with trying to work against the government, so that the people will turn against it at the next elections. I know, Mr. Speaker, that this is a serious charge, and I say it with severity, because we in this house are faced with a government within the government. When you have to ask two or three different questions to elicit information from witnesses appearing before committees, when witnesses plead ignorance of the facts or refuse to disclose some information, it looks bad. In my opinion, a reform is necessary.
No private industry could survive if it were administered as the government is in some departments. No businessman could keep from boiling over if he saw the favouritism and incompetence which prevail in some areas of the administration-and I am not referring to the fact that some civil servants hardly get 40 minutes off for lunch. Not one of us in this house would accept to work under conditions such as are the lot of some civil servants. How could we allow such a situation to endure and civil servants to be subjected to it without even having the right to complain?
Perhaps you would like some proof of my assertions; perhaps you want to know what the civil servants are silently complaining about, because they do not dare raise their voices lest they be ostracized or punished or cast aside. I could read many letters I have received; I could draw a long list of their grievances; and all this would be only the voice of those who have had the courage to protest a situation that this government has inherited from its predecessors who appointed to some key positions their minions and their sbirros.
Do you want to know what the complaints are about? They are about daily inequities; they are about maladministration in some departments; they are about the inefficiency and partisan spirit of some officials. And I limit myself strictly to the charges I felt
Civil Service Act
bound to make because they concern the administration of public affairs.
I will spare you the petty or scurvy tricks and private spite which can develop into every day fare, and can be exercised particularly two or three times a year when the head of a branch prepares an efficiency rating concerning each of the employees under him.
That is the time when promotions are settled for those who knuckle down and hold their tongue, for those who work like slaves so that their supervisor may go to a higher official and brag smugly about the high efficiency of his department; but it is also the time when some are eliminated because they are not found fit for the job, but suited, not always on professional grounds.
If an underling dares offer a suggestion or make a protest against an injustice, it will be entered on his rating, unknown to him, that he is refractory and steps towards his dismissal will even be taken should a difficult situation develop. Afterwards any legal procedure before the courts will be carefully avoided if the civil servant who feels he has been wronged wants to appeal to the courts and to assert his rights as a free citizen.
This method of evaluating the conduct and efficiency of their staff can turn to be the most sinister weapons in the hands of devious supervisors. There are also complaints about the narrow-mindedness of some officials viciously persecuting employees who are only trying to do their duty on religious holidays- which they should do-and who grin and ridicule people who want to comply with the requirements of their faith.
Others claim that some officials tried to stop their subordinates from voting in the province of Quebec, claiming that the government of the day was led by a man with whom the federal Prime Minister was not on good terms. I hardly need to quote any names.
Moreover, there are protests against officials who tolerate a whole section considering itself above all rules and regulations, and who allow their favourites to arrive at the office at any odd time in the morning, whereas other civil servants have to take a cut in salary when they come late because of a storm or because they missed their transfer to another bus, or again, because of some stupid closing of the bridge to Hull. Neither do I need to quote any names here, for here again, those responsible for this discrimination will recognize themselves.
There are grievances against high officials who are never there when some decision must

Civil Service Act
be taken or who make their subordinates work after regular hours out of sheer maladministration.
Others again claim-and this is almost unjust and even insolent-that all civil servants are not entitled to the same number of holidays and that leave is not in proportion to the working days. People complain that overtime, or additional time periods, are in most cases not paid in cash but that employees have to work three and a half hours on end to earn half a day's leave, which in many cases they would rather not have, in order not to be compelled to add those three and a half hours to their normal day of work. And again, overtime has to be calculated as from the moment when the employee signs in which means, if it is Saturday morning, that he may have to spend an hour in the bus coming to the office and another hour when he goes back home.
Some also claim that in the odd branch and the odd department, employees are prevented from taking their holidays when they please. There are some seasons when public servants may not be absent, and they live outside normal society. They are told that no one asked them to work and that they can go and find employment elsewhere. Is that a way of dealing with public servants? Would you and I accept to be treated in this way? After all, those people are our employees, and it is up to us to teach a lesson to some officials who are unfair to the minor civil servants.
Some claim, moreover, that civil servants cannot air their grievances, because the associations which represent them, though they are doing their best, do not have the authority of a professional organization.
These complaints had to do with ascertained and repeated inequities. I might also point out certain grievances no less serious but more difficult to eliminate, cases of obvious mismanagement. Civil servants wrote to me and came to see me to say that they are losing faith in civil service commission examinations because of the results and promotions. That is serious, and if you refer to some of the answers given last year in the committee of the house during the discussion of the operation of the civil service commission, you will find that the witnesses were unable to swear that all the positions under the commission had always been and are still being filled on the basis of competence. This is another thing we inherited from our predecessors.

How is it that applicants for the same examination, who all know each other, who know each other's ability and qualifications after working together for years often find that the less qualified candidates succeed, get promotions and are sent abroad.
How is it that it is often known beforehand that such or such an applicant, for reasons known to their competitors, will certainly be the only ones who qualify? And if unsuccessful candidates make enquiries, they are told to write to the secretary of the commission or to ask for a review of their examination sheets. And of course, when those sheets are reviewed, it is found that the examining officers have not marked them, that it is just a simple appreciation given by anonymous examiners and that it is a a foregone conclusion that the review will confirm the results of the original examination. It is a serious situation, Mr. Speaker, and I have received enough complaints to believe that such doings which are beyond even the commission's control, are the responsibility of a clique of examiners who form a kind of family compact and regard their jobs as a game preserve.
May I continue, Mr. Speaker? It is six o'clock.
(Text):


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it agreed that the hon. member shall call it six o'clock?
Some hon. Members. No.


Harold Edward Winch: Is the hon. member through, Mr. Speaker? If so, I should like to have the floor.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: No, Mr. Speaker. I will go on with my speech.
(Translation):
Some are complaining about the fact that, at the discretion of certain heads of departments some branches are left short of one or two civil servants who are granted extended leave without being replaced, in order that they can be given back their jobs upon their return, while their colleagues have to do the job of the employee who is away and who will be promoted ahead of them because he went abroad to study at their expense. There are complaints also to the effect that some civil servants-and among them some high ranking officials-who have used the installations in their laboratories or offices, on the government's time and for personal purposes, to do private work for other people or outside companies and for which they are paid.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Lionel Chevrier: May I inquire of the house leader what the business will be for Thursday and Friday?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Tomorrow, Thursday, we will commence with the estimates of the Department of Labour. On Friday, if it is agreeable to the other side of the house, I
Business of the House
think it would be acceptable to us if we could complete the debate on this particular bill which subsequently will go to a special committee. If that is done in reasonable time on Friday, we would then continue with the estimates of the Department of Labour.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
90205-6-178
[Stage Direction]
Questions ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
The following answers, deposited with the Clerk of the house, are printed in the official report of debates pursuant to standing order 39:

Mr. Boulanger: 2.	What is the total export of agricultural products, in value, on an annual basis for the period of 1957-60 inclusive?
Imports	
Exports of Canadian produce
2.	What is the total export of agricultural products, in value, on an annual basis for the period of 1957-60 inclusive?
Answer by: Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trade and Commerce):
1 and 2. Statistics of imports and exports of agricultural products are not available. Total imports and exports of products of "farm origin" for the years 1957-1959 are as follows:
(Statistics for 1960 have not yet been compiled)
1957	1958	1959$1,071,326,424 $1,055,389,192 $1,125,394,810 986,901,003	1,113,147,947	1,063,717,735



NEW FEDERAL BUILDING, WOODSTOCK, ONT.

Mr. Martin (Essex East): 1.	Did the Postmaster General authorize a statement made recently by the hon. member for Oxford to the mayor of Woodstock to the effect that a new federal building was to be built in Woodstock immediately?
2.	Has a local official of the Department of Public Works in London, Ontario, been authorized to accept offers for the sale of certain property in Woodstock for the purpose of obtaining the land for the proposed new federal building?
3.	What progress has been made in obtaining land for the proposed new federal building?
Answer by:	Hon. Leon Balcer (Acting
Secretary of State):
1.	The Postmaster General did inform the hon. member for Oxford that a new federal building in Woodstock was to be undertaken as rapidly as possible, depending of course, on acquisition of a suitable site and the preparation of plans by the Department of Public Works.
2.	Department of Public Works officials in Toronto and London have been instructed to investigate possible sites for a new federal building in Woodstock. In doing this, they are, as a normal practice, authorized to obtain offers for the sale of properties that may be suitable.
3.	A preliminary report on a number of properties has been received, but a final recommendation has not yet been made.



CIVIL SERVANTS WITH SALARIES AND TRAVELLING EXPENSES OF $10,000 OR MORE

Mr. Robichaud: What is the total number of federal civil servants whose salary and travelling expenses totalled $10,000 or more for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1960?
Answer by: Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister
of Finance):
By agreement with Mr. Robichaud the question has been rephrased as follows:
What is the total number of federal civil servants receiving salaries of $8,000 or over, whose salary and travelling expenses totalled $10,000 or more for the fiscal year ending 1960?
1,689. This does not include members of the armed forces or the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.



MAIL CONTRACT, ST. REMI-MONTREAL-HUNTINGDON, QUE.

Mr. Dupuis: 1.	To whom was awarded the mail contract covering the St. Remi-Montreal-Huntingdon territory, and on what date was the award made?
2.	At what price was the present contract awarded?
3.	What is the mileage involved in this contract?
4.	Have new tenders been asked recently for the said contract?
5.	On what date are these tenders to be opened? Answer by: Hon. W. M. Hamilton (Postmaster
General):
1.	Mr. Marcel Roy, 24th June 1957.
2.	$13,901.12 per annum.
3.	Night trip, 127.3 miles round trip; day trip, 133.4 miles round trip.
4.	No, but steps are being taken to invite tenders in the near future.
5.	Due date for tenders not known as yet.